Bryan Morris wrote:
>A couple of points/corrections to Ken Johnson's recent post.
>
>It is not simply a matter of RPI's administration not wanting to compete against
>schools of supposedly lower academic caliber.  What RPI's president
>has elected to follow is a system where the schools's hockey team must resemble
>the academic composition of the entire student body, the so-caled academic
>index.  When RPI was involved in its HE mating dance, then ECAC Commissioner
>Laine Kennedy made an interesting statement: RPI's recruiting problem was of
>its own doing.  The ECAC doesn't apply a uniform academic index to each of its
>constituent schools, rather the academic index for each campus is devised by
>that same university.  In RPI's case, the Engineers actually abide by a more
>rigorous academic index than that used by most other ECAC members.  In fact at
>that time, Byron Pipes made the statement that RPI might well further strengthen
>its index, even if it further impeded their recruiting efforts.
 
First, the whole academic index is designed so the hockey team resembles
the entire student body.  RPI hasn't simply decided to do this themselves.
 
Second, that each school devises its own index is partially true, partially not.
 
The academic index has four components for each incoming student:
 
1.  High school GPA
2.  High school class rank
3.  A modifier for how good the high school is
4.  SAT scores
 
1 and 2 are entirely out of RPI's hands.  3 is entirely up to RPI.  4 is out
of RPI's hands.
 
However, the index gets skewed against RPI by 3 and 4.  RPI will weight
high schools with better technical programs higher than other schools, except
for Clarkson, for 3.  The SAT scores work against RPI because RPI goes
for better math scores, but the SAT scores are taken as a whole.  Since
approximately 19% score 600 or above in math, while only 7% do so in verbal,
and the math mean is about 30 points higher than the verbal, concentrating
on math scores will yield a higher overall average scores than concentrating
on verbal ability.  So, an incoming student who isn't good at math has a tougher
time fitting into the index.  Clarkson also has the same basic problem as an
engineering school.
 
That being said, let me make this statement:
 
  That the academic index is the reason for anyone's lack of competitiveness
  is pure and absolute bullshit.
 
Last season I posted an overview of the index, and it seems, at most,
using the index will cost each team one not so bright player each
season.  Whether he is a good player or not can't be determined by the index.
In order to get in, you must finish no more than one standard deviation below
the student body average within the index.  In simpler terms, if you finish in the
top 84% of the incoming class, you're OK.  Hence my use of the phrase
"not so bright."  There's a lot of room there.
 
Now, let's check the facts.  RPI isn't competitive?  Here are the number
of regular season and tournament championships in the ECAC since
1979, when RPI hired Mike Addessa and started taking the program
seriously:
 
Regular Season:
 
  Harvard 7
  Clarkson 4
  RPI 2
  BC, Providence and Colgate 1 each
 
Tournament:
 
  Harvard, RPI and St. Lawrence 3 each
  Cornell and Clarkson 2 each
  Colgate, Northeastern and Providence 1 each
 
This is considered not being competitive?  Looks to me like RPI has
done pretty well.  So has Clarkson, with similar academic
requirements.  The facts don't support the academic index theory.  Where
the hell is Vermont on this list?  If there was ever a school that should do
well with the index, it's the only state school in the conference, which does
give out scholarships, has the second largest enrollment (behind Cornell),
and is in a prime geographic location near Canada.  But they haven't won
anything.  Sorry, theory doesn't work.
 
People at RPI cry about the academic index as an excuse for why RPI
doesn't win it all every year.  There are plenty of real reasons, let's not
use this same old story again.  It's boring and stupid.
 
>The academic caliber of your league's constituent schools, simply, IMHO, doesn't
>play that big a role in your recruiting success.
 
Hit the nail on the head, Brian.
 
 
********************************************************************************
 Is life so dear, or peace so sweet,
 as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
--Patrick Henry, in his speech to the Virginia House of Burgesses, March 23, 1775
--------
Kurt Stutt     ([log in to unmask])
********************************************************************************