Minnesota Boy's Lacrosse now Varsity Sanctioned

[mnref]

What differences might one notice from sanctioning from an official's perspective?

Off the top of my head:

-I might expect a more stringent qualification process that includes first responder training.

-Game fee increases will be managed without as much input from officials. There's a distinct possibilty of a decrease as well.

-A more rigorous evaluation process (perhaps including inter-crew evaluations).

-Possible fewer opportunities since the HS league might limit the number of games due to a small pool of officials that are, in their eyes, properly qualified. The HS League might also shorten the overall season to preserve fields and increase the odds that games get played.

-More evening games as teams with varsity designation gain access to stadiums

I few replies to Mr. Roger's comments...

Actually, the MSHSL (Minnesota State High School League) just had an Ad Hoc committee on officials across all sports. Their NEW requirements are below what we expect of our officials now however they will likely be better able to enforce those requirements. I don't know if the MSHSL requires any first aid/CPR training for officials.

The actual MSHSL bylaw expects a 12 game season, right now teams play 8-10 games generally so there will likely be more opportunities. In addition the bylaw shortens the season which will increase the number of games per week. This will be a challenge to attract and train the required officials.

I don't know what will happen with game fees under the MSHSL but right now lacrosse officials' fees are reasonably close to football and other similar sports. I don't know the fee schedule for girls' lacrosse officials which will likely be a point of comparison as well.

Later,

Matt

[mnref]

I cant wait!!! Finally, the power will be stripped from those who abuse it. You will also see the number of officals drop, as the state will have control over them now, making sure they are properly qualified to be on the field (not saying there arent quality refs, but it appears as the demand goes up, training goes down due to increase numbers). I can see the Penn. model working well here.....

I'm not sure what the Penn. (Pennsylvania?) model is but if the MSHSL treats boys lacrosse like they did girls lacrosse we can probably expect lower training standards in an effort to increase the number of officials.

The landscape has changed a bit since the girls went varsity so that may not happen especially given the report from the MSHSL's ad hoc committee on officiating I mentioned earlier.

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/offjudge/Committee3-8-06.htm

Matt

[mnref]

And what about the HS that doesn't want a varsity program - does that "club" program still get to compete for a HS championship with the "Varsity" programs? And if not, is that a positive outcome?

Again if boys lacrosse is treated like girls, club teams cannot play varsity teams (I believe some scrimmage but no official games). There are two girls state championships in Minnesota - one for MSHSL Varsity teams and the other for the club teams that play under the NSLA or Northern Schoolgirls Lacrosse Assocation.

Matt

[Rob Graff]

So where there was once one unified league, fully functional, we now have 2.

And we have a shortened season.

And teams like St. Paul might be in trouble, as they are banished to the "club" ranks.

[tauter]

So where there was once one unified league, fully functional, we now have 2.

And we have a shortened season.

And teams like St. Paul might be in trouble, as they are banished to the "club" ranks.

Sounds good doesn't it!

Some parents from my team have been talking with the AD at our school and he said there's basically no way he'll be bringing lacrosse in for at least 4-5 years.

I'm not so sure that "legitimacy" is worth what I believe we as a league are going to end up paying in the end.

I'm thankful and appreciative for all the work that was put in by various people throughout the league to get this sanctioning passed, but I can't say that I'm happy about the outcome.

My 2 cents

[laxfan25]

Congratulations - I think! But as always, be careful what you wish for...

What differences might one notice from sanctioning from an official's perspective?

Before varsity sanctioning, HS Lacrosse in MI was organized by the Michigan Scholastic Lacrosse Association, which was run primarily by lacrosse coaches and AD's from a select number of schools. Some people were resentful of the power that some people wielded in the sport.
Official's rates were negotiated between MichLOA and the MSLA, and were standard across the state.
With MHSAA sanctioning, the MHSAA runs the post-season tournament and selects the officials for everything beyond the first-round games. Since the sport is new to them, they have a lacrosse committee of coaches, AD's and a few officials that have helped them get things organized. For instance, the state tourney is seeded, and the committee has major input on the seedings as well as the recommended officials.
(In other sports, tourneys are done by region, so you could have the best teams meeting very early in the tourney if they're all out of one area, such as Detroit).
The MHSAA has tried to recruit new officials, realizing the sport is growing. Their training consists of a six-hour training class, after which you receive an MHSAA card which makes you eligible to do games - no on-field experience needed. In order to be qualified to do tournament games, you have to attend the MHSAA rules meeting (about an hour). These training requirements are well below what MichLOA has for its members, and MichLOA also has a test that needs to be passed. (MHSAA added one this year as well - it's the NFHS test). This MHSAA training is fairly inadequate in length - I went through the Girl's Lacrosse training this spring, I have my card - but am not prepared to do a game IMM.
MichLOA has been very cooperative and helpful with the MHSAA in getting lacrosse underway under their control. Our members have conducted the 6-hour training classes for them. We have also tried to increase the requirements but have gotten pushback on that.
One big issue is that MichLOA is a statewide officials organization, handling lacrosse refs only. MHSAA does not want to deal with statewide groups, they want refs to join local associations. We feel that a big reason for this is that they can control game rates. To date we have remained a unified organization, but I can see this becoming an issue in the coming years. ("Solidarity forever..."). MichLOA feels that since it is focused strictly on lacrosse, we provide a very well-trained group of officials, and teh MichLOA president has done a great job keeping everyone informed of issues and MichLOA training requirements.
Assigning has always been handled in the past by assigners on the east and west side of the state. With MHSAA sanctioning, a school's AD could actually contact officials on their own and contract with them to do games. (This is how football is handled, and ref crews will be lobbying AD's for games.) While this hasn't happened yet - the assigners still handle all of this - it could happen, and the school could then say we'll pay you X to do our games. If guys accept lower rates, that would be a negative.
So those are some of the issues; lower training requirements, negative view towards our lacrosse officials organization and possible dilution of control on assignments and game fees.
As to those who say in their posts that the state org will have higher requirements -

[laxfan25]

For the schools playing under MHSAA, the standard restrictions that are imposed on all sports apply to lacrosse now. These include;
- specific season dates, when practice can start, etc.
- restrictions on out-of-season coaching. A coach cannot get together with more than 3 players at a time out of season.
- restrictions on number of games - per season, per week, etc. This has eliminated some weekend tourneys.
- restrictions on travel. A team cannot travel more than 300 miles to play another team.
- Under the MSLA, there were four divisions of lacrosse teams, with one of them being a developmental class. this made it fun even for new kids, since they had a "state title" to play for (even if it was mocked by the bigger, better schools). Under MHSAA, there are two divisions, based strictly on school size. So now new teams get lumped in with very experience programs - and they take some massive lumps. On the west side of the state lacrosse is now played in a conference, and the better teams have to play the weak sisters, whereas before, they would travel across the state to play all of the better schools. They still play some, but they also have a lot of blowouts in the conference. In the long, long run this may be a good thing. The biggest difference is that the schools that have developed strong middle school programs dominate those where the players don't start until they get to high school. One school district in the area has about 15 middle school teams! (3 high schools/middle schools with multiple teams per age group in each). That is what gives you a strong HS program, and also why we're scrambling for refs.
I'm sure there are many others - these are the ones I'm familar with from the outside.

[horn17]

I think more importantly now...we are going to see the division of the schools....club, varsity, and now do we see the development of different divsions (classes) broken down by school size, etc......

[Sonny]

So where there was once one unified league, fully functional, we now have 2.

And we have a shortened season.

And teams like St. Paul might be in trouble, as they are banished to the "club" ranks.

Sounds good doesn't it!

Some parents from my team have been talking with the AD at our school and he said there's basically no way he'll be bringing lacrosse in for at least 4-5 years.

I'm not so sure that "legitimacy" is worth what I believe we as a league are going to end up paying in the end.

I'm thankful and appreciative for all the work that was put in by various people throughout the league to get this sanctioning passed, but I can't say that I'm happy about the outcome.

My 2 cents

Short term growing pains for long term success. Here in Georgia, the official sanctioning from the state gave AD's and School Boards one less (fake) reason to hide behind for starting new teams.

It was like a chicken and egg test. We aren't going to add new lax teams until the state sanctions the sport. Well now they have sanctioned the sport, so what is your next excuse?

If you truly want to the sport to grow, it needs to grow within the proper structure along with all other main stream sports - not on the outside by a handful of parents, boosters, and former players. The sport needs to be embraced and accepted by the school boards and the athletic directors. It's clear that the sacntioning does that. It won't happen overnight, but in time it will....

[Sonny]

I'm surprised laxfan25 - that the state (Michigan) doesn't set your officials rates for sanctioned H.S. games. They let your officials association do that?

[GrayBear]

"And teams like St. Paul might be in trouble, as they are banished to the "club" ranks."

We've seen trouble before, and can deal with it. I can promise this: We will continue to play and continue to serve the kids without institutional support, specifically at the high school level, since there will (as someone pointed out) always be schools that do not adopt the sport, so there will always be clubs.

The big question I have is how will the new structure(s) react to us clubs? Methinks some philosophical evolution is in order to embrace a lacrosse reality that may not exist for football or hockey. There are "blended" teams for those, and other sports, and these seem to work well with 2, and sometimes 3 schools banding together. In our case, we draw from a lot more than that, and therefore have to rely on our own governance to absorb that many disparate elements. This is the case because usually not enough lax numbers can be acquired from just 2 or 3 schools--our sweep has to be broader.

There are a lot of unique problems a club like ours can have--problems not contemplated (or bothered with) by schools and leagues--like keeping a full roster of varsity players where there is no "captive" source. Essentially we have two options for personnel: (1) establish and keep a youth "feeder" program [we are]; and (2) recruitment [we haven't to date, but now we will]. The result is an uncertain census from year to year, not to mention the adventure in locating and budgeting for rental of fields every season.

We can handle these things but, it would be a lot easier if, going forward, leagues would show some understanding in accommodating us. Knowing what I know, I'm not optimistic. (end of rant)

Gerry

[LaxRef]

The actual MSHSL bylaw expects a 12 game season, right now teams play 8-10 games generally so there will likely be more opportunities. In addition the bylaw shortens the season which will increase the number of games per week.

At least for Varsity teams. It will be interesting to see how the club teams fit into all this. They may need to have more games before and after the Varsity season to spread out the workload for the officials. We can only hope that the higher visibility of lacrosse in this new world makes it easier to attract new officials, although even if we get 100 new ones next year no one should expect any of the new ones to be good for about 3 years.

[Sonny]

It was my experience here in Georgia that "blended" teams actually inhibit the growth of the sport. What incentive do players and parents have to start teams at their own individual high schools if they can play on a "blended" team in the next town or community?

The parents are the key in this scenario. They pay the local property taxes which fund local education. They can pressure the local school boards and the individual schools to add the sport.

If a kid can't play for a blended team, his parents can pressure the local school to start a new team at his school. And the sport grows again.

[laxfan25]

It was my experience here in Georgia that "blended" teams actually inhibit the growth of the sport. What incentive do players and parents have to start teams at their own individual high schools if they can play on a "blended" team in the next town or community?

The parents are the key in this scenario. They pay the local property taxes which fund local education. They can pressure the local school boards and the individual schools to add the sport.

If a kid can't play for a blended team, his parents can pressure the local school to start a new team at his school. And the sport grows again.

Actually, I think "unified" teams have helped in our state. There are a couple of districts that have built new high schools, and they have played as a combined team to start. It will be a few years before there are enough players in one of the districts to form multpile teams - the other district has a booming MS program, so they will have enough bodies much sooner. If a unified team gives more kids a chance to play, rather than sitting on the outside looking in - I think its OK. Alos, the MHSAA has time limits on how many years you can run as a unified program, so that does give them some sense of urgency.

[GrayBear]

If a kid can't play for a blended team, his parents can pressure the local school to start a new team at his school. And the sport grows again.

I don't share the priorities I sense in your statement--apologize if I'm mis-reading it.

Growth, in and of itself, isn't as important as giving kids who want to play a chance to play where they otherwise wouldn't have one. Blended teams are a necessity and don't inhibit anything, IMO. The trouble I see with your approach is that it appears to sacrifice current opportunity (play with a composite club) as a ploy to pressure schools with the notion that there are unaffiliated players out there waiting for them to start their programs. Problem is, while waiting many kids have lost the chance to play.

Not all schools are going to respond to such "pressure". Some will never have teams, just as some will never have hockey or soccer. As for lacrosse in Saint Paul, we are there for those kids.