Re: Harvard Crimson (again) 2018-19
This is one of the best and most evenhanded recaps I've seen on this thread or any other thread in a long time. Not since Dave1382 patrolled the board a decade or so ago.
What Trillium doesn't understand (and his bias against Harvard is so transparent, it's hilarious) is that Harvard doesn't fire coaches unless there is an egregious display of behavior towards the student athletes or the program spirals into disarray with a mass exodus of players because of said treatment. Mark Mazzoleni did his level best to infuriate alumni, parents and former players with his attitude towards the Harvard community, yet it was his treatment of players that ultimately got him his walking papers (and even then, it was a parting of the ways that was spurred on by an offer from the Green Bay Gamblers).
One of my issues with the Harvard program and coaching staff is that building depth is not considered crucial to success. Thus a group of 'star' players get the majority of ice time at the expense of others who languish on the bench. This wears the team down towards March and I believe is one reason we have trouble getting far in our own tournament, let alone the NCAAs.
Regarding Stone’s present team, my fan clock sees next year as the culmination of a three-year rebuild, which seems to be moving ahead. But the incoming recruits will be critical. New line additions will have to unleash Hughes, Gilmore, Jovanovich, Petrie, and KDR to make scoring a habit, not just a happenstance. And we need D! We have some young talent, but Ds seem to take forever to develop (why is that?), and we need a real blueliner, or two, from day one. It would be criminal to have a .500 team in front of Reed for the next three years. But Lethargy? Indifference? I haven’t seen it, and with Fusco and Laing on the ice it would have been hard to get away with. Fatigue, maybe, especially with the past few seasons’ involuntary short benches. And yes, there’s been more than enough poor play, but mostly from those whose trajectory has been downward, which happens, however Machiavellian the recruiting. But I’m going to give it a few more years before putting in a call to Josh McDaniels . . . er, I mean Maura Crowell. (Personally, I wouldn’t trust Lee-J in the Beanpot
This is one of the best and most evenhanded recaps I've seen on this thread or any other thread in a long time. Not since Dave1382 patrolled the board a decade or so ago.
What Trillium doesn't understand (and his bias against Harvard is so transparent, it's hilarious) is that Harvard doesn't fire coaches unless there is an egregious display of behavior towards the student athletes or the program spirals into disarray with a mass exodus of players because of said treatment. Mark Mazzoleni did his level best to infuriate alumni, parents and former players with his attitude towards the Harvard community, yet it was his treatment of players that ultimately got him his walking papers (and even then, it was a parting of the ways that was spurred on by an offer from the Green Bay Gamblers).
One of my issues with the Harvard program and coaching staff is that building depth is not considered crucial to success. Thus a group of 'star' players get the majority of ice time at the expense of others who languish on the bench. This wears the team down towards March and I believe is one reason we have trouble getting far in our own tournament, let alone the NCAAs.
)
