HardCor Lacrosse is pleased to announce our 2014 tryout and tournament schedule for our boy's field lacrosse travel teams.
River Oaks Turf Field (Oakville)
Session 1 - Sunday, September 7th
Session 2 - Sunday, September 14th
grade 3/4 (2005-06)and 5/6 (2003-04) -11 am to 12:20 pm
grade 7/8 (2001-02) - 12:20 to 1:40 pm
grade 9/10 (1999-00) - 1:40 to 3:00 pm
COST to TRYOUT
Skull and Bones - Rochester, NY - Oct. 18th or 19th
BooBash - Oxford, MI - Oct. 25th or 26th
Turkey Shoot - Ithaca, NY - Nov. 15th or 16th
John Mack Southern Tier Shootout - Feb. 7th or 8th
HardCor Lacrosse is focused on providing additional opportunities for those players that have passion and want to further develop their lacrosse skills, playing experience and game awareness IQ in US tournament play.
Email firstname.lastname@example.org - Please include the following;
1. Player's name
2. grade in Sept. 2014
5. Shooting hand - right or left
SC tied Orangeville in their final game, 5-5. There was a 4 way tie for first with Brampton, Burlington, St Cath & Orangeville with 10 points each. The OLA employed some kind of goals for/against tiebreaker for third place and Orangeville came out on top by 2/100's of a point. St Catharines was only beaten by one team (Brampton) with more wins than Orangeville (I believe) but because of the tiebreaker format, they got third.
Not a true top six, not in this new format - IMHO!!!
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 6:58 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
Wow, that is a real tough one for the St Catharine's team to swallow. They were one of my favourites to take the Midget A title this year. The funny thing is that St. Catharines bantam team last year came within a whisker of being eliminated at last years qualifier under a similar scenario. It would have been a shame as they went on to take the Bantam A title at the final six. Perhaps the OLA needs to address this new format. As an impartial observer, I am not convinced we are getting a true top 6 either with this 2 division format.
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 7:51 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
for teams to spend 2 weekends and not play each other to decide the final six seems hard to swallow. I believe teams used to play 10 - 12 games over 2 weekends. If they want to stick with 2 pools of 8 ( 7 games each) why not have the 3rd and 4 th place teams in each pool do a cross over (keep the result of the inter-pool game). Many ways to sort the tie breaker but the main emphasis should be between the 4 teams. By adding only 4 total games a much more acceptable and exciting result could be reached. Just my 2cents....
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 8:37 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
I went to qualifiers 3 times between 04-06 and believe if memory serves we played a full round robin in 2004 of 15 games over the 2 weekends, 3 friday 3 saturday and 1-2 sunday. This may be a little on the extreme side but maybe the 10-12 game idea would give us better accuracy.
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 8:46 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
by Underdog upsets are great for sports (Login 2001laxfan)
Upsets happen in every sport that's why those teams that are not favourites show up for the game.
No sport has a playoff system where every team in the playoffs gets an opportunity to play all the other teams in the playoffs, it's impossible that's why there is no playoff system where it exists.
Upsets happen in "B", "C", "D" provincials and in NCAA basketball, the BCS bowl system in NCAA football.
this is a better system because of the upsets that happened this past weakend, "A" provincials used to be this exclusive club for deep organizations that always have 35 kids at tryouts, when the smaller orgs need to see their team to decide they might be a "B" or an "A" team.
Congrates to the Shelburne peewees for making the final 6, a centre that small does not know they are an "A" team in the pre season.
Congrates to the Windsor Bantams for going undefeated and sending a message, and the London bantams for missing the final 6 by a point and beating Mimico along the way
Zone 7 has 6 teams in the "A" group this year because of mylaxratings and they all deserve to be there, in past years zone 7 was lucky to have an "A" team at any level every other year.
If you can name another team sport that has a playoff system where every team in the playoffs gets to play each other once to see who moves onto the next round then I would love to hear it.
The final 13 system was a flawed system, probably nice to get to play everyone but a 13 team group at every level would have way too many groups at provies, 16 teams in every group is a great system that caters to every level not just the "A" level and it leaves room for underdogs to win big games.
Anyone seen that great sports movie where the favourite wins every game all along the way and then wins the championships? Neither have I.
The best sports stories are created with upsets and underdogs and now OLA minor lacrosse is getting in on the fun.
GO SHELBURNE PEEWEES AND WINDSOR BANTAMS in the "A" Ontario Lacrosse Championships
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 9:00 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
Just for the record, we (St Catharines Midgets) were not upset by anyone, nor were Orangeville ever considered underdogs. We finished the qualifiers with a 4-1-2 record. There were no real upsets in our pool. It finished with a four way tie for first. Shows you how competitive and strong these centres are. Since you can't use head to head in this type of tie, I would have thought that the fact that we had the most wins would advance us. But instead they went to the gf/ga math, and we came out on the losing end (not by a point, by 2/100'ths of one point!) of that formula.
As for your theory about this new format benefitting smaller centres, the midget final six is (if I'm not mistaken) Whitby, Burlington, Orangeville, Mimico, Guelph & Brampton. None of these centres have ever struggled with numbers as far as I can see.
Bitter pill? Absolutely. Having seen both systems played, I much prefer the play everyone once format. It was more exciting, and more upsets and collapses played out there! This new format is a cost cutting measure by the OLA, so I know they won't ever go back to the old way, but they can tweak a few things...
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 1:56 AM from IP address 18.104.22.168
All four teams had 4-1-2 records. The first tie break is points earned in games between the four teams. Brampton and Burlington both had 1-0-2, records from the games played among the four teams, so they both advanced. Orangeville and St. Kitts were still tied with 0-1-2 records. The next tie break is GF% calculated from the games between the four teams. That may have decided it, I'm not going to calculate it. After that it is GF% using all games and then least penalty minutes from all games. The fact that there is a four way tie for first would suggest that there was not enough games played to decide things. I can't believe that St. Kitts wouldn't have finished in the top six if full round robin was played with all 16 teams.
Personally, I think the OLA should create format for A teams similar to AAA hockey where they have Zone teams from every area so that the places that don't have large centers can field competitive A level teams. Then have A leagues like in hockey, a league east of Toronto and a League west of Toronto. Pare down the number of teams that qualify to the provincial A level tournament to a manageable using the regular season league results or play proper play-off series between teams from each league to narrow things down. The lower ranked teams in the current tournament usually get smoked every game the way things were before last year, being the 13th ranked team in the A qualifiers meant that you were in for a long two weeks of getting killed and going 0-12 at qualifiers. The way things are, a team from one pool gets in with a 4-2-1 record over a team with a 4-1-2 record from the other. All four teams that tied first in St. Kitts pool would probably beat Mimico most (if not all) of the time. As it is the #1 team from the regular season in My Lax rankings is out and 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 11 are in.
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 8:26 AM from IP address 22.214.171.124
The fact of the matter is every team knew the rules and format going into the Qualifiers, you are only complaining after because this new format didn't work out in your teams favour. If your kid's team were to have benefited from this Tie Break Format, there would be no subject for discussion. The fact that you decide to point out Mimico is laughable. I had the privilege of watching a few of their games these past two weekends and there is no doubt in my mind that these guys deserve to be in the Final 6. They are a well coached team whose defensive game is one of the best I have seen at the Midget level in quite some time. Not to mention their goalie is probably one of the best playing at the Midget age. Both of Mimico's losses at Qualifiers were both 3-2, having only allowed 13 goals against over their 7 game schedule, the best of any of the 16 teams. It really doesn't matter how well you did during the season as every team experiences player losses to either Field Lacrosse Showcases or Injuries throughout the season. What matters at the end of the day is if your team decides to show up at Qualifiers. Would you say that my kids team Brampton doesn't deserve to be at Final Six because they dropped a game to Beaches 8-7 (14th Ranked Team) or that Guelph should have been knocked out because of their 7-2 loss to Whitby....obviously not. Take a step back and keep your comments to yourself as every team who has qualified for Final 6 deserves to be there. This is Qualifiers and upsets happen all of the time!
Lets go Brampton!!!!!
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:17 AM from IP address 126.96.36.199
I think everyone's comments and replies support my original point, that this 2 pool format is not without it's flaws, and at least the old way produced a more likely TOP SIX instead of a final six. Every team that's going to Windsor played a good solid qualifier and deserves to be going. We are sitting on the sidelines instead of going because of a mathematical elimination and yes, this is a bitter pill simply because it was a sucky sucky way to end a minor lacrosse career. That's all I am saying. ... so everyone relax, and enjoy the rest of the summer! See you next year in the Junior circuits
PEACE! LOVE! LAX!
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:44 AM from IP address 188.8.131.52
This is NOT a better system for "A" at Peewee, Bantam, Midget imvho ! and I'll use this example as one very good reason, (and I'm not from St. Kitt's). Some of the best lacrosse of the season, at any level, happened during the two weekend, 13 game round robins. I would also argue some of the biggest upsets occurred during this format which is what you are basing your argument on and subjective at best.
Movies have nothing to do with the argument, just lots of fluff. No shortage in your post. Congrats to Shelburne or Windsor if they deserve to be one of the 13 teams. I know clearly that Windsor (Bantam) would have been one of the 13, as they earned it. Determining the 13 teams might need some fine tuning, and/or discussion, but the 13 team round format is by far the superior format for showcasing and growing our sport.
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:46 AM from IP address 184.108.40.206
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the 13 Game round robin format at Qualifiers is far better than the two groups of 8. It gives everyone a chance to play everyone, instead of just playing the teams in your grouping. The fact of the matter is this is not the case now and you have to play with the cards that you're dealt...every team knew what they had to do to make Final 6. I find it funny how people on this forum are able to say certain teams would have been in the Final 6 if the old format were to have been in place, as this is all just speculation. All you are doing is playing out scenarios in your head that simply do not exist. No one knows how any team would have done if the old format were to have still been in place. Taking shots at other teams just because of their ranking going into Qualifiers is just not fair to those teams, as every year, new format or old, there is always a dark horse or two who manage to sneak in. Lets not forget that the MyLaxRanking is just a mathematical formula which I personally think does not depict the true ranking of a team. The Brampton Midget team being ranked 10th going into Qualifiers is definitely not a true depiction of how good that team actually is.
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 11:15 AM from IP address 220.127.116.11
HardCor Lacrosse Fall 2014 Programs, run by Troy Cordingley, Head Coach of the Buffalo Bandits of the National Lacrosse League, are now open for registration. Please visit www.HardCorLacrosse.com for details and info on all of our leagues and clinics (below);
HardCor Field Lacrosse League - Sept. 6 to Nov. 1
HardCor Box Lacrosse League - Nov. 16 to Mar. 22
Skill Development Mondays - Oct. 6 to Dec. 15
Skill Development Thurs. - Oct. 9 to Dec. 11
High Performance Elite (Peewee - 6pm) and (Bantam/Midget - 7pm) - Sundays Oct. 5 to Dec. 6
Chicks-Sticks (girls field lax) U9, U11 and U13 Saturdays Oct. 19 to Dec. 7
High Performance Chicks-Sticks (girls field lax) U15 and U19 Oct. 5 to Dec. 14
The mission of HardCor Lacrosse is to elevate each players maximum potential by delivering the most comprehensive and dynamic lacrosse experience. Through high level coaching, HardCor Lacrosse is fully committed to preparing each individual player, beginner or experienced, to improve their performance, knowledge and passion for the game. HardCor Lacrosse strongly emphasizes hard work, team first attitude, intensity and fun in a well organized, fast-paced and positive environment. HardCor Lacrosse wants every player to leave leagues/clinics/camps with a memorable experience while fostering a life-long enjoyment for the game of lacrosse.
REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN ONLINE - www.HardCorLacrosse.com
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 2:31 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
Does anyone have any predicitions for the Peewee B Provincials this week? Based on MyLax rankings it is up for grabs as a lot of teams have won against higher ranked teams. Guelph looks like they are on a roll right now, but you can't count out Centre Wellington, Owen Sound, Newmarket or Oakville 2.
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:46 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
I noticed that the Milton Novice Team some how made it all the way to "D ranking" for the provincials after they played Teir 1 all season. I am not tying to complain but thsi does't seem right to me. Thats a big drop.
Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:59 AM from IP address 126.96.36.199
Barrie 1 - extremely balanced team that was ranked "B" for much of the year. They should go deep.
Clarington 2 - very well coached with an excellent goalie. Can get rattled, though.
Missisauga 1 - could be a tough run for them, I'm afraid.
Welland - could be the team to beat, very talented.
Toronto Stars 1 - seem to struggle in games against weaker opponents, but could be a darkhorse.
Whitby 2 - excellent team
Sudbury - big, physical team that takes foolish penalties. Can intimidate smaller opponents.
St. Catharines 2 - great defensive team, not a lot of scoring. Good coaching.
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 12:15 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
Where you from that you have seen all these teams play? just curious.
I appreciate the information, i did not really get a chance to watch toronto stars, whitby 2, Clarington and Barrie. Why do these four teams impress you the most, do they have stand out players, or just a great team all together.
From my perspective uxbridge, us (Brantford), West durham, and Oakville 3 can compete with anyone. Going to be a very interesting week. I was hoping to hear more feedback lol
Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 5:26 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
I live in Zone 4 and saw most of these teams in local tournaments. It wasn't that those four impressed me the most, I was just sharing my observations of the teams that I personally saw play this year.
Uxbridge had a very solid "C" team in Bantam last year, I'm not surprised that they are again tough to beat. West Durham dominated PeeWee "D" two years ago - if it is roughly the same group of players, they should do well in "C" this year. Oakville teams always seem to be competitive, even their "3" teams.
Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 3:15 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
The Oakville Titans meet up with Ennismore in the semi-finals of the Sr.B playoffs.
Game 1 - Friday July 25 - 8:30pm - Robert E. Young Arena
Game 2 - Sunday July 27 - 7:00pm - Glen Abbey
Game 3 - Saturday August 2 - 7:00pm - Robert E. Young Arena
Game 4 - Sunday August 3 - 7:00pm - Glen Abbey (if nec.)
Game 5 - Tuesday August 5 - 8:30pm - Robert E. Young Arena (if nec.)
It really disappoints when the OLA makes changes to the rulings for provincials
I was sure it was suppose to be 16 in each division for provincials
This year they decided to only put 8 in A for Intermediate! Very disgusted....Cambridge was one of the A teams and should be....Toronto appeals to move from B to A.... Cambridge does not get a chance to fight
They are a true A team .... They deserved to play A they are a fantastic team! This past weekend they proved they should be A by winning their 2nd tournament the Conradi....beating out an A team in the Championship game!
Hmmm....there still is time...adjust the schedule let the teams play where they should be playing and give all teams a chance!
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 12:19 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
Historically the winner of the Conradi is out of the A provincials their first day, the only exception I know of is Orangeville a couple of years back. Looking at MYLAX they have only played four A teams going 4-2, while playing mostly B teams and having very close, mostly one goal games with them. To anyone without a bias that would show they are a clear B team. The Beaches have played five A teams going 3-1-3(this is including the tie and one goal loss they suffered to Clarington in Zone play which is not accounted for). You should also take into consideration that the Beaches won A last year. In my opinion this was the right decision by the OLA, and the A provincials will be stronger because of it.
Had their been 16 A teams, maybe six of the teams wouldn't compete, where as having only 8 A teams will make both A and B instantly more competitive.
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 2:04 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
Good assessment -- My understanding is Cambridge won the B championship and it was Missy beating NOTL for the A championship, with Missy winning 4_3 . Not sure who is the best of the best in the province, but if teams come to play lacrosse, the provincials should be competitive. Tough to say who's to beat in A and B ---
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 2:13 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
Beaches will likely be lucky to advance past the first day of provincials in A. And clearly clarrington aswell, and sudbury who has played 6 games and one tournament deserve A? The OLA has messed up this year. Teams like Cambridge, Guelph, and even stayner all seem to have young teams. And have all proven to be competitors in the A division. Just because beaches won A Last year does not mean they have the same team. If anyone saw them at conradi,they looked like garbage. Clarrington looked as if they didnt even belong there. missi had an unreal preformance by their female goalie all weekend and truely deserved that win. A should be expanded to 10 or 12 teams. So teams in B that have played and beaten most of the teams in A could prove there position. Not get shafted by the OLA.
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 3:57 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
Even if the Beach get a through an appeal -- the team in that 8th position should be notified when ratings first come before appeals so they know some one may bump them and have the ability to appeal as well -
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 4:44 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
The appeal process is a joke. Ola has gone to **** in the past few years. Rankings in the past few years seem to be fairly political. The fact that they give zero explanation for their decisions is bl. Again, the A Division for provincals is basically 5 teams in my opinion. 5 teams who legitimately can be competitive. Beaches, Clarrington, and Sudbury dont have the right to be there. Would have loved to see beaches appeal letter.
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 7:39 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
First off there is only one "R" in Clarington. Yes, Iam from Clarington but no I have no involvement in the Intermediate program. Maybe A should only be 5 teams in the case of only having 5 legitimate contenders. Again Cambridge would still be a B team. This seems to be a yearly ordeal for Cambridge in Intermediate, every year they some how get shafted. Why did they not declare A for the prelim ratings, or why did they not appeal the B rating they were given? I don't think Cambridge got shafted at all, I also doubt anyone here has the whole story as to why they are rated B. I would love to see Cambridge in A, simply to hear all the stories on how the OLA stole the championship from them.
But please enlighten us as to how the rankings are politically influenced.
It appears you are basing your analysis on the Conradi Tournament, one tournament, an open tournament featuring A,B,and C teams. A Tournament whose champion has only twice won the A provincial title. Clarington and Toronto both played in the A final, no they probably dont have the same teams but I can't imagine two teams that were pretty young last year lost very many players. Sudbury was very entertaining C champion last year, they brought 6 runners and a goalie. By far the best games of the tournament were Sudbury games. Why does Cambridge have the right to play A ball above Beaches, Clarington, and Sudbury?
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 9:42 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
You also have to realize that Intermediate is a totally different group than the rest of minor lacrosse. It becomes smaller and smaller every year with more associations going to Jr. C instead of Intermediate.
The 16 "A" teams in Novice through Midget participate at qualifiers. Not at the lacrosse festival. I would guess that Intermediate is not included mainly due to total team numbers.
There are a total of 30 Intermediate teams participating. 8 in A, 16 in B, and 6 in C.
Look at every other age group. Midget has 63 teams, Bantam 81, and Peewee 92. Much easier to go with 16 team divisions in A, B, C, and D.
Could Cambridge have competed in A? Probably. Could other teams compete there as well? Probably. Maybe would have been better to have 3 10 team divisions.
Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 9:44 AM from IP address 22.214.171.124
Not sure who did the scheduling for the Shelburne Midgets but it is just not balanced and unfair at provincials. Yes it is the "D" division and I don't expect the world but playing 4 games in 26 hours at provincials and you may not even advance out of your division and if you do your going to be tired! Friday at 8am, then noon and just to top it off lets have us wait around and play the final game of the night as well at 9pm. So the first game and the last game of the day...just great! Then the next day (Sat) have us play at 10am! So Friday these guys will be up at probably 6am ish if they are staying there and if they are coming from Shelburne across the city in the morning at least 5am ish then get finished playing well after 10pm and if they are lucky in the sack by midnight. Then to top it off Shelburne, North Perth ,Newmarket #2 have to play 4 games to advance(play each other twice) while the other 12 teams only play 3 games to advance. 3 divisions of 4 teams and 1 division of 3 teams. If your in the 3 divisions of 4 teams 2 advance so your chances of advancing are 50% however if you're in the 3 team division like us only 1 team moves on so your chances of moving on are 33%. Plus if you do advance you have to play against a team that has rested only playing 3 games. Great scheduling...anyone else having to play 4 games in 26 hours just to advance out of your division? Not sure how you fix it with 15 teams in "D" but 3 teams just got what the other 12 teams in that same division didn't get....that being a fair schedule!
Okay my bitch session has ended! I feel better now!
Posted on Jul 19, 2014, 12:31 AM from IP address 126.96.36.199
I know most work done by volunteers but come on already in the midst of 1sr weekend & still not schedule -
Give people chance to plan & prepare
The excuse you know its this week doesn't fly.
Do I need to take Friday off?
Can I cancel hotels?
Should I get babysitters?
Same format as last year - fill in the blanks and send out the schedule
Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 7:30 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
I think you will play opposite of what you played this weekend? So if your team played Friday & Saturday this weekend, next weekend you will play Sat and Sun.
But that is just what I think.....but it might make too much sense for the OLA to do it that way.
Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 8:09 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
I'm not 100% sure on this, But Judging by the schedule of other teams in our pool. if you played 3 games in the first weekend, it was 2 sat. & 1 sunday
Now if you played 4 games in the first weekend, you played 2 friday & 2 on sat.
my guess is this coming weekend will be the the opposite of what you played this weekend. if that isn't as clear as mud, i don't know what is lol
Posted on Jul 20, 2014, 11:38 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
Also makes sense to release both weekend's schedules at the same time. It's not like you are waiting to see who will have to play who? You already have that figured out. I know that at least 3 different teams in one age group asked this weekend about the schedule and were told it is done, but "I" may decide to make some changes so I can't tell you. You can wait until it gets released on Monday.(hopefully)
Mirror what you did this weekend and you are all set.
Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 8:29 AM from IP address 18.104.22.168
The Green Gaels and the Halton Hills Bulldogs get their OLA Junior B Lacrosse League Eastern Conference Semi-Finals underway tomorrow night with game #1 of the best of five series starting at 8PM in Bowmanville at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex.
After splitting the regular season series at one game apiece, both teams will be looking to jump out to an early series lead on Saturday night at Rickard to gain control of the second round matchup. Surprisingly, this will be the first playoff series between these two teams since 2011, after what seemed like an annual affair in the post-season in the late 2000's.
Game #1 of the series will be a great compliment to the action at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex this weekend as the Clarington Minor Lacrosse Association is hosting the Dan Greer Memorial Tournament this weekend, a tournament featuring Tyke and Novice teams from across the province. It's a great opportunity to get out to the arena early in the evening before the Gaels and Bulldogs matchup to watch and support some of the future stars of our Nation's Summer Sport.
Tickets for the Green Gaels second round playoff series games at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex are $8 for adults, $5 for seniors and students, while children 12 and under are admitted free under the supervision of an adult.
The floor will be open during the intermissions for kids of all ages to go on the floor with a helmet and stick to throw a ball around during the ten minute break in play.
Posted on Jul 11, 2014, 4:36 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
This is always a fun time to look at the Minor OLA page to see how all the people react to the final ratings and believe me it hasn't changed at all since my son started playing lacrosse way back in the late 80's
Everyone seems to come up with the perfect ways to make the system work but are there revolutionary changes---i would say no--the question that should be raised is WHY My sons year in Peewee A provincials there were 5 teams--Beaches Whitby Orangeville Peterborough and Six Nations--and Nations really was a B team--I asked the coach why they were A and he said for the kids to learn how to play A ball--and look at their association now--that is the right approach
Changes to have to be made--but will they--the OLA will never change from what I have seen over the last 25 years I have had kids play
Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 11:54 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
How can a team like the midget Sarnia pacers be ranked 13th with a 19-1-1 record going to the finals in tournament play winning two get dropped down out of "A" division this makes no sense I thought mylax would have been better then this but the politics in the ola has once again taken over
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 1:55 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
Mind you, I am only reading the current MyLax rankings.
They could have gone 20-0 and still be ranked 13th with what they did in their schedule. I see some pretty close games with 24th ranked Wallaceburg, a close game with 29th ranked Gloucester, a tie with 16th ranked Stars 1 and a game with a 4 goal differential with 36th ranked Stars 2. Regardless of any other team ahead of them, based on the weaker schedule and unimpressive results against weaker opponents, I would not place them in A. This is what MyLax is designed to do, weight the schedule and results.
The Clarington Gaels, on the other hand, had one goal games against top 10 opponents, even though they lost, they had a slightly tougher schedule and very competitive results against the top teams in the province. Owen Sound is in the same boat. Some tough one or two goal losses to the best teams, but hammered the teams they were supposed to, including an 8-1 win over Sarnia.
Based on the records of those two teams, I would rank them ahead of Sarnia.
I mean, its a close call for the Pacers, but look at the tournaments they attended: Milton was a B/C tournament, Herb Lea was a B/C tournament, Super Series is A and Nepean is a B/C tournament. So of 4 tournaments, Sarnia went to 3 B tournaments and only won gold in their own B/C tournament.
Of the three tournaments Clarington went to, 2 of them were A. All three of Owen Sound's tournaments were A. If you want to go A, you go to A tournaments, be competitive and that's all there is to it really.
This message has been edited by tsitshoh from IP address 184.108.40.206 on Jul 7, 2014 4:18 PM
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:13 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
I do agree: Sarnia has not played enough "A" teams to know for sure if they belong but they have only played 3 tournaments to date: Milton B/C won gold...Sarnia B/C won gold...Hamilton A/B Silver (lost in finals). Would have been nice to play in more A/B tournaments, but based on results in Bantam 2 years ago they thought they would be a middle of the pack "B" team. They'll have to play their best to have a good finish in "B", so I guess that is not a bad place to be, but would have been nice to get in to the "A" qualifiers.
Good luck to all!
Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 4:08 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
Lots of posters on here always trashing the OLA... I'm no fan of some of the things they do but most posters seem to just complain for the sake of complaining. How did these "OLA" politcs come into play here?
In doing a little reasearch I was looking at the mylax site & I really don't see that Sarnia has played any of the top 'A' teams out there.
I am not the site designer but I would be pretty confident in saying that who your opponints are is figured into the sites algorithm.
19-1-1 is an impressive record & Sarnia should do quite well in B if that is where in fact they will end up... "Politics" or not
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:18 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
by Not A Lot of opportunities to play "A" Ball (Login titanz43)
It's not easy to play in the top tourneys for teams from Sarnia's zone or Glouchester's zone.
There is Peterborough, Brampton, Orangeville, Owen Sound & Hamilton for A/B tournaments at the Bantam/Midget levels.
If your a centre that does not typically play "A" ball you probably didn't think to enter the Peterborough tourney unless your from the far east.
Last year Brampton & Orangeville were full before the tournament listing was released in March, so that leaves Hamilton & Owen Sound for the teams that have to wait until registration closes to see what you have.
I'm from a small centre and until registration closes I don't know if we have a "B" team or a "D" team.
Sarnia (midget), Glouchester (Bantam) didn't really play the top teams and I'm sure they didn't have an opportunity either.
I know in our org if we win "B" provincials we plan an "A" schedule 2 years later but we still have to wait until registration is closed to make sure everyone comes back to lacrosse.
If you don't have a house league system or tier #2 teams and don't hold tryouts because you only have 15 kids register at each level should you plan on playing "A" ball?
Give London & Nepean A/B tourneys and maybe everyone in Ontario would have the opportunity to play A teams (just an example)
Create a top 24 loop based on results from 2 years ago and eliminate zone games for these teams they just play each other all year, top teams only play the top competition. (just another example)
16 "A" teams and the 8 teams that reached the "B" quarter finals all play each other through the summer with a balanced schedule, maybe have A/B play days in each zone.
In zone 7 for example, the Windsor & London "A" teams were required to play tier 2 teams in their zone so the tier 2 teams get in the required amount of games, 5th ranked Bantam Windsor probably doesn't get much from playing #65th ranked London #2, twice this year but Windsor #2 needed to get 10 games in and zone 7 only has 2 tier #2 bantam teams.
If your in Kitchener you get to play top teams all year and don't have to play Simcoe or Guelph #2 or Six Nations #4.(again just an example)
Different centers face different challenges, Sarnia should have embraced the opportunity to play Midget "A" but maybe they weren't prepared to spend 2 more weekends in Whitby after already spending 3 weekends in hotels, thats a lot of time off work for parents. Parents might already have the festival weekend booked off and never thought they could be an "A" team.
2 years ago the Sarnia Bantams didn't even make it out of their group at Bantam "B" provincials.
In my opinion they are a "B" team along with Glouchester (bantams)
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:05 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
I would like to see Zone concept eliminated altogether and go the same way that hockey is organized. In each of the AAA, AA, A & B levels have 8 regional divisions, for each age category and then provincial tournaments with the divisional champions. Of course, this would mean the Festival idea would be scaled back resulting in a loss of revenue and me being black-listed forever for even suggesting such a thing! Egads!
But I am in favour of removing the Zones to allow each league to run their own administrative affairs. Scrap ratings altogether and go with a divisional playoff format. That will determine who is who and where they should be.
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:39 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
With due respect, I believe the original poster raises some very valid concerns. "MyLax" has shown to be a very accurate evaluation of a particular teams ability. Contrary to what has been stated here, the strength of a teams schedule is taken in to account by MyLax. The argument that a team just entered B/C therefore should not go A is obviously flawed. The argument that parents won't want to spend two weekends in Whitby is ludicrous. The removal of teams by the OLA from MyLax's top 16 should be critically viewed by us all. We need to follow these teams through the provincials and evaluate the OLA's decision. In the bantam division, Huntsville is rated 8th by MyLax. The OLA has decided they are not going to play in the A qualifiers. The reason given, as I understand it, is they are from a smaller center and a weak zone. However, Shelburne, from the same zone, is playing A in two divisions. Honestly, why does the OLA pick and choose teams to drop out of A? Why does the OLA make changes to the MyLax rankings at all?
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:35 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
I made a disinterested case before looking at the final 16's for each division as posted on the OLA website. While I still maintain that if you want to be ranked A, you play in A tournaments and/or play A teams period, I do see where MyLax has been massaged to produce an outcome and I am totally against that. I thought MyLax was supposed to be 'it' as far as rankings go. If that is not the case, then it cheapens everything.
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:43 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
Mylaxrankings was never meant to be "it", and rightfully so, for the very reasons that have been pointed out here. If you go to the OLA announcement when they added "MyLaxRankings", I'm going to paraphrase, but it said something along the lines of "one of the criteria" in helping come up with the rankings. IMVHO that is how it should be, another tool to come up with the impossible, i.e. making everyone happy.
i. as has been mentioned it is difficult to attend "A" tournaments, too few and not enough openings not to mention logistics in geography. This needs to be addressed.
ii. I like the idea of blowing up Zones and coming up with some type of regional representation, but before you blow Zone up, lets have a well thought out and intelligent discussion on what to replace it with.
iii. by far and away the best lacrosse of the universe, at least for minor, was the 13 team qualifiers and Final 6. WHY, WHY, did the OLA ever want to change something that was not broken ! Huge mistake, again imvho. That was easily the best box lacrosse of the year for Peewee, Bantam, and Midget, bar none, and that would include any type of Nationals that I have seen in the last 10 years.
iv. I've said this before, there has to be an incentive to play at "A". There has been some talk about having some type of tournament to determine who gets the last few spots at qualifiers, an excellent idea. Maybe tie in either this kind of tournament or the "A" tournaments to centres/teams that win/compete/ at A. i.e. They would get the right to hold the "A" tournament(s), for either the following year or the year after.
but again... please, please, for Peewee,Bantam and Midget, go back to the 13 team, 2 weekend (6 games per weekend), for Qualifiers. Has to be one of the worst decisions/moves the OLA has made in my 10+ years at minor.
And while I'm at it, I'll make a pitch to the CLA for a two tier National Championship, similar to what Junior hockey or the FIL does at world's.
winner of Group B
"Home and home" round robin, top four teams playoff. 5th and 6th play a one game playoff to determine 5th place.
Just my two cents.
Cheers and good luck to Canada at worlds in the next few weeks !
Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:37 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
I Like all of your points except the 13 team "A" group. In my opinion all groups should be the same size, if the "A" group has 13 teams then so should all the other groups.
It wasn't the "A" group that was broken, it was the 32 team B or C group that was broken, you shouldn't have 12 - 1 scores in any group at provincials although the deeper you get into the rankings the harder that is.
16 teams is not much of a difference and by adding 3 teams you now have the Shelburnes, Windsor's & London's competing at the "A" level at provies and they can beat those teams so they should be there. Having 16 teams creates underdogs & upsets, look at the Peewee final six last year, no one would have predicted those 6 teams because there were some great upsets at qualies.
If you had the chance to watch kids play for championships in the E or F groups it was nice to see those teams finally get the opportunity to play close games vs their level of competition after a long year of blowouts in their zone.
13 "A" teams just seems too small for a province with over 80 teams at some levels and having 16 is just enough to give hope to the underdogs and when it's all said and done the "B" champion is still usually good enough to make the final six in "A" if that's how the ratings would have worked out.
Ontario has a lot more parity today, I look forward to seeing "A" Champions from smaller centres in the near future.
Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:54 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
by Not A Lot of opportunities to play "A" Ball (Login titanz43)
I like the points you make too, maybe mylax rankings should be set in stone.
I would agree with that too but I still think there has to be more opportunites to play the "A" teams throughout the year.
If a team goes 20 - 0 but never plays a top 20 team then it really doesn't make sense for them to have to play the top teams in provincials.
This arguement comes along every year in NCAA football and as long as the OLA is using mylax (and they should) there will people who criticize it.
Remember in College football when TCU, Bowling Green, Boise State..... go 11 - 1 in the regular season there are people screaming that those teams should not get a spot in the cmampionship game over a 10 - 2 Georgia, Florida, Texas team.
In college football they don't want the little centres in the big game, in OLA lacrosse the fans want the little centres in the big games to take their lumps.
I love the chatter, I will certainly be following those "B" teams this season that had a top 16 ranking on mylax at the festival in August
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:46 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
This is why I said in my first post about politics, I was at the agm when they first introduced the mylax system and the way they introduced it was the ranking you have is where you play, and to say that to play in "A" you should play in those tournaments is something that shouldn't always be the deciding factor what about the mid pack "b" teams if they lose in b tourneys should the ola be considerate to them and move them to c division, trust me I like the mylax rating system what I don't like is the way the ola will just change their mind and move teams,they seem to refuse/turn down appeals for many teams that try to play in the division that best suits them, this system is also why they went to a max of 16 teams in each, there is a lot of good points being stated by everyone
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 10:51 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
one very good reason the OLA should not rely only on mylaxrankings is that it supports the notion of running up the score on weaker teams, which in most zones is almost unavoidable, playing weaker teams. If you relied solely on mylaxrankings and it is likely bad enough now given its weight, you give coaches the excuse to run up scores to improve their mylaxrankings position. You also likely limit the development of weaker players on these stronger teams that would otherwise get to play more in these types of lopsided games, again reinforcing the idea of running a short bench. Speaking of which, running a short bench has gotten a little easier to do now that the "A" bracket has moved to 16 teams, and a "softer" qualifier schedule.
Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 9:06 AM from IP address 184.108.40.206
MyLax is MUCH more accurate than you seem to be suggesting. I may be mistaken but I believe the maximum goal differential recorded by MyLax is 8. Having witnessed first hand the OLA drop a team a whopping 19 spots from MyLax a few years ago despite an appeal, believe me we need to be very critical of this practice. qwikstic, want to take a wild guess at who turned out to be right? MyLax may have some limitations but it is much more valuable than you are indicating. The one huge advantage of MyLax is that it is OBJECTIVE. When teams are arbitrarily moved by the OLA, the membership is left to wonder. There are cries of "politics" and favouritism. I am not suggesting MyLax is perfect but we need to look very closely at the results of these OLA decisions to "over rule" MyLax. They should be evaluated critically. My experience has been that MYLax is much better at predicting than the OLA.
BTW, I agree that the 13 team A format was a much better model for qualifiers. There is no better way to get the best 6 teams than to play each team once. In fact, last year the eventual Bantam A champs were very nearly ousted in the qualifiers by a four way tiebreaker because the two groups were uneven. However, the lobby for 16 team divisions seems to be swaying the OLA at this point. It may also be a reasonable approach for teams applying to get in A division again as in years past. Bigger lacrosse centres like Clarington, Burlington, KW etc.. may want all their clubs to play A despite the fact they are not in the top 16.
Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 4:33 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
My intent was not to give that impression, only to counter the call for using MyLax exclusively as many of the posts believe or have called for on this forum. It absolutely does have its use, but it does have some drawbacks. I think the OLA got it right when saying that it was one tool that would be used in determining rankings. Again I don't think you are ever going to make everyone happy, every year, there will always be some subjectivity involved unless you can change the regular season format and/or tournament schedule. (Which I am in favour of, some have suggested a regional type play down which I think has some merit and should be explored more fully). With the current system the OLA needs to ensure that the ranking process is open, transparent and undertaken by qualified, knowledgable people. I know for example in Bantam, our centre had beaten three of the teams head to head in A, but had a few bad games vs some lower ranked teams, for various reasons, which hurt our MyLax rankings. With not enough games played and, what I assume given our preliminary A ranking and relatively late start, the inability to enter A tournaments, we get ranked B.
Posted on Jul 10, 2014, 9:26 AM from IP address 18.104.22.168
No, we are never going to make everyone happy. However, the MyLax system introduced by the OLA has made significant improvements in the ratings system. In fact, there is a lot less complaints on the forum since it's introduction. I believe there is a decent argument to use MyLax alone. There may be some exceptions especially appealing to move up for example due to injuries. However, unilateral team movement from their MyLax ranking should be able to be justified by the OLA. They may even have a good reason! As you stated qwikstic, "with the current system the OLA needs to ensure that the ranking process is open, transparent and undertaken by qualified, knowledgable people".
Qwikstic, you will have the unique opportunity of facing Huntsville(if you aren't with them...lol) this year in the Bantam B provincials. They were rated #7 by MyLax and yet the OLA has decided that they are no better than #17 in the province. BTW, Kudos to the small great lacrosse town of Huntsville on producing such an exceptional team. Good luck in the provincials!
Posted on Jul 10, 2014, 5:39 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
JD no doubt MyLax helps in large part because it does the math for the decision maker(s). It has the added bonus of communicating to the lax world scores and game updates and this makes everything very transparent.
With regard to Bantam, it is a mystery/puzzle to me why the OLA moved Huntsville out of A, using them as an example. But I think moving Gloucester out was the right decision. You could argue that given Huntsville's weaker schedule, due to Zone and geography, that MyLax, is not a good measure for them. A valid point imvho, especially given the number of games, and repetitive competition, i.e. see Gloucester. The goal should be, to obtain an accurate seeding, and there has to be some flexibility. In Huntsville's example I think you have to place a higher weighting on a team's tournament schedule. In their case they've won both their tournaments beating two currently ranked "A" teams along the way and that alone imvho should at least give them the option to play "A". (This gets back to my point of having an incentive to play "A"). Also in MyLax ratings with so few games used to calculate the rankings, a 7-1 win by Caledon over Mimico, where half of Mimico's team was away, probably got them in A, and not a true reflection of their seeding.
To your point I think along with Huntsville, you have to give a big shout out to Windsor, Shelburne, Gloucester and Sarmia (who I understand wanted to appeal to go A ,along with Brampton and P'boro), and all from area's not well known for playing A lacrosse at the minor level. All deserving of consideration to play A at this age group.
FWIW, and IMVHO here is how I would have ranked them, (_) difference from MyLax,
and then if you have to take one more this is where it gets interesting as everyone has beaten someone on the list so take your pick, better yet have a tournament to decide, and for incentive, only let the teams that play A, be able to host the A tournaments in two years time, and profit form it. I would give 16th spot to Brampton, as much as that would pain me, based on the fact they won B two years ago and that should count for something. You could also make an argument for Oakville 2 based on their higher MyLax ranking, but should a 0-0 tie with Oakville 1 count in the numbers ?
16. Brampton ( loses to Peterborough, Oakville 2 x2, split with Orangeville)
16. Halton Hills (loses to Brampton x2)
16. Oakville 2 (loses to Halton Hills, split with Orangeville and Caledon)
16. Peterborough (loses to Oakville 2)
20. Caledon (loses to Brampton, Halton Hills, P'boro x2, split with Oakville 2)
21. Orangeville (Caledon, Brampton, Halton Hills x2, split with Oakville 2)
22. KW (Oakville 2, Orangeville)
23. Guelph (loses to KW, Orangeville, Brampton)
24. Gloucester (not enough info)
Posted on Jul 11, 2014, 3:40 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
Some thing that's was floated (a few beers had been imbibed)
Each grouping would play all there games over one weekend.
So instead of having to travel to Whitby twice - once for 3 and the second for 2 - you'd would play your games on the 1 weekend.
Posted on Jul 6, 2014, 10:37 AM from IP address 188.8.131.52
I could be completely off the boat here, but I think each team in A qualifiers plays 7 games. There is 4 one weekend and 3 the other weekend and the games will be played within two days each weekend so that you are only staying in Whitby one night.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, because that is what I'm telling all my parents.
Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:09 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
Last year we played 4 games over 3 days one weekend and then 3 games over 2 days the other weekend. I hope they change that for this season, but with 48 teams playing each weekend, there may be floor constraints?
Does anyone know when a schedule will come out? If they are not compressing the format, then couldn't they just release last year's schedule and then fill in the team names once they figure that out?
Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 8:40 AM from IP address 220.127.116.11
Bantam is clearly going to be a battle and some great "surprises" with Windsor and Shelburne getting an "A" rating. Equally surprising is Huntsville with a #8 MyLaxRatings, Burlington with a #13 MyLaxRating, and to a lesser extent Brampton, Halton all "B". Might be some interesting appeals in the next few days.
Posted on Jul 3, 2014, 2:40 PM from IP address 18.104.22.168
I'm working on a screenplay about the game and need to include some insiders' stories about coaches, tournaments, fights, strategies, parties, weird players...anything that's worth talking about to make the storyline more real.
I only played middie for 2 seasons and have limited stories. In my next life I want to come back as a kid in Long Island or N Carolina. FYI - my script is about a team that has to go on the road to make up for a game they blew. Not into the traditional Indian heritage perspective. If you have suggestions, glad to her 'em.
Posted on Jun 26, 2014, 5:47 PM from IP address 22.214.171.124
ProLax43 lacrosse clinics are coming to SJ Arena at Niagara Falls!
One of the best lacrosse clinics to come to teh area is coming soon to Niagara Falls NY!
ProLax43 is aimed at high end players of box and field lacrosse and take them to the next level!
The training and coaching is being programmed by the winningest coach in NLL History, Darris Kilgour. His resume is secodn to none when it comes to developing players in the sport!
Check it out at:
Posted on Jun 25, 2014, 3:38 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
Does anyone know any folks in the Belleville area who would be interested in starting a minor lacrosse association? I am somewhat flabbergasted that Belleville doesn't have an association already. I know someone that might be interested in starting something in the Belleville area. If you know of someone, drop me their contact info, or get them to contact me.
Posted on Jun 15, 2014, 9:27 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
Check out ARROW EXPRESS SPORTS web site at www.AESLacrosse.com
for details on the various summer lacrosse camps being help in various locations
including Oakville, Six Nations and Victoria BC.
MIDGET age players, don't miss out on the Pro Lacrosse Experience 2 day event July 3rd & 4th
Registration for all camps is filling fast so dont delay, register online TODAY!!!
Also Jr Knighthawks team info will be posted on the web very soon
AES camps are all developed and run by Pro Lacrosse Athletes and coaches, most of whom are members of the NLL Champions - Rochester Knighthawks. Great opportunity to learn and develop your lacrosse skills as well as learn what it takes to become a professional athlete on and off the floor.
Posted on Jun 11, 2014, 1:20 PM from IP address 184.108.40.206
The first week of the Findley Wilson Gaolie Clinic is in the books!
The special guest this week was Mike Thompson of the Kahnawake Mohawks! Mike helped out as he has played the game at its top levels since the start of his career.
Not to late to sign up as there are 7 weeks left and you NEVER know who will stop by to make the goalies better!
Check out some pics at:
Posted on May 28, 2014, 12:44 PM from IP address 220.127.116.11
I was just wondering what the penalty would be for player tampering in junior lacrosse would be. I recently became aware of a player who was receiving Facebook messages from a GM of a team (the GM made first contact) trying to convince him to get a release to come play for his team. Is there any penalty for this sort of thing?
Posted on May 17, 2014, 3:08 AM from IP address 18.104.22.168
Keep in mind that Minor tampering is very different than tampering at the Junior and up levels.
See pg. 49 for the definition of tampering in Minor.
Junior and up is ANY communication with a player whose rights are not owned by the club, Minor is inviting and allowing to play any player whose rights don't belong to the club. Inviting can be open to interpretation.
I have advised players parents on the release process, and it was insinuated that I was tampering. Even though the player wanted to come play for a team I was coaching, this is NOT tampering in my opinion, as I did not invite the player.
Recently I heard about some junior aged players who were working on releases, sitting in the stands of another clubs practices... is this tampering? evidence of tampering? or not tampering at all?
Posted on May 20, 2014, 9:51 AM from IP address 22.214.171.124
Having a yard sale 699 Wesley dr Oshawa sat and Sunday may 10 and 111 various used items such as dishes and nick knacks also new (clearance) hockey and lacrosse equipment such as : hockey and lacrosse jerseys lacrosse shorts lacrosse sweaters, lacrosse/hockey gloves basketball jerseys, lacrosse and skater shoes , lacrosse shoulder pads, cleats, orange work rain wear, lacrosse elbow pads also electrical supply's new clearance such as pouches, connectors, switches. lacrosse sticks and junior hockey bags
Posted on May 9, 2014, 10:09 PM from IP address 126.96.36.199
SJ Arena at Niagara Falls will be hosting the FIRST ever Findley Wilson goalie clinic for box lacrosse goalies at the SJ Arena!
It will be held on Saturdays starting May 3 at 10 am. The group size will be kept small.
Ages will be from from 5 to 85!!!
Email for more information or an application!
Feel free to call 716-261-9342 as well.
Posted on Apr 21, 2014, 12:09 PM from IP address 188.8.131.52
CSA standard for Ice Hockey is approved. As for suggested, that depends on the individual goalie. Lots of goalies wear ice hockey goalie masks and helmets. You will also want to ensure a capable throat guard is attached as well.
Posted on Apr 15, 2014, 9:56 AM from IP address 184.108.40.206