RPI 2023-24: In Our 200th Year, We're Getting It Right

[DavidNardolillo]

The comments revisiting RPI passing over Ben Barr to hire Dave Smith are understandable but, in my view, are of limited usefulness. My personal opinion on Barr's unsuccessful candidacy was that Barr's profile at that moment was very similar to that of Seth Appert when Seth replaced Dan Fridgen, and the lack of head coaching experience was a killer for Barr at that moment. If that was a factor, perhaps that was unfair, and maybe it turned out to be the wrong call. But, and I don't want to drag Seth here, given what I know of the overall operation of the program back then, I can understand why RPI was looking for someone that looked more like Dave Smith and less like Ben Barr. Your mileage may vary, but I also note that RPI was not the only school to miss out on Barr; his name was in the hat at some other schools but he was passed over until UMass won the national championship.

We also need to be realistic about some of the structural foundations and limitations here. RPI and Maine are two different schools with two entirely different structures relating to Division I sports. RPI has had 3 national tournament appearances in the last 30 years (spanning 4 different head coaches) and has failed to score a goal in any of them. From Buddy Powers' last season until today, the program has close to 100 more losses than wins. This is a result of more than coaching--and this is largely without addressing how COVID was handled and the impacts of that.

I think we are now in the phase where we can start to judge the current program on the results on the ice, but we should support the current staff and players and see how the season progresses after an admittedly disappointing weekend. In making that assessment, we also need to grapple with the reality that RPI's path to success might need to unfold very differently than other Division I programs.

[vicious]

This series at Maine was very telling about the program. Lee and Shirley went with Smith over Barr and from the evidence right in front our face it was a disaster. Per CHN, we were out shot 108-32 ; total dominance. Call it the Tale of Two programs, one in ascendance and one in decline. Another 20 loss season is unacceptable and Marty and the new AD will have to intervene. No more excuses. We could have had one of our own (Barr) fix this but we didn't. Just awful.

Interesting that some are ready to write the team off two games into a 34+ game season, but ok.

[DavidNardolillo]

Interesting that some are ready to write the team off two games into a 34+ game season, but ok.

Agree. Very tough weekend, but now is not the time to throw in the towel.

[AspyDad]

Interesting that some are ready to write the team off two games into a 34+ game season, but ok.

Interesting that given the track record lately and the total dominance that Maine exhibited that you're not concerned

[Ralph Baer]

What evidence are you looking for only 3 months into the job, from someone who ultimately reports to the President?

I should have written that there is no evidence that she either cares or doesn't care as of now.

[troyboy]

The comments revisiting RPI passing over Ben Barr to hire Dave Smith are understandable but, in my view, are of limited usefulness. My personal opinion on Barr's unsuccessful candidacy was that Barr's profile at that moment was very similar to that of Seth Appert when Seth replaced Dan Fridgen, and the lack of head coaching experience was a killer for Barr at that moment. If that was a factor, perhaps that was unfair, and maybe it turned out to be the wrong call. But, and I don't want to drag Seth here, given what I know of the overall operation of the program back then, I can understand why RPI was looking for someone that looked more like Dave Smith and less like Ben Barr. Your mileage may vary, but I also note that RPI was not the only school to miss out on Barr; his name was in the hat at some other schools but he was passed over until UMass won the national championship.

We also need to be realistic about some of the structural foundations and limitations here. RPI and Maine are two different schools with two entirely different structures relating to Division I sports. RPI has had 3 national tournament appearances in the last 30 years (spanning 4 different head coaches) and has failed to score a goal in any of them. From Buddy Powers' last season until today, the program has close to 100 more losses than wins. This is a result of more than coaching--and this is largely without addressing how COVID was handled and the impacts of that.

I think we are now in the phase where we can start to judge the current program on the results on the ice, but we should support the current staff and players and see how the season progresses after an admittedly disappointing weekend. In making that assessment, we also need to grapple with the reality that RPI's path to success might need to unfold very differently than other Division I programs.

Barr was the hottest ***'t in college hockey @ a level above the ECAC and also a legacy where I come from they call that a no brainer and I believe the facts on the ground validate that...If anyone thinks Barr would have done worse than multiple 20+ loss seasons you must be day drinking !

[DrDemento]

Football note - RPI beat Buffalo State 51-28 in a ridiculously sloppy game. We made enough mistakes and took enough penalties and still ran up a big score which should have been even far greater. But we are now 5-1 overall and 1-1 in Liberty League play. Nice to put up a win after a lost weekend of hockey in Maine. We will be better as the season moves on. We may not show it next weekend in which we face two more heavy hitters of HE, but we are going to improve if we put the work in to fix the elements that let us down so badly. Special teams and face offs among other things. But as i kept posting before the season started, we can only go as far as our defense will allow and if we cannot coordinate a decent defense in front of the goal, it will not matter who is between the pipes as they cannot be allowed to face the quality of chances we gave to Maine.

[DavidNardolillo]

Barr was the hottest ***'t in college hockey @ a level above the ECAC and also a legacy where I come from they call that a no brainer and I believe the facts on the ground validate that...If anyone thinks Barr would have done worse than multiple 20+ loss seasons you must be day drinking !

I didn't say he would do worse. Would Barr have done significantly better at RPI? I think he would have been fighting an uphill battle. You can ask Seth how easy it was for a good-recruiting, young, motivated coach to build a consistent winner here. Seth's win-loss record shows it was not easy, despite all the hard work he put in. I do not think that the investment (or lack thereof) in facilities or the school's reaction to COVID would have been any different if Ben Barr had been the coach.

Reasonable people can disagree whether RPI's decision to pass over Barr was the right move. As for it being a no-brainer, note that other schools across the Division I ranks also missed the boat to hire him; Ben Barr went another 4 years before he got a head coaching offer, despite at least a dozen openings during that time. Perhaps a miscalculation, but one that was not solely RPI's.

[Engineers]

I didn't say he would do worse. Would Barr have done significantly better at RPI? I think he would have been fighting an uphill battle. You can ask Seth how easy it was for a good-recruiting, young, motivated coach to build a consistent winner here. Seth's win-loss record shows it was not easy, despite all the hard work he put in. I do not think that the investment (or lack thereof) in facilities or the school's reaction to COVID would have been any different if Ben Barr had been the coach.

Reasonable people can disagree whether RPI's decision to pass over Barr was the right move. As for it being a no-brainer, note that other schools across the Division I ranks also missed the boat to hire him; Ben Barr went another 4 years before he got a head coaching offer, despite at least a dozen openings during that time. Perhaps a miscalculation, but one that was not solely RPI's.

You’re trying to jam a square peg in a round hole. It was obvious at the time it was a bad move not hiring Barr and it’s even more obvious now. Yes the lack of head coaching experience hindered him a bit but he’s also an alum which should have pushed him over the line with RPI. Also it’s widely known he’s one of the best recruiters in college hockey. Much better than appert. He also was trained under some of the best HC in college hockey. Why you would go with a guy who has a terrible record in Atlantic hockey as your next head coach is baffling. Then if head coaching is must for the next hire idk maybe hire a head coach that actually has a history of winning a little. Maine and RPI don’t have different tracks on becoming successful. Invest invest invest in the program and hire good coaches who most importantly can recruit. RPI is not some enigma where the stars have to align to win? But doing what they did 7 years ago made zero sense. Doesn’t matter how your word the ****. It’s a moot point now. We have leaders who care so let’s see how we do this year. I’m rooting for them like I always do but reality is reality.

[engineerhockeyfan]

What makes any of you think that Barr would have done any better at RPI than any of the last three coaches.
He would have been working under Shirley (what's hockey?) and her hand picked AD.
Yeah, he would have had everything he needed to make us better. I think not.
And stop complaining about Covid. Our problems go back 30 years.
We ran into a very good Maine team with a very good game plan.
With the possible exception of Quinnipiac, the ECAC does not have a team that can keep up the pace that Maine played for 120 minutes.
Lets see what the do next week and more importantly what they do in their conference.
I refuse to throw this team down the drain after two games.
Lets talk again in March.

[vicious]

Interesting that given the track record lately and the total dominance that Maine exhibited that you're not concerned

I understand the frustration around both the short and long-term success of the program. Frankly, for those of us who have followed this team for awhile, many of the last 20 seasons have been rough. Given all the recent changes, however, I want to see how this team grows and develops over time. I'm reserving judgment until we have a more complete picture of things. This weekend was two games on the road in one of the toughest places to play anywhere in the east, so while a win would have been nice, I'm more concerned about how they handle the league schedule and what things look like in February.

[DavidNardolillo]

Maine and RPI don’t have different tracks on becoming successful. Invest invest invest in the program . . . RPI is not some enigma where the stars have to align to win? But doing what they did 7 years ago made zero sense.

This excerpt illustrates one point I am making: consider whether what happened seven years ago--and what has happened for the last 30 years--is reflective of an institution, all the way up to the board of trustees, that has different priorities when it comes to Division I athletics. We might not like it, but there is a "reality is reality" there, as well.

As for investment, the way the most other schools have invested in hockey is through alumni donations. RPI has not received these types of donations from alumni and boosters (e.g., $88 million donation to start hockey at Penn State; $75 million donation for on campus rink at U. St. Thomas; $40 million alumni-funded rink at Colgate; $90 million Alfond donation to Maine athletic program). These are the types of structural issues that will be hard to change. I am glad you and others that are unhappy are still supporting the team. Let's see how the season plays out and assess in a few months.

[sk8tronthepond]

RPI has not received these types of donations from alumni and boosters (e.g., $88 million donation to start hockey at Penn State; $75 million donation for on campus rink at U. St. Thomas; $40 million alumni-funded rink at Colgate; $90 million Alfond donation to Maine athletic program).

That is because hockey alumni wanting to make a "large" donation specifically for the hockey program, couldn't do so. Shirley wanted those donations to be "unrestricted", which means she could designate where the money went.

[DavidNardolillo]

That is because hockey alumni wanting to make a "large" donation specifically for the hockey program, couldn't do so. Shirley wanted those donations to be "unrestricted", which means she could designate where the money went.

Hopefully the transition to the new administration will revive interest from the large donor you describe.

But if what you say is true, it is disappointing that a solution could not be found. College presidents fearing pushback from other constituents due to accepting targeted athletic donations are nothing new. I have seen donors at other schools successfully address this through different options--gaining support within board of trustees (who the president reports to), consideration of additional smaller targeted donations to other areas of need (such as other underfunded athletic programs), or use of separate alumni-incorporated "friends of RPI athletics" type-organization where money is secured. And to be fair to college administrators, I've seen situations where some targeted donations come with conditions that are unfair, onerous, or create compliance risks.

[sk8tronthepond]

Hopefully the transition to the new administration will revive interest from the large donor you describe.
College presidents fearing pushback from other constituents due to accepting targeted athletic donations are nothing new. I have seen donors at other schools successfully address this through different options

Really??? I won't look for you to substantiate your claim with regards to other schools. The previous administration had no fears and there were no other options. If you didn't like it, move on.