I watched the video of this guy on Youtube.
Obviously he is an enthusiastic and dedicated and very intense coach.
I attended a university similar to Harvard - close in the rankings, but one of the few at that level of ranking which gives athletic scholarships. I am familiar with the culture of these schools, as I supported my two daughters through Ivy League institutions (yes, not a good value, but saying no to my daughters is not something I do well, it at all).
This coach doesn't seem like a good fit. When I was recruited as a high school athlete, I received a call from a world class athlete affiliated with one of the truly great track and field programs. He quite rightly made the case that if you really wanted to succeed, he thought you (at least statistically) should go to one of the handful of programs which really put people on top. I understood his point, and it really helped me in my decision. Yes, i was a serious athlete, but especially given my poor socio-economic background, I just had to invest in academics, and do it very seriously. (And yes, even as immature as I was, I bought off on the notion that of the three major pillars of college athletic life - academics, athletics and social life, that the social life would have to be sacrificed). I can't help but think that the majority of athletes who go to Harvard have the same considerations, absent the poverty that I experienced.
To this end, I just wonder, as others have mentioned, if the right answer here is that this coaching match was not a good fit. And the invective cast about here doesn't help the issue. If someone wants to really grab the most resources out of the university, which should be the objective for most any college student anywhere, that doesn't mean that they are a snowflake for pursuing academics with absolute rigor. Given that track and field offers very little return on investment (beyond school days) for even the most talented, being a rational decision maker should not be conflated with a snow flake.
My comments here are infected by my own bias. Education was a great investment for me. Track deserves its due in that process. But I would not have been a very good teacher or coach or even in any athletic related career endeavor (kudos to those who can do it), and coming from having nothing in a single mother unemployed and on assistance home, a focus on analytic development and education (where my skills were present) has given me a life I didn't even know existed (I do highly compensated complex intellectual property business and legal work, and truly love my job and what it has given me). I get it - I didn't have the dedication of Arkansas runners and others like them - who of course deserve considerable respect - but that level of intensity didn't make any sense for me. I can't imagine anything different is coming into play at Harvard.
By the way, don't take my comments as derogating the great toughness and dedication displayed by top, top Division 1 athletes. I respect them to this day, and sometimes have regret not following their path. But it wasn't the right course for me.