What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • 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.

Harvard 2022-23: What's Up?

ARM said:
I agree. It's been my experience that the bonds between the players on a team are much stronger than those formed between others in sports (e.g. player/coach), similar to how the bonds within a nucleus are stronger than those between a nucleus and electrons. It seems strange to me that any coach would attempt to intentionally drive a wedge between the players, as Stone has reportedly done. The most powerful driving force in team sports is to do it for the person next to you. Why would a coach intentionally compromise that.
Click to expand...

Thats a great question. Ive been asking it for 5 years now.......
 
reggiedunlap9 said:
and does anyone even mention the fact that Lindsay Reed, maybe the top goaltender in the US decided NOT TO PLAY this year at Harvard(her Senior year !) because of Stones mental abuse ? This kid was on the US U18 team a few years back and Stone drove her out of the game because she was starting a business during Covid. It is simply unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Reed was (is) an outstanding athlete and was in the talk for the Patty Kaz in her freshman year. her leaving the team in her senior year speaks volumes.. Hopefully now, someone is listening..
 
thirdtime's . . . said:
A ramped up #2 Yale team steamrolled a demoralized #26 Harvard team. Pellicci was hung out to dry by her coach.

Down 6-1 at the end of two, instead of pulling a shell-shocked goalie, who was essentially defenseless, Stone chose to send her back out to start the third, where the onslaught continued and she surrendered two more goals. Now she’s pulled, as if she was simply having a bad game, and replaced by Boynton, making her second appearance of the season, as if she could now stop the bleeding. Start the third with Boynton (!), saying “Kid, this one’s lost, that's what you’re here for, we’ve got to give Pellicci a break, she’ll be back for more next weekend, and so will you, lemme see what you can do, I certainly don’t expect anything to turn around but the shelling will condition you for down the road, good luck.”

Pellicci is the player from whom Stone has asked the most all season and is the player who has given her team the most all season. I’ve seen the occasional weird move with the coach and her goalies over the years, but this struck me as the height of insensitivity. Unfortunately, a very telling move at the end of this season.
Click to expand...

You are giving Stone way too much credit here, in thinking she has strung together a sentence that long during a game to any player on the bench...
 
ARM said:
The most powerful driving force in team sports is to do it for the person next to you. Why would a coach intentionally compromise that.
Click to expand...

No question, playing for your teammates is priority one. From the stars to the players on the end of the bench, you pull for each other and support each other through good times and bad. Unfortunately, that isn't the case with this team. And I don't have a good answer for you regarding your question. I could make a thousand guesses and none of them would be close to being accurate. At this point, it's probably best to move forward and hope for a complete housecleaning with appropriate measures to ensure this never happens again.
 
reggiedunlap9 said:
This article tells me all I need to know about the Harvard Athletic department. Mcdermott has no comments about these serious allegations regarding Coach Stone but instead wants to talk about Harvard Athletics policy on Diversity and Inclusion ? Just remarkable.


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/21/mcdermott-inclusion-feedback-initiatives/
Click to expand...

An apology to the team after the fact when the three indigenous ladies were not present is no apology at all. If she had truly seen the error she made and wanted to make a proper apology, she should have reached out the those three FIRST, or at least at some point. That has STLL never happened. If the athletic department really thinks that this story is going to make everyone forget about the years of abuse these girls have suffered at the hands of Coach Stone, they are sadly mistaken.. The tone deafness of this piece is astounding.
 
"McDermott said Harvard Athletics will be administering a redesigned survey next year that resembles Harvard’s Q Guide, a course evaluation tool used by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences."

If the Q Guide resembles the Confi Guide to Courses at Harvard when I was a student, then this redesign will be an absolute joke. Everyone on campus used the Confi Guide to find easy courses to augment their major especially those in the sciences. Half the fun of reading the Confi Guide was finding quotes from students poking fun at courses or professors.

How MacDermott was chosen to lead the Athletics Department is beyond me.
 
reggiedunlap9 said:
This article tells me all I need to know about the Harvard Athletic department. Mcdermott has no comments about these serious allegations regarding Coach Stone but instead wants to talk about Harvard Athletics policy on Diversity and Inclusion ? Just remarkable.


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/21/mcdermott-inclusion-feedback-initiatives/
Click to expand...

This is amazing. McDermott has no comment for The Crimson, while at the same time is actively soliciting former players to voice their support for Coach Stone? That sure sounds like she has an opinion on the matter to me!

There is an obvious conflict of interest here in that the AD cannot differentiate between right/wrong, moral/immoral, impartiality/discrimination - and certainly has an odd definition of the word "Hazing". Imagine being the head of a prestigious athletic department, being trained in compliance and protocol in the event of such accusations, and then telling a player "That's not hazing....but the team isn't allowed to do it anymore."

Where is Larry Bacow on this subject? I know he is one foot out the door, but it is still under his watch. Also Tim Troville, who has direct supervision over Women's Ice Hockey - is he asleep at the switch too?

To tell the truth, I'm almost surprised the 41 other varsity coaches haven't revolted yet due to impartial treatment, not to mention disgust.

The more you lie, the deeper the cover-up gets - and don't ever forget about this guy!

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...irector-tim-curley-prison?device=featurephone
 
reggiedunlap9 said:
This article tells me all I need to know about the Harvard Athletic department. Mcdermott has no comments about these serious allegations regarding Coach Stone but instead wants to talk about Harvard Athletics policy on Diversity and Inclusion ? Just remarkable.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/21/mcdermott-inclusion-feedback-initiatives/
Click to expand...
One would think that the lessons from Penn State and Michigan State would enlighten administrations to the fact that talking about attendance and fundraising won't save you if there has been abuse in your program and you failed to take action. Not saying anything here is close to that level, but the takeaway has to be that programs must investigate in good faith sooner, because problems are compounded when it is left for later. Or more naively, you look objectively into these claims because it's the right thing to do.
 
reggiedunlap9 said:
This article tells me all I need to know about the Harvard Athletic department. Mcdermott has no comments about these serious allegations regarding Coach Stone but instead wants to talk about Harvard Athletics policy on Diversity and Inclusion ? Just remarkable.


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/21/mcdermott-inclusion-feedback-initiatives/
Click to expand...

McDermott was reportedly at the recent Harvard Women’s Hockey alumni event where she gave a speech to the room praising Stone as a heroic trailblazer of women’s sports. This was AFTER Hohler alerted her and Stone about the allegations in the article. Meanwhile, Stone was there behaving like the celebrity and hero her and McDermott believe her to be, literally ripping shots and dancing on tables. You would have thought she had just been inducted into the hockey hall of fame instead of losing 3-1 to Union and facing complaints that she left former players feeling psychologically scarred and even suicidal.

Both McDermott and Stone need to go.
 
ARM said:
One would think that the lessons from Penn State and Michigan State would enlighten administrations to the fact that talking about attendance and fundraising won't save you if there has been abuse in your program and you failed to take action. Not saying anything here is close to that level, but the takeaway has to be that programs must investigate in good faith sooner, because problems are compounded when it is left for later. Or more naively, you look objectively into these claims because it's the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

That's the problem, isn't it? The lack of accountability and a refusal to investigate. It's like McDermott and Stone are mocking the abused players while pandering to donors and making themselves look like God's gift to Harvard. It's a flat-out disgrace.
 
Skate79 said:
No coach in their right mind, not even Stone, would say what you said here. This is the ultimate slap in the face to Boynton and while I presume you were kidding with this quote, it's unseemly. I too was surprised when Pellicci came out to start the third period. It was a bad move all around. Still, I'm not letting the players off the hook here. Pellicci is their teammate and deserved to have them at least try to put up some resistance on her behalf.
Click to expand...



Two things:


1. I apparently wasn’t clear that the words I had Stone “saying” were ones she should have been thinking. Although we do now know that given her reported drill sergeant nature this could indeed have been a verbal command to her back-up goalie on the bench, what I simply meant is that it would have been common sense to think and act along these lines.


2. Numerous teams get blown out in the course of a season, from the inevitable (Post/Hurst), to the predictable (Bemidji/Wisco), to the disappointing (Union/Colgate), to the surprising (QU/PU). Examples abound. Blowouts happen. But none of these cases, as far as I know, is cited as an instance of wholesale abandonment of a teammate. The goalies are certainly shelled in these games, but hung out to dry? The only thing that sets the Harvard/Yale blowout apart is the fact that the blown-out has been a uniquely stressed team this year, and at this point you have to allow for a certain degree of emotional as well as physical exhaustion. I know you’re one to never let players off the hook, but this seems a bit like piling on. I don’t get it.
 
thirdtime's . . . said:
Two things:


1. I apparently wasn’t clear that the words I had Stone “saying” were ones she should have been thinking. Although we do now know that given her reported drill sergeant nature this could indeed have been a verbal command to her back-up goalie on the bench, what I simply meant is that it would have been common sense to think and act along these lines.


2. Numerous teams get blown out in the course of a season, from the inevitable (Post/Hurst), to the predictable (Bemidji/Wisco), to the disappointing (Union/Colgate), to the surprising (QU/PU). Examples abound. Blowouts happen. But none of these cases, as far as I know, is cited as an instance of wholesale abandonment of a teammate. The goalies are certainly shelled in these games, but hung out to dry? The only thing that sets the Harvard/Yale blowout apart is the fact that the blown-out has been a uniquely stressed team this year, and at this point you have to allow for a certain degree of emotional as well as physical exhaustion. I know you’re one to never let players off the hook, but this seems a bit like piling on. I don’t get it.
Click to expand...

No one disagrees with the fact that the players are stressed and emotionally drained. But this blowout was different in that Yale seemed like they were on the power play the entire game. Harvard offered little resistance and that left Pellicci to hold down the fort while Yale stormed the castle. I understand blowouts happen; Harvard used to toy with Union back in the day. The difference being that this was a rivalry game and Harvard should have come out determined to send a message in advance of this weekend's playoffs. That we are not going quietly. Instead, they turtled, and Pellicci paid the price. As tough as it has been on the players, they can't be absolved entirely for what happened in New Haven. Sorry but that's just the way I feel.
 
Skate79 said:
As tough as it has been on the players, they can't be absolved entirely for what happened in New Haven. Sorry but that's just the way I feel.
Click to expand...

This is a valid viewpoint, but to me it feels like a petty thing to argue about. If you think about where current players are mentally, it includes a mix of:

- I’m a senior and my hockey career is ending in shame and scandal. I’m devastated.
- I’m not a senior, and knowing what I know, our team could be suspended next year and I need to either transfer or find a new identity slash something else to occupy the ~40 hours per week I normally dedicate to hockey. I’m lost.
- I want Stone to be fired and while I want to support my goaltender, I also don’t want to
make Stone look good and thereby decrease the chances of her removal. I’m torn.
- I want Stone to keep her job (I don’t know that anyone has this view, but it’s possible there are holdouts on the team), but the majority of my teammates are against me. I’m alone.

Personally I can’t criticize them for losing the will to compete. They are running out the clock because there’s nothing else to do. It’s sad and understandable.
 
Nobody98 said:
This is a valid viewpoint, but to me it feels like a petty thing to argue about. If you think about where current players are mentally, it includes a mix of:

- I’m a senior and my hockey career is ending in shame and scandal. I’m devastated.
- I’m not a senior, and knowing what I know, our team could be suspended next year and I need to either transfer or find a new identity slash something else to occupy the ~40 hours per week I normally dedicate to hockey. I’m lost.
- I want Stone to be fired and while I want to support my goaltender, I also don’t want to
make Stone look good and thereby decrease the chances of her removal. I’m torn.
- I want Stone to keep her job (I don’t know that anyone has this view, but it’s possible there are holdouts on the team), but the majority of my teammates are against me. I’m alone.

Personally I can’t criticize them for losing the will to compete. They are running out the clock because there’s nothing else to do. It’s sad and understandable.
Click to expand...

All great points, but for better or worse, there are several players still on "Team Stone" It is a tough way to end the season no matter what side you take as a player. I am holding out hope for a fresh start for all the returning players next season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top