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 CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Hokydad said:
sterlippo1 said:
please crunch again, no way they were 18 and 10 months.
Click to expand...

you're right of course,;) i did do it and they were the youngest but not having the time to find it as easily as i did back during the season,:eek: the best i can come up with is that i was an inexcusable year off:mad: , i come up with 19 yrs 10 months. so, that's kinda why i said "i think" but your point is taken and i stand corrected but they were the youngest team none the less:D
Click to expand...
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Our hearts go out to the Murphy family, Dan of Harvard and Ben of Maine on the passing of their grandfather Phillip Long who was put to rest today.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Puck Swami said:
Harvard was able to really take advantage of several key trends in that era to roster some awesome teams.

1) The Bobby Orr Boom: Boston kids who started playing hockey in the early 70s as kids and came of age in the mid 80s expanded the talent pool. Harvard was able to exploit some the cream of that larger talent pool.

2) The pinnacle era of offensive hockey - Tha 1980s were an era of freewheeling offensive hockey in the era before defensive systems, video scouting and goaltending styles, coaching and equipment were revolutionzed in the 90s. Harvard's speedy roll-four-lines of skaters were perfect for that era where 7-5 scores were the norm. That's all changed now, as defensive coaching, scouting and goaltending have caught up to skaters. You just don't see a lot of 5-8 defensemen like H's Mark Benning anymore, who ruled in that era.

3) Olympic returns: When you have players like Scott Fusco and Lane MacDonald and Allen Borbeau turning down the NHL to come back from the Olympics and play for Harvard again after the Olympics, you have the recipe for explosively talented teams. Those guys were vastly improved players playing 60 game pre-Olympic tours, and their returns to Harvard put them at a whole different level. With NHL players comprising Olympic players today, you don't have that extra infusion of talent anymore.
Click to expand...

How can you give a critique of Harvard hockey without mentioning Billy Cleary. Since he retired, every coach they've had has been worse than the one he replaced, culminating with Donato. Over the past few years Harvard has had their share of alleged talent come on board, but I have seen nothing that gives me the impression that they know what to do with it. Their performance in the last year's Beanpot was an embarrassment to the Weiland/Cleary tradition.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

bothman said:
Couple of thoughts:

1) Thanks for the well-wishes. This is my first and it's been quite a ride thus far. What a special time in life!

2) Brown has been the perennial doormat in the league for decades. Once a decade they produce a team that makes some noise inthe ECAC before resuming their place at the bottom. A good Brown team is good for the ECAC and thus, good for Harvard so I hope they can build on last season's nice play-off run.

3) Harvard does have some overage players, but last I checked (last year), Harvard had the youngest roster in the ECAC. Let's look at averages and not make exceptions the rules.

4) The Leblanc signing is a big deal and a huge loss for Harvard. As a very wise man once told me after Louis signed with Harvard "Just remember that Paul Kariya is not walking through that door". He was right, but for those following Canada's Junior team scrimmages, Louis has been the star thus far. It takes time to adjust to college hockey and play againsty kids who are between 1-6 yrs older than you. I think Louis was poised for a breakoput year this year (35+ points) and would have challenged for the league MVP subject to Harvard's performance as a team. Also, not that he would have replaced Louis, but this makes the Andrew Calof punch to the gut hurt even more.

5) I don't love the non-conference schedule, but this year, having some weaker non-conference games will probably be a blessing. Harvard is going to struggle to score and certain players are going to have to step it up big time (Fallstrom, Killorn, McCollem, etc), not to mention the goalies.

6) Harvard of the 1980s was BC of today. Even comparing Harvard to BC is crazy right now. BC will win every recruit from Harvard these days, the only saving grace is if the candidate and parents really value education and if there is prior lineage.
Click to expand...

Harvard has a great program and will do just fine. I wouldn't worry!:cool:
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Greg Ambrose said:
How can you give a critique of Harvard hockey without mentioning Billy Cleary. Since he retired, every coach they've had has been worse than the one he replaced, culminating with Donato. Over the past few years Harvard has had their share of alleged talent come on board, but I have seen nothing that gives me the impression that they know what to do with it. Their performance in the last year's Beanpot was an embarrassment to the Weiland/Cleary tradition.
Click to expand...

Billy was a legend in his day - a man of true principle, he was so emblematic of Harvard. He loved the high tempo skating game, and he had many issues with professional hockey.

I think he probably left Harvard just in time - he'd be something of a caged lion coaching in today's world of defensive hockey systems, early signings and family advisors. You are correct that his successors have really struggled for consistency in the new era. It's really quite puzzling - Harvard has great hockey tradition, a fertile recruiting ground, and the best academic brand in the world. They should be better.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Harvard folks: Wondering what do you see as the minimum W-L threshold that Teddy needs to hit in order to remain at the helm? (At least for those who think he's in trouble)
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Puck Swami said:
Billy was a legend in his day - a man of true principle, he was so emblematic of Harvard. He loved the high tempo skating game, and he had many issues with professional hockey.

I think he probably left Harvard just in time - he'd be something of a caged lion coaching in today's world of defensive hockey systems, early signings and family advisors. You are correct that his successors have really struggled for consistency in the new era. It's really quite puzzling - Harvard has great hockey tradition, a fertile recruiting ground, and the best academic brand in the world. They should be better.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That said, why aren't they? Does is come down to something as the wrong coach (ie, plug in a Mike Schaefer or a Mike Eaves and voila - Harvard is a Frozen 4 team every other year?)

I don't think Harvard has made the best head coaching decisions post-Cleary (I was a big fan of the Donato hiring), but I think it's more complicated than that.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Wicked Slappaahs said:
Harvard folks: Wondering what do you see as the minimum W-L threshold that Teddy needs to hit in order to remain at the helm? (At least for those who think he's in trouble)
Click to expand...

I don't think he's in trouble. I think he should be looking over his shoulder given these last few seasons, but I'm not sure the administration holds the team to the same standard as these passionate USCHO posters do.

Louis Leblanc signing to play in the QMJHL is a major red flag in my mind. If he signed to play for Montreal or Montreal's AHL team, that would be another story. I think him signing to play in the Q is a direct shot to Donato's bow that basically says "We don't think you are developing Louis as well as he could be..."
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

good rid****ce to leblanc, he didnt deserve to play there. to many me me players

it is easy to scapegoat the coach but when you look at the end of season games and see players not raising their compete levels, they need to look in mirror also

to many players living off of their reputations
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

bothman said:
Agreed. That said, why aren't they? Does is come down to something as the wrong coach (ie, plug in a Mike Schaefer or a Mike Eaves and voila - Harvard is a Frozen 4 team every other year?)

I don't think Harvard has made the best head coaching decisions post-Cleary (I was a big fan of the Donato hiring), but I think it's more complicated than that.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Tomassoni, Mazzoleni and Donato (sounds like an Italian law firm!) all share some similar results - initial success, followed by a lack of foundation-building.

Both Tomassoni and Mazzoleni peaked in year four of their Harvard coaching careers, when their first recruits blossomed into NCAA teams, but after sucessful 4 year buildups, both coaches had fall-offs in year five from which they never really recovered. Tomassoni never saw the playoffs again, and flatlined himself out of his job with five straight losing teams. Very puzzling. Mazzoleni seemed to hit a personal wall in year 5 and took himself out of Cambridge under some murky circumstances. Puzzling.
Donato had two strong years to start his Harvard career, but the last four years have seen a downward progression. Puzzling again.

The common link is it seems to me that all three coaches seemed to have an immediate plan to resume prominence, but the long-term foundation building to make it sustainable seems to be missing. I think programs need to establish long-term cultures of winning, and all 3 post Cleary H coaches have not been able to make initial success stick over the long term.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

bothman said:
I don't think he's in trouble. I think he should be looking over his shoulder given these last few seasons, but I'm not sure the administration holds the team to the same standard as these passionate USCHO posters do.

Louis Leblanc signing to play in the QMJHL is a major red flag in my mind. If he signed to play for Montreal or Montreal's AHL team, that would be another story. I think him signing to play in the Q is a direct shot to Donato's bow that basically says "We don't think you are developing Louis as well as he could be..."
Click to expand...

Can't agree with all of this, Both. I think mens hockey is held to a higher standard perhaps than most other sports at Harvard. There are numerous hockey alumni in the Boston area and I suspect collectively they exert a lot of influence on Scalise and the administration. Furthermore I think it was this influence that led to Ted Donato's hiring. Scalise has been highly successful in finding and hiring coaches for a variety of teams. He has generally picked men and women with proven records who can relate to the overall situation at Harvard. And they have produced.

Donato is perhaps the exception. Scalise was new in his job at the time and I believe Donato was his first hire. As stated I think he bowed or at least acquiesced to the pressure. Today he is established and strong enough to call the shots.

What does this mean for the Crimson and Donato? Not sure. Harvard is very tolerant and will go the distance with a coach. I don't know of any situations where coaches were bought out of contracts or paid not to coach. Maybe there are some but not many. I think Donato will have the opportunity to serve out his contract, whatever it may be. Hopefully he will find a way to turn our fortunes around.

Leblanc's defection to the pros is but one of many such defections this year. Seems like every week I read about another player heading north. Each time it happens it places more pressure on the remaining bluechip college players with pro ambitions who fear they may be losing ground to their defecting peers. Money talks and I think we have to accept it pretty much as status quo. There is a silver lining however. These defections tend to level the college field. Teams written off as also rans can now challenge the wounded favorites.

On balance I think this could work to our advantage. Notwithstanding the Leblanc loss we have a corps of solid if not all-star players returning who have played on winning teams and are capable of playing winning hockey. Everybody starts at 0-0-0 in October. Let's hope the coaches and players want it enough to make it happen.

GO CRIMSON!
 
Last edited:
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

I'll be the first or perhaps one of the first to raise my hand and say that I wrote a letter to Bob Scalise begging him to hire Teddy as our new coach after Mazz resigned. My reasons at the time were as follows; Teddy was a Harvard grad and thus would understand the demands as a student-athlete, something Mazz never properly grasped during his tenure. Teddy had success at the high school, collegiate and pro level and was an Olympian. He was a proven winner and a big game player and I felt at the time that his resume would attract the talent we would need to compete with HE and WCHA teams for the NCAA Frozen Four.

Obviously, that has not come to pass. Puck Swami made an interesting point about the coaches following Cleary and how after enjoying early success, they dropped off the face of the earth. In Tomassoni's case, there were personal issues that got in the way of his ability to coach and motivate the squad as well as a lack of talent. Mazz just flat out didn't get Harvard and the ECAC. He was stubborn and inflexible and lost his share of players. I can't say what Teddy is experiencing at the moment because I have no insight born out of direct knowledge. I've met and spoken with Teddy on a couple of occasions and found him to be knowledgeable, intense, competitive and yet very approachable. Perhaps his demeanor has changed in the last few years due to the losing. Maybe the players he has recruited are reading their press clippings and forgetting what it takes to win at this level.

Harvard does have the tradition, the academics, and the prestige and there is no reason in the world why other sports should flourish while hockey flounders. Basketball was the doormat sport on campus for decades but Tommy Amaker is on his way to reversing that trend in a big way.

I love hockey and it pains me to see the Crimson fall to doormat status. I think we have the talent to do better than our recent records. Perhaps Teddy could benefit from some veteran assistants who can do a better job of preparation and skill development. Just a thought.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Big Papa said:
excellent reading. good job ralph!
Click to expand...

That isn't me. :) It was Red Cloud. I just posted the link because RC hasn't been posting them on the opponents' threads, and I figure that there is some interest.
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

Skate79 said:
Something has to give or else we are going to be competing with Brown for the worst Ivy men's hockey program. Maybe we are already there.
Click to expand...
Ummm...I think I saw Brown playing in Albany last March... ;)
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

I'm getting tired of reading Heisenberg's reports on all the recruits which our Ivy brethren have lined up. Yale in particular has been very active. Cornell, Brown, and Dartmouth are not far behind. We, along with Princeton, seem to be dragging.

What is it with our hockey recruiting? Our other teams seem to be doing just fine. Any thoughts?

GO CRIMSON!
 
Re: HARVARD CRIMSON 2010-2011 - A New Beginning

ALONZO said:
I'm getting tired of reading Heisenberg's reports on all the recruits which our Ivy brethren have lined up. Yale in particular has been very active. Cornell, Brown, and Dartmouth are not far behind. We, along with Princeton, seem to be dragging.

What is it with our hockey recruiting? Our other teams seem to be doing just fine. Any thoughts?

GO CRIMSON!
Click to expand...

We had two really big classes the past two years (Killorn's year, D. Biega's year) and as a result, there are less roster spots to recruit for?

And seeing as, by my quick glance, there's 8 rising seniors, and there's also 8 recruits on the Heisenberg list, I'm going to go with that. How many players from the other Ivies are rising seniors and thus are leaving after this season?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top