What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

RPI 2025–26: Off the Critical List and In Recovery

Early odds for next week (predictors for RB:))
Girls are 1/2 goal underdogs in both their contest. Boys are underdogs in both also but by 2.5 against QU and 1/2 against Princeton.
 
DrDemento said:
I could not fathom why we had only 4 home games scheduled for the year out of a total of 11 played.
Click to expand...
RPI had a 4-home/6-road scheduling imbalance this year because it made sense within the Liberty League.

Follow this explanation:

Hilbert was added to the league this year, making it seven games per team. How do they resolve the imbalance?

Start by maintaining the current scheduling system (home/road) for each team. It really irritates coaches if they must play league games at the same road site in consecutive years.

Then add a Hilbert game for everyone. If you look at the schedule, there is a logic to what they did.

The league is broken into four groups: RPI/Union in the east, Buffalo State/Hilbert in the west, Hobart/Ithaca/Rochester in the middle and St. Lawrence by itself. There is nothing that can be done with St. Lawrence, all road games are an overnight trip. For the teams in the middle, whether they overnight or bus the same day is up to them.

Focus on the east/west groupings. Those are the only "neighborhood" games, where the teams are so close that the attendance is not affected by distance. Buffalo State and Hilbert are closer to each other than RPI and Union are. If you are one of those teams, when would you want that neighborhood game scheduled? Ideally, the same year the team is on the road four times. Then there are only three overnight trips each year. That leaves RPI with the following:

ODD YEARS: 3-Home/4-Road, with three overnight trips and one neighborhood game.
EVEN YEARS: 4-Home/3-Road, with three overnight trips.

That is a better balance for budgeting and fans and means these four teams only make the "long" trip across the state once each year. For that to occur, RPI had to be on the road at Hilbert this year. Union got the home Hilbert game. This system holds true for all four of the east and west teams.

That leaves RPI -1 in the home/road balance. The two Empire 8 games split, so RPI remains -1 in home/road. That leaves the WPI game, which according to rotation was on the road. That left RPI with the 4-home/6-road schedule.

That might change. When I was at WPI the SID said they might switch the RPI-WPI game, with RPI hosting two years in a row (2026 & 2027). If that happens, then RPI would have the same number of home and road games each season starting in 2027.

We shall see if that comes to be.
 
NOTE: I forgot my password to the board and had to get it reset, so I had some replies holding back. This one addresses hosting the football bowl game:

---

A win in a bowl game was a good way for the football team to turn the corner after a few tough losses. Would it have been better had it been at home? Sure.

I asked about RPI being on the road. It was explained that they did not believe they could staff the game due to the reliance on students for staffing, combined with the change in the academic calendar, resulting in the belief many students left before or at the start of the weekend. I am not sure of all the staffing that is done by students, since I spend the entire game in the media area. There are a lot of students there, but the majority are with RPI-TV, which is incredibly good at staffing games during breaks. Therefore I have no firm idea the numbers needed for a game.

Had RPI been selected for an NCAA home game, they would have accepted the game and approached staffing by asking other colleges in the area to help. That is common in the college sports world.

I did not ask for details, such as if they had done a head count before making the decision. It would not have made a difference; the game would still be in Pittsford even if I had gotten an answer. Once Ithaca beat RPI an NCAA home game was out of the question. Had that game gone the other way, I suspect RPI would have been forced to plan for an NCAA home game (requiring a win against Union) and then a home ECAC game might have been possible (since the planning had been done). RPI applied for the bowl game at the deadline, likely due to the decision on whether to host or not.

This reminded me of the 2022 bowl game versus Morrisville (in Troy). There were a number of different people in the press box that day, along with some key people missing. It almost seemed like a road game due to the quite different atmosphere. I believe there were a couple of “fill-in” people at the St. John Fisher game. Not everyone saves the date for these events, and some will only go out of their way if it is an NCAA game.

Regardless, I think RPI should have hosted the bowl game. Get the game then figure out how to staff it. This reminds me of “Why Not Change the World?" I think that is a terrible slogan. Available answers are “Cost too much,” “Too difficult” or “Not feeling it today.” And numerous others. Make the slogan an order: “Change the World!” Or in this case, “Host the Game!”
 
Thanks Kurt for the explanations. Makes a ton of sense when you put it all out there. But was still annoying as heck since RPI-TV only covered the home games on YouTube and that meant i could not find a way to watch or get others to meet up with us to watch at our local pub for the rest of the games. Although this was arguably not our absolute best season or team ever, this was a very good season with a lot of excitement provided by a very good team with a lot of talented players on both offense and defense. And of course, the commentary provided for the broadcast was, as usual, superb! ;)
One question lingers - after scoring that late TD against Ithaca, why go for the 2 points after the TD instead of the almost certain PAT kick to tie and hope to take the game that meant so much to OT??
 
kurt stutt said:
Regardless, I think RPI should have hosted the bowl game. Get the game then figure out how to staff it. This reminds me of “Why Not Change the World?" I think that is a terrible slogan. Available answers are “Cost too much,” “Too difficult” or “Not feeling it today.” And numerous others. Make the slogan an order: “Change the World!” Or in this case, “Host the Game!”
Click to expand...
That sounds like DC changing its license-plate slogan from "Taxation Without Representation" to the more accurate "End Taxation Without Representation".

Coach Lang certainly seems to be causing a number of former RPI posters to come back here after many years. :)
 
DrDemento said:
One question lingers - after scoring that late TD against Ithaca, why go for the 2 points after the TD instead of the almost certain PAT kick to tie and hope to take the game that meant so much to OT??
Click to expand...
Whenever I discuss end-of-game decisions in sports, I always remind people that we never know exactly how it would have played out with a different decision, unless what happened is so late there were very few courses of action. My big example: If Bill Buckner had gotten that out, the game would have continued (it was tied) with no guarantee the Red Sox win. Odds would still have been in the Mets' favor (being the home team in extra-innings).

With that out of the way, I did ask Coach Isernia about the decision when I interviewed him prior to the Union game. A summation:

They had the chance to take the lead. Going for two in football is generally considered a 50/50 shot, but they felt the play they ran had better odds than 50/50. RPI also had two timeouts, so if they failed, they could stop the clock and get the ball back if they stopped Ithaca in three plays (which they did). Additionally, they had a kick blocked earlier and were concerned about a repeat of that.

When RPI went for the two (and the lead) in 2021 against Union, the situation was worse. Less time on the clock, there was no expectation of getting the ball back if it did not work (onside kick was successful). You take chances, sometimes they work, sometimes they do not. No guarantees in a game or in life. Make a choice and live with it.

Here are the scenarios. I asked AI to run estimates on previous football games to generate approximate odds for victory:

1. RPI goes for 2, makes it, now leads by 1

Ithaca is down 1 with the ball; any field goal or touchdown wins it. If they do not score, RPI wins; there is no overtime risk.

RPI win estimate: ~60%

2. RPI kicks the extra point, ties the game, then kicks off

Ithaca gets the ball. Any Ithaca score likely wins in regulation. If Ithaca does not score, probably overtime, which is close to 50–50 overall with only a small bias based on overtime choice order (defense first has the advantage). Both teams are making different clock choices. RPI is no longer immediately using timeouts as they give Ithaca an advantage, so even if Ithaca does not score there will be less time on the clock if RPI gets a stop (RPI got the ball with 40 seconds left in reality). Ithaca can afford to use the clock so long as they are moving the ball, they can dial back the offense if they feel they will not get close enough to score but do not want RPI to get the ball with time left.

RPI win estimate: ~35%

This is noticeably worse than being up 1, because in the "no score" scenario here RPI only gets a coin-flip, not an automatic win.

3. RPI goes for 2 and misses OR goes for 1 and misses, still trail by 1, then kicks off

Ithaca can:

* Run clock and punt, leaving RPI with little time/too much field to win. NOTE: This happened.

* Get a first down and essentially kill the game.

RPI's path to victory is "get a quick stop or turnover then execute a scoring drive" – both things that must happen.

RPI win estimate: ~15%


At the end of the game, with two timeouts still available, 1:53 is a lot of time left for Ithaca. Once Ithaca gets the ball on the kickoff, the teams make different choices depending on the score being tied or Ithaca up by 1. I do not believe Ithaca would have executed three rushing plays by the QB if the game were tied (that is what they did). Those plays were called to get RPI to use its timeouts. A tied game would see different plays. Maybe they would have fumbled or been intercepted. We will never know.

But there are two things that are always true in football:

1. At any point, being in the lead is better than being tied, which is still better than trailing.
2. Having the ball is better than not having the ball.

At the end game, if the score is tied, the team with the ball has a better chance of winning. That is what RPI was looking at if they kicked and tied it. They rolled the dice and lost. It happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top