I seem to recall a discussion thread maybe during the 1991 playoffs around
  divisions, but I could be wrong.  Someone with more time could search
  hockey-d.
 
  I think the ECAC has two "Divisions" (note the capital "D").  The ECAC
  Division I division (little "d") includes the likes of Clarkson and RPI.
  The ECAC Division III has (at least) two divisions, the ECAC East and ECAC
  West.  Rochester Institute of Technology is in the same division as
  Plattsburgh and Canisius - the ECAC West (actually, Plattsburgh is a SUNY -
  State Univ. of NY - college, so I guess it will now be in the newly-formed
  ECAC SUNY division).  RIT is a Division III school competing in Division III
  sports.  I believe RPI and Clarkson are technically Division III schools
  that happen to have a Div. I hockey program.  Schools in this category
  started/upgraded their hockey programs before the NC$$ rules that say
  something to the effect that all sports programs must compete at the
  Division level that the school is labeled.  Doesn't Union College have
  something like 5 years to upgrade its other sports programs to the Division
  I level?  Some schools have done the same thing with hoops - the only
  Division I sport they have is basketball.  I am pretty sure RIT plays
  basketball against RPI on a regular basis, but not hockey.  I think the fact
  that the league name "ECAC" is used across Divisions is a point of
  confusion.
 
  I am not sure what Division (I, II, III, ???) Canisius College as a whole is
  labeled by the NC$$.  They do have a Div. I baskatball program, don't they?
  The impression I get from the original notes (from Dr. Roth?) is that they
  are a Div. I school that fields a Div. III hockey program, and thus cannot
  particiapte in the NC$$ playoffs.  I know there are some schools in New
  England states that cannot play in the NC$$ playoffs because their local
  division (little "d") says they cannot.  (Mike M. - support me here?)  Kind
  of along the same lines as the NC$$/WCHA/CCHA/Big-10 division discussion of
  a while back, different divisions have rules that may be a superset/subset
  of the NC$$ rules.
 
  Does this make sense?  I don't think I have deviated from previous
  discussions, but I am sure more knowledgeable people will provide gentle
  correction if it is needed.
 
 
                              Larry
 
===============================================================================
Lawrence E. Haag
Eastman Kodak Company                   Reply to [log in to unmask] -OR-
Rochester NY 14652-3302                          [log in to unmask]
(716) 477-3669
===============================================================================