Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning
You're right, but I was speaking to the chances of Teddy leaving of his own accord.
I think there is a tacit acknowledgement on the part of the Athletic Dept. that they acted precipitously in hiring Teddy. Teddy has always struggled with details and minutiae; he's a big picture guy. He's a brilliant recruiter but being a hockey coach is so much more. Tomassoni, too, was a brilliant recruiter and he put together the '89 championship team, yet he wasn't much of a head coach. The administration is trying to prop up Teddy and he's responding OK.
I do not see championships in our future but I do not think there's a huge, vocal fan or alumni base that is clamoring for national titles either. Most, not all, of us are happy with what we have, a likable head coach who runs a clean program. The goal should be to keep the train on the tracks and Teddy's done that. If we had a national championship game in, say, Madison would anybody show up? My guess is maybe a 500-800 max would show. Mazzaloni ruffled a lot of feathers. He was demanding and insensitive to players who didn't see things his way. All he cared about was winning and he had a brusque, my-way-or-the-highway attitude. I think in hiring Teddy the hiring committee wanted to get as far away from that type of person as possible, and in doing so they ignored the experience thing. Or they just took a leap of faith that since Teddy played a ton of hockey at the highest levels he would know how to coach. If more people were really upset with the program maybe Teddy would be on notice but that's just not the case. The lack of pressure for that sort of thing to happen is another reason the Harvard job is regarded as a good one by many coaches.
The Ivy league doesn't often put winning at a premium. That's changed a little in recent years. Tim Taylor finally wore out his welcome. Yale gave him a long rope. Grillo at Brown was given many chances, too. Even Scalise has pulled the plug ( sort of ) on some Harvard head coaches---or so I hear. I don't think Scalise has all the patience in the world but Teddy will have ample opportunity to turn things around. I believe that he will eventually, but I also don't realistically think Harvard will be winning a national title any time soon. It probably won't ever happen under Teddy. For me as a fan, I'm happy with seeing Harvard turn in consistently good efforts and have a nice clean program. I wouldn't be one of those fans willing to travel to Madison and paint my face. There's probably no school that has less of those fans than Harvard ( not trying to be condescending ). Win and they would show up? I don't think so. I hear your frustration, eaglehockeyrules, and maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there are enough of those fans to warrant making drastic changes in the program.
Good points all around, CMKnight, but Harvard/Scalise
did a lot to retain Tim Murphy when the Indiana grid iron was courting him 2-3 years ago. Likewise, the hoops coach Amaker was a "big acquisition" for the program (though I believe he is as dirty as a pig pen), so it really does seem as though H wants to play with the big boys.
For a bunch of pasty white boys, yes the Ivies lack; I think you still have to ask yourself, "why do the pasty white boys down at Duke do so well in hoops?!" Are they dirty? Are their academic standards not as good? I expect a barrage of comments on academics from The College faithful. It is a known fact H's academics are not the most stringent, wink wink, and no need to mention the grade inflation scandal... right? To say H does not turn a blind eye is to say H has
never done anything wrong... and that we all know is a fib. Once you are accepted in, you are in; Anyone, Bueller, minimum GPA?
Nice article on the Back Page of The Crimson today; on how very little H spends on the sports program. We tout 41 D-1 sports, but we put in the 2nd lowest amount into those sports in the Ivy... how much is the endowment these days?! You are right, though, H does not draw like a BC, Minnie, Michigan, Cornell, Maine, etc. As a season ticket holder I see that nearly every game; however, I do not think it is as bad as Hokydad makes it out to be.
I would not seriously expect H to win national championships; however, a Beanpot would (and should) be a reasonable goal, as would a season of over .500 with all of the immense talent H steals from other schools. Each year before Donato took over, H hockey was pre-season ranked in the top 10, but that stopped after the Mazzoleni kids cycled through and USCHO/Coaches, etc. saw Donato for what he is = a fraud as a coach. I also doubt his ability to recruit, and that is a job often left to scouts and those who can see talent in players (I do not think Donato has that gift); however, Ted's job would be to seal the deal - that he has done, but ability to retain... hmm... just ask LeBlanc.
I guess I just do not see what you lads see in Donato, less the whole secret handshake of The College. I could careless about the sentimental-droll-nostalgia of him being a man of character, a teacher, saved a puppy stuck in a fence, a leader, a player... he could have tea with the Pope every week, but he has proven himself a lousy coach with all of the "supposed" talent H gets.
A big difference between BU of the 1990s and BC of the 2000s and H of the 1990s/2000s is not so much coaching, but is the
CONDITIONING.
I would love to see those winning days and ways back at Harvard Hockey, but with the current staff at Harvard... ehh, less than .500 is the new norm.
Oh, 1988-1989, how I miss thee... (nah, just good coaching).
