HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

[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.

 

[Veritas]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Mwade: Thanks for posting that. I knew a bit of it but not what he had. Schitzophrenia is a miserable life. My brother in law has been afflicted with it since he was 20 and he is 55 now. A life with zero happiness! Very sad for a nice family.

As to recruiting: you have to remember that in Bill Cleary's day admissions was a bit different. People uset to joke that Billy had a key to the admissions office and to the drawer where the acceptance letters were kept. It is much harder nowadays for Teddy. I understand he had a boy who committed but could not get accepted. The boy went to Princeton where one would expect similar admissions standards. It is no good recruiting them if you cannot get them admitted. It looks like the athletic department are emphasizing basketball at the expense of hockey. The hockey team is larger but basketball has 4 paid coaches instead of three.

I will say the team looked quite good this weekend. At least they seem to be improving as the season goes on.

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Mwade: Thanks for posting that. I knew a bit of it but not what he had. Schitzophrenia is a miserable life. My brother in law has been afflicted with it since he was 20 and he is 55 now. A life with zero happiness! Very sad for a nice family.

As to recruiting: you have to remember that in Bill Cleary's day admissions was a bit different. People uset to joke that Billy had a key to the admissions office and to the drawer where the acceptance letters were kept. It is much harder nowadays for Teddy. I understand he had a boy who committed but could not get accepted. The boy went to Princeton where one would expect similar admissions standards. It is no good recruiting them if you cannot get them admitted. It looks like the athletic department are emphasizing basketball at the expense of hockey. The hockey team is larger but basketball has 4 paid coaches instead of three.

I will say the team looked quite good this weekend. At least they seem to be improving as the season goes on.

The NCAA only allows 3 paid hockey coaches.

 

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

As to recruiting: you have to remember that in Bill Cleary's day admissions was a bit different. People uset to joke that Billy had a key to the admissions office and to the drawer where the acceptance letters were kept. It is much harder nowadays for Teddy. I understand he had a boy who committed but could not get accepted. The boy went to Princeton where one would expect similar admissions standards. It is no good recruiting them if you cannot get them admitted. It looks like the athletic department are emphasizing basketball at the expense of hockey. The hockey team is larger but basketball has 4 paid coaches instead of three.

Wow, so a kid gets rejected at Harvard but is able to get picked up by Princeton?! Some sort of hijinx going on there, or lack of the Ivy League actually enforcing their standards and rules?

When it comes to Princeton, all that really sticks with me is Jacques Joubert leaving there, sitting out a year, playing for BU and winning the NC in '95 (as team captain I believe).

I am curious, anyone know just what are the differences between H and Princeton recruiting/commitment practices? Does Princeton really follow the standard of the Ivy League and NCAA, or is it the standard of Princeton and the NCAA?

Ironically, Harvard wanted Travis Roy. Offered him whatever financial (wink wink) deals they offer to kids, as did Maine and BU. Roy said he did not want to deal with H, H athletics, and the academics... remember he was supposed to be the next Paul Kariya. I often wonder what would have happened if he went to H over BU.

 

[Hokydad]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Mwade: Thanks for posting that. I knew a bit of it but not what he had. Schitzophrenia is a miserable life. My brother in law has been afflicted with it since he was 20 and he is 55 now. A life with zero happiness! Very sad for a nice family.

As to recruiting: you have to remember that in Bill Cleary's day admissions was a bit different. People uset to joke that Billy had a key to the admissions office and to the drawer where the acceptance letters were kept. It is much harder nowadays for Teddy. I understand he had a boy who committed but could not get accepted. The boy went to Princeton where one would expect similar admissions standards. It is no good recruiting them if you cannot get them admitted. It looks like the athletic department are emphasizing basketball at the expense of hockey. The hockey team is larger but basketball has 4 paid coaches instead of three.

I will say the team looked quite good this weekend. At least they seem to be improving as the season goes on.

that is what sometimes happens whena kid gets home schooled(by mom/dad) and on line garabge classes in high school

you have to earn Harvard a little bit.....

 

[goblue78]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

The rules in football in the Ivy League (with which I'm more familiar -- I think hockey is similar) are rules which center around an entering class of athletes, not necessarily individuals. There are minimum standards which must be met for individuals, but in addition there are standards for the entering group as a whole. Thus, one school might be able to accept an athlete another school turned down because of the makeup of the entire cohort with him. This leads to a phenomenon (in football -- I doubt it happens nearly as much in hockey) of accepting some much less skilled (but higher scoring) freshmen to allow one or two more skilled, but marginally less qualified, students in. In addition (again this is football) there is a relativity requirement -- the entering football class needs to be within 100 SAT points of the entering class as a whole, so that a, say 10 point SAT difference between Harvard and Princeton would make some players eligible for one and not the other.

But finally, there is certainly the relationship between the coach (and/or his staff) and the admission office. Every coach wants to get his/her recruits in. At the margins you have to disappoint somebody and there is scope for diplomacy in that process. I have no idea where Donato's staff is on that score.

 

[bothman]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

The rules in football in the Ivy League (with which I'm more familiar -- I think hockey is similar) are rules which center around an entering class of athletes, not necessarily individuals. There are minimum standards which must be met for individuals, but in addition there are standards for the entering group as a whole. Thus, one school might be able to accept an athlete another school turned down because of the makeup of the entire cohort with him. This leads to a phenomenon (in football -- I doubt it happens nearly as much in hockey) of accepting some much less skilled (but higher scoring) freshmen to allow one or two more skilled, but marginally less qualified, students in. In addition (again this is football) there is a relativity requirement -- the entering football class needs to be within 100 SAT points of the entering class as a whole, so that a, say 10 point SAT difference between Harvard and Princeton would make some players eligible for one and not the other.

But finally, there is certainly the relationship between the coach (and/or his staff) and the admission office. Every coach wants to get his/her recruits in. At the margins you have to disappoint somebody and there is scope for diplomacy in that process. I have no idea where Donato's staff is on that score.

This is generally right.

The Ivy League employs what is called the Academic Index - it is a way to ensure that coaches / schools don't cheat the system within the Ivy League. These Academic Indexes are public and basically they are an average of what the student body is as a whole at each school. Athletic teams must have an AI that falls within one standard deviation of the average across the entire student body.

A couple of takeaways:
1) It is possible for a kid to get admitted that is underqualified, so long as the team average is where it needs to be
2) Schools with higher AIs (Harvard, Yale, Princeton) may not be able to admit a kid that schools with lower AIs can (Brown, Cornell, Penn)
3) There are always a couple of kids each year that the coach really has to go to bat for to get that kid past admissions...and generally, while the coach only has 2-3 bullets, they usually work. The Calof situation at Harvard is a situation where there was a disconnect with admissions and Donato. Harvard's loss is Princeton's gain since Calof may very well be the top freshman this year.

 

[CMKnight]

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.

Yes, players today are generally stronger and bigger, but my comparision is between the Harvard players of the 80's and today vis a vis their respective opponents. This Harvard team is definitely not strong on the puck and that is one of the things that has consistently led to Harvard losing the 50-50's, coughing up the puck in their own end and generally being outmuscled all over the ice. Assistant coaches from from some HE and ECAC schools ( my cousin included ) as well as several scouts have noted that Harvard is weak in this area. Being strong on the puck can have little to do with size. Presently, some of BC's top forwards are small guys but knocking them off the puck is no mean feat. Nathan Gerbe, Giunta ( the Habs capt ) and Ryan Shannon were other examples. Back when, the Fuscos were incredibly strong on the puck despite being "tiny." It always been important, no matter how much the game has changed.

This season steps were taken to shore up things up like having a strength coach work with the team on a full-time basis but to date we haven't seen that much improvement. Harvard's strength and conditioning remain suspect. In this season of one goal losses, Harvard is running at a - 7 third period scoring differential. That in large part is down to conditioning and plain old hard work. Yep, I question the work ethic of this team as well as the leadership, and feel it's part of what's wrong with this team. Individually, I'm seeing far too many players showing little if any improvement during their time at Harvard in the last few years. Hard work and commitment are essential, but how can that happen when only slightly more than half of the team had any meaningful summer league play for any significant length of time last year? How can it happen when some key players barely lace them up?

As for commitment to the game between players in the 80's and Harvard teams the last couple years, again, compare the accomplishments in terms of team records and as individual acheivements. Harvard teams competed regularly at a national level and players who came to the school as less than national blue chip recruits worked hard to develop themselves into Olympic and NHL calibre players ( at a time when the NHL had fewer teams ). In the last couple years I don't see any kids like Jerry Pawloski, Don Sweeney, Neil Sheehy, or Kevan Melrose-- guys who just molded themselves into better players through hard work while they were at Harvard. Winning/success won't happen without determination and effort.

I agree that kids have to be commited to hockey to get to the D1 level but I think that level of commitment has waned for too many present players after they get to Harvard. When recruiting kids a coach has to guage their level of commitment as well as their talent level. Recently I think Harvard has recruited some kids who have fallen short of giving the level of commitment needed to maximize their potential as college players. IMO, Teddy has had talented players before who applied themselves more than the present crew and the result was that the team had a great deal more success. I feel that Teddy has learned from the last couple years in terms of whom he recruits. He's also learned more about coaching. Bright(er) days are ahead.

 

[CMKnight]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

...There are minimum standards which must be met for individuals, but in addition there are standards for the entering group as a whole. Thus, one school might be able to accept an athlete another school turned down because of the makeup of the entire cohort with him. This leads to a phenomenon (in football -- I doubt it happens nearly as much in hockey) of accepting some much less skilled (but higher scoring) freshmen to allow one or two more skilled, but marginally less qualified, students in...

In some instances, I've heard of certain recruits who had scored well on the SAT's being asked to retake their SAT's in an attempt to boost the overall group average. In one instance it was a major recruit who was being asked to do this!

 

[ALONZO]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

I believe the basketball team has only three assistant coaches.......Blakeney, DeStafano and Hufnagel. Because mens basketball had been an embarassment for many years I suspect a certain accomodation was made in conjunction with Amaker's hiring to reverse the situation. This may have had a temporary negative effect on recruiting for other sports but, aside from mens hockey, if in fact such was the case, you would never know it. Harvard sports have been on a roll and mens basketball has been revitalized.

I don't know what the problem is with our hockey team. All I know is that the direction has been down for a number of years and I don't see anything to indicate a change.

GO CRIMSON!

 

[Skate79]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Yes, players today are generally stronger and bigger, but my comparision is between the Harvard players of the 80's and today vis a vis their respective opponents. This Harvard team is definitely not strong on the puck and that is one of the things that has consistently led to Harvard losing the 50-50's, coughing up the puck in their own end and generally being outmuscled all over the ice. Assistant coaches from from some HE and ECAC schools ( my cousin included ) as well as several scouts have noted that Harvard is weak in this area. Being strong on the puck can have little to do with size. Presently, some of BC's top forwards are small guys but knocking them off the puck is no mean feat. Nathan Gerbe, Giunta ( the Habs capt ) and Ryan Shannon were other examples. Back when, the Fuscos were incredibly strong on the puck despite being "tiny." It always been important, no matter how much the game has changed.

This season steps were taken to shore up things up like having a strength coach work with the team on a full-time basis but to date we haven't seen that much improvement. Harvard's strength and conditioning remain suspect. In this season of one goal losses, Harvard is running at a - 7 third period scoring differential. That in large part is down to conditioning and plain old hard work. Yep, I question the work ethic of this team as well as the leadership, and feel it's part of what's wrong with this team. Individually, I'm seeing far too many players showing little if any improvement during their time at Harvard in the last few years. Hard work and commitment are essential, but how can that happen when only slightly more than half of the team had any meaningful summer league play for any significant length of time last year? How can it happen when some key players barely lace them up?

As for commitment to the game between players in the 80's and Harvard teams the last couple years, again, compare the accomplishments in terms of team records and as individual acheivements. Harvard teams competed regularly at a national level and players who came to the school as less than national blue chip recruits worked hard to develop themselves into Olympic and NHL calibre players ( at a time when the NHL had fewer teams ). In the last couple years I don't see any kids like Jerry Pawloski, Don Sweeney, Neil Sheehy, or Kevan Melrose-- guys who just molded themselves into better players through hard work while they were at Harvard. Winning/success won't happen without determination and effort.

I agree that kids have to be commited to hockey to get to the D1 level but I think that level of commitment has waned for too many present players after they get to Harvard. When recruiting kids a coach has to guage their level of commitment as well as their talent level. Recently I think Harvard has recruited some kids who have fallen short of giving the level of commitment needed to maximize their potential as college players. IMO, Teddy has had talented players before who applied themselves more than the present crew and the result was that the team had a great deal more success. I feel that Teddy has learned from the last couple years in terms of whom he recruits. He's also learned more about coaching. Bright(er) days are ahead.

Great points. Don Sweeney in particular is someone who exemplified getting the most out of his skill level simply because he applied himself and made himself stronger on and off the puck. We really haven't had the caliber of a Sweeney, Sheehy or Melrose for a long time.

I wonder if Teddy is really holding these players accountable. The on ice sloppiness is the worst I've seen since the end of the Tommasoni era. I heard some disturbing news this week that he has not been diligent in getting after the kids to hit the books. This is something Billy would have never tolerated. Commitment has to be equal parts hockey and academics. The coaching staff has to set the tone and expectations. If it is working for Harvard men's hoops, it can work for the hockey team.

Bob Gaudet went through some trying times at his alma mater but he seems to be righting the ship. So I suppose anything is possible.

 

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Great points. Don Sweeney in particular is someone who exemplified getting the most out of his skill level simply because he applied himself and made himself stronger on and off the puck. We really haven't had the caliber of a Sweeney, Sheehy or Melrose for a long time.

I wonder if Teddy is really holding these players accountable. The on ice sloppiness is the worst I've seen since the end of the Tommasoni era. I heard some disturbing news this week that he has not been diligent in getting after the kids to hit the books. This is something Billy would have never tolerated. Commitment has to be equal parts hockey and academics. The coaching staff has to set the tone and expectations. If it is working for Harvard men's hoops, it can work for the hockey team.

Bob Gaudet went through some trying times at his alma mater but he seems to be righting the ship. So I suppose anything is possible.

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.

 

[ALONZO]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

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.

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!

 

[LTsatch]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Any thoughts on Fridays game? How has Harvard been playing lately?

 

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

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!

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.

 

[kdiff77]

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

In case any of you were planning on making the trip to Providence tonight, the game has been postponed until Tuesday, February 22nd because of the weather.