HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

[dmjossel]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Yet you state how talented Merrimack is? Give me a break. I bet there that most teams nationally would like to have the "dearth" of talent that Harvard has every year, this year included. Sure, I bet none of their Shattuck or USNDPT kids could make a team as 'great' as the South Shore Kings, but hey, they gotta start somewhere.

Looking at the PWR I think I see 32 teams that are more than happy without all of the talent that Harvard supposedly has right now. One of those teams is #11 Merrimack, who beat Harvard at home this season. I'm honestly not sure why you bring that up.

Are you saying that Harvard is more talented than Merrimack this season? If so, what was the reason for the loss-- dumb luck? Lack of effort? Harvard is more talented than Merrimack, but we don't work as hard? Is that something to be proud of?

I've been a fan of Harvard hockey since the late 80s leading up to their '89 championship, and I'm sort of glad Harvard and Merrimack don't play in the same league, so I can root for both. It's a shame Harvard's program is struggling, but I honestly don't see how defending the current talent level is productive, unless the idea is that a new coach will somehow magically turn everything around in less than a single recruiting cycle. It's hard as a fan-- and even harder as a student-- to realize that sometimes the only way for a team to be better is for it to be composed of an almost entirely different group of people. It's unpleasant, but sometimes true.

Merrimack's last coaching change I think is a big part of this year's positive results for that program, but it took a whole recruiting cycle before things started to move forward. I doubt it would be any different for Harvard.

[Skate79]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Finally won a game tonight and scored more than two goals to boot. Had to be one of the most boring games I've seen in a long time. I guess that happens when you have the bottom of the barrel playing each other.

Some bright notes from the game. Alex Killorn flashed some serious speed all night the most exciting of which came near the end of the second period when he blew past the Colgate D and flipped a wrister past the goalie. He had a few other chances and set up his linemates for good scoring opportunities. Danny Biega also continues to impress. Danny's instincts are better than his two brothers and he just seems to have a knack for putting the puck through a pinhole. Great that he got the hat trick tonight but his motor was really going strong all night.

Ryan Carroll played well in net. Colgate has a nice breakout but they aren't very good at finishing not counting their two goals tonight which were a result of egregious breakdowns by Harvard. Someone has to coach Marshall Everson and Alex Fallstrom in the D zone. They seem incapable of knowing where the hell they are supposed to be at any given time.

Hey, we can't complain. A win is a win is a win. Bring on the Big Red for a White Out tomorrow at Bright.

[CMKnight]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

This post shows a complete lack of knowledge about a) the college game and b) ivy league hockey

I don't like to be critical on this forum because I'm not an insider and there is a ton I don't know and I misunderstand and get things wrong all of the time. However, when a post is blatantly false I have to respond. TO say that the players back in the 80's worked harder in the weight room is false. The off ice training and weight lifting in hockey is a very recent phenomena, and while those 80's teams were tremendously talented(no argument there), I have no doubt in my mind that Ivy players now are in better physical condition (in the weight room). No doubt. Almost every kid spends the entire summer training and lifting weights and conditioning. Those who don't are left behind. Also, I would also say that this era of Ivy Leaguers skates much more in the summers now as well. Div 1 hockey is so good now that you don't make it near this level unless you are skating almost full time since you are young. There are just way too many good players and people that want to be at this level. To me, this is almost indisputable as well. I would say in the 80's the players were more likely to be at Disney or NYC for an internships, especially given the fact that admissions standards for hockey players are at or near an all time low. Also, further evidence is the fact that Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, and Cornell (seemingly every year except this year) are prominent in the national picture recently. Players at all these schools and harvard were most likely recruited by all the Ivies, or at least looked at. So this is not endemic across the Ivy league, which by itself would lead me to believe that that is not the problem at alll.

The Harvard teams in the 80's worked extremely hard on and off the ice, and, yes much harder than the present Harvard players. Technology is nothing if you don't use it. This Harvard team is one of the softest in the ECAC. They are weak on the puck, and lack the muscle to bang with most teams in the corners despite often having significant size advantages over opponents. Although a (real ) strength coach was finally hired this season many players still do not work hard enough on their strength training. Harvard made the NCAA's 7 times in the 80's, played in the Final Four 4 times, played for the national title twice, and won it once. They produced 3 Hobey Baker winners in the process. They didn't acomplish those feats without a ton of hard work. Players like the Fuscos, Bourbeau, CJ Young, Teddy, Don Sweeney, Neil Sheehy did came to Harvard as good local players but often not regarded as top of the heap recruits. Teddy was the highest draft pick and he was only a 5th round draft pick who was considered undersized. These were the star players at Harvard; the others were often even lesser known. Those guys had total comitment to developing their games, increasing their strength and ourworking opponents on the ice. Many guys came to Harvard as realtive unknowns and acheived great success because they pushed themselves and each other to max out their potential. The results of these efforts were tangible and hard work was a point of pride among the Crimson those Harvard teams. I don't see that with the present Harvard team. I see plenty of guys who do little or nothing to increase their strength and individual skills, and do not push themselves enough even in games compared to to Harvrad players from the 80's. The comparative results speak for themselves.

I don't think anyone disagrees that Yale has more talent than Harvard in the last couple years, and it's no surprise that they are ahead of us in the standings. Keep in mind though that Harvard had more talent than Yale in Teddy's first 3 years and they finished ahead of Yale over that stretch.

There has ostensibily been talent coming to Harvard over the last couple years but I not feel many of those "talented" players were really self-motivated to play to at their highest levels. Things have been a little rough over the last 2 years with poor senior leadership ( captains ). Team effort and focus remains a concern that didn't really exist in Teddy's first 3 years. It's been tough for Teddy but people need to back-off and realized that things will get better once we see more talented and, more importantly, more motivated players coming to Harvard.

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Finally won a game tonight and scored more than two goals to boot. Had to be one of the most boring games I've seen in a long time. I guess that happens when you have the bottom of the barrel playing each other.

Some bright notes from the game. Alex Killorn flashed some serious speed all night the most exciting of which came near the end of the second period when he blew past the Colgate D and flipped a wrister past the goalie. He had a few other chances and set up his linemates for good scoring opportunities. Danny Biega also continues to impress. Danny's instincts are better than his two brothers and he just seems to have a knack for putting the puck through a pinhole. Great that he got the hat trick tonight but his motor was really going strong all night.

Ryan Carroll played well in net. Colgate has a nice breakout but they aren't very good at finishing not counting their two goals tonight which were a result of egregious breakdowns by Harvard. Someone has to coach Marshall Everson and Alex Fallstrom in the D zone. They seem incapable of knowing where the hell they are supposed to be at any given time.

Hey, we can't complain. A win is a win is a win. Bring on the Big Red for a White Out tomorrow at Bright.

Ahh, the battle of the ECAC Three Win Teams. I am glad H won it, 4-15 seems more respectable now; especially when the team "should of, could of, would of" been playing like that all season long. Donato is a coaching genious,right?! RIGHT!?

As the old saw goes, "... even a blind squirrel find a nut."

[Herrmoto]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Those Harvard teams that were great in the late 80s and early 90s had some players who could put up some serious points- typically the skill and speed kids that BC seems to monopolize these days, and which, significantly, it gets to commit to its program years in advance. I believe at least four 1995 birth year players have committed to BC within the last 6-9 months- early commits being the norm in DI hockey because of the competition from Major Junior.

Can Harvard get players like that anymore? Doubtful, because I can't see how its admissions department can play the early commit game with kids who haven't even recorded a grade on their high school transcripts, let alone how its coaches could dissuade a family from taking a scholarship offer worth more than $200,000 for the chance of Harvard admission (and the potential of paying the full freight). So with the skill off the board, what's left for Harvard is what's left for all the other DI schools who can't land the precocious talent: grinders and pluggers, and a couple of late maturers who weren't Peewee and Bantam standouts, who really have to be melded into a winning team with a lot of hard work and determination. Looks like Yale, Brown, and Princeton are doing pretty well with what's out there, and that has to be attributable to the zeal of its players and coaches. Harvard? The record speaks for itself.

[Skate79]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Ahh, the battle of the ECAC Three Win Teams. I am glad H won it, 4-15 seems more respectable now; especially when the team "should of, could of, would of" been playing like that all season long. Donato is a coaching genious,right?! RIGHT!?

As the old saw goes, "... even a blind squirrel find a nut."

Right. He is a coaching "genious". Kan u reed this?

[Skate79]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Those Harvard teams that were great in the late 80s and early 90s had some players who could put up some serious points- typically the skill and speed kids that BC seems to monopolize these days, and which, significantly, it gets to commit to its program years in advance. I believe at least four 1995 birth year players have committed to BC within the last 6-9 months- early commits being the norm in DI hockey because of the competition from Major Junior.

Can Harvard get players like that anymore? Doubtful, because I can't see how its admissions department can play the early commit game with kids who haven't even recorded a grade on their high school transcripts, let alone how its coaches could dissuade a family from taking a scholarship offer worth more than $200,000 for the chance of Harvard admission (and the potential of paying the full freight). So with the skill off the board, what's left for Harvard is what's left for all the other DI schools who can't land the precocious talent: grinders and pluggers, and a couple of late maturers who weren't Peewee and Bantam standouts, who really have to be melded into a winning team with a lot of hard work and determination. Looks like Yale, Brown, and Princeton are doing pretty well with what's out there, and that has to be attributable to the zeal of its players and coaches. Harvard? The record speaks for itself.

We can't play the early commit game. Plain and simple and all the coaches at Harvard know it and have to deal with it. I'm not necessarily sure however that Harvard can't attract talented players with skill. Not saying they can do it from the same pool as BC and BU because they can't. But other sports programs at Harvard are attracting those skill players. Look at the basketball team. They regularly knock off BC these days. That would never have happened in the eighties.

I think it has more to do with learning how to sell these kids and what they are after. Major Junior is what it is and Harvard can't compete against that level of competition. But there should be no question that Harvard can sell itself as a way to go pro given the players who currently play on NHL rosters (including Dom Moore)

[sam12]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

CMKnight,

I'm not talking about technology, Im talking about the mindset in hockey. Since the 80's, it has been more and more important for hockey players to train all year round. Do you think the fuscos were stronger than any player on the team now? Those guys are tiny. But puck protection is not just about strength, to me it has always been about attitude as well as a skill that is practiced. Maybe the team doesn't have those 2 neccessities, but as far as strength goes, Ive seen enough of the players to know we have enough of that. I'm not sure what inside info you have to paint all of the team with your statement that they are all weak and out of shape, but I really couldn't disagree more. I also couldn't disagree more with the players in 89 being in "better shape" or more committed players. Lets face it, college hockey is a lot better than it was back then. We have to admit that this is a different environment for Harvard. The kids these days don;t make it to this level without serious commitment on and off the ice. It's that simple.

Saw a comment above on the Devin twins on Cornell( and how Harvard could have recruited them), and since they are coming into town tonight, I looked into their past stats. They seemed to do ok in the Mass high school system, but they both went to play in the British Columbia Hockey League, and by using their stats as a metric, they both did quite poorly. However, at Cornell, they have developed nicely and fit into the team well there. So maybe it isn't so much about missing players in recruiting, its developing them and putting them in an environment to succeed. It is also very easy to sit here with a 4-15 record and look at all the teams doing better than us and say " if we had those players that we could have gotten things would be better", when in fact the situation would probably be the same if we had recruited those players, since they would have come into Harvard's environment.

[bothman]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

We can't play the early commit game. Plain and simple and all the coaches at Harvard know it and have to deal with it. I'm not necessarily sure however that Harvard can't attract talented players with skill. Not saying they can do it from the same pool as BC and BU because they can't. But other sports programs at Harvard are attracting those skill players. Look at the basketball team. They regularly knock off BC these days. That would never have happened in the eighties.

I think it has more to do with learning how to sell these kids and what they are after. Major Junior is what it is and Harvard can't compete against that level of competition. But there should be no question that Harvard can sell itself as a way to go pro given the players who currently play on NHL rosters (including Dom Moore)

Not true.

We can play the early commit game, it's just a little different. We can say "Yes" to a kid, but it's a half-baked yes. So long as you can deliver X on your SATs and Y on your grades, we can take you.

Some players are comfortable taking ownership and accountability for delivering their end of that bargain. Others aren't.

Harvard has "signed" sophmores who have yet to take the SATs. So while Harvard's commit is a little different than one from a BC or BU, they can "sign" kids early.

[bothman]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Can Harvard get players like that anymore? Doubtful, because I can't see how its admissions department can play the early commit game with kids who haven't even recorded a grade on their high school transcripts, let alone how its coaches could dissuade a family from taking a scholarship offer worth more than $200,000 for the chance of Harvard admission (and the potential of paying the full freight). So with the skill off the board, what's left for Harvard is what's left for all the other DI schools who can't land the precocious talent: grinders and pluggers, and a couple of late maturers who weren't Peewee and Bantam standouts, who really have to be melded into a winning team with a lot of hard work and determination. Looks like Yale, Brown, and Princeton are doing pretty well with what's out there, and that has to be attributable to the zeal of its players and coaches. Harvard? The record speaks for itself.

Harvard's announcement a few years back that they would provide a full ride to anyone that got in whose parents fell below a certain income threshold (Does anyone know what it is?) has largely eroded this issue. I know of one very high end recruit who would have gone to BU had it not been for the free ride granted as a result of this decision.

[bothman]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Right. He is a coaching "genious". Kan u reed this?

Let's all heed Big Al's advice and ignore this joker.

[ALONZO]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Harvard's announcement a few years back that they would provide a full ride to anyone that got in whose parents fell below a certain income threshold (Does anyone know what it is?) has largely eroded this issue. I know of one very high end recruit who would have gone to BU had it not been for the free ride granted as a result of this decision.

I believe the threshold is $60,000. Some families can get aid with incomes up to $180,000. It depends to some extent upon what other obligations the family has and upon the family's capital resources.

GO CRIMSON!

[ALONZO]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Seems like we played well enough to win tonight but unfortunately could not put the puck in the net. The effort and intensity were there as we controlled play most of the way. This game may have been our best of the season but still a loss. The Crimson just needs to find a way to win.

We'll have a another chance against Brown on Wednesday and then against Yale on Friday. The latter has hit a bump in the road and undoubtedly will lose their #1 ranking. Their goaltending remains suspect. Maybe we can prolong their problems. Hope so.

GO CRIMSON!

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Right. He is a coaching "genious". Kan u reed this?

Yes Skate I certainly made a typographical error, but it is not the end of the world. Is it? For the fainthearted Harvard College dandies like you, I sincerely apologize for my egregious crime! However I surmise the message was not lost in my post at all, since you felt compelled to post a little zing to me. Please, keep your focus on your program which appears to be in the crappah. Remember to spell check, proof read, and gloss over your Chicago Manual, as I'll be there to remind you when you commit your egregious crime!

[mwade]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Story on Tom Cavanagh's suicide - http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/ci_17245875 Very sad.