graduating form "League" to "Conference"

[NKlaxguy]

The argument that people will confuse MCLA Div I Lacrosse and NCAA Lacrosse is just riduculous.

Really? Because trust me it happens, especially at large schools east of the Great Lakes states. And I don't mean confuse it by the level of play, but confuse it by being associated with a large school etc. The abundance of NCAA varsity out here leads to easy confusion among uneducated fans. And speaking of ridiculous, I think it is just as ridiculous that teams think A & B is possibly confusing.

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.

Well I'm not surprised they don't confuse it in California because most of the people out there still think you guys are running around with pool cleaners. (joking).

League name designations and divisional labeling. A and B. Is it really a big deal? Who cares what other people think?

Amen!

[TheNino57]

Okay, so getting back to the original topic- It is difficult to explain to our freshmen (it's difficult to explain it to some of the older guys who never really understood in the first place) how our organization operates. They're confused when we say "the conference" when we are referring to the "Pacific Northwest Collegiate Lacrosse LEAGUE." "Why do you say conference when the word conference is no where in the title?" There aren't any more leagues, there is only one league. Since the MDIA is out and the MCLA is in, I think this is an ample opportunity to change some conference designations that make more sense on a national scale now, while we are already dealing with new acronyms.

[NKlaxguy]

Okay, so getting back to the original topic- It is difficult to explain to our freshmen (it's difficult to explain it to some of the older guys who never really understood in the first place) how our organization operates. They're confused when we say "the conference" when we are referring to the "Pacific Northwest Collegiate Lacrosse LEAGUE." "Why do you say conference when the word conference is no where in the title?" There aren't any more leagues, there is only one league. Since the MDIA is out and the MCLA is in, I think this is an ample opportunity to change some conference designations that make more sense on a national scale now, while we are already dealing with new acronyms.

Comeee on...it is really that hard to explain/understand?? Have them PM me and I will explain it in two sentences. One reason League/Association is kept is because of tradition. Some of these 'conferences' were around before joining the MCLA/USLIA and, I would assume, would like to keep some connection to the past. Also please consider the following NCAA lacrosse conferences:

Great Western Lacrosse League
Colonial Athletic Association
Patriot League
Liberty League
The Ivy League
Pilgrim League
Mountain Pacific Sport Federation
New England Women's Lacrosse Alliance

If it's ok for the NCAA it's ok for us.

[TheNino57]

Wow. You're not a fan of Arby's Restaurants, are you?

[buffalowill]

Valid points fellas... I do see now how some of the larger institutions back east might confuse MCLA lacrosse and varsity lacrosse. However the point I am trying to make is not that the A and B designations are confusing....but rather that the A and B designations themselves may carry subjective conations. I know from personal experience in the WCLL that people carry predetermined negative views on the B division and B division teams even if they are just a casual fan or uninformed parent. I just feel that is is unfair to these programs.
John Paul...that is a great point you made about the varsity coaches that I had overlooked. However, let me pose this situation....Say a large amount of B teams (and/or conferences) felt that the B league designation unfairly targeted their programs as inferior to their A division counterparts and wanted to change their name to Division II or III as opposed to "B"? Would you suggest following the lose recommendation by the somewhat MCLA associated varsity coaches' council? Or, would you recommend to satisfy a request by the member and paying MCLA programs? Just food for thought.

[laxdad03]

I honestly don't understand how "B" is seen as intrinsically being either any more or less "inferior" sounding than "II" or "III" -- everyone seems to know (and not have any problem with the fact) that NCAA Division II and III teams tend not to be as top-notch proficient (on the whole, and/or at the top levels of the division) as Division I teams -- although of course, like any good (statistically valid, and thereby potentially useful when applied properly) broad generalizations in life, there are certainly individual variations and exceptions. I've seen a lot of posts about MCLA B teams "moving up" to play in the A division. Of course everyone probably understands that the top "B" teams would likely be able to beat some goodly number of "A" teams on a regular basis. Just as there's considerable discussion about MCLA teams being "inferior" to NCAA teams, etc., and whether any MCLA teams will "move up" to Varsity status, who would beat whom, etc.

The divisions ARE different, with different criteria -- that's why different divisions EXIST. Let's just ensure that we have the differences clearly (and fairly) understood, try to let the individual teams be comparatively judged primarily by their own characteristics and accomplishments and not overly burdened on the sole basis of any stereotypical generalizations, and leave it at that.

[Phantanimal]

What if there were colors to represent each division, like in in the American Lacrosse League. They have the blue and gray conferences that act as geographic divisions between the NE and Baltimore/Virginia teams. A color would not divulge any status, just separation since...

Of course everyone probably understands that the top "B" teams would likely be able to beat some goodly number of "A" teams on a regular basis.

...it seems a bit fuzzy exacly where all of our generalizations and specific criteria divide teams in each division. All the teams in a given conference or league are subject to the same dues and the same eligibility checks. All the teams have 1 vote in conference (or league) descisions so if there's already flux between who's A and B and there's an issue between good and bad in the labeling system, remove all of the subjectivity. Make the separation into names without value, it's just a label.

http://www.americanlacrosseleague.org/

[TheNino57]

I honestly don't understand how "B" is seen as intrinsically being either any more or less "inferior" sounding than "II" or "III" -- everyone seems to know (and not have any problem with the fact) that NCAA Division II and III teams tend not to be as top-notch proficient (on the whole, and/or at the top levels of the division) as Division I teams...

Actually, the NCAA divisions have nothing to do with proficiency or skill. The divisions are based on how many scholarships can be given out. Div. I has the most, Div. IAA (football only) slightly less, Div. II has even less, and Div. III has no athletic scholarships.

The complaint about the A vs. B divisions is that discussion continues to view the B division as the lesser skilled division. That may be true of some teams, but is not what is intended. I was of the mindset when the A and B divisions were realligned, the B division was for smaller schools and the A for larger schools (those with a NCAA Div. I football program).

[onpoint]

But also a primary factor in introducing Division B was to give the smaller schools something to play for. Many now Division B teams complained that they could not compete with the Division A schools for national and conference championships. In my mind, what USD and Claremont did is ideal. They used Division B to build their programs and now they believe they can compete on a national level against the best teams in the MCLA. Of course, Division B is great for a lot of teams, but let's remember that skill level was a large factor in switching it up to begin with. The opportunity is there as a program like Sonoma State shows.

[Jana]

I believe the high schools use the baseball model - only in reverse.

A = Small Population
AA = Medium Population
AAA = Large Population

Why don't you just state what you mean?

Small College Division
Large College Division

[TheNino57]

I believe the high schools use the baseball model - only in reverse.

A = Small Population
AA = Medium Population
AAA = Large Population

Why don't you just state what you mean?

Small College Division
Large College Division

Excellent point.

[laxdad03]

Actually, the NCAA divisions have nothing to do with proficiency or skill. The divisions are based on how many scholarships can be given out. Div. I has the most, Div. IAA (football only) slightly less, Div. II has even less, and Div. III has no athletic scholarships.

The complaint about the A vs. B divisions is that discussion continues to view the B division as the lesser skilled division. That may be true of some teams, but is not what is intended. I was of the mindset when the A and B divisions were realligned, the B division was for smaller schools and the A for larger schools (those with a NCAA Div. I football program).

Of course the criteria for the NCAA divisions aren't directly proficiency or skill based. I don't think I said otherwise. I just pointed out that no one seems surprised or hurt that Division I tends to have better teams on the whole and at the top levels, and I would think this would be the case for the MCLA as well. I think onpoint's take on this is just right.

It will be very interesting to see how USD and Claremont will do now against various other teams in Division A on a more regular basis (in a way similar to posters on laxpower discussing how LeMoyne and Salisbury would be able to beat the Sienas of the world, but would probably have a tough time at present with Syracuse et al, and in a way similar to it being interesting to see how MCLA teams fare periodically against NCAA ones). "A" and "B" are fine names, probably as good as (but different from) I, II, and III. Sufficiently well-informed people should understand that they relate basically/originally to school size or whatever (and THIS should be the focus of efforts to educate, rather than griping that "B" doesn't sound as good as "A" in the same or a different way that "II" might not sound as good as "I"), and enjoy watching the teams play.