>>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

[Ivan Lennon]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Would love to see RIT in the above scenario but agree that it would be unlikely.

I think RIT will need to move to athletic scholarships somewhere down the road if they want to consider an upgrade to another league. I've seen marked improvements among many of the AHA teams who benefit from athletic scholarships. Those who don't have athletic scholarships, if they haven't already noticed, will soon find themselves at a disadvantage. I don't know all the legal mumbo jumbo behind it, but at some point it will need to happen if RIT wants to remain a force in the AHA or any other league they may find themselves in down the road. This is just my opinion, I'm sure others will bring up Union and the Ivies, however if you think about it, do you want to continue down the road we are on, and how that path effects attendance in our new rink, or do you want to see an RIT team with the type of talent they played against at the last two Brick City's (Michigan and Boston College)?

RIT as a D3 school (unlike grandfathered Hopkins, SLU , CC, etc)- regardless of another league - cannot move to grants in aid unless all sports are moved to D1
An expensive highly unlikely scenario in that RIT is quite content w/ its Liberty association

Moreover SLU's move to scholarships did not result in a more competitive "product" and Union manages as do the Ivies

 

[Tom Naeger]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

I think the more likely scenario would be the split of Ivy School from the ECAC to the their own league. The remaining ECAC teams should be interested in adding teams from the Western POD of the AHA. Another possibility would be some of the teams on the eastern side of the current WCHA could get interested in joining with some of those same teams in the Western POD of the AHA.

The people in power at RIT that I've spoken to never really say much on the idea of changing a conference. The definite feeling I get would be that there preference would some kind of merger with the ECAC. I still think there are some dominoes to fall, and a surprise or two within the next couple of years...

 

[XCTiger]

About the time that the Tiger Women's move to DI, I remember (or at least think I do) that there was some discussion of possibly petitioning for the ability to offer scholarships for the hockey program.

Suggestions of Union as a example of success without scholarships fail to look at the fact that the Dutchmen moved to DI in 1991 and really only became a consistent factor in the ECAC in '08 or '09. Prior to that they were middle of the pack at best, and prime examples of the lack of institutional support.

I think while RIT may not be actively pursuing another conference, they are doing all of the things necessary to put the program in the position to be able to take advantage of an offer should it arise in the future.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Suggestions of Union as a example of success without scholarships fail to look at the fact that the Dutchmen moved to DI in 1991 and really only became a consistent factor in the ECAC in '08 or '09. Prior to that they were middle of the pack at best, and prime examples of the lack of institutional support.

So with institutional support, it's perfectly feasible. Why does it matter that Union wasn't interested in being great for so long? RIT is, now.


Powers &8^]

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

RIT as a D3 school (unlike grandfathered Hopkins, SLU , CC, etc)- regardless of another league - cannot move to grants in aid unless all sports are moved to D1

AFAIK, we don't have to go to DI to offer scholies; just DII.


Powers &8^]

 

[XCTiger]

So with institutional support, it's perfectly feasible. Why does it matter that Union wasn't interested in being great for so long? RIT is, now.
Powers &8^]

Just pointing out that it didn't happen for Union for a lot of years. Most of the discussion fails to consider that fact, only looking at the last 3-4 seasons and saying "see, they can do it".

 

[MattS]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Not so original an idea: - Ivies go it alone bringing back Penn and adding Columbia.
RIT and Syracuse advocate for an Empire State League along w/ 2 Buffalo schools, Colgate and the 4 Liberties currently in the ECAC
(Highly unlikely to be supported by the latter 5 who LOVE the existing Ivy connection - as would RIT!)

I think the more likely scenario would be the split of Ivy School from the ECAC to the their own league.

I didn't want to get sucked into this discussion (again), however I cannot help myself.

Unless Columbia starts and Penn revives their hockey programs then there is very little chance the current Ivies break away from the rest of the ECAC. I have heard nothing about either of those two universities adding hockey although I suppose they could surprise and do so. There is no real upside for the Ivies to leave the ECAC. The rest of the ECAC have decent to good academic reputations so that is fine. Excluding Brown (almost always) and Princeton (mostly), the Ivies are competative with the rest of the ECAC, so that isn't agood reason to leave. I suppose the non-Ivy institutions could split from the Ivies but that would be just plain old dumb for a sport like hockey.

 

[Ivan Lennon]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

AFAIK, we don't have to go to DI to offer scholies; just DII.


Powers &8^]

I don't think Lou Spiotti Jr. envisions Mechanics' Inst. membership in the D2 Northeast 10 - a non championship
league with such powerhouses as Franklin Pierce, College of St Rose, University of New Haven, inter alia.

Hardly a step up in the college ice hockey pecking order

As to grants in aid at that level you might want to check

 

[Tom Naeger]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Unless Columbia starts and Penn revives their hockey programs then there is very little chance the current Ivies break away from the rest of the ECAC. I have heard nothing about either of those two universities adding hockey although I suppose they could surprise and do so. There is no real upside for the Ivies to leave the ECAC. The rest of the ECAC have decent to good academic reputations so that is fine. Excluding Brown (almost always) and Princeton (mostly), the Ivies are competative with the rest of the ECAC, so that isn't agood reason to leave. I suppose the non-Ivy institutions could split from the Ivies but that would be just plain old dumb for a sport like hockey.

Columbia or Penn bring back a program would be nice, but not needed for the scenario to work. If all the current Ivy teams broke away that would make a Ivy League of 6 teams, the same number of teams in the Big Ten. I'm guessing your just saying you think it would be better for them to just stick with the ECAC and I probably agree with you there. However, I have heard some rumors about the possibility of being one Ivy League of interest to those schools. So I don't consider the idea far fetch. Personally I like the idea of a 6 or 7 team league. You can play everyone in the league the same number of time and increase the number of NC games. I really would like to see more non league match ups...

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

I don't think Lou Spiotti Jr. envisions Mechanics' Inst. membership in the D2 Northeast 10 - a non championship
league with such powerhouses as Franklin Pierce, College of St Rose, University of New Haven, inter alia.

A "non-championship league"? *** are you talking about? The NE-10 has 24 championship sports, including ice hockey (though that's irrelevant for RIT's purposes).

And besides which, there are other D-II conferences. ECC is one, that's where Roberts Wesleyan went (though they sponsor fewer sports than NE-10 does, particularly [for RIT's purposes] swimming/diving). CACC is another option, albeit with the same problem (and no men's lacrosse). Out of all of them, NE-10 is the most feasible, and that's the one you choose to single out and disparage?

And it's not like our current conference stablemates like RPI, St. Lawrence, and U of R are powerhouses either; they're D-III for heaven's sake.

Hardly a step up in the college ice hockey pecking order

Who said it was? It doesn't have to be, since our college ice hockey conference wouldn't change.

As to grants in aid at that level you might want to check

D-II institutions can grant 13.5 men's and 18 women's scholies in ice hockey. Since we're in the AHA, the 13.5 limit wouldn't affect us, but it would be enough to offer the AHA max, which is all we need.

If you're suggesting we move D-I, why? First, we'd have to go through D-II anyway to do so, so we'd still need to "slum it" with the NE-10 or some other league (and "put up with" a number of scholarships that exceeds the AHA limit) for several years anyway. Second, what D-I conference is available that would provide more "powerhouse" opponents than any of the D-II options? The MAAC, with those powerhouses Canisius, Fairfield, and Iona?

Look, I totally get there aren't any really good D-II conference options. But that wasn't my point. My point was that we don't have any strong reason to go all the way to D-I if offering scholarships is the main goal.


Powers &8^]

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Just pointing out that it didn't happen for Union for a lot of years. Most of the discussion fails to consider that fact, only looking at the last 3-4 seasons and saying "see, they can do it".

But you haven't explained why it's relevant, unless you're claiming that Union wanted to be better but couldn't because they hadn't been D-I long enough (as opposed to couldn't because of lack of institutional support). Did Union have to be a cellar dweller for 15 years? Or was it just that they finally woke up and decided to put resources into the program?


Powers &8^]

 

[Ed Trefzger]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

The simplest option would be for the NCAA to grant legislation for the non-grandfathered D-III programs to offer scholarships for their D-I sports. It would affect only five institutions:

Franklin and Marshall (wrestling)
Hobart (men's lacrosse)
MIT (women's rowing)
RIT (men's and women's hockey)
Union College (men's and women's hockey)

Since the window for playing up has now closed and no other teams will be allowed to "play up", wouldn't it make sense for all 11 D-III schools with D-I teams to be playing under the same rules?

 

[Ivan Lennon]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

A "non-championship league"? *** are you talking about? The NE-10 has 24 championship sports, including ice hockey (though that's irrelevant for RIT's purposes).

And besides which, there are other D-II conferences. ECC is one, that's where Roberts Wesleyan went (though they sponsor fewer sports than NE-10 does, particularly [for RIT's purposes] swimming/diving). CACC is another option, albeit with the same problem (and no men's lacrosse). Out of all of them, NE-10 is the most feasible, and that's the one you choose to single out and disparage?

And it's not like our current conference stablemates like RPI, St. Lawrence, and U of R are powerhouses either; they're D-III for heaven's sake.




Who said it was? It doesn't have to be, since our college ice hockey conference wouldn't change.




D-II institutions can grant 13.5 men's and 18 women's scholies in ice hockey. Since we're in the AHA, the 13.5 limit wouldn't affect us, but it would be enough to offer the AHA max, which is all we need.

If you're suggesting we move D-I, why? First, we'd have to go through D-II anyway to do so, so we'd still need to "slum it" with the NE-10 or some other league (and "put up with" a number of scholarships that exceeds the AHA limit) for several years anyway. Second, what D-I conference is available that would provide more "powerhouse" opponents than any of the D-II options? The MAAC, with those powerhouses Canisius, Fairfield, and Iona?

Look, I totally get there aren't any really good D-II conference options. But that wasn't my point. My point was that we don't have any strong reason to go all the way to D-I if offering scholarships is the main goal.


Powers &8^]

"Non championship" meaning there is NO D2 national champion in ice hockey whereas there is at D1 and D3.
There is no such thing as a D1 MAAC hockey league

Again - RIT as a D3 school is forever PROHIBITED from grants in aid ( what you mislabel as "scholarships") unless ALL sports are D1.
This will NEVER happen for financial/philosophical/geographic reasons.
The anomaly is the NCAA grandfathered lacrosse/hockey programs based on sports history at the handful of schools

Moreover w/ existing/anticipated entry of large state schools ( e.g., ASU, PSU) the D1 ice hockey landscape may arguably be totally changed as it
was a century ago in football when Colgate, Lafayette, Chicago, Union plus the Ivies were the powerhouses

Even absent the above, today large land grant universities plus Hockey East tend to dominate in both men and women's game w/ an occasional
blip for the ECAC schools (and RIT, Mercyhurst) )

I never noted SLU etc as an athletic powerhouse; but it has been a universally respected program since 1925

They have contended ( a sore subject) in numerous men/women's ice hockey championships plus won D3 championships
SLU. in effect, competes at D1 level in NCAA mens and women's skiing and college squash w/ a #1 national
ranking w/ the same number of teams as men's ice hockey

A successful overall athletic program ( currently SLU is ranked 11th nationally) is not measured by number of NCAA championships alone.
ECAC hockey players generally graduate and go on to successful careers both out and in hockey - Cornell,'s Ken Dryden, SLU's Brian McFarlane, Ron Mason
(2nd "winningest" college hockey coach), Mike Keenan (KHL, NHL, AHL championships), etc.



Again grant in aids are NOT a panacea - witness SLU being more successful w/ ice hockey player need based aid ( as for all students) than it has been
w/ grants in aid which frequently are partials - as many parents find out to their dismay when their son/daughter gets an alleged "full ride" in a D1 sport
Like football - w/ 5th grade reading levels at UNC - how willing are you to compromise the school's integrity

 

[MattS]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Columbia or Penn bring back a program would be nice, but not needed for the scenario to work. If all the current Ivy teams broke away that would make a Ivy League of 6 teams, the same number of teams in the Big Ten. I'm guessing your just saying you think it would be better for them to just stick with the ECAC and I probably agree with you there. However, I have heard some rumors about the possibility of being one Ivy League of interest to those schools. So I don't consider the idea far fetch. Personally I like the idea of a 6 or 7 team league. You can play everyone in the league the same number of time and increase the number of NC games. I really would like to see more non league match ups...

What I meant was is that I don't believe the Ivies make a move to leave the ECAC without the missing two starting up ice hockey. I know for NCAA purposes 6 would be OK, but I don't think it would be for the Ivy League members. Unless the other large conferences broke into smaller conferences, I think it would create a shceduling nightmare for non-powerhouse teams. For example, what team would want to schedule a game at Brown unless Brown fronts a ton of money for the team to come?

 

[lmg6841]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

For example, what team would want to schedule a game at Brown unless Brown fronts a ton of money for the team to come?

The change in how PWR is calculated benefits for road wins now, right? That's helped AHA schools get more home games.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

"Non championship" meaning there is NO D2 national champion in ice hockey whereas there is at D1 and D3.

No one was talking about moving to a D-II hockey league. We're already at D-I in hockey, so moving to D-II would be a downgrade.

There is no such thing as a D1 MAAC hockey league

Who said there was? I was talking about conference options should RIT move the entire athletic program to Division II, since we couldn't stay in the Liberty League.

Again - RIT as a D3 school is forever PROHIBITED from grants in aid ( what you mislabel as "scholarships") unless ALL sports are D1.

As I said before to start this discussion, I don't believe we have to go to D-I. D-II would be sufficient to offer scholarships.

Look, I apologize for not being explicit. Let me be so now.

We were talking about offering scholarships. Someone suggested that we would have to move all sports to D-I to offer scholarships. I don't believe that's true, as D-II institutions like Mercyhurst, Bentley, Minnesota State, Bemidji, etc., all offer scholarships. That's all.

In reply to my comment, you then said, "I don't think Lou Spiotti Jr. envisions Mechanics' Inst. membership in the D2 Northeast 10", implying that for some reason the Northeast 10 would be beneath us as an all-sports conference.

Again grant in aids are NOT a panacea - witness SLU being more successful w/ ice hockey player need based aid ( as for all students) than it has been
w/ grants in aid which frequently are partials - as many parents find out to their dismay when their son/daughter gets an alleged "full ride" in a D1 sport
Like football - w/ 5th grade reading levels at UNC - how willing are you to compromise the school's integrity

I'm not the one saying we need scholarships to be competitive. I'm just saying we don't have to go D-I to issue them. And Ed offered another way forward, though I don't know if it'll ever happen. I've been surprised before, though.


Powers &8^]

 

[Downstate_RIT_Fan]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

I almost feel bad for bringing this scholarship topic up this time around, (someone else can bring it up a year from now, lol) but I think it is a good topic for discussion that RIT fans need to have. I brought it up after reading over on the Bentley blog that that fanbase was basically happy with their team and the AHA scholarship increase but to attract even better talent they needed a new rink. Should they succeed in that endeavor, they will have a nice setup to sign future Bentley players.

XCTiger brings up the point that I would make also when looking at Union, since going D1 they have had more losing seasons, especially early on, than winning seasons and I would hate to see RIT put together a long list of tough seasons after opening up a beautiful new rink. They could lose the casual fan.

I guess the last point I would make is the economic impact on a family sending their child to a four year private school. Anybody who is currently doing this knows how expensive a four year school has become. I think we would be fooling ourselves if we think the economic impact to 'most' families is not a factor when sending a D1 hockey player to college. That said, why not level the playing field and offer scholarships for just the D1 hockey programs at RIT? Let the economic professors and the RIT legal team make a case for it, find some clause that allows RIT to be grandfathered in like many of the other schools that have benefited from being 'grandfathered' in. Maybe the 'grandfathered' schools will speak up on RIT's behalf.

In my opinion RIT is doing everything they can to position themselves to make a move into a league where sellouts or near sellouts is the norm at most games across the league. Now they have to take the steps, double down if you will, to bring in the talent, even if it means a stab at scholarships, to successfully compete in a bigger league against better teams. I'm not a UConn fan but they increased the talent of their team pretty quickly to not be blown out by the powerhouses of the Hockey East. Penn State also put together a team pretty quickly that today would not lose to Buff State.

As AHA hockey continues to get better, and our Frozen Four run becomes just a memory, the pressure on the coaching staff to find talent that may have been passed over by other schools only increases. Not a great position to be in.

 

[Bing]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

An article that claims that Tanev is Vancouver's best defensive player, supported by statistics: http://thehockeywriters.com/is-chris-tanev-the-leagues-most-underrated-defenseman/

 

[LtPowers]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

An article that claims that Tanev is Vancouver's best defensive player, supported by statistics: http://thehockeywriters.com/is-chris-tanev-the-leagues-most-underrated-defenseman/

Certainly a good argument, at least for people who don't think a defenseman's main value is his point shot.

Not that Tanev has a bad point shot; he's just not going to be a point-per-game player in the NHL.


Powers &8^]

 

[komey1]

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Re: >>>>>RIT TIGERS... The Polisseum, just like the Ritter only more of us!<<<<<

Catching up on the thread ....

No way Syracuse would want to be in a NY only league in hockey long term. The names aren't going to be big enough for Syracuse fans - at least in men's sports. The teams in the league are the teams that are scheduled as warmups for basketball.

I agree that RIT is putting the foundation down in terms of facilities and such for a move to a bigger conference. They will be set up for a move should an opening be created, and hopefully in the meantime a rise back to the AHA top.