PDA

View Full Version : RIT Tigers 2017 / 2018. Is time to go out and capture some prey!



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Schmitty
03-05-2018, 03:50 PM
And yet only 2 years ago, we were enjoying a 2nd straight NCAA tournament appearance.

Coach Wilson has earned a long leash based on what he has done. Honestly, RIT is lucky they have had him as long as they did. I know quite a few of us were concerned he would be poached after the Frozen Four run. I would not be surprised if some schools had interest.

Now if there are no tournament or conference regular season championships in the next four years, then we can talk.

So weíll be talking in four years then?

On a more serious note, I donít know if Iíd necessarily advocate for firing him now (though I wonít shed any tears if he is), more that Iím advocating for letting him walk in 2022.

He earned a long leash, but 12 years is a lot of leash to choke yourself with.

Schmitty
03-05-2018, 03:59 PM
Double posted, ignore this

Rochester
03-05-2018, 05:37 PM
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/31/rit-hockey-ncaa-scholarships/22651989/

I truly believe that this program is extremely limited by having no scholarships. RIT is in the worst conference and is an extremely expensive school. Wayne and company have done a great job trying to find gems but the AHC is just getting better. What collegiate athlete wants to graduate with almost $200,000 in debt when they can get up to a full ride... Also attendance has dropped considerably...

What are the chances of RIT actually winning this scholarship debate?

Enjoy your offseason Tiger fans from all around.

LtPowers
03-05-2018, 07:05 PM
What collegiate athlete wants to graduate with almost $200,000 in debt when they can get up to a full ride...

I would be stunned if any men's hockey player had to take out $200k in loans. RIT does everything they legally can to get financial aid to these student-athletes.



Also attendance has dropped considerably...

This is a problem too, and part of what I was referring to with the loss of our home-ice advantage. We've lost something that packed the Ritter.


Powers &8^]

Downstate_RIT_Fan
03-05-2018, 09:51 PM
I would be stunned if any men's hockey player had to take out $200k in loans. RIT does everything they legally can to get financial aid to these student-athletes.

Powers &8^]

A loan is a loan...even if it's 40K, (using the 200K example, the student-athlete gets 15K 'grant' a year over four years for 60K total, parents cash flow around 100K give or take and the student-athlete has a 40K loan to pay back on future ECHL or similar wages). Or the student-athlete can take a look at one of the other AHC schools that offer scholarships and are increasing their hockey scholarship numbers to eventually be 18. So what does the RIT Hockey Program offer that the student-athlete can't get at another school? A easier path to the NHL? A small fish bowl rink that sells out every game and has rabid fans that intimidate the opposing team? Nope. I think those ships have sailed, yes Tanev from RIT is in the NHL, and so is Conacher from Canisius, and the Ritter is no more, replaced with the opponent friendly GPC.

I don't envy what our RIT coaching staff has to do to recruit top level talent, I've written before that maybe they need to take a page out of the recruitment book that Union uses as they seem to have a good pipeline of talent using the same rules...

Without scholarships it's only going to get harder, still not impossible to continue to bring in top talent but definitely harder. The playing field has shifted and maybe the writing is on the wall and Munson knows this.

Winters mentioned that Munson has been putting effort into the D3 programs. If that is the case is it in an effort to bring the entire school to D1 sometime in the next few years?

Russell Jaslow
03-05-2018, 10:12 PM
https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/31/rit-hockey-ncaa-scholarships/22651989/

I truly believe that this program is extremely limited by having no scholarships. RIT is in the worst conference and is an extremely expensive school. Wayne and company have done a great job trying to find gems but the AHC is just getting better. What collegiate athlete wants to graduate with almost $200,000 in debt when they can get up to a full ride... Also attendance has dropped considerably...

What are the chances of RIT actually winning this scholarship debate?

Enjoy your offseason Tiger fans from all around.

One huge mistake in this article.

Union CHOSE to not give scholarships out. They were part of the grandfather rule put in place when the rule to not allow schools with single sports playing up to give scholarships out was passed.

That is why Clarkson, SLU, RPI, Hartwick soccer, etc. still give scholarships. At the time, RIT had not yet moved their hockey teams up. Union was already D1 in hockey, but they chose not to take advantage of the grandfather rule, and in fact fought against the grandfather rule in the first place.

Iím also pretty darn sure Hobart lacrosse was already D1, so they also chose to continue to not give scholarships away.

RIT Winters
03-06-2018, 07:11 AM
A loan is a loan...even if it's 40K, (using the 200K example, the student-athlete gets 15K 'grant' a year over four years for 60K total, parents cash flow around 100K give or take and the student-athlete has a 40K loan to pay back on future ECHL or similar wages). Or the student-athlete can take a look at one of the other AHC schools that offer scholarships and are increasing their hockey scholarship numbers to eventually be 18. So what does the RIT Hockey Program offer that the student-athlete can't get at another school? A easier path to the NHL? A small fish bowl rink that sells out every game and has rabid fans that intimidate the opposing team? Nope. I think those ships have sailed, yes Tanev from RIT is in the NHL, and so is Conacher from Canisius, and the Ritter is no more, replaced with the opponent friendly GPC.

I don't envy what our RIT coaching staff has to do to recruit top level talent, I've written before that maybe they need to take a page out of the recruitment book that Union uses as they seem to have a good pipeline of talent using the same rules...

Without scholarships it's only going to get harder, still not impossible to continue to bring in top talent but definitely harder. The playing field has shifted and maybe the writing is on the wall and Munson knows this.

Winters mentioned that Munson has been putting effort into the D3 programs. If that is the case is it in an effort to bring the entire school to D1 sometime in the next few years?

I doubt many recruits would look at Ritter vs GPC and think Ritter was the better place to be. Sure, it was packed...but it was also kind of a dump (in a loveable way). GPC has all kinds of amenities and creature comforts for the players that would certainly be more attractive to them than how full the stands are.

I'm not sure we know what Union does differently to recruit better talent. However, it definitely goes back to the conference discussion. They play in a more prestigious conference and frequently play far more prestigious opponents which not only raises their national profile but also raises their value to recruits. There's a much better chance of NHL scouts seeing you play if you're playing for Union than for RIT.

My sense from Munson has not been an interest in D1, but a simple desire to see our school be more than a mediocre D1 hockey school. He wants sustained, championship-level success at lacrosse, basketball, baseball, etc. And based on how these teams have been doing lately, this seems like a much more attainable goal than getting scholarships for the hockey program.

Moving to the ECAC for that matter seems like a more readily attainable goal than getting scholarships and would over time still prove to be a boon for us, I think. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see us offer scholarships, I just don't think it is very likely anytime soon/ever. If it were to happen, I think we'd have a good shot at quickly becoming a perennial top dog in AHC like we were back when none of the other schools were really trying.

komey1
03-06-2018, 08:39 AM
I doubt many recruits would look at Ritter vs GPC and think Ritter was the better place to be. Sure, it was packed...but it was also kind of a dump (in a loveable way). GPC has all kinds of amenities and creature comforts for the players that would certainly be more attractive to them than how full the stands are.


I think if RIT was in the Ritter, the team's record would be worse because they would not be able to get some of the best players that have come. Back when RIT started in Atlantic Hockey, the Ritter was better than at least half the arenas in the conference. That would no longer be the case. It would be near the bottom if not the bottom arena from a player's perspective.



I'm not sure we know what Union does differently to recruit better talent. However, it definitely goes back to the conference discussion. They play in a more prestigious conference and frequently play far more prestigious opponents which not only raises their national profile but also raises their value to recruits. There's a much better chance of NHL scouts seeing you play if you're playing for Union than for RIT.


Conference affiliation is important because of two factors: NCAA championship opportunities and chance to be seen by scouts. Atlantic Hockey has been a 1 bid league almost every year it's been in existence and that's going to be hard to change in the near future. I'm not saying it won't happen, but it won't happen very often. So basically, there is a 1/11 chance of making the big tournament. And because the conference is a lower level conference, it's hard to judge how good a player is based on accomplishments in Atlantic Hockey.


My sense from Munson has not been an interest in D1, but a simple desire to see our school be more than a mediocre D1 hockey school. He wants sustained, championship-level success at lacrosse, basketball, baseball, etc. And based on how these teams have been doing lately, this seems like a much more attainable goal than getting scholarships for the hockey program.

I think this is a great goal, Athletics at RIT should be more than just hockey. One of the best ways to instill school spirit is to have winning sports teams. It should be important to have multiple high caliber teams. Hockey will probably always be the flagship sport at RIT, but it should not be the only sport that gets the school's attention.


Moving to the ECAC for that matter seems like a more readily attainable goal than getting scholarships and would over time still prove to be a boon for us, I think. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see us offer scholarships, I just don't think it is very likely anytime soon/ever. If it were to happen, I think we'd have a good shot at quickly becoming a perennial top dog in AHC like we were back when none of the other schools were really trying.
I would agree that a move to ECAC would be a boon long term. However, don't expect that RIT could just jump in that league and be a contender. They probably would need a couple recruiting cycles just to get to a point of consistently having home ice in the first round of their playoffs. In terms of scholarships, I don't think it would change all that much the type of players RIT can get right now. Are you suggesting that other teams are consistently getting better players than RIT?

RIT Winters
03-06-2018, 09:43 AM
I would agree that a move to ECAC would be a boon long term. However, don't expect that RIT could just jump in that league and be a contender. They probably would need a couple recruiting cycles just to get to a point of consistently having home ice in the first round of their playoffs. In terms of scholarships, I don't think it would change all that much the type of players RIT can get right now. Are you suggesting that other teams are consistently getting better players than RIT?

I think that having scholarships pretty much automatically improves the quality of recruits, especially to a program that already receives so much support and resources from the school. How many kids won't even consider us because of the financial burden for doing so?

I don't think it's unlikely that RIT would be able to steal away some quality recruits that normally sign on to teams in better conferences by promising them bigger minutes and a potentially more likely path to the NCAA tournament (compared to middle/bottom tier teams in those leagues at least). Even within AHC we're seeing more and better scholarship recruits in the league...it's hard to imagine RIT wouldn't be a more alluring destination than Niagara, Holy Cross, etc. if we could match them dollar for dollar.

TigerFan86-87
03-06-2018, 12:04 PM
We've lost something that packed the Ritter.
Powers &8^]

Although attendance has been down a bit, it's never been that great relative to the size of the GPC to begin with. It's not surprising that as the teams fortunes dip, so will attendance. However, most, if not all, of the GPC crowds are significantly larger than the Ritter can even hold. At the end of Ritter's time, the crowds were dipping to consistently less than sellout levels because of the quality of the team itself. So the attendance is still greatly improved since then.
What needs to be done is to find a way to make the GPC a bit more like the Ritter relative to it being an uncomfortable place for opponents to play in. I have no idea what the solution is aside from getting about 3 times as many students in the building on a regular basis and somehow magically make the seating bowl steeper and closer to the ice. I was probably one of many who suggested in our post-season survey from the GPC a couple seasons ago that more general admission was needed for students, but then they added GA seats behind the Tigers' goal. I was proposing adding more GA to extend the section around the opponents' goal and let students sit in GA closer to and at center ice, especially on the bench side (where TV cameras can see - like Duke does with basketball). That could intensify the atmosphere in there as well as make it look from TV like there are actually people there. When you watch the broadcast, it looks like a library in there. Of course that would only help if more students attended. Lower the student ticket prices even more and make them free occasionally (giveaways at various campus events, maybe) and try to do whatever you can to get them in the house with a host of sections set aside just for them. Let the "wealthy" alumni that can afford center ice reserved seats to sit on the penalty box side of center ice.

Schmitty
03-06-2018, 12:40 PM
Are you suggesting that other teams are consistently getting better players than RIT?

One would think enough suggestion is provided by results. :/

Downstate_RIT_Fan
03-06-2018, 01:51 PM
One would think enough suggestion is provided by results. :/

If someone has a lot of time maybe a highly unscientific correlation of teams performance versus the number of USHL and BCHL players on the roster can be looked at.

Then look at the other teams in AHC as the scholarship numbers increase.

Not trying to diminish the players from other leagues but Iíve always thought that the USHL and the BCHL were the two premier junior leagues where D1 schools looked for their top talent.

komey1
03-06-2018, 03:14 PM
One would think enough suggestion is provided by results. :/

This year's seniors had 2 NCAA tournament bids and 1 NCAA tournament win.
The juniors had 1 NCAA tournament bid

The core of our defensemen were upperclassmen, and the defense was the worst part of the team. Most of our freshman did not put into prime spots aside from goalie - and that was because there was no clear favorite. That is still the case as all 3 have eligibility for the upcoming season. Dupois got time as a starter and was solid. Willett got into that spot and was pretty good. Let's judge them after 3 or 4 years.

blazer777
03-06-2018, 08:19 PM
Double posted, ignore this

Sorry, I can't look away from this quote!

“I sense great vulnerability. A man-child crying out for love. An innocent orphan in the post-modern world.”
“I see a parasite. A sexually depraved miscreant who is seeking only to gratify his basest and most immediate urges.”
“His struggle is man's struggle. He lifts my spirit.”
“He is a loathsome, offensive brute. Yet I can’t look away.”
“He transcends time and space.”
“He sickens me.”
“I love it.”
“Me too.”

Ed Trefzger
03-06-2018, 08:35 PM
One huge mistake in this article.

Union CHOSE to not give scholarships out. They were part of the grandfather rule put in place when the rule to not allow schools with single sports playing up to give scholarships out was passed.

The grandfather rule actually did precede Union's move. They, like RIT, had to make a choice to move either to D-I or D-III when D-II was ended the first time in 1983. There was some disappointment around campus when RIT moved to D-III, but that's the path a lot of schools took, and that's when D-III actually became as good as D-II had been. (I had thought as you did but was corrected by the AD on this point and have verified the info as correct.) Union made the move 8 years later.

The issue of scholarships was revisited again in 2004 under proposal 65, which would have stripped the scholarships away, but the 400-some-odd D-III schools voted to keep them grandfathered.

The argument RIT makes is that now that nobody else will be allowed to play up -- RIT women were the last to make the move -- that everyone should be put on the same playing field. But it's D-III that needs to approve.

Three of the six NCAA D-I hockey commissioners have told me on various occasions that they would support allowing Union and RIT to offer scholarships, and that they would do so right away if hockey were allowed to have its own "federation" within the NCAA. That federation idea is one in which individual sports could set rules that pertain specifically to that sport with more autonomy.

cplinford
03-07-2018, 07:20 AM
If someone has a lot of time maybe a highly unscientific correlation of teams performance versus the number of USHL and BCHL players on the roster can be looked at.

Then look at the other teams in AHC as the scholarship numbers increase.

Not trying to diminish the players from other leagues but I’ve always thought that the USHL and the BCHL were the two premier junior leagues where D1 schools looked for their top talent.

Not getting recent recruits from these leagues, especially the USHL I think has been huge

Russell Jaslow
03-07-2018, 08:54 AM
The grandfather rule actually did precede Union's move. They, like RIT, had to make a choice to move either to D-I or D-III when D-II was ended the first time in 1983. There was some disappointment around campus when RIT moved to D-III, but that's the path a lot of schools took, and that's when D-III actually became as good as D-II had been. (I had thought as you did but was corrected by the AD on this point and have verified the info as correct.) Union made the move 8 years later.

The issue of scholarships was revisited again in 2004 under proposal 65, which would have stripped the scholarships away but the 400-some-odd D-III schools voted to keep them grandfathered.

This is what I'm talking about. Union had the opportunity to provide scholarships after this particular ruling (it was kind of a reset of the grandfather timing). They chose not to. Not only that, they were against the this proposal in the first place.

At least that is the way I understood and remember it. Apparently, assuming you asked the AD the proper question, the grandfather timing did not get reset. Is that what you are saying?

Ed Trefzger
03-07-2018, 09:03 AM
The grandfather timing was 1983, but Union didn't go D-I until 1991, so they missed the opportunity. They didn't choose by not accepting the ability to be grandfathered; they chose by not going D-I at the deadline.

RIT Winters
03-07-2018, 09:06 AM
Not getting recent recruits from these leagues, especially the USHL I think has been huge

For a recent point of reference, Garbowsky came from the BCHL. Scored 133 points in 107 games in the league. McGowan had 135 points in 117 games. I guess it's no surprise the MGM line went off.

2017-18 Tigers from the USHL or BCHL:
- Jake Hamacher (F)
- Myles Powell (F)
- Christian Short (G)
- Adam Brubacher (D)
- Dan Willett (D)

None of these guys scored at a pace anywhere near Garbo/McGowan. Closest is Powell who had one season with 59pts in 58 games, but the two years prior he was well below point per game pace. Willett was a minus player over his 5 year, 4 team USHL career, totaling -25 in 266 games.

The rest of the team breaks down as:
OJHL: 5
AJHL:8
SJHL: 3
CCHL: 3
NAHL: 2
MJHL: 1

One could argue that outside of maybe Powell and Brubacher the current group of USHL/BCHL players is not overly impressive. Even Powell and Brubacher are above average Tigers, but pretty solidly league average players. This years leading scorer Erik Brown came from the CCHL. His linemates both came from the OJHL.

LtPowers
03-07-2018, 09:51 AM
Although attendance has been down a bit, it's never been that great relative to the size of the GPC to begin with. It's not surprising that as the teams fortunes dip, so will attendance. However, most, if not all, of the GPC crowds are significantly larger than the Ritter can even hold. At the end of Ritter's time, the crowds were dipping to consistently less than sellout levels because of the quality of the team itself. So the attendance is still greatly improved since then.
What needs to be done is to find a way to make the GPC a bit more like the Ritter relative to it being an uncomfortable place for opponents to play in. I have no idea what the solution is aside from getting about 3 times as many students in the building on a regular basis and somehow magically make the seating bowl steeper and closer to the ice. I was probably one of many who suggested in our post-season survey from the GPC a couple seasons ago that more general admission was needed for students, but then they added GA seats behind the Tigers' goal. I was proposing adding more GA to extend the section around the opponents' goal and let students sit in GA closer to and at center ice, especially on the bench side (where TV cameras can see - like Duke does with basketball). That could intensify the atmosphere in there as well as make it look from TV like there are actually people there. When you watch the broadcast, it looks like a library in there. Of course that would only help if more students attended. Lower the student ticket prices even more and make them free occasionally (giveaways at various campus events, maybe) and try to do whatever you can to get them in the house with a host of sections set aside just for them. Let the "wealthy" alumni that can afford center ice reserved seats to sit on the penalty box side of center ice.

The penalty box side is the side visible on camera. All those club seats look empty because a lot of people are up in the club lounge drinking. I'm not sure how you could extend the GA seating into that area.


Powers &8^]