Debate, kinda like you who have gone to the lowest denominator with me. Look I get it, you both have a stake in Dave but there's no need to try and chirp at a beloved alum who is a hot commodity right now in the coaching world. Dubuque is a landing spot for future successful coaches, well run organization. If this thing comes back it will need to be with someone who is committed, vibrant and knows his way around junior hockey, Kirk has connections in both Canada and the States. Also, please don't accuse me of running a narrative when I've heard that COVID excuse over and over.
USCHO Fan Forum
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
RPI 2023-24: In Our 200th Year, We're Getting It Right
- Thread starter Ralph Baer
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Debate, kinda like you who have gone to the lowest denominator with me. Look I get it, you both have a stake in Dave but there's no need to try and chirp at a beloved alum who is a hot commodity right now in the coaching world. Dubuque is a landing spot for future successful coaches, well run organization. If this thing comes back it will need to be with someone who is committed, vibrant and knows his way around junior hockey, Kirk has connections in both Canada and the States. Also, please don't accuse me of running a narrative when I've heard that COVID excuse over and over.
Why do alum(s) disrespect Kirk? You must be well aware that most programs turn to former alum to coach their teams. How bout we do this and listen to you and others who are advocating keeping around a coach entering the season with .384 winning percentage at RPI overall and .326 for this year?! RPI whiffed on Barr, let's not whiff again.
No one is disrespecting Kirk. He's done a fine job at Reading and Dubuque. We just aren't ready to announce that he's the unqualified answer to our problems. Like any candidate he brings potential strengths and weaknesses and they should be considered when making a decision on a program's future, particularly whether he can be put in a position to succeed with staff and support to build on the positives and fill in for the weaknesses while also investing in the program infrastructure, promotion, etc. I don't think "Fire Dave and go hire X because he's the answer" is correct no matter who "X" is (excluding complete fantasies like Jim Montgomery, Adam Oates, etc.).
As for hiring alums to be HC, if 4 out of 12 in our league (Harvard, Cornell, Colgate and Yale), 4 out of 11 in HE (BU, BC, Northeastern and UNH) and 3 out of 11 in AH (Canisius, AIC and I'll give you Army even though Riley isn't an alum but grew up there) is "most programs" then you are correct.
Edit: Oops. I forgot Madigan isn't the coach at Northeastern any more so it's 3 of 11 in HE.
Last edited:
The only evidence is the wins and losses, both your opinion and mine have zero effect. You cannot have this type of play continue. WS made a valid point about PK, PK is a lot about effort. You can't have cellar dwellers hang 12 on you over a weekend. You can't put the blame on the netminders when there hung out like ours are.Also as was pointed out earlier on, a firing of Smith is not imminent whether we want it or not, based on all the evidence that has been said on here. It is an interesting idea that could be explored in a few years but for now that’s all it is
No one is disrespecting Kirk. He's done a fine job at Reading and Dubuque. We just aren't ready to announce that he's the unqualified answer to our problems. Like any candidate he brings potential strengths and weaknesses and they should be considered when making a decision on a program's future, particularly whether he can be put in a position to succeed with staff and support to build on the positives and fill in for the weaknesses while also investing in the program infrastructure, promotion, etc. I don't think "Fire Dave and go hire X because he's the answer" is correct no matter who "X" is (excluding complete fantasies like Jim Montgomery, Adam Oates, etc.).
As for hiring alums to be HC, if 4 out of 12 in our league (Harvard, Cornell, Colgate and Yale), 4 out of 11 in HE (BU, BC, Northeastern and UNH) and 3 out of 11 in AH (Canisius, AIC and I'll give you Army even though Riley isn't an alum but grew up there) is "most programs" then you are correct.
Edit: Oops. I forgot Madigan isn't the coach at Northeastern any more so it's 3 of 11 in HE.
Adam Nightingale, Michigan State
The only evidence is the wins and losses, both your opinion and mine have zero effect. You cannot have this type of play continue. WS made a valid point about PK, PK is a lot about effort. You can't have cellar dwellers hang 12 on you over a weekend. You can't put the blame on the netminders when there hung out like ours are.
Apologies if I wasn't clear. Meant the ringing endorsement Dr. Bowers gave, the extension, the fact that Vines is still there, etc. Has nothing to do with either of our differing opinions, just reading the room at RPI I would make a friendly wager he is not relieved after this year is all I meant
Adam Nightingale, Michigan State
What's your point? Nightingale's resume looks nothing like Kirk's. He hasn't spent 80% of his coaching career in a minor pro environment. He was on staff at Michigan State, then coached at SSM (which recruits over as big a range as any college), was on an NHL staff and then coached at the USNTDP before moving 60 miles up the road to East Lansing. That's not Kirk's background. Frankly, I don't know of any college head coach, successful or not, whose previous history behind the bench was overwhelmingly in low-level minor leagues. Perhaps you can point one out.
Getting back to Nightingale, if your point was that he's an alum, as I noted about 30% of college coaches are alums. That's a reason to consider a candidate, not a reason to hire him. Some coaches succeed at their alma maters while others fail. Nightingale's predecessor at Michigan State, Danton Cole, was also an alum and they couldn't wait to run him out of town.
As I've said before I "root for the laundry." I will support whoever is coaching the team in cherry and white at the time. Frankly, I don't know any of these guys personally - I met Seth a few times in 11 years (and only one that involved a real conversation) and I've never met Dave Smith - so my allegiance transfers as each guy gets the job. If someday it's Kirk I'll back him too, but I don't get so caught up in them that I believe anyone is our savior without other changes. I try to be a realist about our current situation and about what the potential is for the future.
Last edited:
What's your point? Nightingale's resume looks nothing like Kirk's. He hasn't spent 80% of his coaching career in a minor pro environment. He was on staff at Michigan State, then coached at SSM (which recruits over as big a range as any college), was on an NHL staff and then coached at the USNTDP before moving 60 miles up the road to East Lansing. That's not Kirk's background. Frankly, I don't know of any college head coach, successful or not, whose previous history behind the bench was overwhelmingly in low-level minor leagues. Perhaps you can point one out.
Getting back to Nightingale, if your point was that he's an alum, as I noted about 30% of college coaches are alums. That's a reason to consider a candidate, not a reason to hire him. Some coaches succeed at their alma maters while others fail. Nightingale's predecessor at Michigan State, Danton Cole, was also an alum and they couldn't wait to run him out of town.
As I've said before I "root for the laundry." I will support whoever is coaching the team in cherry and white at the time. Frankly, I don't know any of these guys personally - I met Seth a few times in 11 years (and only one that involved a real conversation) and I've never met Dave Smith - so my allegiance transfers as each guy gets the job. If someday it's Kirk I'll back him too, but I don't get so caught up in them that I believe anyone is our savior without other changes. I try to be a realist about our current situation and about what the potential is for the future.
Yup. 1000%. I like the RPI Engineers. I am not an Appert fan or a Smith fan or a MacDonald fan, but an RPI fan. I grew up watching Polacek and York and have supported the program forever, and work hard to drum up support through our content of the team on the blog which gets posted here a lot.
This is why I comment when there is a win with zero posts on here after, but the second it goes wrong there are people who can't wait to come out of the woodwork so that they can be right. I find it infuriating that we call ourselves fans and there is 0-2 posts after a win and there has been 5 pages after this weekend. Maybe this program's slow decline has made us all cynical, and maybe those of you that have followed the program for longer have dealt with it for even more time.
You can say that it is looking "long term" when being cynical at the program and wanting to see a new coach, but I don't think prior to this year that the coach has done so terribly given the circumstances that we cannot wait to show him the door. IMO that is not accurate, but we all have different opinions and that is ok. Should we have hired Ben Barr 7 years ago? Potentially. He was the hot candidate and made a lot of sense. I will say he would not have had the same level of success at RPI as he did at Maine, we have significantly worse facilities and arena, in a worse conference, and like it or not the university COVID policy was bad for hockey and would have stunted his development too. We will never know how he would have done here; I am sure we have our opinions. I do find it amusing that in life we want what we don't have, under Appert we wanted a more disciplined and structured team (which prior to this year was Dave), and now we want a more talented one (which is what Appert was good at). I will say that no matter who you side with in the Appert vs Smith debate, neither has had immense amounts of success here and taken us where we want to be. I think they both would agree with that.
I will say AD that while you are attempting to make a larger point about alumnus, Michigan State is really not a worthwhile example. They are in the B10 with a large NIL fund they use to recruit players and have significantly better facilities and branding. It really is not a comparable situation. Someone brought up Union the other day and how they are maximizing their roster, and I would say this is much more relevant and indicts this year's team and staff at RPI much more than the MSU example. It is ugly right now without a doubt. I will say that I think we all will be rooting on the team this Saturday and hope they can pull out the win against Union. I think we all want what is best for the team we just have different ideas of how to do it, and different opinions about the current landscape of RPI Hockey, which is what makes us fans. Hopefully this is an olive branch to those I have disagreed with on here... Every coach deserves a fair shot to succeed at RPI. Seth was probably not given that. Smith probably not either. When the day comes that Smith no longer coaches here, whether that is in a month or a decade, I hope that we have the right people in charge to support the staff and return this program to prominence as we all want. Let's Go Cherry and White.
Wicked Slappaahs
I miss Tie Domi
Yup. 1000%. I like the RPI Engineers. I am not an Appert fan or a Smith fan or a MacDonald fan, but an RPI fan. I grew up watching Polacek and York and have supported the program forever, and work hard to drum up support through our content of the team on the blog which gets posted here a lot.
This is why I comment when there is a win with zero posts on here after, but the second it goes wrong there are people who can't wait to come out of the woodwork so that they can be right. I find it infuriating that we call ourselves fans and there is 0-2 posts after a win and there has been 5 pages after this weekend. Maybe this program's slow decline has made us all cynical, and maybe those of you that have followed the program for longer have dealt with it for even more time.
You can say that it is looking "long term" when being cynical at the program and wanting to see a new coach, but I don't think prior to this year that the coach has done so terribly given the circumstances that we cannot wait to show him the door. IMO that is not accurate, but we all have different opinions and that is ok. Should we have hired Ben Barr 7 years ago? Potentially. He was the hot candidate and made a lot of sense. I will say he would not have had the same level of success at RPI as he did at Maine, we have significantly worse facilities and arena, in a worse conference, and like it or not the university COVID policy was bad for hockey and would have stunted his development too. We will never know how he would have done here; I am sure we have our opinions. I do find it amusing that in life we want what we don't have, under Appert we wanted a more disciplined and structured team (which prior to this year was Dave), and now we want a more talented one (which is what Appert was good at). I will say that no matter who you side with in the Appert vs Smith debate, neither has had immense amounts of success here and taken us where we want to be. I think they both would agree with that.
I will say AD that while you are attempting to make a larger point about alumnus, Michigan State is really not a worthwhile example. They are in the B10 with a large NIL fund they use to recruit players and have significantly better facilities and branding. It really is not a comparable situation. Someone brought up Union the other day and how they are maximizing their roster, and I would say this is much more relevant and indicts this year's team and staff at RPI much more than the MSU example. It is ugly right now without a doubt. I will say that I think we all will be rooting on the team this Saturday and hope they can pull out the win against Union. I think we all want what is best for the team we just have different ideas of how to do it, and different opinions about the current landscape of RPI Hockey, which is what makes us fans. Hopefully this is an olive branch to those I have disagreed with on here... Every coach deserves a fair shot to succeed at RPI. Seth was probably not given that. Smith probably not either. When the day comes that Smith no longer coaches here, whether that is in a month or a decade, I hope that we have the right people in charge to support the staff and return this program to prominence as we all want. Let's Go Cherry and White.
I don't care how you want to categorize it, what all of us want is a team that competes and progresses toward winning. By any reasonable standard we have the opposite of that at the moment. We've landed with a thud in last place in a VERY weak conference, and have historically bad defensive statistics. This team is on pace to give up something in the range of 130 goals against.... In any rational review of any hockey program, that should have loud DEFCON 5 warning bells going off. And then I have to listen to Smith on Wyland's show every Tuesday talk about the process and growth and peaches and cream and rainbows and unicorns...UGGGGGGHHHH.... Somebody shoot me now !!
For the record, I do not think goaltending has much to do with it. I like Watson and Miller. I wish we could drill into the stats to see how many of the 96 GAs have been back door goals we've given up with an opponent standing on the backside pipe.... MIND BLOWING that our staff can't solve that... I personally don't care who the bloody coach is, but trudging to the HFH to watch this stuff is literally a form of torture.
Fix the TEAM defense (which will fix the PK BTW). Let's start there...good things will follow. GO RED !
DavidNardolillo
Member
In any rational review of any hockey program, that should have loud DEFCON 5 warning bells going off.
This is a periodic reminder that DEFCON 5 is actually the lowest state of readiness. DEFCON 1 is the imminent danger level. ;-)
For the record, I do not think goaltending has much to do with it. I like Watson and Miller. I wish we could drill into the stats to see how many of the 96 GAs have been back door goals we've given up with an opponent standing on the backside pipe.
Agree. The defensive issues go beyond the goaltending. Dartmouth had 47 shots on goal . . .
DavidNardolillo
Member
Vines isn’t going anywhere.
There is more than one coach at RPI that has a well-respected spouse that also works at RPI.
DavidNardolillo
Member
The season has been really poor so far; no glossing over that. The league season can be salvaged, but it is getting harder to stay optimistic for a significant turnaround given the manner of the losses and the underperformance to last year. Back to basics needed in the defensive mindset, as Wicked Slappaahs has consistently noted for several weeks now. I am looking forward to the game this weekend. Even when the teams are down, playing Union always gets the temperature up, and the team is at the point where it needs any spark it can get.
I am not interested in the coaching change discussions at this stage. It might be clear after the season that some fresh eyes and ideas would be a good thing, but the debate is not productive now. It's also clear to me that no matter who the coach is, there needs to be better support from the institution, as others have highlighted. I am optimistic about the new leadership at RPI, but what's possible likely depends on some significant alumni financial support.
I am not interested in the coaching change discussions at this stage. It might be clear after the season that some fresh eyes and ideas would be a good thing, but the debate is not productive now. It's also clear to me that no matter who the coach is, there needs to be better support from the institution, as others have highlighted. I am optimistic about the new leadership at RPI, but what's possible likely depends on some significant alumni financial support.
I don't care how you want to categorize it, what all of us want is a team that competes and progresses toward winning. By any reasonable standard we have the opposite of that at the moment. We've landed with a thud in last place in a VERY weak conference, and have historically bad defensive statistics. This team is on pace to give up something in the range of 130 goals against.... In any rational review of any hockey program, that should have loud DEFCON 5 warning bells going off. And then I have to listen to Smith on Wyland's show every Tuesday talk about the process and growth and peaches and cream and rainbows and unicorns...UGGGGGGHHHH.... Somebody shoot me now !!
For the record, I do not think goaltending has much to do with it. I like Watson and Miller. I wish we could drill into the stats to see how many of the 96 GAs have been back door goals we've given up with an opponent standing on the backside pipe.... MIND BLOWING that our staff can't solve that... I personally don't care who the bloody coach is, but trudging to the HFH to watch this stuff is literally a form of torture.
Fix the TEAM defense (which will fix the PK BTW). Let's start there...good things will follow. GO RED !
To your point, these are Dave's teams SOG totals throughout his career, always out shot:
05-06 - 947 to 1120
06-07 - 871 to 1160
07-08 - 882 to 1246
08-09 - 1041 to 1253
09-10 - 1155 to 1280
10-11 - 1042 to 1435
11-12 - 892 to 1221
12-13 - 1287 to 1458
13-14 - 1202 to 1414
14 - 15 - 1051 to 1069
15-16 - 1040 to 1347
16-17 - 1097 to 1294
RPI
17-18 - 981 to 1249
18-19 - 919 to 1208
19-20 - 984 to 1027
21-22 - 1207 to 1208
22-23 - 896 to 1017
23-24 - 552 to 806
Tough on your netminders, when you're constantly outshot.
Yup. 1000%. I like the RPI Engineers. I am not an Appert fan or a Smith fan or a MacDonald fan, but an RPI fan. I grew up watching Polacek and York and have supported the program forever, and work hard to drum up support through our content of the team on the blog which gets posted here a lot.
This is why I comment when there is a win with zero posts on here after, but the second it goes wrong there are people who can't wait to come out of the woodwork so that they can be right. I find it infuriating that we call ourselves fans and there is 0-2 posts after a win and there has been 5 pages after this weekend. Maybe this program's slow decline has made us all cynical, and maybe those of you that have followed the program for longer have dealt with it for even more time.
You can say that it is looking "long term" when being cynical at the program and wanting to see a new coach, but I don't think prior to this year that the coach has done so terribly given the circumstances that we cannot wait to show him the door. IMO that is not accurate, but we all have different opinions and that is ok. Should we have hired Ben Barr 7 years ago? Potentially. He was the hot candidate and made a lot of sense. I will say he would not have had the same level of success at RPI as he did at Maine, we have significantly worse facilities and arena, in a worse conference, and like it or not the university COVID policy was bad for hockey and would have stunted his development too. We will never know how he would have done here; I am sure we have our opinions. I do find it amusing that in life we want what we don't have, under Appert we wanted a more disciplined and structured team (which prior to this year was Dave), and now we want a more talented one (which is what Appert was good at). I will say that no matter who you side with in the Appert vs Smith debate, neither has had immense amounts of success here and taken us where we want to be. I think they both would agree with that.
I will say AD that while you are attempting to make a larger point about alumnus, Michigan State is really not a worthwhile example. They are in the B10 with a large NIL fund they use to recruit players and have significantly better facilities and branding. It really is not a comparable situation. Someone brought up Union the other day and how they are maximizing their roster, and I would say this is much more relevant and indicts this year's team and staff at RPI much more than the MSU example. It is ugly right now without a doubt. I will say that I think we all will be rooting on the team this Saturday and hope they can pull out the win against Union. I think we all want what is best for the team we just have different ideas of how to do it, and different opinions about the current landscape of RPI Hockey, which is what makes us fans. Hopefully this is an olive branch to those I have disagreed with on here... Every coach deserves a fair shot to succeed at RPI. Seth was probably not given that. Smith probably not either. When the day comes that Smith no longer coaches here, whether that is in a month or a decade, I hope that we have the right people in charge to support the staff and return this program to prominence as we all want. Let's Go Cherry and White.
All my best to you and your loved ones. #LGR
There is more than one coach at RPI that has a well-respected spouse that also works at RPI.
True but one isn’t going anywhere unless they leave on their own and the other might be eventually. We all know this
I agree the leadership has me optimistic but I said months ago after a ridiculous blowout loss that unless the people in charge start heavily investing in hockey it’s going to be very hard to compete. It all comes down to $$ always has always will.The season has been really poor so far; no glossing over that. The league season can be salvaged, but it is getting harder to stay optimistic for a significant turnaround given the manner of the losses and the underperformance to last year. Back to basics needed in the defensive mindset, as Wicked Slappaahs has consistently noted for several weeks now. I am looking forward to the game this weekend. Even when the teams are down, playing Union always gets the temperature up, and the team is at the point where it needs any spark it can get.
I am not interested in the coaching change discussions at this stage. It might be clear after the season that some fresh eyes and ideas would be a good thing, but the debate is not productive now. It's also clear to me that no matter who the coach is, there needs to be better support from the institution, as others have highlighted. I am optimistic about the new leadership at RPI, but what's possible likely depends on some significant alumni financial support.
I'm not sure why people are so convinced Vines isn't going anywhere. They almost pulled the trigger last year. They did a performance review last year in the second half of the season and started bringing in players to chat about it. That's the extent of the info I have on it, but I can say for sure that it was considered at minimum. Whether they decided that he is the guy to lead the women's program or they just wanted to leave it up to the new AD, I cannot say. But I don't think he has immunity just because of Sachi.
I don't have anything new to say about Dave and the men's program. I think we've gone through all the talking points ad nauseum at this point. I still would be pretty surprised if they made a move there following this season. Looking forward to the Mayors Cup for both programs on Saturday.
I don't have anything new to say about Dave and the men's program. I think we've gone through all the talking points ad nauseum at this point. I still would be pretty surprised if they made a move there following this season. Looking forward to the Mayors Cup for both programs on Saturday.
I agree the leadership has me optimistic but I said months ago after a ridiculous blowout loss that unless the people in charge start heavily investing in hockey it’s going to be very hard to compete. It all comes down to $$ always has always will.
Agree whole heartedly. Sadly though we could say that so many things now come down to $$ and always will. Additionally, before the season and during the early part of it I repeatedly posted that this team can only go as far as the defense and special teams will allow. I felt that then and even more so now. We are just not that far off in other aspects of the game but just off the scale of any measurement of team defense.
To your point, these are Dave's teams SOG totals throughout his career, always out shot:
05-06 - 947 to 1120
06-07 - 871 to 1160
07-08 - 882 to 1246
08-09 - 1041 to 1253
09-10 - 1155 to 1280
10-11 - 1042 to 1435
11-12 - 892 to 1221
12-13 - 1287 to 1458
13-14 - 1202 to 1414
14 - 15 - 1051 to 1069
15-16 - 1040 to 1347
16-17 - 1097 to 1294
RPI
17-18 - 981 to 1249
18-19 - 919 to 1208
19-20 - 984 to 1027
21-22 - 1207 to 1208
22-23 - 896 to 1017
23-24 - 552 to 806
Tough on your netminders, when you're constantly outshot.
Shoot more. Pass less especially to the defense.
Very true doc. Until they figure out the defensive and special team issues it will be tough sledding. Considering how bad the defense has been it’s surprising they’re averaging 2.7 goals a game which isn’t that bad considering they’re always chasing the game. Imagine if the defense was good I would say we would be closer to 3 goals a game or more. We’re not that far off to your point. Ugh don’t get me started with $$ I looked at my w2 I paid nearly 60k in taxes last year. UnrealAgree whole heartedly. Sadly though we could say that so many things now come down to $$ and always will. Additionally, before the season and during the early part of it I repeatedly posted that this team can only go as far as the defense and special teams will allow. I felt that then and even more so now. We are just not that far off in other aspects of the game but just off the scale of any measurement of team defense.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.