I loved the call, and I would absolutely make that call again if I'm Ryan Soderquist. I loved it, I loved it, I loved it. It backfired, but what a moment that was.
Here's the deal with the way the coaches view the matchups in the playoffs. They a) knew that Canisius had beaten RIT when they called timeout in OT. They b) knew they were going on the road and really didn't give a care about the difference between a 9 seed and a 10 seed and who they're playing. And c) for the seniors, on the last game of the year, where at that point they knew nothing was really at stake, they went for broke. Would they do it again? yes. Would I support that decision? Absolutely.
The coaches view the league in 3 tiers, and it really doesn't matter what your seed is in that tier. You're either 1-4, 5-8 or 9-12. If you're 1-4, it doesn't matter who you play because you only need to win two games to advance to Rochester. If you're 5-8, it doesn't matter who you play because you only have to win 2 games at home to advance to someone's campus, and if you're 9-12, it doesn't matter who you play because you only have to win two games on the road to advance.
The biggest difference is between if you're at home or on the road. If the difference and decision is going to cost you home ice, then he doesn't make that call. But since it wasn't going to change anything besides a trip to Rochester (7 hours) or Canisius (8 hours), then it doens't matter. Coach isn't thinking about future matchups, and if you think he should, then I respect that opinion. But I absolutely loved the call; it took major major major stones to make that call, and I would absolutely do it again. Hell, AIC yanked the goalie 10 seconds earlier and I loved the call when they did it.