Club Teams That Could Compete In MCLA

[GCUlaxn1]

If money wasnt an issue what club teams could compete in Division 1, 2, 3,? Any thoughts???

[mnlax9]

club A- BYU (D1/D2), Florida(D2/D3) , Colorado State(D1/D2), Colorado (D3)
club B- Montana, St. Johns (MN), Westminister, Dayton (All D3)

[wingslax5]

Westminster (UT) is planning on going D3 in the next 2 years.

[UTlax31]

Dude...Florida's good...but not the best team in the SELC... Georgia was the best team in the SELC so they should def be on that list. So should Michigan, Florida State, and most years Virginia Tech. UC Santa Barbera and really almost any team from the west coast would be able to hold their own against most D2 teams and Lower end D1 teams.

[amersurfcrwn]

Georgia was the best team in the SELC so they should def be on that list.

Yeah I agree, they're real solid

[dwyer28]

i think that any of the big colleges like BYU,Florida,Georgia and like Michigan would go Div I to fit with the rest of their athletics and plus most of those guys on the club wouldnt be on the actually Varsity team.

but i think that the UCSB,BYU,Oregon,and Colorado and Colorado State teams could keep up with some lower D1 teams..

[Dlaxer6]

i just got back from BYU camp and someone was saying that they scrimaged or something against a D2 team and beat them. coach lamb also said that he thinks that if they tried really hard they could possibly be D1 in four to five years but that was just his oppion

[dta06]

i just got back from BYU camp and someone was saying that they scrimaged or something against a D2 team and beat them. coach lamb also said that he thinks that if they tried really hard they could possibly be D1 in four to five years but that was just his oppion

BYU scrimmaged Colorado college which is a mid-end DIII school, and beat them 15-5

[GoDucks34]

Oregon, GO DUCKS, and BYU who we lost to in the championship.

[livinglegend]

what about lindenwood?

[aaphs84]

What's the point of this thread?

Schools that add varsity teams do not just pick up the club team and make it varsity. It's like a whole new team. Maybe a few of the club guys would be on it. How good a current club team is has no effect on how good that school would be at NCAA lacrosse. Different players. Probably different coaches. WAY, WAY better support. Different team.

and Laxmiddie32...SELC schools can only be D1 if they want to be varsity. They are all too big to have D3 sports.

[UTlax31]

The point of this thread is to converse about how there are players from different areas that are pretty good and either did not get looked at by any teams or they decided not to play at a school with a varsity team. We are comparing the team as a whole to varsity teams. We shouldn't be speculating if they could move up or not because they can't and prolly won't, but we can atleast imagine how the teams would match up against varsity teams in certain divisions...

[fenwicklax89]

boston college

[egrlax10]

i think that the top 25, maybe top 30 teams in mcla a division could go d3, and the top 10 teams would be competitive. and you have to remember, if any of these teams were to move to the ncaa ranks, they would bring in a lot of new players and they would probably get new coaches, so you cant really guess how competitive the mcla teams would be in the ncaa.

sorry aaphs84, just noticed that i posted the same thing as you.

[spenny]

What's the point of this thread?

Schools that add varsity teams do not just pick up the club team and make it varsity. It's like a whole new team. Maybe a few of the club guys would be on it. How good a current club team is has no effect on how good that school would be at NCAA lacrosse. Different players. Probably different coaches. WAY, WAY better support. Different team.

and Laxmiddie32...SELC schools can only be D1 if they want to be varsity. They are all too big to have D3 sports.

exactly. check out the number of kids from the St. John's club team made the varsity when they went D1

[dwyer28]

any of the colleges with big names like georgia,michigan,BYU,oregon,TN,etc went varsity they would probably be really good in division 1 anyways because of recruiting and just because of being a big name college good recruits would probably go there.

[McSwarmFan]

Are we talking about moving from Club to NCAA Div I - III?
If so there are three somewhat intertwined issues that each school/conference would need to consider in elevating lacrosse as with any other sport.

1. The first is budget issues. Varsity sports are expensive. Can/will the atheletic department support a new sport, which will require a large upfront investment even on an elevation. (THis would vary based on whether the athletic department hosts the club or if they are separate, and if the U continues to maintain a club level team.

2. Along with the budget issues comes Title IX compliance, unless the university is single/gender. This can result in :banghead:

3. The other is NCAA regulations and preferences. The strongest one being that schools select a Divisional affiliation and the NCAA strongly desires that they compete only in that division. LaCrosse has a few Hockey have several teams that play up. Including the reigning NCAA I Champ JHU for lax, Col College for hockey. Most schools that play div II for other sports have to play Div I for sports that offer only I and III.
The twist is that teams playing Div I Basketball (it might be football too) must play all other sports in Div I so the big schools Mich. Fla. MN etc would not have an option of playing down. The reason is Basketball and football generate so much money at the DI level they have an unfair advantage.

The assumption that the players won't be the same is accurate to a degree, but it will provide the transistion time, but the recruiting etc will most likely have to start before the competition does. The point being, and supporting this discussion is that there are lacrosse players with the chops to play NCAA lax who are currently on club teams. That will likely always be the case, as some talented lacrosse players choose to attend schools that offer only club level teams.

I would not be surprised to see the MIAC (St. John's Univ conference) in MN to offer LAX at the div III level within the next five years.

[GCUlaxn1]

Well rumor has it that BYU is playing In the LAX for Lukema. I think they could compete pretty well if Denver can

[scarsdalelax08]

BYU and CSU would easily play D1 mainly BYU, BYU would handle some teams they pull in 99% of Mormon recruits like all-american recruits from MD that could go to top tier D1 schools go to BYU because it allows them to go on there religious mission

[lax21goalie2008]

Florida State is a pretty good club team.

[Laxattack05]

Not UI. yet.

[dwyer28]

BYU and CSU would easily play D1 mainly BYU, BYU would handle some teams they pull in 99% of Mormon recruits like all-american recruits from MD that could go to top tier D1 schools go to BYU because it allows them to go on there religious mission

Exactly. those guys are so good because they get ALL the mormon talent from the east coast.

[byualum]

Exactly. those guys are so good because they get ALL the mormon talent from the east coast.
Not quite...in the past few year very good Mormon players have played at UMass, Navy, Army, Denver and Notre Dame de Namur.

BYU is playing in the Lax for Leukemia this fall in the Baltimore area. Other teams playing are: Syracuse, North Carolina, Johns Hopkins, Penn State, Towson, Rutgers, UMBC, Air Force, Quinnipiac, Albany, Binghamton, Mt. St. Mary's, Villanova, St. John's and Washington College.

And just to be clear, MCLA teams like BYU, CSU and Michigan would HAVE TO play at the DI level. The NCAA no longer allows athletic programs to field teams is multiple divisions. There are a few programs that have been grandfathered in, like the Hopkins lacrosse programs (men and women) and the Colorado College hockey program. These teams play DI competition, while most of the other sports at those schools compete at a lower level.

[Pinball]

St. John's (mn) is unique because it does not have to worry about Title IX

[Lax101]

A few thoughts:

1) To say that INSERT CLUB TEAM beat INSERT NCAA TEAM in a scrimmage means that they can hang with NCAA level teams is too far of a jump. The point of scrimmages for a NCAA program is not to play their hardest, not to work push themselves to the fullest, but rather to use it as a learning tool for how the team plays at a holistic level. Meanwhile, many of these club teams are playing at 110%, with a chip on their shoulder trying to prove themselves that they were good enough to play at these schools. I've seen plenty of scrimmages between club and NCAA teams-the NCAA teams go at 75%, the club teams at full speed.

Let me use another reference: Le Moyne plays Syracuse annually, and Le Moyne usually wins. Does this mean Le Moyne could hang with Syracuse in a real game? Absolutely not. Le Moyne, although probably the most polished D2 program, plays a painfully ugly style of lacrosse that left visitors in the press box this year at the NCAA Finals cringing at their mediocrity. Yet Le Moyne will win a scrimmage against one of the best teams historically in DI lacrosse

2) To say that these kids outside of hot beds couldn't get recruited, at this day and age, is a laughable excuse. There are so many elite teams on the West Coast, so many rising camps, so many high school programs, that there is a way to get attention from east coast schools.

I'm from Eastern Massachusetts, the largest US Lacrosse Chapter in the country and home to a handful of the top 100-200 programs in the country. Does this mean I EVER had lines of coaches and scouts coming to my games? Absolutely not. The only way any kids from my area get recruited is the same: writing letters to coaches, attending showcases, going to camps, playing on club teams, etc.

There's a growing attitude with players outside hotbeds that east coast players have it easy and coaches give us much more attention. I admit, NCAA coaches may weigh east coast players higher if they played against better competition, which always isn't available in the west coast.

Otherwise, saying these west coast kids "didn't have a chance" to play at an NCAA school is a terrible excuse. Kyle Kapron (aka Kryptic) played in one of the weaker west coast states, yet he's at Navy. And he went through the same recruiting process that the average east coast player goes through.

3) To say that the top club teams could play at a D1 level is a specious claim at the least. Everybody likes to say that their buddy down the street is D1 calibre, or the best player on their team should be an All-American, etc. Let's look at the facts: the average D1 team gets to seek out the best players they want, and they receive countless letters, game tapes, and messages from prospective athletes. And they can bait players with scholarship and aid. If you're a top team in Division I, you already have the allure of being a respected, highly competitive program.

Meanwhile, club teams don't get to REALLY recruit. Some have tryouts, and some don't. Most of these players don't choose the school primarily for lacrosse, although some like having a quality club team. And on top of that, most have to pay to play, on top of their tuition.

So look at these two teams' situations...and you're saying so many of these teams can hang with programs with all of these resources?

It's true: Lower end DIII programs are worse than high end high school varsity programs in terms of skill level. Some top club teams could beat them. The same applies for D2. But to make a blanket statement about teams being competitive with DI is ludicrous.

Some people are already skeptical about top DIII programs (i.e. Salisbury) being able to hang with DI programs, and there's some legitimacy to that. But to say these kids could form a decent DI program, particularly when none would likely make the team if the school went varsity, is farfetched at best.

4) Some players look great, but the entire team is no where near as deep. A lot of the club teams, at least the local ones like BC, have some great players, but they're ultimately show-offs and hotshots who may look like D1 players but lack the precision, field vision, and overall athleticism that a top D1 player would have.

Is that to say that all top club guys are show-offs? Does this mean that all club players are inferior to D1 talent? Of course not. But don't be fooled by these club hotshots when the teams lack the recruits and commitment, and these kids are looking for the circus shot goal.

[AttackTC]

Well said, as an MCLA alum I also agree that no club teams could be competetive in D1. While there are players in the MCLA who could make a top D1 team, the MCLA has yet to produce a team of players of that caliber.

One huge difference is the athleticism and speed of the game. D1 teams train year round and condition heavily outside of practice. Some players in the MCLA do take it very seriously and it reflects in their ability to play at a high level. Every year more club teams start to work on their athletic abilities more and more, and as the abilities start to catch up in the near future so will their chances of being competetive.

[Eclipse]

A few thoughts:

1) To say that INSERT CLUB TEAM beat INSERT NCAA TEAM in a scrimmage means that they can hang with NCAA level teams is too far of a jump. The point of scrimmages for a NCAA program is not to play their hardest, not to work push themselves to the fullest, but rather to use it as a learning tool for how the team plays at a holistic level. Meanwhile, many of these club teams are playing at 110%, with a chip on their shoulder trying to prove themselves that they were good enough to play at these schools. I've seen plenty of scrimmages between club and NCAA teams-the NCAA teams go at 75%, the club teams at full speed.

Let me use another reference: Le Moyne plays Syracuse annually, and Le Moyne usually wins. Does this mean Le Moyne could hang with Syracuse in a real game? Absolutely not. Le Moyne, although probably the most polished D2 program, plays a painfully ugly style of lacrosse that left visitors in the press box this year at the NCAA Finals cringing at their mediocrity. Yet Le Moyne will win a scrimmage against one of the best teams historically in DI lacrosse


This could not be more true. We played a few club teams this year, and most of them we just sort of walked in not really caring a whole lot, and clearing our benches by the second half, with the only exception being Lindenwood.

Nobody in the NCAA cares if you beat a club team, but kids in the MCLA really care if they beat an NCAA team, because it just gives them self assurance that they play on an "NCAA Caliber Team" even though a good majority of the time, its not true. Its all the reason you don't hear about it when NCAA teams slaughter MCLA, but always hear about it when an MCLA team takes down an NCAA team.

Case in point, the BEST MCLA teams are equal to Mid Level D3 teams, or a little better.

[aaphs84]

Maybe Fontbonne is not the best example. No offense, but Lindenwood was the only half-way decent MCLA team you played, and they beat you...and while they are good and take it more seriously than most, they are not one of the elite MCLA teams.

I think it's very simplistic to say that NCAA vs. MCLA matchups are always taken lightly by the NCAA team and incredibly seriously by the MCLA team. Again speaking about the elite teams, they usually approach scrimmages the same way the NCAA teams do. Their focus is to win a national championship in the MCLA, so a team like CSU is going to be way, way more up to play BYU, for example, as opposed to Colorado College. When BYU goes out to the Lax for Leukemia tournament this fall I guarantee they'll go deep into their roster. They'll be fired up to play those teams, but they'll approach them as scrimmages.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there's a difference between the elite MCLA teams and the rest, just as there is between the elite NCAA teams and the rest. Nobody in the MCLA with any self-respect or knowledge is saying the top teams are the same as decent D1 teams or top D3 teams. They shouldn't be. They don't have nearly the same resources. But given the lack of support they get, it's pretty impressive what they are able to do.

[Eclipse]

Although I agree Fontbonne isnt the best example, I think your looking at it a little wrong.

I agree Lindenwood is not Elite, but they certainly are good. They do make it to the National Tourney every year. While they did beat us, keep it on the spectrum. That Good, but not Elite MCLA, hardly took down a team with 35 Freshman on it. Keep that in perspective. Where Lindenwood lands in the top 20 every year in MCLA, my program is nowhere near that at this moment, and had a team full of kids fresh out of highschool.

Either way, I think I can agree that there is a difference between the Elite and the Best, and clearly a large difference between those elite, and the NCAA.

[RYU]

Lindenwood isn't a good example to use as a representation of an upper echelon MCLA team, b/c Lindenwood is actually a Varsity team. They are fully sponsored by their school, but since Lindenwood is part of the NAIA, and there are so few other NAIA mlax teams, they compete in MCLA. In fact, Lindenwood might have the best resources & funding in all of MCLA.

[Eclipse]

Lindenwood isn't a good example to use as a representation of an upper echelon MCLA team, b/c Lindenwood is actually a Varsity team. They are fully sponsored by their school, but since Lindenwood is part of the NAIA, and there are so few other NAIA mlax teams, they compete in MCLA. In fact, Lindenwood might have the best resources & funding in all of MCLA.

I agree, they have very very nice facilities. I wasn't referring as much to their varsity status as I was the skill level in which they fall in MCLA.

[laxplaya77]

I think in 5-7 years michigan, ohio state, florida state, byu, and vermont could compete with the major d1 teams like hopkins and duke for the title.

[shiftylax]

Lindenwood isn't a good example to use as a representation of an upper echelon MCLA team, b/c Lindenwood is actually a Varsity team. They are fully sponsored by their school, but since Lindenwood is part of the NAIA, and there are so few other NAIA mlax teams, they compete in MCLA. In fact, Lindenwood might have the best resources & funding in all of MCLA.

I coached at a small D3 school a few years ago and we played lindenwood in Florida for spring break. We smashed them with freshmen and sophomores playing the entire second half. In the 4th quarter their D men tried to fight kids on my team. I say this not to prove superiority, but to make this point - club teams suffer against NCAA teams because of superior coaching and discipline - not necessarily skill.

[spenny]

I think in 5-7 years michigan, ohio state, florida state, byu, and vermont could compete with the major d1 teams like hopkins and duke for the title.

in 5-7 years none of those teams will be NCAA varsity teams. (other than vermont and Ohio state which are both currently NCAA teams)

they are all big time football schools and title 9 currently makes adding mens sports and football incompatible
check out the link to the article i posted earlier today in the "schools that could go D1 thread"

[The Doors]

I coached at a small D3 school a few years ago and we played lindenwood in Florida for spring break. We smashed them with freshmen and sophomores playing the entire second half. In the 4th quarter their D men tried to fight kids on my team. I say this not to prove superiority, but to make this point - club teams suffer against NCAA teams because of superior coaching and discipline - not necessarily skill.

You could not be more wrong here. At the end of the day, it comes down to skill. The top talent most always heads to the best schools. This is true for any sport. That is why Hopkins is always a powerhouse in lacrosse, North Carolina in Basketball, and USC in football.

Also, take a look around at the top MCLA teams in the country. John Paul at Michican, Jason Lamb at BYU, Flip at CSU, and AJ Stevens at Illinois. These coaches are some of the best in the business, regardless of league affiliation. In fact, I would argue they are better coaches than Danowski, Tierney, or Pietremala considering they don't always have the best talent coming in, have to raise their own money, and still consider to produce results year in and year out. Can any of these teams compete against Hopkins or Syracuse for a title? Probably not, but its because the caliber of their players on the field and not the quality of coaching on the bench

[socal laxdawg16]

ucsb and byu would definantly be able to compete with d1 schools, and hopefully ucsb goes d1 because thats where I'm going next year.

[kleinlax-75]

texas a&m could easily field a DIII team along with UT and arizona

[spenny]

they are all division 1 schools. they would have to field D1 lax teams

[shiftylax]

You could not be more wrong here. At the end of the day, it comes down to skill. The top talent most always heads to the best schools. This is true for any sport. That is why Hopkins is always a powerhouse in lacrosse, North Carolina in Basketball, and USC in football.

Also, take a look around at the top MCLA teams in the country. John Paul at Michican, Jason Lamb at BYU, Flip at CSU, and AJ Stevens at Illinois. These coaches are some of the best in the business, regardless of league affiliation. In fact, I would argue they are better coaches than Danowski, Tierney, or Pietremala considering they don't always have the best talent coming in, have to raise their own money, and still consider to produce results year in and year out. Can any of these teams compete against Hopkins or Syracuse for a title? Probably not, but its because the caliber of their players on the field and not the quality of coaching on the bench

Aren't you making my point for me? I mean my opinion isn't to knock the MCLA coaches, it's to explain that the coaching pool isn't as deep with club teams - thusly the talent isn't as deep. As I expected you name doff the good coaches of the cliub teams - where are the coaches of the bad teams? Surely you cannot believe that all of the club teams have better coaches than NCAA teams - if they did they would be coaching NCAA teams - its that simple. Good coach = good discipline.

As for raising money - I'd look at the dues numbers for all of those club teams you are touting. D3 teams work with miniscule budgets considering that the NCAA forces all teams to have matching colour gloves and helmets on top of the uniforms. Doesnt that take skill? Do you know how many rules there are for NCAA programs regarding fundraising? Dozens.

Also - Aren't the best coaches coaching D1 schools? Is the good old boy lax mafia that strong? The answers would surprise you if you dug a little deeper than defending club programs.

Again, your opinion is your opinion and I think that Jason Lamb in particular would be a top tier coach anywhere in the country. Consider this: Would any of those coaches you named take a position elsewhere considering how entrenched they are at their current programs? They're all practically ambassadors for their programs - especially Flip, Lamb, and Paul. I hear what youre saying, but I think saying that a club team could compete with a top 20 D1 or D3 team is lunacy. (I'd say D2, but then it would only be top 10 - at best).

In the end, its good for duscussion, but leads to little more than bickering amongst completely different members of the same community.

[The Doors]

There are good and bad coaches in all sports at all levels across all divisions of play. Saying NCAA coaches are superior to MCLA ones is just asinine, and the reverse would be true as well. As someone who has coached across all levels of play, and currently in the interview process for an NCAA job, I can tell you some of the best coaches I have ever met were not even at the collegiate level.

MCLA teams also have to have matching gloves, helmets, unis etc. And this money isnt provided by school, but by the players.

I never once said in my post that any MCLA could hang with NCAA programs, but the reason of them not being able to compete is much less about poor coaching as it is about lack of talent.

As someone who is an ambassador of the sport in an up and coming region, a former MCLA player, MCLA coach, HS coach, and hopefully NCAA assistant, I like to think I am more versed in the nuances in the play at the highest levels. The reason NCAA teams are more touted is because they have the better players, recruiting, tradition, etc. Very few teams MCLA teams could compete with NCAA teams at any level, but it is not because of the lack of quality coaches.

[shiftylax]

FYI: the large majority of my post was not directed squarely on you. I will clarify my nuanced suggestion that the best coaches are in the NCAA - particularly D1. There is a "read between the lines" thing going on there that you may have missed...

[Laxer123321]

BYU would be a solid DI team. They held their own against Villanova, who is a good team. They have some sick players who I bet got DI offers but passed them up.