Mike Zak writes:
>In regards to Clarkson's (and most likely other team's) scheduling of
>non-league opponents, the majority of the schedule is hammered out a
>year in advance.
 
Usually this is true, but this season most nonleague games were not set
until summertime (a few months before the season).  Many teams were left
scrambling around at the last minute to find games.
 
>                  So it is kind of hard to predict which team is
>going to be good next year.
 
Yes, but you can take a good guess.  It isn't as bad as football where many
schedules are set five years in advance.
 
>                            Clarkson and Saint Lawrence have had
>rotating agreements with Northeastern, Lowell, BC, BU, UNH and the
>Syracuse and Dexter Tournaments.
 
Right, I agree that their nonleague schedule has improved in recent years
a little bit.
 
>                                  BU pulled out this year while BC
>came up here.  BU went to play RPI and another ECAC, missing two of
>the top four ECAC teams.  It looks like BU opted for an easier
>schedule.
 
I believe that BU had no choice but to pass it up, BC wanted to come up
there for Clarkson's first game of the season (to open Cheel, with this
being Ceglarski's last season, and CU wanted them too) which meant it had to
be the weekend of 10/26 or 11/2, since Clarkson was at NU-UML 11/8-9, but
BU already was scheduled to play RPI (a return engagement since BU went
there last year) 10/26 and Colgate (another return engagement) 11/2.  BU
had already fulfilled its obligation by playing at CU-SLU in 1989-90 and
hosting them in 1990-91.  It was either sign a new contract or fulfill
existing ones.  In fact, it wasn't even pulling out, so there was no
opting for the easier schedule although BU certainly does have an easier
one than last year.  But I don't hear them complaining. :-)
 
>          As for Concordia, I'm pretty sure that Clarkson has played
>them every other (at least) for a long while, 9 years or more.  Since
>Concordia is a Canadian team, and doesn't figure into TCHCR or the NC#^
>seeding, what's the big deal?  The two schools have established a
>series and it shouldn't be dropped just because Concordia isn't good
>enough for some people.
 
Playing Concordia and TJ Vitkovice (since cancelled) would have been two
nonleague games used up that could have been used to play other DivI teams.
Since you say CU apparently has an agreement with Concordia, this makes it
even worse IMO.  These games won't help you as far as strength of schedule
go.  But Clarkson still goes out of its way to schedule them??
 
The reason Concordia should be dropped is that when you get better, you
need to "move up".  Just like teams who move up from DivIII to DivI, you
schedule better competition, and if you want to be considered alongside
the Minnesotas and Michigans, you should try to schedule the type of
competition they play.  Clarkson seems to be entering a period of growth
in its program; they have always been good, but now they are becoming
serious challengers for the national title.  And the opening of the new
rink will only help them in recruiting in the future.  I see them only
getting better.
 
>                        Is there going to be more declarations of
>schedule padding when Clarkson plays the SIT because Ohio State and
>Army are going to be there?  Actually, I don't think Clarkson has any
>say in who gets invited to that (or the Dexter) tournament.  Who does?
>The host team?
 
If it is run by a team, they usually put it together and invite teams (there
is no host for the Freezeout, for example).  But still, when you agree to
play in someone's tourney, you usually know who else will be there.  Yet
I am not specifically talking about tourneys where other DivI teams are
involved.
 
>               I do believe that strength of schedule is important,
>but teams should not go searching around for the best teams to play,
>especially when a repertoire has been established.
 
But that still does not make it anyone else's fault if Clarkson (or anyone)
does not have a schedule that sufficiently allows them to prove themselves.
 
>                                                   Also, what will
>the lower teams do when no one schedules a game against them, and
>how does one expect them to have any motivation to improve?
 
But this won't happen.  Not everyone can be among the best, and as some
teams near that pinnacle, others drop.  Besides, I am not advocating a
separation of the top and bottom teams in DivI.  This will never happen
for teams in a league, they will always have games against top teams in
the nation.  The 34-game limit does hurt the Independents more than anyone,
but that's another story.  Clarkson scheduled two of eight games against
teams that aren't even in DivI.
 
>                                                             Too
>bad Clarkson can't take the three worst teams in Div I and go to
>Hawaii and have a tournament just like Georgetown does in basket-
>ball. :-)
 
What do you think Thompson was doing there, if not scouting talent?  There
certainly was no coincidence that BU played at Minnesota-Duluth last year
and nabbed a top goalie from Minneapolis, or another good one from Madison
(playing for Dubuque, juniors).  A big reason for playing nonleague
games in out-of-the-way places is recruiting.  When UMD came out here to
play BU for their return trip a few weeks ago, I'm sure they were trying to
entice some Boston kids to make the trip West.  And, of course, trips like
Hawaii or Alaska are also considered rewards for some teams.  And some
play them that way. :-)
 
On the recruiting issue, there is the story of the DU (?) coach a few years
back who rented a car somewhere like Portland, Oregon to see a kid play,
then drove to see someone else, etc. and by the time he returned the car to
Portland a week later, he'd logged several thousand miles!  And, true story,
he had picked that agency because it offered "unlimited mileage".
 
 
- mike