Like Harvard’s D last Sunday, I’m a little late to respond, but . . . SAY WHAT?
What does it really mean to say that H thought it had the series won before stepping out on the ice? Do you mean this team forgot that Princeton had taken them to the max twice within the previous thirty-plus days, denying them dominance in every aspect of play? There may well be questions about decisions made behind the bench this whole series, and many questions about decisions made on the ice, but a team doesn’t have to be “lazy” to simply get outplayed by a talented and determined opponent. A loss does not make the team reprehensible.
Btw, it would not be a stretch to see the Connors and the McQuigge and the defense that Harvard faced, however unevenly, lead the Tigers to the ECAC tournament crown. An upset, to be sure, but not a total stretch.