Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

[Watson Rink]

Re: Perfect Parity the Goal THIS YEAR, okay?

One of the all-time greatest moments in Olympic history, to be sure. The two lowest that immediately come to mind: 1936 in Berlin when Hitler wanted to showcase the Aryan "master race" and of course the 1972 Munich tragedy.

And also in '36 the Japanese forcing Korean and Manchurian athletes to adopt Japanese names under which to compete for Japan

[OnMAA]

Re: Perfect Parity the Goal THIS YEAR, okay?

And also in '36 the Japanese forcing Korean and Manchurian athletes to adopt Japanese names under which to compete for Japan

One of those Korean guys ended up Winning Gold in the Marathon for Japan. Said runner would coach several of his runners to victories at the Boston Marathon years later. Not only that, many years later he would be one of the final torch bearers at the Seoul Olympics.

(Have a track background and met Ms Meyer, the White Runner from South Africa that won the silver in Barcelona, several times. I can actually speak Afrikaans. Once met Mark Plaatjes, a black runner from South Africa who would eventually win a World Championship Gold medal for USA. He was shocked when I addressed him in Afrikaans when introducing myself at the Finish line in the Boston Marathon. )

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

I don't know that I'd hold Crowell to the same standard as Stone, because it isn't like she is the one who decided to create a thin roster. I think Crowell has done very well with the hand she's been dealt.

I'm not holding her to the same standard. I'm just saying that going deep into March will really help solidify her case for D-1 jobs. Although after tonight's game, I'm not so sure.

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Not to depart from the ongoing Olympic history lesson but tonight's game was a bust. If I paid to watch on the Ivy network, I'd demand my money back. Seriously. I've never seen two teams have so much trouble trying to complete passes and set a play. Harvard fought the puck all night and never got any flow going to create chances. It really looked like both teams had learned to play hockey last week and decided to try to play each other and see what happens. Ouch. UGGGLEEE!

It took until the third period for Harvard to get some semblance of offense. Hillary Crowe got the Crimson on the board with a power play goal stationed in front of the Union goalie and knocking in a rebound of a Marissa Gedman shot. Harvard's second goal came on a wrist shot from the point by Sarah Edney that was partially screened. That was it with Union offering little in the way of offense. Their best player was #10 who has size and some skill.

As a whole, the Dutchwomen are better than previous editions. They can skate now at a D-1 level and positionally, they are much improved. But they have zero offensive skill and do a poor job of setting up a play or forechecking. Harvard wasn't pushed that much in their D zone.

Once again, Crowell decided to go with two lines about three quarters of the way through the second period and pretty much the entire third period. Can't believe that against a team like Union, she decided to pull back the third line which wasn't half bad. Dylan Crugnale and Gina MacDonald got shifts in the third period when Jessica Harvey got hurt but that was it until Union pulled their goalie with two minutes left. Then Crowell got the bright idea to put Hannah Zarzecki out there after she had sat for half the second and most of the third period. Yup, that made a lot of sense.

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

So, Harvard lost a 2014-2015 recruit to Cornell:

http://www.cyahockey.com/news_articl...errer_id=96603

Interesting that Harvard asked her to do a PG year - someone woke up and counted the D for next season I guess (even though they are only playing 4 this year apparently). I would say she made the right decision ... who knows if the Harvard "commitment" would have been honored next year - interesting to read between the lines - there is definitely some passive aggressive negativity towards Harvard in this announcement on the part of teh player and the program. This kind of stuff is eventually going to start impacting their ability to get kids - they are betting that the Harvard allure is great enough to attract recruits in the face of repeated commit/decommits every year...maybe they are right!

[Just a Spectator!]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

So, Harvard lost a 2014-2015 recruit to Cornell:

http://www.cyahockey.com/news_articl...errer_id=96603

Interesting that Harvard asked her to do a PG year - someone woke up and counted the D for next season I guess (even though they are only playing 4 this year apparently). I would say she made the right decision ... who knows if the Harvard "commitment" would have been honored next year - interesting to read between the lines - there is definitely some passive aggressive negativity towards Harvard in this announcement on the part of teh player and the program. This kind of stuff is eventually going to start impacting their ability to get kids - they are betting that the Harvard allure is great enough to attract recruits in the face of repeated commit/decommits every year...maybe they are right!

Unfortunatly, this happens at other schools as well, though it does seem like it’s been a common occurrence at Harvard lately. You would tend to believe it is more likely to occur at a school that does not offer any type of athletic scholarships such as an Ivy League school, where a coach has nothing to lose by verbally committing to a player other than some negative conversation on a board such as this, and which is forgotten as soon as a new topic is posted. Though I sympathize with this player and wish here great success at Cornell, I do believe it could have been worse, where as she went to a school and was promised this or that only to find herself sitting on the bench, or worse in the stands, which I have personally witnessed several times to both my friends and former teammates. At some point players and their parents do catch on and in the end it ends up hurting a team’s recruiting and ultimately the continued success of any team.

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Unfortunatly, this happens at other schools as well, though it does seem like it’s been a common occurrence at Harvard lately. You would tend to believe it is more likely to occur at a school that does not offer any type of athletic scholarships such as an Ivy League school, where a coach has nothing to lose by verbally committing to a player other than some negative conversation on a board such as this, and which is forgotten as soon as a new topic is posted. Though I sympathize with this player and wish here great success at Cornell, I do believe it could have been worse, where as she went to a school and was promised this or that only to find herself sitting on the bench, or worse in the stands, which I have personally witnessed several times to both my friends and former teammates. At some point players and their parents do catch on and in the end it ends up hurting a team’s recruiting and ultimately the continued success of any team.

Every year there are a few cases of "change". Sometimes it is cause the player has a change of heart. Sometimes the player cannot make "the grade" to get into the school. Sometimes there are personal circumstances. Sometimes the school/coach cannot hold the "commitment", or they pressure a recruit to make a choice when they are not ready. There is often more than one side to each story. The danger with all these "public" announcements is that people scrutinize them to the n'th degree, and either the school or the player gets vilified over it when there is a change.

Long story short, making that final commitment is a tricky for a 16 or 17 year old to make, especially if they have many choices. Coaches oversell their programs, and recruits (and parents) over-belief, which can lead to disappointment real quickly when the truth sets/sinks in. IMHO, being pressured to make a commitment prior to the summer leading into your Senior year should not be allowed.

[ARM]

IMHO, being pressured to make a commitment prior to the summer leading into your Senior year should not be allowed.

That sounds good in theory, but remember that the real source of the pressure is coming from basic supply and demand. No matter how the coach phrases it, whether it is the hard-sell approach that you mean or a kinder, gentler message, it still comes down to each scholarship program having only so many spots, and once they are gone for a season, they're gone. My understanding is that non-scholarship schools run into admissions limits as well. If opportunities at BC or Wisconsin or Minnesota are highly sought, and student-athlete initiated contact is allowed, which I think it still should be, some players' first choices will fill up early, so they'll move to their second choices and so on. If there are HS sophomores who know where they want to go, or at least think that they do, and want to lock down that decision, that creates the pressure on the rest of the recruiting class. When lines form hours or days in advance of a coveted product going on sale, it isn't the seller that is creating the pressure, but the other buyers. Finite supply is what ultimately creates pressure, whenever that ultimately occurs.

[Hux]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

There is also the assumption here that the player is decommitting from her first choice. Could well be that she was interested in the bucolic hills of western New York as her number one, but that wasn't immediately available, so she opted for the skyline views from north of the Charles.

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

There is also the assumption here that the player is decommitting from her first choice. Could well be that she was interested in the bucolic hills of western New York as her number one, but that wasn't immediately available, so she opted for the skyline views from north of the Charles.

Possibly true, but the announcement certainly doesn't read that way. Reads more like "they BS'ed me and I'm taking my game elsewhere"....

[Blackbeard]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Coaches oversell their programs, and recruits (and parents) over-belief, which can lead to disappointment real quickly when the truth sets/sinks in.

This topic was discussed here at some length a couple of years ago. While in any business situation a good dose of healthy skepticism is usually a good idea in order to attempt to separate the chaff from the wheat, if by "over-believe" you are referring to believing the coach's promises/commitments to the recruit with respect to playing time then I couldn't disagree more.

The "advantage" that the coach's have when making such promises is that all this stuff is verbal...as in "where's the proof that I said that?" or "that's not exactly what I said" or "you must have misunderstood me" or "I don't recall saying that". If these "promises" were in writing on the program's letterhead then you would see a lot less of this stuff happening...even where the promises were not exactly specific as to the number of shifts per game or number of games per season etc. that was promised by the coach...because a good percentage of litigation is settled by determining what would be "reasonable" in each specific situation. Such a hammer hanging over their heads would cause the coach's to sharpen up their communication skills, improve their memories and positively encourage them to understand that ethics dictates that a promise is a promise and that the often high ideals and principles that their program expects the recruit to adhere to applies to the coach's as well.

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Possibly true, but the announcement certainly doesn't read that way. Reads more like "they BS'ed me and I'm taking my game elsewhere"....

I disagree with that read between the lines assessment. I read it as...We will have a spot for you the year after next and recommend you do a PG year, and the player opted for another option to start play right away and not do the PG year.

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

That sounds good in theory, but remember that the real source of the pressure is coming from basic supply and demand. No matter how the coach phrases it, whether it is the hard-sell approach that you mean or a kinder, gentler message, it still comes down to each scholarship program having only so many spots, and once they are gone for a season, they're gone. My understanding is that non-scholarship schools run into admissions limits as well.

Agree that the early commit trend is driven by supply and demand. That is the sad part of the extra pressure, we should not be putting our 15 and 16 year old's under. Very few know at that age what they "Really" want, and it often changes by the time they are 18 or 19.

My understanding is that non-scholarship schools run into admissions limits as well.

That is true for some of the non-scholly schools our D was involved with. Pretty sure most if not all Ivy schools have to meet a academic index of some sort for each incoming class. I have even heard of a case of a higher end academic recruit taking the SAT/ACT again to boost her score so they can bring another player in. For example, if several potential early commits ALL end up at the low range of their test scoring tables or academic results, it may force the coach to have to let one of them go to meet the team's index. Bottom line is that there are a lot of variables, and more uncertainties the further you are away from your senior year.

[COLD AS ICE]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

So, Harvard lost a 2014-2015 recruit to Cornell:

http://www.cyahockey.com/news_articl...errer_id=96603

Interesting that Harvard asked her to do a PG year - someone woke up and counted the D for next season I guess (even though they are only playing 4 this year apparently). I would say she made the right decision ... who knows if the Harvard "commitment" would have been honored next year - interesting to read between the lines - there is definitely some passive aggressive negativity towards Harvard in this announcement on the part of teh player and the program. This kind of stuff is eventually going to start impacting their ability to get kids - they are betting that the Harvard allure is great enough to attract recruits in the face of repeated commit/decommits every year...maybe they are right!

Isn't this the way the system is supposed to work? What is the problem? It appears, from the little information available, that Harvard offered this defenseman a spot in 2015. They looked at their roster, with no defensemen graduating, and 2 returning from the Olympics, and felt it was unlikely a freshman would get appreciable playing time in 2014. The coaches made that honest assessment, and acted accordingly. I have not seen anything that implied the coaches initially offered a spot in 2014, and then changed their minds and suggested the PG year as plan B. The player decided she valued a spot at Cornell in 2014 more than a spot at Harvard in 2015. That is her perrogrative. Time will tell if this was a good decision. I think most recruits would look at this as the Harvard coaches making an honest assessment of this recruit's abilities, sharing it with the player, and making what they felt was a responsible offer. The player evaluated that offer, and decided to go elsewhere. What the Harvard coaches did not do was mislead the player into believing she would get significant playing time in 2014. If I was a prospective Harvard recruit, I would respect the coaches' honesty and straight forward approach to an all too common situation.

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

This topic was discussed here at some length a couple of years ago. While in any business situation a good dose of healthy skepticism is usually a good idea in order to attempt to separate the chaff from the wheat, if by "over-believe" you are referring to believing the coach's promises/commitments to the recruit with respect to playing time then I couldn't disagree more.

That is not what I meant.