graduating form "League" to "Conference"

[buffalowill]

On a somewhat related note I have always thought it odd that the MCLA names the two divisions "A" and "B". I feel that the "B" division name is inappropriate because it is easy to relate B league with bush league or somehow not as good (or organized) as the A division which is not the case. I see no reason why the association would not change the names to MCLA Div.1 and Div. 2. If club rugby and club hockey national organizations do this why not us? MCLA Div. 2 champion sounds a whole lot better to a non-lacrosse person (and university personnel) than Div. B champion.

[TheNino57]

I concur with you on that. Div. 1 and Div. 2 makes much more sense. I was considering bringing this topic up too in this thread. With NCAA Div. 1 and Div. 2 (also, Div. 3) setting the benchmark, I think that people not familiar with lacrosse/MCLA would be able to understand the difference between the Divisions much easier

[bste_lax]

I want to say someone once mentioned that the referee council (or someone else) referred to us as "Division IIII" to go along with NCAA Division I, II, III. So in order to make it less confusing, they went with Division A and B.

This wasn't the main reason but one of the reasons they went with A and B.

I could be totally wrong on this but I could have sworn someone posted about this in the past.

[Sonny]

I want to say someone once mentioned that the referee council (or someone else) referred to us as "Division IIII" to go along with NCAA Division I, II, III. So in order to make it less confusing, they went with Division A and B.

This wasn't the main reason but one of the reasons they went with A and B.

I could be totally wrong on this but I could have sworn someone posted about this in the past.

Partly right.... but I think the MDIA Council didn't want to be confused with the NCAA Varsity Lacrosse. Thus, they chose divisions that were different then the NCAA Div. 1, Div. 2, etc.

[Phantanimal]

I think the letters A and B can carry subjective connotations, whereas numbers, or Roman numerals, present no semantic value. The NAIA has 350 D I and D II collegiate sports programs. http://naia.cstv.com/ Many reputable schools compete in this association and have existed without any confusion with the NCAA. This didn't seem to be an issue with their governing body... Individuals exist and accept positions to properly regulate the teams within a given division anyway. As long as the proper context (NCAA, MCLA, NAIA or whomever) is established it shouldn't be difficult to identify any given team. Of course this banks on having competent individuals occupying the council.

[NKlaxguy]

It would not be a good idea to change to Division 1 and 2. The last thing we need is some kid from (insert A team school here) going around saying he plays Division 1 lacrosse. Or a casual fan going to what he is told is a Division 1 lacrosse game and finding a level of lacrosse not close to what Division 1 NCAA truly is. All of us involved with the MCLA know the difference, but A and B is set up so as not to confuse the average fan. We don't want to accidentally mislead the new fan/player in regards to the different levels of collegiate lacrosse.

The NAIA is not a good example, it has been around for over 50 years, and although those schools may be 'reputable' I guarantee you the average sports fan could not name five NAIA schools. Unless you are a small time, West of the Mississippi basketball/football fan the NAIA does not register on your radar. If you meet a 'D1' baskeball player from Lindsey Wilson College (NAIA D1), you know he doesn't really play NCAA D1, because no sports fan outside of that school and it's alumni has ever even head of the school. If you meet a lacrosse player from Michigan, and you don't know anything about lacrosse, you might assume he plays D1.

This all leads to the point that some might argue NCAA Varsity lacrosse is threatened by a highly successful club league like the MCLA. Some athletic directors might see an MCLA team as an easy out and an excuse to not have a varsity team. Exactly another reason why we need A and B labeled divisions; to differentiate ourselves from the varsity counterparts.

As long as the proper context (NCAA, MCLA, NAIA or whomever) is established it shouldn't be difficult to identify any given team. Of course this banks on having competent individuals occupying the council.

I don't see how it is any councils responsibility to make sure every player/representative who says what league their school plays for always says 'MCLA' or 'NCAA' before the stated division. If your implying that the fact that we have an A and B division is the result of incompetence I would have to say that is a pretty stupid comment.

[KnoxVegas]

I want to say someone once mentioned that the referee council (or someone else) referred to us as "Division IIII" to go along with NCAA Division I, II, III. So in order to make it less confusing, they went with Division A and B.

This wasn't the main reason but one of the reasons they went with A and B.

I could be totally wrong on this but I could have sworn someone posted about this in the past.

Partly right.... but I think the MDIA Council didn't want to be confused with the NCAA Varsity Lacrosse. Thus, they chose divisions that were different then the NCAA Div. 1, Div. 2, etc.

For the record, the NCAA uses Roman numerals to differentiate its divisions (i.e. Division I, Division II, Division III and for football Division I-AA)

As for the MCLA and the use of Division A and Division B, can we get a definitive definition of what constitutes an "A" and a "B" team?

[TheNino57]

As for the MCLA and the use of Division A and Division B, can we get a definitive definition of what constitutes an "A" and a "B" team?

Please elaborate.

[KnoxVegas]

To be more specific, that if Team X joins a MCLA-member conference and fits the definition of what a Division A team is, then Team X must compete at the Division A-level. Team X should not be allowed to compete as a Division B team with caveats. Either Team X is a Division A team or a Division B team.

Arkansas and Memphis compete in the GRLC B Division but are by definition Division A teams. These two schools are not eligible for the playoffs or nationals. If there was a new definition, then these schools might have the opportunity to compete for the post-season. I know that from last year Oklahoma, Wyoming, Alabama and UNLV competed as Division B teams in their respective conferences.

How to redefine Division A and B is something that I feel needs to be addressed. We lost a good team from the GRLC in '06 with Northern Illinois dropping out and joining the GLLL over this question.

[Phantanimal]

I don't see how it is any councils responsibility to make sure every player/representative who says what league their school plays for always says 'MCLA' or 'NCAA' before the stated division. If your implying that the fact that we have an A and B division is the result of incompetence I would have to say that is a pretty stupid comment.

I'm not implying any incompetence, nor would I ever because I'm impressed with our representation. To me, the A and B decision could have been decided by a coin flip. 6 and 1 half dozen the other, I just like numbers better. We still play... I'm trying to say that the sports organizing body, any sports orgainizing body for that matter, exists to meet demand from interested groups of players. If someone is interested in playing sport "x" they are responsible for understanding their place in the whole scheme of that organized sport.

The last thing we need is some kid from (insert A team school here) going around saying he plays Division 1 lacrosse.

If somone wants to misrepresent themselves that's their ethical dilemma. It's not the councils responsibility, you're right, it's up to a player to tell people the truth. Also, if a fan calls themselves a fan they should know better than to label a team incorrectly. Seriously, we live with access to the internet which can clarify these things in seconds.

[buffalowill]

I have to give the B division some more love:
Here are a few examples of national club organizations that use the DI, DII and DIII divisional distinctions.

Collegiate Water Polo Association
http://www.collegiatewaterpolo.com/html/MenSchd2006.htm
Interesting they have DI and DIII divisions only

USA Collegiate Rugby
http://www.usarugby.org/#
They have Collegeiate Div I which includes some "varsity" programs (NOT NCAA) and D II

American Collegiate Hockey Association
http://www.achahockey.org/index.php
This national organization (that is probably closest to the MCLA in terms of regulations and organization) has DI, DII and DIII divisions.

As much as I hate to add them:
The NCLL
http://www.ncllax.com/

They have non-varsity school teams competing as NCLL Div. I memebers. Have the varsity coaches requested that these schools not use the D I and DII distinctions?

The argument that people will confuse MCLA Div I Lacrosse and NCAA Lacrosse is just riduculous. At UCLA NOBODY confused the ACHA D II Hockey Team or the CWPA D I water polo teams with the varsity teams on campus...it just would not happen. This is just my personal experience, perhaps at a smaller school with a smaller athletic department the situation is different.

[scooter]

I think that lacrosse would be different, since so many of the MCLA schools are huge schools. Kansas, Texas, Illinois, USC, Michigan, etc.... are all very recognizable school names that are frequently on ESPN and other networks for other sports be it NCAA basketball or football.

To the casual fan, there would be no reason to think that lacrosse is different than the other sports. UNC has a NCAA sanctioned DI basketball and lacrosse, but Kansas has NCAA sanctioned DI basketball and then MCLA D1 lacrosse....

I think it would be quite hard to differentiate amongst the two if they had the same numbering system. Even if NCAA uses Roman Numerals, verbally both leagues would be Division 1

[TheNino57]

The argument that people will confuse MCLA Div I Lacrosse and NCAA Lacrosse is just riduculous. At UCLA NOBODY confused the ACHA D II Hockey Team or the CWPA D I water polo teams with the varsity teams on campus...it just would not happen. This is just my personal experience, perhaps at a smaller school with a smaller athletic department the situation is different.

Point well made. At our games, we get about 20-30 spectators (depending on weather). I find it hard to believe that any of these "fans" will confuse our B Division club program with a NCAA Division II Varsity program- especially because almost all of the spectators are watching because they know players on the team.

[John Paul]

To be more specific, that if Team X joins a MCLA-member conference and fits the definition of what a Division A team is, then Team X must compete at the Division A-level. Team X should not be allowed to compete as a Division B team with caveats. Either Team X is a Division A team or a Division B team.

We do have a strict definition. The teams you mentioned are A teams as far the national is concerned. If a conference wants to allow them to play a B schedule that's up to the conference, but the MCLA considers them A for purposes of post-season, awards, rankings, etc. (all of which they are eligible for).

Point well made. At our games, we get about 20-30 spectators (depending on weather).

The typical DII or DIII game is not much different. Very few fans attend at many schools.


The assertion that we used A and B rather than 1 and 2 in order to avoid confusion with the NCAA is correct. The negative connotations about being club are going to exist regardless of what we call ourselves. In fact, I could argue that by switching to 1 and 2 we open ourselves up to even more of that. Calling ourselves Division 1 and 2 only adds legitimacy in the eyes of those who would then assume we are varsity. As soon as you explain that you are not, you're back where you started.

There is also a political aspect to this that many don't see. Our organization needs to fit into the lacrosse world. Many of our teams now play varsity teams on a regular basis, and many of our coaches have personal and professional relationships with varsity coaches. Our organization has gained a lot of respect, and that has helped teams schedule games, coaches and players get jobs, and maybe even a player or two being looked at for professional lacrosse opportunities. We work directly with the IMLCA (varsity coaches association) and we have a voting seat on the USL Coaches Council Exec. Bd. Changing our division names wouldn't jeapordize any of that, in fact most would probably not even notice, but it wouldn't be a smart political move.

They have non-varsity school teams competing as NCLL Div. I memebers. Have the varsity coaches requested that these schools not use the D I and DII distinctions?

The argument that people will confuse MCLA Div I Lacrosse and NCAA Lacrosse is just riduculous. At UCLA NOBODY confused the ACHA D II Hockey Team or the CWPA D I water polo teams with the varsity teams on campus...it just would not happen. This is just my personal experience, perhaps at a smaller school with a smaller athletic department the situation is different.

My guess is no, but the difference is that none of those organizations have the kind of relationship we do with the varsity world, and the other sports don't have the same varsity growth compared to youth/high school growth issues we do in lacrosse.


That fact is MCLA teams are club teams, not varsity. When I first started I used to get chafed at being called club (ironically, our team was very much a club team back then in how we operated). Now it doesn't bother me. I'm proud of what we've been able to achieve. I'd rather meet someone with low expectations and prove them wrong then have to explain when they find out we are not what they thought we were (although I'm always a bit flattered when they assume we are varsity from seeing us). Some will not take you seriously until the varsity label is added (and if you read the forums on other sites, even then they'll only take you seriously if you're winning championships). I've found that most, once they understand what the MCLA is doing and what its teams are accomplishing, have a lot of respect.

[Zeuslax]

Very good post.


We are really talking about 2 things here. League name designations and divsional labeling. A and B. Is it really a big deal? Who cares what other people think? The real detractors will be hard to win over anyway? I tell you what, I received more emails this year from potential players saying that they WANT to play in our system. In fact some would perfer it? Of course, why not. We are a legitamate and viable option. Not many would have said that 5 years ago.