PDA

View Full Version : HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning



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

alslammerz
02-02-2011, 06:01 PM
Amaker was not the Assistant at Michigan. He was and had been the Head Coach in Ann Arbor for six years. His overall record was respectable but he was fired because he did not do well in the Big Ten and failed to get the Wolverines into the NCAA tournament.

I think the alleged NCAA violations are a thing of the past. Both the Harvard coaches and the University were cleared by the Ivy League and the NCAA.

GO CRIMSON!

In point of fact- one secondary recruiting violation was issued by the NCAA over the summer. And it's done now.

(Now for some microhumor likely only I'll get)- iggleshockeyrules, how do you feel about Cornell basketball (http://cornellbasketball.blogspot.com/2011/01/news-and-notes-sunday-edition_30.html)? (Don't answer, I won't see it.)

Big games Friday and Monday. Should be fun. Would be nice if this weather clears up although I'm enjoying this night off thanks to it.

Skate79
02-02-2011, 06:45 PM
Hogwash! The reason it worked for Harvard Hoops is because they got the Assistant from UofM... who, if you remember, is still mired up in NCAA recruiting violations.

Do us all a favor and stick to BC athletics. It's more your speed. You have no idea what you are talking about.

bothman
02-03-2011, 03:36 PM
My error on his post at UofM. However, if you go on The Crimson, and search it... Amaker was in violation when he was employed by Harvard and talking with kids in New York and New Jersey; I believe that story was run less than a year ago.

I suppose it is all just a coincidence, right? I mean you get a guy who has past trouble with NCAA violations, specifically around recruiting and deal making, and suddenly the worst hoops team in the Ivy is suddenly # 1. Riiiiiiight. ;)

I've said it once and I'll say it again.

Anytime someone comes to a Website and spits out the perpetual venom that this guy does, something doesn't add up.

alslammerz
02-03-2011, 05:22 PM
New column today: If the ECAC Playoffs Started Today, Version 1 (http://bit.ly/eJRVXe). (I'll post a women's one later tonight in the Harvard women's forum.)
I'll keep who we'd be playing a secret but I'll give you a hint...there will be fish.

Also, I decided to play SID for this column and dig up the past histories for these hypothetical matchups. Hopefully if any of these series actually come to pass, I've made someone's life a little easier.

Skate79
02-05-2011, 10:01 AM
FYI - I was at the women's game against Princeton last night and overheard a conversation about the team holding a players only meeting recently. They apparently went to Bob Scalise to voice their displeasure with Teddy. Again, I don't know if this is true or not. Just overheard a conversation.

Also, in that same conversation, it was suggested that the new hockey administrator brought aboard is a 'hot shot' whatever that means and was hired to relieve Teddy of some admin stuff that had him bogged down and unable to focus on this coaching duties. Apparently Teddy felt that having this person aboard would make him a better coach. Again, this is from a conversation and I have no way to validate any of this.

Could it be that soon we'll be referring to coaching men's hockey as "The Cleary Curse"?

alslammerz
02-05-2011, 11:13 AM
Tough loss last night but Harvard held strong against one of the best teams in the country. Rondeau had to make several huge saves or there would have been an upset last night.

Ever since that Northeastern stinker, Harvard has been playing their best hockey, even if they only have the one win to show for it. They keep playing like this and it should be a fun one on Monday.

H60Hockey
02-05-2011, 03:24 PM
At the game. A few observations.

For pure excitement one of the better games I've see in years. The differentiator was speed; 1/2 of the H side were a step behind. Harvard's defense played their best game of the year. Goalies both played lights out; thought Rondeau was untidy at times giving the Crimson extra chances.

The game changer? IMHO a non-call on a centerline trip (tackle) in the 3rd which stopped a clear breakaway (Yale fans around me agreed). Next shift Yale scores. Also another non-call; a concussive elbow which sent Caldwell to the locker room. Generally a clean game with a minimum of chippyness.

Think Ingalls has an ice problem. LOTS of lost edges and bouncy pucks. Building felt warm. Hmmm. Remember Harkness was rumored to soften the ice for the third if he was behind.

Place was packed. Three rows standing room. Those were the days.

sam12
02-05-2011, 09:47 PM
skate,

As far as the meeting behind closed doors and going to Scalise, while I really don't know if that is probable or not, it seems to me something like that would be kept very secret, so my guess is that is just speculation.

For your other point, I think you may be referring to Bill Downey, who was hired this summer to be a "director of hockey operations", or something like that.

alslammerz
02-05-2011, 10:43 PM
The game changer? IMHO a non-call on a centerline trip (tackle) in the 3rd which stopped a clear breakaway (Yale fans around me agreed). Next shift Yale scores. Also another non-call; a concussive elbow which sent Caldwell to the locker room. Generally a clean game with a minimum of chippyness.

Yeah, there were several missed calls. Moriarty getting around the Yale defenseman at the Harvard blue line to only get bear hugged down from behind stood out in my mind (and might be the play you are talking about). I do remember thinking about the non-call right after the goal, though hard to say it was the ultimate game changer. As for the hit on Caldwell, I was following the puck and missed it but saw the video in the press box- it too missed the actual hit but it was in frame enough to see Ziegler coming and for me to put two and two together. Considering the emphasis on blind side hits, to not even seen a minor was discouraging but since I missed the hit as well I can kind of see the ref missing it. (Even if there are two of them.)

Skate79
02-06-2011, 07:26 AM
skate,

As far as the meeting behind closed doors and going to Scalise, while I really don't know if that is probable or not, it seems to me something like that would be kept very secret, so my guess is that is just speculation.

For your other point, I think you may be referring to Bill Downey, who was hired this summer to be a "director of hockey operations", or something like that.

Possibly but it's not the first time this has happened. During the Tommasoni and Mazz eras, players held the same type of meeting and I know this because parents of the players told me so. I know, I know, parents can be overzealous and protective but why make up something like this? Again, I can't verify any sources because I don't know the people involved in the conversation I overheard and who they know. Given the electronic era in which we live, not much stays secret or private these days. It stands to reason that there may be a kernal of truth to all of this.

Skate79
02-06-2011, 07:34 AM
Yeah, there were several missed calls. Moriarty getting around the Yale defenseman at the Harvard blue line to only get bear hugged down from behind stood out in my mind (and might be the play you are talking about). I do remember thinking about the non-call right after the goal, though hard to say it was the ultimate game changer. As for the hit on Caldwell, I was following the puck and missed it but saw the video in the press box- it too missed the actual hit but it was in frame enough to see Ziegler coming and for me to put two and two together. Considering the emphasis on blind side hits, to not even seen a minor was discouraging but since I missed the hit as well I can kind of see the ref missing it. (Even if there are two of them.)

I didn't see the game but in general good teams playing in their home arenas will get away with stuff like this. Cornell gets away with garbage year after year at Lynah. As Harvard is pretty bad this year, they are not going to get any breaks from the refs especially away from Bright. Non calls are non calls; you have to forget about them and continue to play on and hopefully finish your chances. The fact is the Crimson can't put the puck in the ocean and that has been one of the main reasons why they are awful.

alslammerz
02-06-2011, 10:19 PM
I didn't see the game but in general good teams playing in their home arenas will get away with stuff like this. Cornell gets away with garbage year after year at Lynah. As Harvard is pretty bad this year, they are not going to get any breaks from the refs especially away from Bright. Non calls are non calls; you have to forget about them and continue to play on and hopefully finish your chances. The fact is the Crimson can't put the puck in the ocean and that has been one of the main reasons why they are awful.

I mean, the holds and stuff fine (I guess). Like I said, hard to blame that for the loss and Harvard played well anyway. But the blind side hit, yeah, that should get called. My guess is both refs didn't see it. I know I missed it live. So it's unfortunate that it didn't get called but I can see why it didn't.

bothman
02-07-2011, 03:14 PM
You know what, whatever gets this team to start playing to their potential and thato put forth an effort that demonstrates a commitment to winning, then whatever facilitates that, I am all for it.

If you look at this team, they beat Colgate, signicantrly outplayed a Cornell team in a 2-1 loss, hung tough with a Top 5 team in the country in a 1-0 loss....perhaps the tide is turning a bit here. We old timers surely remmeber the Mazz regular seasons that were filled with indifferent play and underperformance only to be bandaided by a great playoff run.

Here's to a good Beanpot showing and a strong finish to the regular season! Anything can happen in the ECAC!

eaglehockeyrules
02-07-2011, 05:46 PM
Harvard hockey is like a mother who lost a young child... just so sad.

I've watched this horrible game on NESN. 4-0 after two; the last Harvard power play the puck was in Harvard's end more than it was between the blue lines, much less NU's end. Harvard has given up. They panned in on Donato, several times during the power play, and he had a look of fear and bewilderment on his face... isn't it obvious at this juncture he is out of his league coaching at Harvard?

This once great program... oh what could have been.

eaglehockeyrules
02-07-2011, 05:56 PM
You know what, whatever gets this team to start playing to their potential and thato put forth an effort that demonstrates a commitment to winning, then whatever facilitates that, I am all for it.

If you look at this team, they beat Colgate, signicantrly outplayed a Cornell team in a 2-1 loss, hung tough with a Top 5 team in the country in a 1-0 loss....perhaps the tide is turning a bit here. We old timers surely remmeber the Mazz regular seasons that were filled with indifferent play and underperformance only to be bandaided by a great playoff run.

I actually agree with you. Mazz had some horrible seasons, and still ended up .500 and got in the NCAA tournament; however, I just do not see this Crimson squad pulling upsets this year.

FWIW... I am not here intentionally railing Harvard to upset anyone. I genuinely love the school (I earned my Master's degree there) and the hockey program (ticket holder for 15+ years), but it really does break my heart to see it go from the 1980s power house to what it has become under Scalise/Donato.

H60Hockey
02-07-2011, 07:33 PM
If you get a chance to watch the H-NU game don't. Forget the 43 SOG; 10 had a chance. One goal in the last three games. There is no system, just a lot of skating around. I've coached Bantam teams with more imagination. I really feel for these kids because they're better than this.

eaglehockeyrules
02-08-2011, 10:43 AM
If you get a chance to watch the H-NU game don't. Forget the 43 SOG; 10 had a chance. One goal in the last three games. There is no system, just a lot of skating around. I've coached Bantam teams with more imagination. I really feel for these kids because they're better than this.

Agree... the SOGs were not quality shots; H lacks development and coaching. Time for TOP TOP SECRET meetings with Scalise!

sam12
02-08-2011, 01:13 PM
Skate, I don't believe that anyone would intentionally make the top secret meeting with scalise up, but you know how it goes. A player tells his mom that the players had a players only meeting, she tells a friend "maybe they went to scalise", and from there it spreads out from a maybe to a "I heard".

Caught the game on NESN, and I'd have to agree that while 43 shots looks like a veritable peppering of the goalie, most were from the outside or from far out with no screen. It seems like they have been instructed to shoot from everywhere.

Skate79
02-08-2011, 06:04 PM
Skate, I don't believe that anyone would intentionally make the top secret meeting with scalise up, but you know how it goes. A player tells his mom that the players had a players only meeting, she tells a friend "maybe they went to scalise", and from there it spreads out from a maybe to a "I heard".

Caught the game on NESN, and I'd have to agree that while 43 shots looks like a veritable peppering of the goalie, most were from the outside or from far out with no screen. It seems like they have been instructed to shoot from everywhere.

Agreed. You start with one version and by the time the fifth person has heard it, there are additional details and a new slant on the event or story. It never fails.

Andy Brickley commented that after the regular season game against the Huskies (another shutout), the coaches held an off-ice meeting where they reviewed the game with the team on video and pointed out where mistakes were made and the necessary corrections. Looks like the video review hasn't sunk in yet.

We've now scored one goal in the last three games and have been shut out by the same goalie twice within a month. I've stopped wondering how much worse it can get. Does anyone really think this team will match the team low of seven wins from '79? I don't.

Herrmoto
02-08-2011, 06:51 PM
Gotta be a bad situation with the team right now. When things don't go well for young players who are used to considering themselves stars, it's the rare one who takes the responsibility, or the initiative, to make things better. The usual path is to join a few other players who aren't used to a little adversity, and blame the coach for their trouble. And these kids are smart enough, and confident enough, to convince themselves that no matter what the coach says, it's useless, and won't work. Regardless of what merit the players' opinions might have, if they have indeed rejected the coach, it's probably time for a change, because you can't replace all of them.

Coaching in the Ivy League is the toughest assignment in college sports- something Bill Fitzsimmons, who has served on plenty of coach search committees, will tell anyone. Once the kids, who are smart and prone to making sport out of scrutinizing authority figure, decide against you, there's trouble. (And plenty of the folks who are reading will have no trouble coming up with examples of this occurring in their college days- woe to the tubby coach with the limited vocab...)

I hope I'm wrong on this. The coach is a personable man, from a great family, and is a good family man himself. Maybe these players don't deserve him, and maybe they'd be better off if they had the character he had as a player. But it looks like whatever connections need to be made to score goals and win hockey games aren't being made. It's really too bad....