For those of us who root for teams that have been eliminated from
their league tournament and have no chance to be chosen for the
NC$$ tournament, it is time to reminisce about the past season
and look forward to next year.
 
It reality, RPI performed about as well as one should have expected
this year.  I hoped for better, but ...  Indeed, the team had exactly
as many league points as they did in 1991-92 when it was at the same
point in the four-year cycle of recruiting that it is now.  This year
a 7-13-2 record, and in 91-92 a 6-12-4 record.
 
However, comparing the two years there are a number of differences.
 
1) Going into 91-92, there were essentially no proven forwards,
while this year, the Senior class had proven offensive skills, and
Sophomore Eric Healey had proven as a Freshman that he could put
the puck in the net.
2) Not counting playoff games, this year's team was 2-7-1 in non-
league games, while in 91-92 it went 6-2.  However, note that three
of the victories in 91-92 were against non-Div-I teams (2 vs
Alabama-Huntsville and 1 vs RIT).
3) This year in the playoffs, RPI beat lower-seated Dartmouth and
then lost twice to higher-seated Vermont.  Four years ago, 10th
seated RPI beat 7th seated Vermont and then number 1-seated Harvard
before losing in overtime to St Lawrence.  So clearly, the team
ended the season on a positive note in 1992, while this year,
although there was some improvement at the end of the year, it was
not nearly as impressive.
4) Until the playoffs, RPI did not win a one-goal game this year.
In 91-92, RPI won 5 one-goal games including four in overtime.
5) The main difference is that this year for the first time in a
decade, looking back over the season, RPI won almost all of the
games that they should have won and lost almost all of the games
that they should have lost.  Yes, RPI probably did upset Cornell,
tied SLU, and lost to an Army team that they should have beaten
based upon the computer rankings, but that is about it.  In past
years (and this includes 91-92, see for example the playoff victory
vs Harvard), upsets in each direction were the norm.  This unpre-
dictability, in my opinion, has always characterized RPI -- but not
this year.
 
I expected better because I figured that the defense would be able
to replace Adam Bartell (which I think it did) and the offense
although it did lose a lot from last year would be about the same
because of improvement in the returning players and contributions
from at least some of the freshmen.  This did happen, but the team
was just not able to put it together.
 
Well, onto next year.  It is hard to compare 96-97 with 92-93
mainly for two reasons.  1) RPI is losing players who scored well
over half of its goals this year, and lost little offensively four
years ago.  2) The goalie situation.  In 92-93, RPI had an
experienced returning Neil Little -- now ...
 
I am eagerly awaiting hearing about the recruits for next year
considering that there are apparently eight vacant scholarships.
Some of these, especially in goal, will need to produce
immediately.
 
Those of us who lived through the 1965-66 season know that it could
always be worse.  (I got to keep reminding myself of that.)
 
Ralph Baer
RPI '68, '70, '74
Allegiance for sale for the playoffs (cheap), prefer team nicknamed
"Bears" or whose colors are Red and White.  It looks like it will be
BU.
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph N. Baer
[log in to unmask]
Naval Research Laboratory     Code 7142     Washington, DC 20375-5350
Ph: (202) 767-3173         FAX: (202) 404-7732
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.