Non NCAA Varsity Teams in the MDIA

[John Paul]

In fact, there are a handful of IA teams that have some money available now, specifically for lacrosse players. In every case, it's not a lot, but it's there. Lindenwood, by the way (I know we're not talking about them in this discussion), does not have scholarship money earmarked specifically for lacrosse players. Many small schools make scholarship and grant money much more available than larger schools to the general student body.

Again, it's a hard thing to quantify or regulate, assuming we would ever want to.

[Kevin Boyle]

Any team that is the representative team of a college in the sport of lacrosse should be allowed admission to the MDIA so long as they can meet all the other requirements of the league. The adjective "varsity" is an administrative label that schools use to sell their programs. The administrative label that a school puts on one of its programs should not determine admission to the league. It doesn't really tell you anything about the team. There are plenty of teams that are called "varsity" that have smaller budgets and poorer structure than a lot of teams in this league that happen to be called "club". Except from a marketing standpoint, these terms are meaningless. And if they were meaningful, then including these teams can only raise the level of structure and competition in the league as a whole. So why not let em in?

Today, Lindenwood... Tomorrow, Notre Dame and Butler

I haven't been following the Lindenwood discussion. But, I recall a pretty lengthy debate on the old forum regarding whether or not USL-MDIA rules allowed teams that were given the label "varsity" by their school administration to be admitted into the league. From what I recall about that discussion, there was considerable room for debate on this issue. Although I was eventually told that there were rules prohibiting such teams from joining the MDIA, it seemed that based on the rules that were actually available to the public and other information about the league that was available to the public, there was a pretty good argument for admitting so called "varsity" teams under USL-MDIA rules. Has this situation been cured?

[Dan Wishengrad]

I thought only DI and DII schools awarded scholarships for lacrosse players, and that DIII schools only gave out scholarships based solely on financial need. Is this not correct?

The whole issue of money to play MDIA lacrosse is a complicated one. Some programs charge very high player dues -- about $1500 here at UW, where the university only gives us about $1600 as our entire allotment for the year. This causes alot of good players to not play lacrosse for the Huskies every season. And I know we are not alone in suffering this problem.

I realize some programs charge alot more than we do -- does anybody know who has the highest dues in the entire MDIA? But some teams may waive player dues (we don't) for certain players, which becomes, essentially, a "scholarship" to play -- although this is NOT technically true, because "scholarship" means paying for tutition specifically.

The difference from school-to-school on how much it costs to play and how much funding the university gives to the team varies greatly. Here in the PNCLL, one school (Whitman) charges no player dues at all, with the college paying for everything. At Linfield, they are not ALLOWED to charge player dues or even technically do any fund-raising, which puts that program in a real bind. Some schools only give the club a few hundred dollars (like at PLU), but at others the figure we were told is over $10,000 (Oregon).

I think it would be interesting to examine "the books" for all the teams, see how much they spend each season and where it comes from. There may be more "scholarships" given among our "virtual varsity" clubs than anyone really knows.

[Bluevelvet]

I am not odvocating any postion. I am trying to focus issues and see the controversy from all perspectives. Most posters seem to think that Lindenwood got screwed. I'm not so sure.
I do not understand why Lindenwood is not a varsity team under the NAIA and on probation before joining the NCAA. This is the type of arrangement that NDNU has with D2. This is the arrangement that Dominican has . They play WCLL teams but are not in the WCLL. They also play NCAA opponents.
It seemns to me that Lindenwood is trying to have it both ways. Their athletic department is trying to claim varsity athletic success by competing exclusively against club teams. I presume that they support the team in many ways as a varsity team. Travel, dues, officiating, coaches salary, uniforms come to mind in addition to partial scholarships which have been alleged here as well.
Is this this what we want the MDIA to be? A huge tent for club teams as well as weak varsity programs that would die as a club. It seems unfair to me. How did Lindenwood get so good in such a short time. If they attracted top players by offering money and varsity status, are they competing fairly with the other teams in the GRLC?
NDNU has been able to beat almost all the WCLL teams in just 2 or 3 years. Their varsity status is the reason. They are now moving on to the NCAA D2. Dominican is supposedly doing the same thing but with much less success. I cite NDNU as an example of how varsity staus (alone) can make a brand new team more than competitive in the tough WCLL. I imagine it must seem even more unfair in the weaker GRLC. Whatever advantage Lindenwood had over the other GRLC teams it sure worked fast.
Maybe Lindenwood should play GRLC and MDIA opponents before moving on to NCAA status. But to field a varsity team which deliberately and exclusively plays club teams seems unfair. If varsity teams can't join the WCLL why should they be allowed in GRLC?
Just playing devils advocate here.

[CATLAX MAN]

I think it all goes back to the intention of the program at each university. NDNU is a good example of a university that intended to compete in NCAA Div. 2 right from the start. They made that perfectly clear. They knew that it would take a few years to get properly organized and they started building their program by recruiting players from all over, but mostly from Canada, offering partial scholarships in some cases.

It would appear that the intention of the Lindenwood program is to compete at the club level. At least, that's what they seem to imply in their previous statements and actions. I don't recall hearing or seeing anything that indicates that their intention was anything different.

I guess that I have to ask why did the GRLC allow them to join the conference in the first place if there was a question of this "varsity" status hanging over them? The league's actions in the past seem to contradict their now punitive actions that they are now taking.

I agree that there is a gray area in when is it that you cross the line into "unfair advantage" with regards to funding sources and the ability to attract players. However, know ing what I have paid personally over the last number of years, I would've welcomed the university's financial help wherever it may been offered. Unfortunately, it never was offered, but that's another story altogether.

[AO]

Funding disparity is a universal issue at all levels of college sports, including lacrosse, at both the club and varsity level. When I coached DIII up thru 2003, our annual budget was about $23,000. That included part-time head and assistant coaches salary, equipment, meal, officials, and transportation. While many of our opponents (league and non-league) had similiar amounts, several others had budgets that were double or even triple that of our own. Of course, while bigger budgets didn't necessarily translate into better programs all the time, odds were in favor that the deeper the pockets were, the more successful was the program.

There were also the programs where the coach was a full-time employee of the school (admissions office, intramural sports director, etc.) and operated the lacrosse program of around $35k to cover all the usual team expenses minus a head coach salary.

[Bluevelvet]

Catlaxman-
I realize that there is a disparity of wealth at any level of competition.
Some club teams have well organized fundraisers, and high dues to support six figure budgets. Some don't have much funding from any source.
This seems different. The Lindenwood University support is systemic. We pay to play; they get paid to play.
They have assured themselves of almost always dominating the GRLC. They get NCAA players who are on the bench or injured and they give them some money to transfer to Lindenwood (not "athletic scholarships"- of course). They tell them how the University supports the team. They tell them they are varsity. They get to use the weight room, have trainers, preferential class scheduling, tutors, preferential admissions and all the perks that no one else in the MDIA gets. They don't have to fundraise or pay dues.
How can they not succeed against the competition in the GRLC with these systemic advantages? Lindenwood wants to field a varsity team and play against club teams forever! Is that fair? Why don't they move on to NCAA competiton? They want a successful varsity program on the cheap. Aren't they using the GRLC and the MDIA?
I sure agree it would have been great if UCSB had offered our sons partial scholarships instead of us paying tuition, room and board as well as dues and other "voluntary contributions" for 4 years.

[Jack Cribbin]

Bluevelvet,

Your post above, could not be any further away from the truth.

[John Paul]

I guess it's typical of message boards, but you're making some assumptions here. Lindenwood players pay dues, for example. They are clearly supported differently than their NAIA programs, which are the programs they intend to support as varsity. You cannot just switch a program from NAIA to NCAA. The entire athletic department would have to switch. Lindenwood is firmly entrenched in the NAIA. You would never see NDNU willingly list their program as club on their website, as Lindenwood has done in response to this issue.

If Lindenwood is recruiting, I've never seen it. I'm out east at many of the top recruiting events every summer, and I've never seen anyone from their staff there. I'm sure they recruit regionally, and I'm sure they respond to kids who contact them, but I don't see them out beating the bushes. I don't get the sense they're recruiting any more than any of the other IA programs that actively recruit.

They are directly supported by their athletic department. So is their roller hockey team and the skeet shooting team. Every sports team on campus is. That's not uncommon at small schools. Does the school use lacrosse as a means to attract students? Yes. Do they do a pretty good job of finding financial aid for all of their students who qualify? Yes. Are those the two things we want to exclude them for?

When the Michigan athletic department announced five years ago that they were making us a "varsity club" program, nobody in the IA complained (at least openly). We did get a lot of calls, and we still do, from other club teams, parents from other programs, rec sports departments and athletic departments looking for advice on how they could create a similar program. I see Lindenwood, and I see things we have they don't and things they have we don't. I use those things they have that we don't as a benchmark to strive for, and as an example we can use to show our administration what our peers are doing.

[Bluevelvet]

I admit that I have made some assuptions on how Lindenwood operates based on my experience with varsity athletics while attending an NAIA university. Maybe things are different at Lindenwood.
The question is not whether this varsity had an advantage over their competition (even little Whittier's varsity dominated all the big Pac 10 schools in the WCLL). The question is how much of an advantage and whether it is so significant that it ruins the competition.
I am not convinced that the advantage is insignificant.

[CATLAX MAN]

I think that the biggest factor is the success of a program is having a good coaching staff that can help set up a disciplined structure in which players can improve as a team and then inspiring those players to achieve. Once you have that structure in place, the results are bound to come. Look at how far the Oregon program has come in such a short period of time as an example of this and they did this without the benefit of being "varsity." NDNU has become successful in a short period of time also, but that is also because they had the benefit of Doug Locker & Joe Romano running the athletic department & the team and they already had a proven track record at Whittier where they had already achieved success in developing a lacrosse program.

On the other hand, just being a varsity program does not guarantee success or necessarily an advantage in attracting players. Varsity programs that lack the knowledge & structure mentioned above have a harder road towards success, and it may not happen. Look no farther than the Dominican program as an example of this.

At the end of the day, I think the decision to attend a particular university will, in most cases, be determined by other factors than whether or not the lacrosse team is varsity if the student/applicant is making a rational, informed decision.

[5280paradise]

While the debate of this issue makes for great reading, ultimately a mutually agreeable solution will need to be implemented. One point is that NAIA (didn't know it still existed) can't be NCAA for some sports and NAIA for others just like D1 can't be D3 for selective sports or vice versa. D3 schools with current D1 programs (Hopkins LAX and CC Hockey) are grandfathered in as I understand it. So, the options are play NCAA at your school's level or club. I don't think that NAIA currently sanctions lacrosse so there option is club or nothing. The desire for some appears to be a level playing field. This is very rare in any sport at any level. If you think the big D1 athletic programs all play with the same resources, you are mistaken. Hence the huge 'arms race' for donations to build better facilities, etc to attract better 'student' athletes. Yes, the NCAA governs the number of athletic scholarships but not much else. There is no control over schools supplementing the athletic aid with academic or need based aid. Small private schools are much more accustomed to this than large public schools are. Also, not every D1 program is funded with the maximum number of scholarships and there is a huge variation in the cost value from school to school. It is not level now for anyone and it won't ever be level. However, I think that club level programs are where the growth of the sport will be absorbed in the foreseeable future and it is critical that rules & guidelines are in place and enforceable if the concept of club organization is to last. You can not guarantee a reliable competitive balance but you can guarantee equal opportunity. If Lindenwood is better, work to improve. If your school won't help, work to change it. Please do not begrudge schools/programs that have created a situation that gives them a competitive advantage. That is the challenge that most club teams face with CSU, BYU, UCSB and Sonoma and a few others. Bottom line is the 150+ and growing club teams need to work to have these guidelines in place. They will be necessary to accommodate the coming growth.

Incidentally, I pay $2000+ each on top of tuition for two kids to play for club teams that are committed to playing at the highest level. I am sure others pay more but I am also sure that many pay less. Our choice and more power to those that can some how do it for less.

[Zeuslax]

Everyone’s ultimate goal is for their lacrosse program to be entirely funded or fully supported by the university. I haven't seen it mentioned in this topic, but there is a whole other side to this issue. There is the scenario where the institution could say, "You guys are doing fine". Why do you need more support? At the former school I was with, we were hurt sometimes by our "large" financials. The university would inspect our budget compared to others and have the opinion that we didn't need as much money. This was accomplished by comparing our financials to other clubs. Some didn't see our contributed portion as us doing a great job, or being more organized, they saw it as a potential to decrease our requested amount(s). This wasn't always the case, but it was a recurring theme. Sometimes the increased organization, fundraising, dues, and level of commitment were opinioned to be a chance for the school to "help" another club. Of course our increased organization and campus involvement was rewarded 99% of the time. Sometimes our budget just looked ridiculous when compared to other clubs.

Yes, the MDIA has some clubs operating as varsity programs. Even these programs are still growing and evolving. As the big programs become larger, I could see the potential environment. Of a school not increasing status and having a club’s success inhibiting varsity growth.

Most of us are not dealing with the problem of too much support for sure.

[John Paul]

You are stating part of the concern that a handful (not the majority) of varsity coaches have stated...that the MDIA could inhibit varsity growth if AD's see highly organized, competitive, well-funded teams on campus that are not costing them any money, or worse, if other AD's cut programs in order to enable an MDIA-like program to take their places.

I completely disagree with this line of thinking. What we are doing will help varsity growth down the road, when the sport has grown to the point that significant varsity growth makes sense (we're not there as a sport yet, but we're getting closer). I can see it happening firsthand. Five years ago there was no talk on our campus coming from our athletic or academic administration about varsity lacrosse. Now there is. (Disclaimer - I am not saying there is a plan, just talk.)

[porterjive]

We are a 2nd year VARSITY program, this means were endorsed and funded by the school and recognized by the athletic dept.

we dont have enough money to keep the team going even as club

Your post seems to contradict itself.

i meant because were varsity we can afford to exist, but if our funding were cut we couldnt afford to be club