The NCAA News - News and Features

The NCAA News -- November 9, 1998

Championships crossroads

Division II Convention delegates face decisions on whether to eliminate men's lacrosse, ice hockey events

BY DAVID PICKLE
STAFF WRITER

Division II has quietly arrived at a major moment of transition in its championships program.

At the 1999 NCAA Convention, delegates will vote on whether to eliminate the Division II Men's Ice Hockey Championship and whether to continue the Division II Men's Lacrosse Championship.

If the Convention discontinues either championship, it will do something that has not been done before. Never has any of the three divisions eliminated a championship without leaving a National Collegiate championship alternative in place.

To understand how Division II arrived at this point, a bit of history is necessary:

A division championship must be sponsored by at least 40 institutions. A moratorium permitting championships to continue with low numbers expires this year, but for most sports, the issue is moot. That is because the 1997 Convention approved legislation that no Olympic sport can be discontinued without the approval of the membership. That is why 1999 Convention Proposal No. 2-21 is necessary to end the Division II Men's Ice Hockey Championship.

But lacrosse is not an Olympic sport.

Because the championship moratorium is about to expire and because only 30 Division II institutions sponsor lacrosse -- 10 fewer than the required number -- the 1999 Division II Men's Lacrosse Championship will be the final one unless Division II approves Proposal No. 2-19 at the January Convention.

The discontinuation of an NCAA championship is rare. Gender-specific National Collegiate fencing championships were eliminated in 1990, but a coed championship was established in their place. Division II discontinued its men's gymnastics championships in 1985 and its women's gymnastics championships in 1987, but Division II institutions retained access to National Collegiate championships in both sports. Boxing was voted out in 1961, but it was discontinued for everybody.

In the case of the Division II Men's Ice Hockey Championship, sponsorship is at such a low level that there is no meaningful support for continuing the event. The top programs have migrated to Division I, leaving only a few schools behind. By next year, only seven institutions will be eligible for the Division II Men's Ice Hockey Championship, and almost everybody agrees that seven is not enough for a viable national championship.

But in lacrosse, the issue is quite different.

Sponsorship growing

Supporters believe that the quality of play in the division is high and that sponsorship is growing despite a number of impediments over which supporters have no control.

Ron Hebert, men's lacrosse coach at Northwood University and former president of the Division II Lacrosse Coaches Association, noted that 17 Division II institutions sponsored men's lacrosse when the championship was established in 1992.

"We're at 30 now," Hebert said. "But we've lost a number of schools to Divisions I and III. Springfield went to III, Denver to I and Quinnipiac to I."

Indeed, if Division II men's lacrosse had been able to keep all of its sponsoring institutions, it might not be in its current predicament since significant net growth has been achieved. There simply hasn't been enough of it. "Losing even one member is big in this situation," Hebert said.

Lacrosse is a regional sport, contested mostly on the East Coast. The men's championship is a popular Division I event, but it was sponsored by just 52 institutions in 1997-98 -- only 12 over the minimum.

So the pool of possible sponsoring institutions is limited to begin with. Beyond that, the growth of the men's game may be complicated by several Title IX considerations.

The most obvious one is that adding men's lacrosse as a new sport would cause a proportionality problem at almost any institution unless it was accompanied by the addition of a comparable women's sport.

However, proportionality is not the only gender question. For instance, some women's emerging sports are close to the required number of sponsors but have not been elevated to full championship status because they haven't met the standards. At the NCAA Title IX Seminar earlier this year, questions were raised about why some men's championships were continuing below the required level of sponsors while women's emerging sports with similar sponsorship could not be established.

Also, Division II currently has 13 men's championships and 10 women's championships. If the division eliminates the two men's championships and adds women's golf (which likely will happen in 1999-2000), it would have 11 championships for each gender. Some believe that would leave the division in a more appealing position legally if the U.S. Supreme Court decides in Smith v. NCAA that federal antidiscrimination laws apply directly to the Association.

Challenges from the beginning

Division II coaches do not seem to blame Title IX for the imperiled status of their championship. Instead, they appear to look at it more as a fact of life -- one of the many obstacles that they have to deal with.

In fact, the championship has had to fight since its birth. It was created with less sponsorship than normally would be required -- along with the men's ice hockey and women's field hockey championships -- through special legislation after Division III opted to create its own championships in those sports. Two years later, the Convention established 40 as the minimum number for a division championship. All championships had to comply by 1998-99. The clock has been ticking on the Division II Men's Lacrosse Championship since then.

Tony Caiazza, men's lacrosse coach at Dowling College, believes that the sport can satisfy the sponsorship requirement, given enough time. He said the sport is "booming at the high-school level" and that it could benefit from an influx of provisional members. [In fact, part of the problem is that Division II is smaller than the other divisions. That means the requirement of 40 is more demanding for a Division II sport (260 active members/15.4 percent) than it is for one in Divisions I (310 members/12.9 percent) or III (387 members/10.3 percent).]

Figures from the National Federation of State High School Associations show that high-school participation for boys' lacrosse has grown by 34 percent since 1992 (total participation of about 28,000), compared to 10 percent growth for boys' overall sports participation in the same period.

As for the game itself, Caiazza said that Division II institutions have been able to carve out an identity while at the same time becoming more competitive, and Hebert agrees.

"The Division II championship has done a lot for the growth of lacrosse," Hebert said. "It has promoted an area where growth was negligible. Since the championship was established, lacrosse in Division II has increased in both quantity and quality."

Be that as it may, the Division II governance structure -- all the way from the Championships Committee to the Management Council to the Presidents Council -- has opposed the proposal to continue the championship.

At that level, the issue is clearly defined: A championship either meets the criteria or it doesn't. Lacrosse doesn't.

"Really, that is the question," said Lynn Dorn of North Dakota State University, chair of the Division II Management Council. "What number makes a championship legitimate? That's why the legislation was established. The Management Council is simply recommending that we adhere to the criteria that we have created."

The dynamics of the situation make discussion difficult. Those who want to maintain the championship are strident in their mission, but those who want to let the system run its course have nothing against the sport. This is not a conflict about men's lacrosse.

To the extent that conflict exists, it is about process and communication. Had Proposal No. 2-19 not been sponsored, the championship simply would have disappeared. No action would have been necessary, and no notice would have been required.

In that regard, Hebert said he feels somewhat misled. "All along," he said, "we were told that it looked good -- that we were protected by special legislation, or by a moratorium or that the championships committee would support us."

Small championship

In this bottom-line era, one ironic twist is that the decision isn't really about money. The championship is so small -- two teams -- that overhead is minimal. Only the Division II ice hockey and field hockey championships cost less in 1996-97, according to the most recent NCAA Annual Reports, and the balance sheet almost certainly became more favorable with the 1998 championship, which was conducted for the first time in conjunction with the Divisions I and III men's championships.

"I know financial concerns are significant," Caiazza said, "but Division II lacrosse is not a threat. It is not dragging money from other championships and is probably about a break-even proposition for Division II."

For his part, Caiazza wants the issue to be resolved. "I'm in the middle of recruiting," he said. "When I'm talking with recruits, they want to know what's happening in Division II lacrosse. I have to explain -- and rightfully so -- what's going on in Division II."

And if Division II does not vote to continue the championship?

"That's the unanswered question," Hebert said. "I've been told a lot of schools would drop the sport. Some would try to go to Division I and not really do anything. I think very few would add it."

Caiazza said it isn't automatic that Dowling would go to Division I if the Division II championship is eliminated. "It's more expensive," he said, "and there's the reality of whether you can be competitive. It's a whole different being."

The possibility exists that the United States Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association could intervene and sponsor a championship for the affected schools. As it happens, the USILA sponsored all intercollegiate lacrosse competition before 1971.

"Sometimes," Caiazza said, "things go full circle."