Well thirdtime tell me how you really feel. So now I’m supposed to be a mind reader and have a crystal ball into the women’s program to understand everything that’s going on with the team prior to the start of the season? Wow, no pressure there. High decibel atmosphere of a Friday night at Lynah? The rink looked half empty to me. I think everyone has empathy for the players especially McDonald, Thompson and Daniels. What happened to them is inexcusable. So we now know that fear has been a factor in their play this season but it is not the sole reason for their overall record. And Cornell’s defense and goaltending issues were magnified when they lost 5 to 1 to Dartmouth the next day. This wasn’t about starting a backup goalie. This was about a Cornell team that was looking past both Harvard and Dartmouth and they paid the price. It happens. You said a couple of weeks ago that Harvard was a hot mess and did not agree with me when i laid the blame on the coaching playbook. Now you want to change the narrative? Okay, no problem but I don’t appreciate the sanctimonious tone of your post accusing me of flogging a dead horse. You’re off base there.
USCHO Fan Forum
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Harvard 2022-23: What's Up?
- Thread starter thirdtime's . . .
- Start date
Well thirdtime tell me how you really feel. So now I’m supposed to be a mind reader and have a crystal ball into the women’s program to understand everything that’s going on with the team prior to the start of the season? Wow, no pressure there. High decibel atmosphere of a Friday night at Lynah? The rink looked half empty to me. I think everyone has empathy for the players especially McDonald, Thompson and Daniels. What happened to them is inexcusable. So we now know that fear has been a factor in their play this season but it is not the sole reason for their overall record. And Cornell’s defense and goaltending issues were magnified when they lost 5 to 1 to Dartmouth the next day. This wasn’t about starting a backup goalie. This was about a Cornell team that was looking past both Harvard and Dartmouth and they paid the price. It happens. You said a couple of weeks ago that Harvard was a hot mess and did not agree with me when i laid the blame on the coaching playbook. Now you want to change the narrative? Okay, no problem but I don’t appreciate the sanctimonious tone of your post accusing me of flogging a dead horse. You’re off base there.
ILoveHockey
Registered User
I didn’t see a comments section and I read the article fairly soon after it appeared in the digital version of the Globe.
The comments were there for at least a few hours. There were many posts, including many from those who have never watched a women's hockey game. I did not see a reason justifying taking down the comments, but I might have missed it. Usually, offensive comments are just deleted at the request of a reader or on the Globe's own initiative.
Blackbeard
Well-known member
A Canadian version of the story...https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/katey-stone-harvard-hockey-coach-abusive-allegations-1.6732019
ShootDePuckNo
New member
Do you think that this story plays out differently at a scholarship school as opposed to a private university where aid is based on need? I would think that the biggest fear of a non-scholarship school coach is not losing, but rather that some of these recruited players decide after 1-2 seasons that they just want to be regular students. That seems like potentially wasted time and effort. For the scholarship schools, this is not an issue. If you chose to just be a student, you now must pay your own way. If the coach doesn't like you, they can just take away your scholarship and send you to the transfer portal.
If this story has any validity, away from what was deemed as insulting terminology, why would any coach want to drive away players after working so hard to recruit and retain them?
If this story has any validity, away from what was deemed as insulting terminology, why would any coach want to drive away players after working so hard to recruit and retain them?
Do you think that this story plays out differently at a scholarship school as opposed to a private university where aid is based on need? I would think that the biggest fear of a non-scholarship school coach is not losing, but rather that some of these recruited players decide after 1-2 seasons that they just want to be regular students. That seems like potentially wasted time and effort. For the scholarship schools, this is not an issue. If you chose to just be a student, you now must pay your own way. If the coach doesn't like you, they can just take away your scholarship and send you to the transfer portal.
If this story has any validity, away from what was deemed as insulting terminology, why would any coach want to drive away players after working so hard to recruit and retain them?
Interesting perspective! However, it is my impression that most women who end up in an Ivy school hockey program are there mostly for the hockey and would not be excited about being just a "regular student". The huge endowments of the Ivy schools just give them a competitive advantage in recruiting women from middle income and lower income families with only a pretty minimal academic threshold.
Thanks. thirdtime's . . . would never troll on such a sensitive subject. I've actually been struggling with this issue since I first heard about the article coming out. As much as I believe that Coach Stones behavior is unacceptable and that Harvard needs to move on with a new coach, It really bothers me that the Boston Globe can find 16 unhappy players, (many of them "borderline") and totally destroy a very successful coaching career. Really sad
I can tell you that there are infinitely more than 16 unhappy players he could have talked to. Dozens more, including a great many former national team players across at a decade and a half. Stone's psychological abuse, and demoralizing of all but her small number of favourites (who could always do no wrong in her eyes) has has lifelong negative impacts on so many former players. This is a poorly kept secret among those who had the misfortune to be on the inside of HH and their close friends in other programs. Every year since back in her glory days in the early 00's the chemistry in her dressing rooms is a mess by year end as she can't help but pits players against one other. That's why the team inevitably self destructs come playoff time. Too many players who were top of the heap in minor hockey soon become shells of their former potential because she can't help but make it all about her, at their expense, instead of what's best for the team. What is sad, is that despite complaints year after year about her to the administration, and the FAS survey confirming that the women's hockey program had the lowest player satisfaction of 42 Harvard teams, Harvard chose to continuously turn a blind eye to her abuse and the well-being of the student athletes because all they cared about was winning. The fact that MANY student athletes were forced to play through brain injuries, shoulder injuries, hip injuries, were made fun of for experiencing mental health challenges--most of which she was responsible for, were told they were lazy when they had severe mononucleosis, were cut or forced to quit for some of these things, is the tip of the iceberg. The article let her off lightly frankly. There's far worse stuff. Stone destroyed her coaching career all by herself. It's about time she's held accountable
Do you think that this story plays out differently at a scholarship school as opposed to a private university where aid is based on need? I would think that the biggest fear of a non-scholarship school coach is not losing, but rather that some of these recruited players decide after 1-2 seasons that they just want to be regular students. That seems like potentially wasted time and effort. For the scholarship schools, this is not an issue. If you chose to just be a student, you now must pay your own way. If the coach doesn't like you, they can just take away your scholarship and send you to the transfer portal.
If this story has any validity, away from what was deemed as insulting terminology, why would any coach want to drive away players after working so hard to recruit and retain them?
Simple. Stone is a malignant narcissist. She is incapable of seeing herself as responsible in any way for any negative result. It is invariably, in her mind, because players are lazy, or stupid, or selfish or whatever. So she can't help herself from making them suffer for making her look bad. Because it's always all about her. She revels in being the omnipotent one.
Elite players who have devoted their WHOLE LIVES to the sport of hockey, live and breathe the sport. It doesn't occur to many 17 year olds that they aren't going to play forever. If you haven't been an elite athlete or part of their family, you probably have no idea of the sacrifices that takes. After spending that length of time with hockey as the #1 priority in their lives, they don't suddenly for no reason "decide after 1-2 seasons that they just want to be regular students". If they leave hockey, it's generally only because she made their lives unbearable, a living hell. It's a necessary act of self-preservation. What's truly sad is how a coach can cause such irreparable harm to the lives of so many for so long, and yet what is being discussed and focused on is how unfortunate it is for her that she's finally being exposed for the sick person she is.
reggiedunlap9
Member
I'm sure there is a lot more coming out on HH. My guess is Harvard is trying to hold on and get through the season and Coach Stone will quietly resign. They don't have many games left.
I don't think we've heard the last from Bob Holher on this subject either. I'm sure he is on the warpath looking for his next program to destroy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think we've heard the last from Bob Holher on this subject either. I'm sure he is on the warpath looking for his next program to destroy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sure there is a lot more coming out on HH. My guess is Harvard is trying to hold on and get through the season and Coach Stone will quietly resign. They don't have many games left.
I don't think we've heard the last from Bob Hohler on this subject either. I'm sure he is on the warpath looking for his next program to destroy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't know squat about Bob Holher or his history. What I do know is that there are several women's hockey programs in addition to this one, where inappropriate and/or abusive behaviours by long time "well-respected" winning Head Coaches were enabled and swept under the carpet for many years by their administrations, to the long-term detriment of their student-athletes. Thank god for media outlets and reporters like Bob Hohler who eventually shine a light on this. It's sadly the only way to force schools to take action. Without exposure in the media, the mistreatment would never stop.
In the past 10 classes of freshman who have now graduated from Harvard, 36% of the student-athletes were not rostered 4 years. In the past 5 classes, that rises to 47%! These figures are way beyond the average of other D1 and Ivy programs, and should be unacceptable to the administration. Even athletes who did graduate, including Peper found the experience and environment toxic. One's university years are supposed to be a highlight in life, not a nightmare to be endured.
This high level of attrition, as well as the lowest student satisfaction level among 42 Harvard teams, is a huge red flag to a coaching problem within, as it was with McCloskey et al. Why don't athletes want to continue to play for her? If it's that the student athletes were just "too soft" or "not talented enough", why is she still such an awful recruiter after 25+ years experience?! It's also telling that very few athletes in her program proportionately who do stay, ever improve their stats significantly over their 4 years with her. Why has that never seem ed odd to HH supporters? She does not develop the talent she recruits, but in a high proportion of cases, she actually manages to destroy the confidence and thus denigrates the inherent talent of the players she brings in.
So you can villainize Bob Hohler, and question his motives, but I don't understand how or why you would wish to defend a coach whose behaviour has been appalling, and who, by objective metrics over the past 10 years (as noted above, and by her playoff performance) is no longer deserving of her position.
Do you think that this story plays out differently at a scholarship school as opposed to a private university where aid is based on need? I would think that the biggest fear of a non-scholarship school coach is not losing, but rather that some of these recruited players decide after 1-2 seasons that they just want to be regular students. That seems like potentially wasted time and effort. For the scholarship schools, this is not an issue. If you chose to just be a student, you now must pay your own way. If the coach doesn't like you, they can just take away your scholarship and send you to the transfer portal.
If this story has any validity, away from what was deemed as insulting terminology, why would any coach want to drive away players after working so hard to recruit and retain them?
Someone had mentioned that Quinnipiac went through something like this in 2015 and I believe they offer athletic scholarships to their D-1 women's and men's hockey teams. The coach who was the subject of complaints from Bobcat players was either fired or stepped down.
By the way, this isn't finished being explored in more depth in the media. There are other noted media outlets contacting other former players beyond the sources in the Boston Globe article to get their stories.
If the NY Times does a piece on this travesty, then it will get Harvard's attention. But I can tell you that this happened in the men's program with Mark Mazzoleni and that despite numerous complaints and letters from alumni, parents, and players, the athletic department ignored it until they couldn't. Then Mazz 'quietly' stepped down and Teddy took over. I expect the same will happen in this case only sooner given the media attention and the intervention of the indigenous tribes in Canada. I learned during a cross-country trip I took by train from eastern to western Canada that you don't mess with the Canadian indigenous tribes under any circumstances. They mean business as Harvard is about to find out.
I don't know squat about Bob Holher or his history. What I do know is that there are several women's hockey programs in addition to this one, where inappropriate and/or abusive behaviours by long time "well-respected" winning Head Coaches were enabled and swept under the carpet for many years by their administrations, to the long-term detriment of their student-athletes. Thank god for media outlets and reporters like Bob Hohler who eventually shine a light on this. It's sadly the only way to force schools to take action. Without exposure in the media, the mistreatment would never stop.
In the past 10 classes of freshman who have now graduated from Harvard, 36% of the student-athletes were not rostered 4 years. In the past 5 classes, that rises to 47%! These figures are way beyond the average of other D1 and Ivy programs, and should be unacceptable to the administration. Even athletes who did graduate, including Peper found the experience and environment toxic. One's university years are supposed to be a highlight in life, not a nightmare to be endured.
This high level of attrition, as well as the lowest student satisfaction level among 42 Harvard teams, is a huge red flag to a coaching problem within, as it was with McCloskey et al. Why don't athletes want to continue to play for her? If it's that the student athletes were just "too soft" or "not talented enough", why is she still such an awful recruiter after 25+ years experience?! It's also telling that very few athletes in her program proportionately who do stay, ever improve their stats significantly over their 4 years with her. Why has that never seem ed odd to HH supporters? She does not develop the talent she recruits, but in a high proportion of cases, she actually manages to destroy the confidence and thus denigrates the inherent talent of the players she brings in.
So you can villainize Bob Hohler, and question his motives, but I don't understand how or why you would wish to defend a coach whose behaviour has been appalling, and who, by objective metrics over the past 10 years (as noted above, and by her playoff performance) is no longer deserving of her position.
I for one think Hohler is terrific and I'm glad he did this piece. I don't think anyone except her most ardent admirers is defending Coach Stone at this point. The evidence is damning, and I am supremely disappointed in my alma mater for allowing this to fester for so long and doing nothing about it. The university comes across as hypocritical when it emails alumni like me trumpeting values such as diversity and inclusion and then turning a blind eye to Coach Stone's behavior. It's time to clean house and bring in a new staff.
MAHOCKEY FAN
Member
Not that different is the story of legendary Olympic and Cal swim coach Teri McKeever. She was fired on Feb 1 after an investigation….the stories have so many parallels if you dig in. Emotional abuse, favoritism, forcing athletes to play through injuries. I read most of this last summer …but here is a link on the firing
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/cal-f...nt-allegations
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/cal-f...nt-allegations
Someone had mentioned that Quinnipiac went through something like this in 2015 and I believe they offer athletic scholarships to their D-1 women's and men's hockey teams. The coach who was the subject of complaints from Bobcat players was either fired or stepped down.
He was fired.
https://theqbsn.com/2015/10/former-w...0abuse%20arose.
His assistant Cas Turner (in the picture of the article) took over and has done one great job at the Q.
I think former assistant Maura Crowell would jump at the chance of taking over for Katie. Any other thoughts.
Last edited:
I think former assistant Maura Crowell would jump at the chance of taking over for Katie. Any other thoughts.
Why would she leave a program that she revitalized?
reggiedunlap9
Member
Yes I am a Coach Stone fan but I think I have been pretty clear that she needs to go and she needs to go now. The fact that she is still on the bench is shocking to everyone. I hear there is more disturbing stuff that is currently being investigated by the school including very serious recent hazing allegations. Really disturbing stuff and supposedly Coach Stone was aware. I know they recently kicked a player off the team for bullying but not sure if these 2 issues are related. Harvard need to address this now before they end up losing more players. Just a terrible season for HWH
Why would she leave a program that she revitalized?
I had the same thought. Unless she is a Mass native and wants to come home.
Yes I am a Coach Stone fan but I think I have been pretty clear that she needs to go and she needs to go now. The fact that she is still on the bench is shocking to everyone. I hear there is more disturbing stuff that is currently being investigated by the school including very serious recent hazing allegations. Really disturbing stuff and supposedly Coach Stone was aware. I know they recently kicked a player off the team for bullying but not sure if these 2 issues are related. Harvard need to address this now before they end up losing more players. Just a terrible season for HWH
With two weeks to go in the regular season and possibly one more week if they make the playoffs, I'm guessing that Harvard won't make a decision until early March. Unless of course Coach Stone steps down voluntarily. I don't see that happening but you never know.
He was fired.
https://theqbsn.com/2015/10/former-w...0abuse%20arose.
His assistant Cas Turner (in the picture of the article) took over and has done one great job at the Q.
I think former assistant Maura Crowell would jump at the chance of taking over for Katie. Any other thoughts.
Thanks for providing the link. Crowell would be a great 'get' but as I posted in response to Steamboat, I don't see why she would leave M-D. I don't know the women's coaching landscape so I have no insight into who would be a sure-fire candidate to replace Coach Stone.