Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

[sam12]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

So age isn't a factor. And in my opinion talent (or at least the ability to recruit talent) should not be a factor. Many draft picks on the roster, many players that have shown top level talent. And other ivies can do well. Are you telling me that Yale has more talent, or at least better recruiting classes than Harvard? Or Princeton under Gadowsky? Or frankly Cornell (although admissions are lower there, independent media sources consistently rank Harvard's classes better, and very high nationally). So not age, not talent. Then what? The only logical thing to look to next is coaching. I'm not in the room, and I don't know much about what goes on around the rink other than what I see or hear on this board or infer with my occasional chats with alum. But it does seem like the logical conclusion. Last year appears to be an aberration, brought on by an exceptional player, a strong(er) senior class apart from Killorn (with a couple pretty good players and a few solid ones), and strong overall (I'm guessing) senior leadership which maybe helped right the ship and get them going in the right direction despite Donato. Look at the 3 years before that. All poor seasons. No exceptional seniors (is this recruiting or development...my thought is poor development, think Doug Rodgers or Al Biega who should have been high impact seniors), few pretty good seniors. The last good season before that was 07 08, where they made the ECAC finals as well. They had no standout player, but they had a very strong senior class, with many pretty good players (Meintel, Pelle, Taylor, MacDonald etc) and several solid seniors that made up a class that seemed to provide very strong leadership to keep everyone on task and the team heading in the right direction. The lack of such classes in the interim seasons points to poor development to me, with these 2 senior classes (08,12) being exceptions in terms of leadership (and possibly development, though it is hard to tell, since we don't really know how much they could have developed). It is possible to see a strong Harvard hockey, which competes every year in the ECAC with a chance at going to the NCAAs every year. And with a proper confluence of factors, there is no reason they can't be a top ten team nationally, as Yale seems to somehow manage almost every year for the past 5 or so, last year notwithstanding.

 

[BCHF]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

I watched the Beanpot last night up until BC scored its second goal. Truthfully, it was more one-sided than the final score. Men against boys. BC is loaded with kids who are 21, 22, 23 years old and are sophs and juniors. We can't compete effectively against that kind of age difference and you see it on the ice. Our kids are physically less imposing and not as fast or skilled with or without the puck. Girard did the best he could but he was left alone on an island. I lost count of how many times we messed up passes, coughed up the puck and stood around and watched as BC skated circles around us. It was sad really.

I said this when Hockey East was formed in the eighties that eventually, the Ivy League would have to consider going their own way and creating a schedule where they would play teams more in line with their academic standards and recruiting. To continue to play against HE including the Beanpot is a joke. We are not competitive in any way with these schools and it isn't going to change any time soon. I don't think a coaching change will help. Relaxing academic standards and raising the age of incoming frosh is the only way to go if we want to continue to play HE schools.

I must call you to task on your inaccurate assessment of the age of the young men on BC's roster. Closer inspection will enlighten you to the fact that BC is the youngest team in Division I Men's College Ice Hockey, a position they often hold. Why...because they attract very talented players that often move on before their college eligibility expires...Dumoulin & Krieder from last years team. Their success has to do with many factors I'm sure...talented kids, great coach, strong "winning culture" to name a few. But do not suggest they win because they have older players.

One has to look no further then the teams you mentioned from your conference to see the impact of much older players...Yale, Cornell, Dartmouth which represent some of the oldest team rosters in the country. It is not about lowering standards but developing a winning culture which typically starts with the coach.

 

[bothman]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

I must call you to task on your inaccurate assessment of the age of the young men on BC's roster. Closer inspection will enlighten you to the fact that BC is the youngest team in Division I Men's College Ice Hockey, a position they often hold. Why...because they attract very talented players that often move on before their college eligibility expires...Dumoulin & Krieder from last years team. Their success has to do with many factors I'm sure...talented kids, great coach, strong "winning culture" to name a few. But do not suggest they win because they have older players.

One has to look no further then the teams you mentioned from your conference to see the impact of much older players...Yale, Cornell, Dartmouth which represent some of the oldest team rosters in the country. It is not about lowering standards but developing a winning culture which typically starts with the coach.

For BC posters, I would ask you to consider the 2000-2001 season as one to compare to what Harvard is currently going through. Granted, Harvard is not coming off a national championship, but like BC was undermanned due to some unexpected events, Harvard could not have prepared to what happened regarding the cheating scandal.

It is what it is and folks can come on here and chest thump or berate the coach, but when you are playing every night with 4 recruited defenseman, that's a major problem that few coaches could overcome....as Jerry York showcased in 2000-2001.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

When Brayden Jaw is playing defense there's really nothing to be said.

Let's just beat Cornell next week. That's all I care about.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Good job, good effort

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Okay, since I've been called to task on the BC roster, I took a look and here is what comes from their media guide:

Albers, SR, 24 (in March), Dyroff, SR, 23, Smith, SO, 21, Billet, 21, SO, Barone, 22, SO, Sullivan, 20, FR. If BC is the youngest team in D-1, then the AHL has hijacked college hockey. And if you think I pulled this out of thin air, go back and check the Boston Globe or NY Times archives for an article that interviewed coaches and NHL admins on this very subject. I didn't start this; people more knowledgeable than myself where hockey is concerned brought up this subject about colleges recruiting 20 year olds. It's out there and you can't deny it.

Regarding Harvard's talent. This notion that because Harvard has NHL draftees on their roster, they should be winning more than they are losing is ridiculous. Chris Biotti was a #1 draft pick of the Calgary Flames. In his time at Harvard, he did great at international tournaments but did nothing while donning a Crimson uniform. People openly wondered what his issue was when he could play so well overseas. We've had other NHL draftees like Peter Ciavaglia who dominated while in college but never got a look see with the Sabres. Others such as Craig Adams have carved out a nice career in the NHL even though he was just okay while at Harvard. Just because you are a draftee doesn't automatically mean you are going to make your college team a rousing success.

Coaching. I'll admit that I was one of a handful of alums who wrote to Bob Scalise asking him to consider Teddy once Mazz resigned. I thought either Teddy or Ron Rolston would be a great choice. I get that just because Teddy has had success wherever he has played be it at Catholic Memorial or the NHL, it doesn't mean he would be a great coach. Claude Julien was a marginal player at best yet he has become a terrific NHL head coach. A lot of factors have to be considered. Perhaps the job is too much for him. I was hoping that having O'Connell and Fortin as assistants would help. Billy Cleary had a bad stretch at Harvard that had people asking for his head. He managed to turn it around with the classes of '82 and '83. Maybe lightening can strike twice. Or maybe it is time for a change. Problem is, to get that coach that will take you to the NCAAs, you need help from admissions. Just ask Tommy Amaker.

I agree that Harvard has been losing some recruiting battles to other Ivies. This can't continue if we are to turn the ship around. But I still contend that there is enough evidence that sometime in the near future, we need to consider breaking off from the ECAC. I think hockey is the only sport at Harvard where the Ivy League is part of a larger conference. Perhaps it is time for a change.

 

[claver2010]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Okay, since I've been called to task on the BC roster, I took a look and here is what comes from their media guide:

Albers, SR, 24 (in March), Dyroff, SR, 23, Smith, SO, 21, Billet, 21, SO, Barone, 22, SO, Sullivan, 20, FR.

You realize 2 of the 6 you listed played on Monday, both of whom are 4th liners?

Though I agree age of college hockey players is an issue, think you're calling to task the wrong group.

Let's just beat Cornell next week. That's all I care about.

You could also beat BU at 4:30

For BC posters, I would ask you to consider the 2000-2001 season as one to compare to what Harvard is currently going through.

Believe you mean 2001-02 season but understood, we had to play a couple of weekends with 4 defensemen, not easy to say the least.

On a positive note regarding Harvard hockey, Girard really impressed me. It could've been 6 or 7-1 if not for him.

 

[bcarlisle]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

The six-non-Ivy ECAC schools would have trouble staying afloat. Four of them are D-III schools. HC would probably like to join them, but IIRC when Vermont left the ECAC they applied but were ruled out due to their rink. Is Bentley any better? One who would probably be interested is RIT.

Holy Cross was ruled out of the ECAC sweepstakes principally because they would not or could not upgrade their women's program from D3 to D1 -- which the ECAC set as a requirement. I don't think the rink had anything to do with it --and I'm reasonably sure both the Ivies and the non-Ivies in the ECAC would have preferred Holy Cross over Quinnipiac. Believe it or not (almost) all of the pre Q-pac non-Ivies in the ECAC have academic standards (albeit not as tough as the Ivies --but consistent with their own overall academic profiles). It's never been clear if Q-Pac actually has any such standards and its curriculum and philosophy are kind of an oddball fit in the ECAC --notwithstanding their rink and money (and now, their national standing). They should be in HE -- now not possible with CT and ND joining that league.

If the Ivies were to leave the ECAC, who would they play against? If the theory is that they can't be competitive with HE or the other major D1 leagues, the Ivies would be signing up for four games against each other, a few random games against legacy ECAC teams and the likes of Alabama-Huntsville, Robert Morris, Bentley and Canasius. The result would be a league like Atlantic hockey. One autobid every year and zero other teams to the NCAAs. And, that would be ridiculous given how many NHL draftees teams like Harvard and Cornell are able to recruit.

I agree that if the Ivies did bolt, Holy Cross and RIT would be the most logical additions to the ECAC assuming the league didn't crack entirely. Holy Cross because of its academic profile, history, cachet and location and RIT because it already plays D3 sports in the Liberty League leagues against Union, SLU, Clarkson and RPI.

If the NCAA tourney teams were picked today, there would be two Ivies in the top 16. That would never happen again if the Ivies disengaged from the ECAC in order to avoid tough competition. And once that started happening, even the rump ECAC would be trying hard to avoid scheduling the Ivies because those games would be unlikely to help their own non-league records in NCAA selection. Bad idea. The ECAC may be imperfect but it works reasonably well for both sides.

 

[Casey]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

I said this when Hockey East was formed in the eighties that eventually, the Ivy League would have to consider going their own way and creating a schedule where they would play teams more in line with their academic standards and recruiting. To continue to play against HE including the Beanpot is a joke. We are not competitive in any way with these schools and it isn't going to change any time soon.

I can assure you that any discussion among the Ivy League teams breaking away has had nothing to do with lowering the level of opponent or of lack of ability to compete. In fact, one of the big positives for teams like Harvard, Cornell and Yale would be the ability to schedule more big-name opponents, thanks to at least two fewer league games and the ability to open with conference games (eliminating the perceived need to start with Atlantic teams or the silly Ivy Shootout).

And Ivy teams have been plenty competitive against the other three top conferences. Harvard last season was 2-2-1 against Hockey East and was very competitive at North Dakota. Even with this year's struggles, the Crimson has a road win and a road tie against Hockey East and has arguably been more competitive against HE teams than ECAC teams. Yale, meanwhile, is 3-0-1 against HE and WCHA teams and Cornell is 4-1-0 against teams from the other three big conferences that aren't Denver. Dartmouth and Princeton have done fine, and Brown has struggled in limited chances.

Semi-related, due to Quinnipiac/conference realignment being discussed previously in this thread: If they can show some staying power, and I see no reason why they wouldn't (top 10-15, not necessarily No. 1/2), they would be the prime candidate for poaching by the NCHC if that league has any more aspirations of making its name slightly less stupid (don't know that they do). I can't think of any Hockey East schools that would rather face the NoDaks UMDs of the world, but Quinnipiac has always been about upward mobility and has a beauty of a rink.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

One aspect of Harvard's problems may be that Harvard has decided to allow other sports to take precedence in the quest for qualified recruits. I am not a convinced that Harvard Hockey is being treated as it has been in the past by the athletic department as to admission of recruits.

Harvard freshmen have, I understand, the highest Academic Index (AI) of any university. It is my understanding that under Ivy rules the mean AI of varsity athletes' AI must be within one standard deviation of the AI of their class. I also understand that for football there is an Ivy rule as to which of the four AI bands recruits fall in, with specific numbers of recruits allocated to each band. For all other sports, allocation of admitted recruits is up to the admissions office with input from the athletic department. Naturally, the higher the AI required, the smaller the recruiting pool for any sport.

About six or seven years ago the new athletic director decided to place increased emphasis on basketball, at a time when women's hockey was outdrawing men's basketball in attendance. He had been approached by some wealthy alumni who offered support. They recruited a new basketball coach. I understand they got around the Harvard policy that a coach should not be paid more than a University Professor by having the pay supplemented by donations from the alumni group.
I am convinced that in the coach recruitment process the coach was assured that he would be allowed to recruit from the lower AI bands.

If Harvard is admitting basketball recruits from lower AI bands and the mean AI of all varsity athletes must be within one standard deviation of the mean AI of their class it is implicit that higher AI scores are required from other varsity athletes including hockey. I fear that Harvard hockey is being sacrificed on the altar of Mr Scalise's worship of all things basketball. Perhaps we do not need a new hockey coach, simply a new athletic director.

 

[Onion Man]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Okay, since I've been called to task on the BC roster, I took a look and here is what comes from their media guide:

Albers, SR, 24 (in March), Dyroff, SR, 23, Smith, SO, 21, Billet, 21, SO, Barone, 22, SO, Sullivan, 20, FR. If BC is the youngest team in D-1, then the AHL has hijacked college hockey. And if you think I pulled this out of thin air, go back and check the Boston Globe or NY Times archives for an article that interviewed coaches and NHL admins on this very subject. I didn't start this; people more knowledgeable than myself where hockey is concerned brought up this subject about colleges recruiting 20 year olds. It's out there and you can't deny it.

Regarding Harvard's talent. This notion that because Harvard has NHL draftees on their roster, they should be winning more than they are losing is ridiculous. Chris Biotti was a #1 draft pick of the Calgary Flames. In his time at Harvard, he did great at international tournaments but did nothing while donning a Crimson uniform. People openly wondered what his issue was when he could play so well overseas. We've had other NHL draftees like Peter Ciavaglia who dominated while in college but never got a look see with the Sabres. Others such as Craig Adams have carved out a nice career in the NHL even though he was just okay while at Harvard. Just because you are a draftee doesn't automatically mean you are going to make your college team a rousing success.

Coaching. I'll admit that I was one of a handful of alums who wrote to Bob Scalise asking him to consider Teddy once Mazz resigned. I thought either Teddy or Ron Rolston would be a great choice. I get that just because Teddy has had success wherever he has played be it at Catholic Memorial or the NHL, it doesn't mean he would be a great coach. Claude Julien was a marginal player at best yet he has become a terrific NHL head coach. A lot of factors have to be considered. Perhaps the job is too much for him. I was hoping that having O'Connell and Fortin as assistants would help. Billy Cleary had a bad stretch at Harvard that had people asking for his head. He managed to turn it around with the classes of '82 and '83. Maybe lightening can strike twice. Or maybe it is time for a change. Problem is, to get that coach that will take you to the NCAAs, you need help from admissions. Just ask Tommy Amaker.

I agree that Harvard has been losing some recruiting battles to other Ivies. This can't continue if we are to turn the ship around. But I still contend that there is enough evidence that sometime in the near future, we need to consider breaking off from the ECAC. I think hockey is the only sport at Harvard where the Ivy League is part of a larger conference. Perhaps it is time for a change.

Typical Harvard idiocy. The guy on the previous post listed the age of the BC kids vs. the age of the Harvard kids by class and your squad is older. I know Harvard "geniuses" don't always like facts, especially when they prove their ignorant hypotheses wrong.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

GAME UPDATE

Just saw this in the Harvard Storm Center website:
"Men's Ice Hockey: is playing at home Saturday (Feb. 9) vs. Dartmouth. That game is confirmed. The game is currently scheduled for broadcast on WBIN-TV as well as Fox College Sports."

I am posting this as both Harvard women's games this weekend have been postponed due to the blizzard forecast. Also perhaps as the Governor has asked all motorists to stay off the road after 12 noon Friday and also ordered MBTA service to end at 3:30PM on Friday.

Much as I love Harvard hockey I plan to stay home unless the storm is a complete fizzle. I am on crutches (messed up lumbar disk) and will not risk another fall.

To those rugged souls who plan to brave the storm and attend (whether you are of a Crimson or Green persuasion), I hope you stay safe and enjoy the game.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Update is Updated

I just checked the ECAC website and as I type this the ECAC is saying the men's Harvard - Dartmouth game has been changed from Saturday at 7:00PM to Sunday at 5:00PM at Bright. The Harvard Athletic website is still saying it is on Saturday!!

Clearly all should check before they start out to Bright Arena.

And to all in the storm area - stay safe!!

 

[Humanoid]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Other media outlets also reporting time change is to 5 PM

http://excalibursportspage.com/2013/02/08/college-hockey-weekend-schedule-update/

 

[H60Hockey]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Harvard sports site has the game Sunday at 4pm.

 

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

So guys, honestly, you still happy with Donato? I wonder if Scalise is still happy? The alum?

Tee hee.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

So guys, honestly, you still happy with Donato? I wonder if Scalise is still happy? The alum?

Tee hee.

He has 17 players - what coach would you like to hire that piles up the wins with this roster? Basketball has managed to cope so far w/ the losses but basketball is also a game where you can get by with only 7 players. Meanwhile, Brayden Jaw is playing defense in the Beanpot. He hasn't played D since bantams. So who is walking in that door that would have done significantly better with this team?

 

[eaglehockeyrules]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Alslammerz,

But, but, but, but what about all those recruits touted about earlier in this very thread?! In fact, over the last 7 years?! By the regulars here on USCHO?! Face it, Donato does not DEVELOP his players. I asked the same question 4 seasons ago in this forum. HOW MUCH MORE PROOF DOES ONE NEED TO SEE DONATO IS IN OVER HIS HEAD? A few more losing seasons? More Beanpot embarrassments? Last place in the ECAC? # 56 out of 59 in D-1? From pre-season ranking to oblivion?

Skip the basketball parallelism; over on The Crimson, I see several apologists spinning it as the Academic Scandal of the Century. Amaker is a cheat to begin with. Fact is, Government 1310 was offered to Harvard Extension School as Government E-1310, and ironically no one in Extension got popped for cheating; therefore, making The College, FAS, Fellows, etc. look like dopes. HAA never came out and said (n=X) players from Hoops, from Gridiron, from Hockey, etc. were affected; quite surprisingly Murphy (who has very high ethics, morals and character) even waffled on his affected players this past fall.

Also, why is Yale succeeding? Same academic criteria, but Harvard folks will poo-poo that! You'll, "... say we've the highest standards in the Ivy League!"... wink wink (see Amaker above). Suddenly Harvard is "really good" in hoops. OK, either a great coach, Amaker, unlike Donato, or a little something something is being overlooked / done for the hoops... because you know darn well it was a black-mark on the program for not 1.) winning the Ivy Crown in 60+ years, and 2.) making any post-season play in 60+ years. But, I am resigned to admit H hoop's success it is a miracle or divine intervention at the least, that turned the program around. That happens a lot in D-1, when you get a new coach, with NCAA violations hanging over his head, but hey, Harvard is about academics and not sports! Or is it? (see Murphy above).

Sorry, when it comes to Harvard Hockey I am a very frustrated fan, and I am not meaning to take it out on you personally. That said, it is time for Harvard, HAA, and Scalise to come clean and admit they made a mistake with hiring Donato. Sure Mazz was not "their guy" but Donato is no coach. Heck, if Donato had any pride, he tender his resignation after this season; however, we'll win 3 games heading to the ECACs and everyone will forget 5-16-1. Good job Ted '91! Just because you have a Harvard AB does not mean you can do a certain task proficiently, and Donato has proven that for years behind the Harvard bench, at the expense of Harvard Hockey. Was it worth it?

I'd give my left nut to go back to the glory days of the late 80s, and rid Harvard of the mess known as Donato. That said, you ignored the earlier question, are you still happy with Donato as head coach?

 

[brookie]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

Instead of debating the average age of team members, just go to elite prospects website. Complete rosters of all team including average age, height and weight!
http://www.eliteprospects.com/[/url]

Okay, since I've been called to task on the BC roster, I took a look and here is what comes from their media guide:

Albers, SR, 24 (in March), Dyroff, SR, 23, Smith, SO, 21, Billet, 21, SO, Barone, 22, SO, Sullivan, 20, FR. If BC is the youngest team in D-1, then the AHL has hijacked college hockey. And if you think I pulled this out of thin air, go back and check the Boston Globe or NY Times archives for an article that interviewed coaches and NHL admins on this very subject. I didn't start this; people more knowledgeable than myself where hockey is concerned brought up this subject about colleges recruiting 20 year olds. It's out there and you can't deny it.

Regarding Harvard's talent. This notion that because Harvard has NHL draftees on their roster, they should be winning more than they are losing is ridiculous. Chris Biotti was a #1 draft pick of the Calgary Flames. In his time at Harvard, he did great at international tournaments but did nothing while donning a Crimson uniform. People openly wondered what his issue was when he could play so well overseas. We've had other NHL draftees like Peter Ciavaglia who dominated while in college but never got a look see with the Sabres. Others such as Craig Adams have carved out a nice career in the NHL even though he was just okay while at Harvard. Just because you are a draftee doesn't automatically mean you are going to make your college team a rousing success.

Coaching. I'll admit that I was one of a handful of alums who wrote to Bob Scalise asking him to consider Teddy once Mazz resigned. I thought either Teddy or Ron Rolston would be a great choice. I get that just because Teddy has had success wherever he has played be it at Catholic Memorial or the NHL, it doesn't mean he would be a great coach. Claude Julien was a marginal player at best yet he has become a terrific NHL head coach. A lot of factors have to be considered. Perhaps the job is too much for him. I was hoping that having O'Connell and Fortin as assistants would help. Billy Cleary had a bad stretch at Harvard that had people asking for his head. He managed to turn it around with the classes of '82 and '83. Maybe lightening can strike twice. Or maybe it is time for a change. Problem is, to get that coach that will take you to the NCAAs, you need help from admissions. Just ask Tommy Amaker.

I agree that Harvard has been losing some recruiting battles to other Ivies. This can't continue if we are to turn the ship around. But I still contend that there is enough evidence that sometime in the near future, we need to consider breaking off from the ECAC. I think hockey is the only sport at Harvard where the Ivy League is part of a larger conference. Perhaps it is time for a change.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2012-2013

That said, you ignored the earlier question, are you still happy with Donato as head coach?

I am b/c I can recognize the difficulties of losing 3 of your starting 6 defensemen for most of the year. Also it's great that there was no one cheating (or worth bothering to look into about cheating) from the Extension School. 125 members of the actual student body though were investigated and without HAA violating federal confidentiality laws, we can reasonably say some of them were athletes, possibly even hockey players. (Again, to your absurd comments regarding Harvard's other coaches - specifically naming players in this instance would have been a violation of federal confidentiality laws concerning universities and their student bodies.) The result is a depleted roster that at one point had 17 skaters on it, including only 5 defensemen. Even now, players are being forced to play out of position. Sorry I'm not going to hold that against the coach. If we had this record and all of our players were here? Then sure, I'd be more willing to consider a new coach. (FYI - I wasn't comparing the situation to basketball but namely taking away a comparison. It would be easy to say basketball has had success but hockey hasn't despite the same challenges of losing roster players. But because basketball needs to use less players, their depth is less depleted, meaning it is not a valid comparison).

Now you get to answer my question: What coach do you want who would have success with this current (as in, dressing today vs. Dartmouth) roster?


For all: I'm still not sure of how PDO works exactly besides the basics, but PDO is essentially a measure of luck. Most teams regress to a mean of 1000 for PDO (SV% + SH%). Harvard has a PDO of 913. (Edit: Oops, no it doesn't. PDO is only supposed to measure play at full strength.) It would be interesting to look at PDO for all college teams but according to this measure, Harvard has been "unlucky." The problem with short schedules are that there's less time to regress to the mean. http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2013/01/21/pdo-explained/

PS - Alex Killorn was called up to Tampa Bay today! Congrats to Killer...guess Stevie Y didn't hear about how his coach didn't develop him the last 4 years.

PPS - Quick observations from today's TV broadcast. One, Brayden Jaw started for us today...on defense. Proof positive of what I was saying. Two, I hate the Fox Sports play by play guy.