FB: Liberty League

[Jonny Utah]

I think looking at his style at Bucknell might be more telling since his stint there was for multiple seasons.  According to this old bio, his attack was a run-centric "spread option offense" that didn't focus much on the passing game until about midway through his tenure at Bucknell.

http://www.bucknellbison.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/landis_tim00.html

Yea who knows, it would be hard either way with a new system, run or pass.

[lewdogg11]

Utah, maybe so, the problem is, this league is so bad, and their OOC schedule is so bad, how can you 'predict' losses to any teams other than possibly Alfred, Hobart, or Union?  It's very difficult.  I, like you said, have them going 1-2 vs. Alfred, Union and Hobart.  I just can't pick out another team that they maybe should lose to.

That is the problem with picking games in the preseason.  You really can't predict wins or loses for a team like RPI because there are so many unknowns going into next year.  New coaching staff, new system, some new players, some bad losses last year, etc.  Like you and others have said, RPI may have underperformed for the amount of talent they have had, and they might have lost a game or two last year because of those underperformances. 

It seems that RPI has been one of those teams that lose one, sometimes two or three games a year to teams they are better than.  Are these loses always the fault of the coaching staff?

That being said, Caselton State and MM are probably the only two guarentted wins for RPI, with WPI being a team they should beat.  Utica, St. Lawrence, Union and Rochester are four teams that seem to have the talent to beat RPI, Ithaca, Alfred or any east team on any given Sunday.  It would be hard to predict RPI to lose to one of those teams if you went down the list, but RPI has found a way to lose to these teams in the past, and I don't see this year being too much different. 

Utah, i'm not blaming those bad losses on the coaching staff.  But there has to be SOMETHING there that for some reason, RPI drops atleast 1 game that they shouldn't each year, or they play a terrible team way too close for comfort.  It could be motivation, or preparation, or some strange inability to perform against competition pretty far below you.  I don't know what it is, and it very well may continue.  But going into the season, I have some optimism, and i'd like to think that those losses will not occur this year.  I could be way off and they could be terrible, but i'd like to think they have enough talent coming back, and the new coaching staff will whip them into gear.

And Frank, enough with this 'it's hard to go to a new system' nonsense.  1, half of these kids are aeronautical engineers.  'Teaching' the system won't be that hard and is probably already an afterthought minus the incoming freshman.  2, 'executing' the system probably began in the spring and will get fine tuned in camp.  3, when RPI changed from a Pro offense to their spread, they did it in 1 season.  They didn't ease into it.  it was just done, and they seemed to fair pretty well.  If they were trying to teach football players to play cricket, we might have a problem, but it's football.  Most of these kids have a decent football pedigree, and they'll somehow figure it out.  And my guess is that the new offense will be something more simplified if anything.

[Frank Rossi]

Long story short, I'm siding with JU's prediction.  I think RPI drops 3-4 games this season.  2012 is likely the year for RPI's success, as the team goes out and begins recruiting D1-caliber talent to begin its internal transition to D1 over the next year.  That's my best estimate based on what I've watched in these types of situations.

[lewdogg11]

Long story short, I'm siding with JU's prediction.  I think RPI drops 3-4 games this season.  2012 is likely the year for RPI's success, as the team goes out and begins recruiting D1-caliber talent to begin its internal transition to D1 over the next year.  That's my best estimate based on what I've watched in these types of situations.

I don't know anything about going DI so i'll leave that to you guys.  And I don't disagree with 3-4 losses.  But for a preseason prediction, I don't THINK they should lose more than 2-3 games tops.  Likewise, you'd probably do something similar with Union's schedule, except there are 4 teams on their schedule that you can look at now and think that they could lose to better teams.  Just a tougher schedule.

[Frank Rossi]

One other thing, LD... I think every team in the East has the "dropping a game we can't explain" phenomenon.  No team from the East has gone undefeated except for Curry in 2006 and 2007 and SUNY-Maritime in 2010 since Union and DelVal went undefeated in 2005.  In other words, no school from what people consider to be the "cream" conferences in the East (the LL, E8, NJAC, MAC) has made it through unscathed in six years.  This isn't isolated to just RPI.

[lewdogg11]

One other thing, LD... I think every team in the East has the "dropping a game we can't explain" phenomenon.  No team from the East has gone undefeated except for Curry in 2006 and 2007 and SUNY-Maritime in 2010 since Union and DelVal went undefeated in 2005.  In other words, no school from what people consider to be the "cream" conferences in the East (the LL, E8, NJAC, MAC) has made it through unscathed in six years.  This isn't isolated to just RPI.

Frank, I realize all of this.  But just in recent years, losing to Rochester and St. Lawrence in 2006, Rochester in 2007, Merchant Marine in 2008, Rochester again in 2009, Utica and WPI in 2010.  Not to mention some games that were way too close for comfort.  I just hold RPI's program to be in much higher standing than many of the teams on their schedule, and I, along with many, EXPECT them to win.  Complacency and excuses lead to mediocrity.

[Jonny Utah]

This RPI transition to D1 has me thinking.

Are the recruits now being told that RPI might or will become D1?  If so, what are they told about scholarships in the future (if there are any)?  Is it then fair that RPI may have d1 recruits on a d3team?  Is if fair not to tell the current freshmen?   What has the coach been told?  Did he take the job on a "rumor" that they were going D1? 

[SaintsFAN]

Brad Ferro update (dude who punched snooki):

He's now a Cav Scout.. joined up after losing his job.  He got the last Airborne slot of this newest class and is training with a bunch of Army Rangers.  They are celebrating his punch.

Thought you guys would like to know the Jersey Shore community has infiltrated the intelligence sector of the army --- God help us all. 

[Frank Rossi]

...But just in recent years, losing to Rochester and St. Lawrence in 2006, Rochester in 2007, Merchant Marine in 2008, Rochester again in 2009, Utica and WPI in 2010....

2006:  Rochester 7-4 (ECAC), SLU 5-4
2007:  Rochester 6-5 (ECAC)
2008:  USMMA 3-7
2009:  Rochester 4-6
2010:  Utica 5-5 (Started 5-1), WPI 3-7 (Started 3-1)

I'm only willing to really give you the 2008 USMMA loss as the abomination standard here.  I'll also consider giving you 2009 Rochester on this point.  The rest, not so much.  In 2010, the LL was completely a mediocre league, and RPI caught two teams with hot starts (Utica in 2010 wasn't Utica of the past, and WPI is a trophy game with a team that always threatens RPI in normally shootouts). 

My point is that maybe expectations are a bit out of sorts if you're going to hold losses like 2006, 2007 and 2010 against the team without the context.  We all think our team should go X-0 every year, but it hasn't happened in six years.  These other teams are not always the pushovers we used to assume they were.  So, I'm not really finding it fair to crucify based on two specific results out of six that I'm willing to give you in the above list.  With the exception of 2008, RPI hasn't had a top-to-bottom strong team.  That doesn't discount Jimmy Robertson's strength and his receiving corps.  It's just RPI has been missing a key piece or two for about five years in the first place.  The recruiting game may have something to do with this since Florida is not a bastion of recruiting for RPI still. 

[Frank Rossi]

This RPI transition to D1 has me thinking.

Are the recruits now being told that RPI might or will become D1?  If so, what are they told about scholarships in the future (if there are any)?  Is it then fair that RPI may have d1 recruits on a d3team?  Is if fair not to tell the current freshmen?   What has the coach been told?  Did he take the job on a "rumor" that they were going D1? 

This was the scenario when UAlbany beat Union in 1997 54-0 to end the series.  The thing was that Albany was at D2 in a transitional year and had already been recruiting D1-caliber players.  The difference, too, was that Albany announced their plans and their transition attack publicly so that everyone was on the same level of knowledge by that point.

The coach knows everything about the decision mechanics, and you can't tell me that it wasn't enticing in the consideration to come on board (let's face it, it's an honor to be able to build up a program in such a way, and there are virtually no expectations when it comes to wins and losses in that scenario for years -- it's job security). 

I think part of the silence is based on one of your other questions.  I think there's a concern that the LL would question the acceptability of a member school stacking their decks with D1 recruits.  If RPI showed their hand, the LL might vote to remove the school prior to the actual transitional year(s) in order to remove the advantage and begin to go after other schools for the LL (I know there has been some mutual interest in that department between LL schools and schools outside the LL).  The reason why they aren't rushing to accept a NINTH member is that 9-team leagues are a problem for Pool C purposes (only 1-2 OOC games per school make everyone's OWP stick between .480 to .520 while other conferences have much wider margins).  However, an EIGHTH member is desirable in football based on the need to keep some sanity in scheduling (ask the E8 ADs how much fun scheduling up to 4 OOCs per year was).

Overall, JU, it's a legitimate set of questions -- and it's not being ignored by member schools from what I understand through conversations during the offseason.  However, there's only so much that can be done to force RPI to answer the question at this point.

[Jonny Utah]

This RPI transition to D1 has me thinking.

Are the recruits now being told that RPI might or will become D1?  If so, what are they told about scholarships in the future (if there are any)?  Is it then fair that RPI may have d1 recruits on a d3team?  Is if fair not to tell the current freshmen?   What has the coach been told?  Did he take the job on a "rumor" that they were going D1? 

This was the scenario when UAlbany beat Union in 1997 54-0 to end the series.  The thing was that Albany was at D2 in a transitional year and had already been recruiting D1-caliber players.  The difference, too, was that Albany announced their plans and their transition attack publicly so that everyone was on the same level of knowledge by that point.

The coach knows everything about the decision mechanics, and you can't tell me that it wasn't enticing in the consideration to come on board (let's face it, it's an honor to be able to build up a program in such a way, and there are virtually no expectations when it comes to wins and losses in that scenario for years -- it's job security). 

I think part of the silence is based on one of your other questions.  I think there's a concern that the LL would question the acceptability of a member school stacking their decks with D1 recruits.  If RPI showed their hand, the LL might vote to remove the school prior to the actual transitional year(s) in order to remove the advantage and begin to go after other schools for the LL (I know there has been some mutual interest in that department between LL schools and schools outside the LL).  The reason why they aren't rushing to accept a NINTH member is that 9-team leagues are a problem for Pool C purposes (only 1-2 OOC games per school make everyone's OWP stick between .480 to .520 while other conferences have much wider margins).  However, an EIGHTH member is desirable in football based on the need to keep some sanity in scheduling (ask the E8 ADs how much fun scheduling up to 4 OOCs per year was).

Overall, JU, it's a legitimate set of questions -- and it's not being ignored by member schools from what I understand through conversations during the offseason.  However, there's only so much that can be done to force RPI to answer the question at this point.

Yea I wonder if they are waiting for an invite from the Patriot league or something?  I believe there is a 4 year transition period anyway for d-1 schools once they announce, so it seems strange that RPI would wait any longer than they have to.  Also keeping a "secret" to current recruits seems kind of hard to do.

I mean, BU, Northeastern, Hofstra all dropped football because it costs about 750K-1 million  a year and there were no crowds/profits at any of the schools.  I assume RPI knows that going in.

Then you never know about these donations in the first place.  RPI gets a lot of that 92 million to build the facilities from donors, and who knows what these donors want back for the donation?  Curtis Priem (Big $$ RPI alum) is one of these guys who put some good cash into the facilities.  I wonder if he wanted something back?

[Frank Rossi]

Listen, when you look at the costs and benefits of going Division 1, you should look at sport-by-sport concerns in the first place.  This is where the entire equation doesn't add up when I look at it:

Hockey - This is already RPI's revenue sport and is already at Division 1 through the old grandfather clause from the 1990s.  If RPI goes up, they lose the grandfather if they ever were to transition back to Division 3 in later years.  D1 here is more a risk than a benefit for the team.

Football - Obviously, football would be in a non-scholarship league -- the cost of a scholarship league is not something a 5,000-person school would want to even begin to entertain (at least $1.2 million per year for football scholarships alone -- ouch).  However, there is no way around higher recruitment and staffing costs that go along with the jump -- this is why schools like Siena, Northeastern and Hofstra all had to take a step back.  If you need to pump an additional $400,000 per year into the football program to get it to function correctly, you would need to make that up in gate fees and television rights.  That won't happen the first five years -- maybe ten.  Even UAlbany hasn't really enjoyed enormous attendance increases in its first 14 seasons at D1, and you can't honestly jack up the admission fee for fans in an unproven setting.  Net-net, you need to budget about ten years into your plan to even hope to enjoy some benefit of D1 football at a school with a local fan base that already isn't paying much homage to the UAlbany football program.

Basketball - Here's the real gem for most schools considering D1.  However, this gem may be diluted already.  Siena used to have the monopoly in D1 basketball in the Capital Region until UAlbany's climb.  UAlbany basketball put itself on the map by nearly pulling off the first ever 16/1 upset against UConn in 2006.  However, beyond their games against Siena, crowd sizes aren't enormous generally for the Danes.  That's OK since basketball is actually a low-budget sport, even if scholarships are allowed.  You play enough games with small enough teams and staffs that allow the balance to lean in favor of D1 basketball.  However, basketball is honestly the reason the NCAA made the one sport=all sports rule for D1 since every school wanted a piece of that pie.  For RPI, they wouldn't recognize a real gain for probably the first five years unless they were able to shock the area and make it into the NCAAs during those years.  Otherwise, with the exception of games against UAlbany and Siena (both would like the local opponent and would schedule them), I can't see real growth in the first 5-10 years there. And don't forget, women's basketball goes along with this and traditionally has been a very poor revenue generator for even local schools.

The Rest - Obviously, the rest of the sports are money losers at either level when compared to any ticket sales or admission fees.  Yet, between extra compliance officials needed at the school, extra coaches, broader recruiting budgets and the rest, the costs become astronomical.  There's a reason why many sports get relegated at the D1 level (look at Siena -- even hockey became a club sport there).  Even if you retain 10 sports each with a women's component -- if each of those sports costs the school on average an extra $50,000 per year for each gender (including compliance costs attributable to those sports), that's an additional $1,000,000 per year that needs to be generated somehow (again, assuming no scholarships).  That comes to another nearly $200 per student per year if you can't recoup those costs otherwise.  I don't see alumni giving just jumping through the roof at D1 at RPI off the bat since there will be mixed emotions about the move.  So, with football costs that basketball doesn't cover, you could be looking at a $1.4-2.0 million per year increase in athletics budget alone (even without scholarships) to be competitive at Division 1.

This is why I always question the move overall.  I'm not saying anything that is RPI-specific beyond using its size and the fact that hockey is a nullity when I look at these numbers.  It's just a lot of money to throw at a scenario that, in many ways, doesn't do much to enhance the school's national reputation.  Remember, RPI has the same problem that Union and Springfield and many other schools have -- its surrounding location isn't very positive for reputational enhancement beyond academics.  I don't see how mediocrity at Division 1 improves that notion of the school at all.

[Jonny Utah]

Listen, when you look at the costs and benefits of going Division 1, you should look at sport-by-sport concerns in the first place.  This is where the entire equation doesn't add up when I look at it:

Hockey - This is already RPI's revenue sport and is already at Division 1 through the old grandfather clause from the 1990s.  If RPI goes up, they lose the grandfather if they ever were to transition back to Division 3 in later years.  D1 here is more a risk than a benefit for the team.

Football - Obviously, football would be in a non-scholarship league -- the cost of a scholarship league is not something a 5,000-person school would want to even begin to entertain (at least $1.2 million per year for football scholarships alone -- ouch).  However, there is no way around higher recruitment and staffing costs that go along with the jump -- this is why schools like Siena, Northeastern and Hofstra all had to take a step back.  If you need to pump an additional $400,000 per year into the football program to get it to function correctly, you would need to make that up in gate fees and television rights.  That won't happen the first five years -- maybe ten.  Even UAlbany hasn't really enjoyed enormous attendance increases in its first 14 seasons at D1, and you can't honestly jack up the admission fee for fans in an unproven setting.  Net-net, you need to budget about ten years into your plan to even hope to enjoy some benefit of D1 football at a school with a local fan base that already isn't paying much homage to the UAlbany football program.

Basketball - Here's the real gem for most schools considering D1.  However, this gem may be diluted already.  Siena used to have the monopoly in D1 basketball in the Capital Region until UAlbany's climb.  UAlbany basketball put itself on the map by nearly pulling off the first ever 16/1 upset against UConn in 2006.  However, beyond their games against Siena, crowd sizes aren't enormous generally for the Danes.  That's OK since basketball is actually a low-budget sport, even if scholarships are allowed.  You play enough games with small enough teams and staffs that allow the balance to lean in favor of D1 basketball.  However, basketball is honestly the reason the NCAA made the one sport=all sports rule for D1 since every school wanted a piece of that pie.  For RPI, they wouldn't recognize a real gain for probably the first five years unless they were able to shock the area and make it into the NCAAs during those years.  Otherwise, with the exception of games against UAlbany and Siena (both would like the local opponent and would schedule them), I can't see real growth in the first 5-10 years there. And don't forget, women's basketball goes along with this and traditionally has been a very poor revenue generator for even local schools.

The Rest - Obviously, the rest of the sports are money losers at either level when compared to any ticket sales or admission fees.  Yet, between extra compliance officials needed at the school, extra coaches, broader recruiting budgets and the rest, the costs become astronomical.  There's a reason why many sports get relegated at the D1 level (look at Siena -- even hockey became a club sport there).  Even if you retain 10 sports each with a women's component -- if each of those sports costs the school on average an extra $50,000 per year for each gender (including compliance costs attributable to those sports), that's an additional $1,000,000 per year that needs to be generated somehow (again, assuming no scholarships).  That comes to another nearly $200 per student per year if you can't recoup those costs otherwise.  I don't see alumni giving just jumping through the roof at D1 at RPI off the bat since there will be mixed emotions about the move.  So, with football costs that basketball doesn't cover, you could be looking at a $1.4-2.0 million per year increase in athletics budget alone (even without scholarships) to be competitive at Division 1.

This is why I always question the move overall.  I'm not saying anything that is RPI-specific beyond using its size and the fact that hockey is a nullity when I look at these numbers.  It's just a lot of money to throw at a scenario that, in many ways, doesn't do much to enhance the school's national reputation.  Remember, RPI has the same problem that Union and Springfield and many other schools have -- its surrounding location isn't very positive for reputational enhancement beyond academics.  I don't see how mediocrity at Division 1 improves that notion of the school at all.

Well that is why I brought up the donor issue.  If someone tells the school that they will give them 30 million for facilities and another 10 million to budget those sports, the school might need to listen.

But each time I think that RPI might have no intent to go D1, I look at the football coach they hired.  You just don't see coaches with his resume go to small d3 colleges to become head coaches. 

Then there is the question in the back of my mind of whether or not they eventually want to take the big leap like SUNY Buffalo or Umass has done.  But that stadium is not qualified so I assume that D1 BCS is out of the question.

[Frank Rossi]

Right.  15,000 is the minimum average attendance for a program that wants to be in FBS.  Their stadium, even if you finished the other side, probably could seat no more than 11,000.

[lewdogg11]

All I know is when RPI goes D1, i'm starting my own website (www.usedtobed3football.com) and i'm gonna make some new message board friends so I don't have to carry on with you losers.