Bill Fenwick quoted the NCAA and then commented:
 
> The actual text is "... the committee also voted that games against emerging
> programs (institutions starting new hockey programs that are not eligible
> for
> championship competition) would not be considered. The action was taken in
> an
> effort to assist the institutions with emerging programs in establishing
> quality
> schedules."  So playing games against a "new" Div. I program will not
> adversely
> affect your RPI.
 
> I wonder what "new" means... is Niagara, starting their second year of Div.
> I
> competition (playing in the Div. III ECAC West and not scheduling enough
> games
> against Div. I foes to be eligible for the Div. I tourney) still considered
> "new"?  I assume a game against a team like Canisius, which is also Div. I
> but
> not eligible for the postseason, *would* count in the RPI, since Canisius
> has
> been around for several years.  When is a "new" program not a "new" program?
> It's not like the NCAA to be so vague :-)
 
This sounds like the word "new" is wrong -- they mean teams which don't
play the requisite number of Div-1 opponents.  I.e., you play Iona and it
will not count, but play Mankato and it will.  At least that is my reading.
Indeed, it is very vague, as I can also get the opposite interpretation.
How does this differ from what has been used in the recent past?  I seem
to recall that the games that, for example, Army played against Iona,
Villanova, etc did not count for their RPI, but did count for meeting the
minimum number of Div-1 opponents.
 
Ralph Baer
RPI '68, '70, '74
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.