Brian Morris writes:
>RPI in contrast picks
>opponents who are basically Division II (Air Force) or most likely rebuilding
>(Northeastern, Bowling Green--but please, no disrespect intended.)
 
It sounds from this as if who RPI plays nonconference is solely up to
RPI, as if they had the first selection of opponents and then everyone
else got to decide who played whom!  Very few teams can simply pick up
the phone and land anyone they want for NC opponents, and RPI isn't
one of those few.  For example, maybe RPI wanted to play BU but BU had
other commitments.
 
Also, on Air Force, since RPI played two at USAFA last season, my
guess is that RPI was locked into a home-and-home deal that required
them to host the Falcons in 95-96.
 
I don't believe that overall RPI's NC schedule for next season looks
much worse than last year, if it even is worse.  First, 5 games are
virtually the same as last year: Merrimack, Army, Lowell, USAFA (2).
 
DivI opps gone are BU, Maine, BC, and Merrimack (RPI Inv opponent in
the 2nd game played between the two last year).  But Maine could have
been replaced by Miami in the Invitational depending on how the games
played out.  BC and Merrimack didn't fare well in the RPI rating.  BU
is the big loss.
 
DivI opps added are BGSU (twice), Northeastern, and 2 of Clarkson/PC/
UIC.  No one equals BU, but if Clarkson is strong as usual, they could
come close.  BG may have lost Holzinger, but I don't expect them to just
be a rebuilder next season.  Northeastern loses a few seniors who were
either injured (Bouchard) or underachieved (Aube), and they could
still be a contender if Ben puts together a good freshman class (as he
has tended to do lately).  UIC is an unknown to me.  Providence has a
lot to replace in Kramer, Quenneville, and Bell, but I won't bet against
Pooley.  There are a few question marks among these teams, but all are
teams I would expect to be competitive and with a decent or better
shot to beat RPI.
 
But the point is that there are many dynamics involved in nonconference
scheduling.  I.e., prior commitments you have, prior commitments the
teams you want to play have, home-and-home deals, a reluctance to
travel to certain places at certain times, etc. as well as the simple
possibility that teams you want to play just may not want to play you
for no real reason.
 
Tony Buffa adds (just saw this):
>Taking a cue from Brian Morris' post, I was wondering whether most
>non-conf games are set well ahead of time (like years?).  I know in
>bigtime football and basketball, non-conf foes are setup a long ways in
>advance, sometimes making for huge mismatches at the time of play when it
>looked like an even game when the schedules were made.... one of course,
>cannot predict how recruiting, academic losses, early pro moves, etc, will
>go.  Is this not the case in DI hockey?  Or is it just RPI that seems to
>be scheduling non-conf from one year to the next?
 
No, it is not just RPI.  DivI hockey is not like football and
basketball in this regard.  There are no 20-year agreements like some
football schools have.  Sometimes you will have extended agreements
for nonconference nontournament games, and a good example is the Maine/
PC/Clarkson/SLU four-year arrangement which is still ongoing.  But for
the most part, it seems that teams tend to schedule no more than a
couple of years in advance at most, with many games scheduled from
year to year to fill holes in the schedule.
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93