I don't think that games against D1 teams that have played less than two
years should count in the RPI.  I'm might change my mind on that after
thinking about it, but generally it seems to be a good move.
 
I do not however think we should give teams that play new programs a pass
if they lose.  Likewise games against new programs ought to be reflected
in their record if they win.  However new, they are D1 teams.  Sure
winning against a soft new program, which isn't an automatic in a number
of cases, might seem like a nice way to pump up a record.  But the voters
are going to know if they play those teams anyway.  And would I as a voter
ignore it if Maine, or any other team lost to a new program?  no.  I'd
drop a team that lost an expo game against Canadian team, or a new D1
program.
 
So why shouldn't those games be shown on the rocords?  Polls are
subjective, not scientific.  The RPI is not based on what pollersters
think.  And not including games against new programs seems more to prevent
teams from gainning an unfair advantage by racking up lots of points
against teams not able to compete as yet.  What if Michigan suddenly went
to the MAAC? (This is strictly for the sake of debate here of course)
They own the conference, rack up an RPI ranking that is not reflective of
how they would do playing in the CCHA.  Or if a team that might place 6th
in the CCHA went to the MAAC and wound up doing the same thing?  They
would never otherwise make it to the NCAAs.  So the reason for excluding
the games from the RPI is understandable.  The polls however are
different.  There is no real reason to exclude games for the sake of those
polls.
 
So I strongly feel the polling bodies should include those games.  Let the
voters read the box scores and figure out how much the game means.
 
Nathan W.L. Boyle
BGSU
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.