Hardly a day or even a meal goes by without someone asking me something similar to the following question: "Why is the hockey team bad?"

I admit that I have also fallen into that trap a couple of times--a trap because there is a fundamental problem with the question.

Plainly put, the men's hockey team isn't bad. The Crimson is 3-4-1, not 1 5 2, 1-6-1, 0-7-1 or 0-8-0.

Three of Harvard's four losses have been by one goal, and two have come in the final minutes of the game. Aside from the drubbing by B.U. last Tuesday, the Crimson never trailed by more than two goals.

Don't get me wrong--they aren't playing like world beaters, but they also aren't bad. The team is, well, OK.

What I can answer is what the Crimson is missing this year.

Success always whets one's appetite, and people expect more and more the next time. Last year's squad came within one overtime goal of playing for the national championship and went 24 5-4, while this year's squad already has lost four games--two at home, where last year's squad never lost.

But in the world of college sports, there is a lot of turnover due to graduation. This year's version of the Harvard hockey team has many new faces, so the players cannot be expected to perform the same as last year's did.

They are trying just as hard, but they aren't executing as well and are also not getting many breaks. Most of Harvard's deflections are blocked or go wide, while the other team's fluky shots are going in rather often--B.U.'s first two goals came off strange deflections, while Harvard's game-opening goal was nullified because the referee had whistled the play dead.

Harvard's really sore spots have been its passing game and discipline. Even though it beat Union last Saturday, one can't expect Harvard to be winning too many games when it's playing shorthanded 10 times. A similar number of bad penalties led to the Yale loss.

But even more fundamental is the passing game Harvard has been sloppy all over the ice. The passes aren't crisp or accurate quite often. And that leads to the defensive turnovers that have plagued the Crimson.

Bad passing is a big problem also on the power play, which is clicking at only 11 percent, compared with last year's 33 percent. And the team has no go-to guy like Sean McCann '94, who was not only a defensive superstar but also the king of the one-timer on the power play.

The players need more time to adjust to each other's playing style, and the frequently-changing forward combinations haven't really helped build team chemistry. Some pairings have come about because of injury, but others are done to shake up the team to try and find some people who work well together.

Coach Ronn Tomassoni even took captain Ben Coughlin off the line with Kirk Nielsen and Jason Karmanos to stir things around. The problem is that this threesome was Harvard's best unit last year, and they were playing pretty well this year.

None of the three scored or assisted on an even-strength goal in the past two games with their new partners.

Heck, maybe I am wrong and this change will make the Crimson an even better squad in the long run, but the move seems to aggravate the problem rather than to cure it.

In any event, fans have to give the team more time to gel, as Harvard has played but eight of its 28 games.

Maybe there will be a major turnaround, and maybe there won't. If the team is playing its best hockey come February and March, then it could go as far as last year.

And if it doesn't happen, then it's just too bad. But don't count out Harvard yet and definitely do not call the team bad.