New Ivy League "Commissioner": More of Same?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php/2009/02/11/ivy-league-names-new-executive-director?blog=2


Ivy League Names New Executive Director

The Council of Ivy Group Presidents announced today that Robin Harris, Senior Counsel and Co-Chair in the Collegiate Sports Practice at Ice Miller, LLP, will be the new Executive Director of the Council of Ivy Group Presidents, effective July 1, 2009, and as such, the chief executive officer of the Ivy League athletics conference.

“Robin Harris is a dedicated and talented athletics administrator and attorney, with a keen understanding of the importance of academics in intercollegiate athletics and a deep appreciation of the role of competitive athletics as a component of a liberal arts and science education,” said Penn President Amy Gutmann, chair of the Ivy Group.

Anybody know anything about her? She appears to be someone who worked in the NCAA in all sorts of administrative roles and was a corporate lawyer based in Indianapolis (I think) as a part of Ice Miller. I have no idea if she has any thoughts on football, etc.

[Ivytalk]

Never heard of her. Her academic creds show that she's a "double Dookie," so I guess there's no risk of bias here.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Never heard of her. Her academic creds show that she's a "double Dookie," so I guess there's no risk of bias here.

xconfusedx

This begs for explanation... xlolx

[Franks Tanks]

xconfusedx

This begs for explanation... xlolx

I think he means she has an undergard and grad degree from Duke

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I think he means she has an undergard and grad degree from Duke

Ah, I see! *shakes head and looks for more coffee*

[MplsBison]

Does this mean we'll see a post-season men's basketball tournament and football in the FCS playoffs?

[Husky Alum]

Yeah, but the post season basketball tournament will roate between Bridgeport Connecticut and Boston, MA and the Ivy League Commissioner will state that neither Yale nor Harvard have a home court advantage as the schools aren't based in Bridgeport and Boston.

(Insert Sarcasm).

[MplsBison]

I would think an Ivy League post-season tournament would be held in New York? Maybe MSG?


Maybe say only the top 6 teams get in?

[ngineer]

Ivy League just said they will continue to 'skirt the issue' of playoffs for football...;):D

[Ivytalk]

I would think an Ivy League post-season tournament would be held in New York? Maybe MSG?


Maybe say only the top 6 teams get in?

I love Chinese food!;)

I say that a double Dookie should be a playoff promoter!xnodx

[blackcaesar3k5]

I would love to see Crimson particapte in 1-aa playoffs..

[Syntax Error]

I'd like to see the Ivies in the Division I football championships too but I don't think I ever will. :(

[Ivytalk]

I'd like to see the Ivies in the Division I football championships too but I don't think I ever will. :(

I'm somewhat more optimistic, SE!xnodx

[Syntax Error]

I'm somewhat more optimistic, SE!xnodxWhy? Could you extrapolate?

[Ivytalk]

Why? Could you extrapolate?

Not really. Just a hope that the new Ivy commish might bring everyone into the 21st century. No empirical evidence, but hope springs eternal!:)

[brownbear]

I really hope the Ivy League doesn't start a basketball tournament (for the sake of putting the best representative in the NCAAs), but I definitely think the Ivy League should put a team in the FCS playoffs. It's completely ridiculous that we aren't in it yet, and whoever the Ivy commish is needs to realize that football is about more than just the Harvard-Yale game.

By the way, if the Ivies sent a team to the FCS playoffs, it would not have been the Crimson.xsmiley_wix

[Ivytalk]

I really hope the Ivy League doesn't start a basketball tournament (for the sake of putting the best representative in the NCAAs), but I definitely think the Ivy League should put a team in the FCS playoffs. It's completely ridiculous that we aren't in it yet, and whoever the Ivy commish is needs to realize that football is about more than just the Harvard-Yale game.
By the way, if the Ivies sent a team to the FCS playoffs, it would not have been the Crimson.xsmiley_wix

Indeed! It's also about the Brown-Columbia game!:D

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I really hope the Ivy League doesn't start a basketball tournament (for the sake of putting the best representative in the NCAAs), but I definitely think the Ivy League should put a team in the FCS playoffs. It's completely ridiculous that we aren't in it yet, and whoever the Ivy commish is needs to realize that football is about more than just the Harvard-Yale game.

By the way, if the Ivies sent a team to the FCS playoffs, it would not have been the Crimson.xsmiley_wix

Yep, Brown would have won the autobid, but Harvard would have been an at-large over Maine. xsmiley_wix

I agree with you completely, but it is my impression that the lack of an Ivy League postseason tournament in basketball is much, much higher up the list of many Ivy League fans' desires than postseason in the FB playoffs.

It is somewhat ironic, though, that a postseason tournament in basketball will likely just confirm that the #1 or #2 team will make the NCAA's every year, while all the Ivy FB teams get no chance at the postseason no matter how great they are. No move would help Ivy League football gain more interest than entering the FCS playoffs.

[MplsBison]

It's mind boggling to me that the Ivy League doesn't have a post season men's bball tournament. The only conference out of 31.


Football on the other hand, not that I agree with it, but I can see why the presidents are so fearful of letting the IL participate in the FCS playoffs. They do not want to get beat by some little state school full of "moron thugs" who might make the IL teams look silly when they are essentially junior colleges compared to the IL schools academically.

Again, don't agree with it, but it will be a big risk for them, in their minds.

[Ivytalk]

It's mind boggling to me that the Ivy League doesn't have a post season men's bball tournament. The only conference out of 31.


Football on the other hand, not that I agree with it, but I can see why the presidents are so fearful of letting the IL participate in the FCS playoffs. They do not want to get beat by some little state school full of "moron thugs" who might make the IL teams look silly when they are essentially junior colleges compared to the IL schools academically.

Again, don't agree with it, but it will be a big risk for them, in their minds.

I disagree that the lack of an Ivy men's hoops tournament has any ill effect. Why compete hard to win a regular-season title and an NCAA berth, only to have it tarnished by a sub-.500 team that gets lucky enough to win 3 straight in a tournament? As I recall, Penn and Princeton had a playoff game one year (not too long ago) when they tied for the Ivy title and split their regular season games. That's as far as it should go, with all due respect to the ACC et al.

As for losing to "moron thugs" in an FCS playoff game, I doubt that's been on the top 5 list of "reasons" over the years. The players would be thrilled to knock heads with scholar-athletes from other conferences. Instead, it's been a contrived concern for academics and exams, as well as an oversized respect for "tradition,"among other things. I hope the new commish persuades the Ivy presidents to revisit the playoff issue from a fresh perspective.xpeacex

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I hope the new commish persuades the Ivy presidents to revisit the playoff issue from a fresh perspective.xpeacex

I hope so too - but the new commish is such an enigma - where does she stand on these topics?

[bulldog10jw]

Not really. Just a hope that the new Ivy commish might bring everyone into the 21st century. No empirical evidence, but hope springs eternal!:)

21st century? They never came into the 20th century. I'd settle for that. xlolx

[LBPop]

I Instead, it's been a contrived concern for academics and exams, as well as an oversized respect for "tradition,"among other things.

Having gone through the Ivy recruting process during the Penn streak five or six years ago, I think one of the "other things" you reference is that entering the playoffs would dilute the meaning of the Ivy League Championship. Those Penn coaches were waving their rings around all weekend and very proud to proclaim their dominance among the best schools on the planet (I exaggerate only slightly). If they had been beaten in the playoffs, I don't think they would have been able to crow so loudly.

[LeopardFan04]

I disagree that the lack of an Ivy men's hoops tournament has any ill effect. Why compete hard to win a regular-season title and an NCAA berth, only to have it tarnished by a sub-.500 team that gets lucky enough to win 3 straight in a tournament? As I recall, Penn and Princeton had a playoff game one year (not too long ago) when they tied for the Ivy title and split their regular season games. That's as far as it should go, with all due respect to the ACC et al.

As for losing to "moron thugs" in an FCS playoff game, I doubt that's been on the top 5 list of "reasons" over the years. The players would be thrilled to knock heads with scholar-athletes from other conferences. Instead, it's been a contrived concern for academics and exams, as well as an oversized respect for "tradition,"among other things. I hope the new commish persuades the Ivy presidents to revisit the playoff issue from a fresh perspective.xpeacex


In, I think, 2002, there was a three way tie between Penn, Yale, and I believe Princeton. If memory serves, Yale beat Princeton at the Palestra. Then, Penn beat Yale at Lafayette to decide the tourney bid. It was a great game. I'm not sure how they determined who would get the bye.

[bulldog10jw]

In, I think, 2002, there was a three way tie between Penn, Yale, and I believe Princeton. If memory serves, Yale beat Princeton at the Palestra. Then, Penn beat Yale at Lafayette to decide the tourney bid. It was a great game. I'm not sure how they determined who would get the bye.

Coin flip.

[Marcus Garvey]

Men's BBall tournaments exist for one reason only: TV.
The major leagues due it for for the money. The Big East, ACC, SEC, Big 10, & Pac-10 command signifigant moolah for their tournament games.
The smaller leagues do it for the exposure. They fawn for the attention of that one time a league contest makes it onto ESPN or ESPN2. There's no other reason for it.

I respect the Ivy for choosing not to dilute the regular season. But I do have one beef with their "playoff game" rules. If 2 teams are tied, they hold a nuetral site playoff game regardless of head-to-head record. In '95 I think, Penn and Princeton were both 12-2 in league play, but Penn was 2-0 vs. the Tigers. They still played a playoff game at Lehigh to determine the auto-bid recipient. Princeton won in OT (or double OT, I don't rememember, but I was at the game).

7 or so years ago, the Pac-10 voted 8-2 to institute a post-season tournament. The 2 schools who voted against: Stanford and Arizona. Stanford voted "nay" for ideoligical reasons. UofA voted "nay" because a league tourament would cost them 2 home games a year, and their Athletic Dept. depends upon basketball revenue.
Frankly, the Pac-10 screwed up further by having the tournament in L.A. every year. They play the 1st round games on a Thursday afternoon at the Staples Center. As you'd imagine, attendence languishes. They should rotate it every year among at least 5, possibly 6 sites: L.A., Phoenix (or Glendale, AZ), Oakland, Portland, Seattle and possibly Spokane, since U-Dub and Wazzu are so far apart.

[MplsBison]

Men's BBall tournaments exist for one reason only: TV.
The major leagues due it for for the money. The Big East, ACC, SEC, Big 10, & Pac-10 command signifigant moolah for their tournament games.
The smaller leagues do it for the exposure. They fawn for the attention of that one time a league contest makes it onto ESPN or ESPN2. There's no other reason for it.

I respect the Ivy for choosing not to dilute the regular season. But I do have one beef with their "playoff game" rules. If 2 teams are tied, they hold a nuetral site playoff game regardless of head-to-head record. In '95 I think, Penn and Princeton were both 12-2 in league play, but Penn was 2-0 vs. the Tigers. They still played a playoff game at Lehigh to determine the auto-bid recipient. Princeton won in OT (or double OT, I don't rememember, but I was at the game).

7 or so years ago, the Pac-10 voted 8-2 to institute a post-season tournament. The 2 schools who voted against: Stanford and Arizona. Stanford voted "nay" for ideoligical reasons. UofA voted "nay" because a league tourament would cost them 2 home games a year, and their Athletic Dept. depends upon basketball revenue.
Frankly, the Pac-10 screwed up further by having the tournament in L.A. every year. They play the 1st round games on a Thursday afternoon at the Staples Center. As you'd imagine, attendence languishes. They should rotate it every year among at least 5, possibly 6 sites: L.A., Phoenix (or Glendale, AZ), Oakland, Portland, Seattle and possibly Spokane, since U-Dub and Wazzu are so far apart.


How would it dilute the regular season if only the top 6 or 4 teams made it to the tournament?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I respect the Ivy for choosing not to dilute the regular season. But I do have one beef with their "playoff game" rules.

The trouble with this is that the basketball season then becomes two, possibly three, schools playing for the NCAA's with the rest simply playing out the string. I happen to really like the PL's system where everyone makes it and has a shot at the big dance. It gives 4-22 teams something to play for. Of course, for your conference your mileage may vary.

[Marcus Garvey]

How would it dilute the regular season if only the top 6 or 4 teams made it to the tournament?

That's a different scenario. I was referring to the conferences were all teams partcipate. I'm still not a big fan of tournaments regardless.

[MplsBison]

The trouble with this is that the basketball season then becomes two, possibly three, schools playing for the NCAA's with the rest simply playing out the string. I happen to really like the PL's system where everyone makes it and has a shot at the big dance. It gives 4-22 teams something to play for. Of course, for your conference your mileage may vary.

There's always two sides to the same coin.


Fans of teams who won the regular season title hate the tournament and fans of teams who did not win the regular season title love it.

[Marcus Garvey]

The trouble with this is that the basketball season then becomes two, possibly three, schools playing for the NCAA's with the rest simply playing out the string. I happen to really like the PL's system where everyone makes it and has a shot at the big dance. It gives 4-22 teams something to play for. Of course, for your conference your mileage may vary.

That's pretty much how it is regardless. You seldom see a 4-22 team play any better during their lone tournament game. Anyway, if all teams are eliglble to qualify for the NCAA Tournament by virtue of winning 3 to 5 games in March, why bother with a conference schedule in the first place? Sounds to me like a bunch of A.D.'s are merely being lazy with respect to scheduling games. Hell, let's take it further, why play before March at all? Let the guys practice 2-3 times a week, and foregoe "regualar season" games. That should give players plenty of time for studies, or toking the bong, whatever their priority is...

[Ivytalk]

In, I think, 2002, there was a three way tie between Penn, Yale, and I believe Princeton. If memory serves, Yale beat Princeton at the Palestra. Then, Penn beat Yale at Lafayette to decide the tourney bid. It was a great game. I'm not sure how they determined who would get the bye.

That must have been what I was thinking of. Thanks.xthumbsupx

[MplsBison]

That's pretty much how it is regardless. You seldom see a 4-22 team play any better during their lone tournament game. Anyway, if all teams are eliglble to qualify for the NCAA Tournament by virtue of winning 3 to 5 games in March, why bother with a conference schedule in the first place? Sounds to me like a bunch of A.D.'s are merely being lazy with respect to scheduling games. Hell, let's take it further, why play before March at all? Let the guys practice 2-3 times a week, and foregoe "regualar season" games. That should give players plenty of time for studies, or toking the bong, whatever their priority is...

You're completely disregarding the single biggest reason why regular season games are played: teams get better the more games they play.


Some teams really take off after they've gelled 15 games in.

[ElSissy]

I doubt that the new commish was hired to rock the boat. During the interview process I'm certain she was asked if putting a league football representative into the playoffs was a priority. After she answered, "Not no, but hell no!" she was hired.

[Marcus Garvey]

You're completely disregarding the single biggest reason why regular season games are played: teams get better the more games they play.


Some teams really take off after they've gelled 15 games in.

And some teams get worse. See Baylor.

[MplsBison]

And some teams get worse. See Baylor.

Did they have injuries or was it because the rest of the teams got much better?


Regardless, the majority of teams get better by playing games in the regular season.



Your idea of skipping the regular season is ridiculous.

[Ivytalk]

Coincidentally, I just got an alumni e-mail from Harvard's president, concerning how Harvard is dealing with the financial crisis, and an endowment that is worth 30% less than it was 9 months ago.

Surprise, surprise: nothing about the athletic programs, much less the FCS playoffs.xcoffeex

xblahblahx

[Marcus Garvey]

Did they have injuries or was it because the rest of the teams got much better?


Regardless, the majority of teams get better by playing games in the regular season.



Your idea of skipping the regular season is ridiculous.

Precisely. It's no less ridiculous than awarding the auto-bid to a team based on a 3 or 4 game win streak at the end of the season, as opposed to awarding it based upon a season's worth of work.

[MplsBison]

Precisely. It's no less ridiculous than awarding the auto-bid to a team based on a 3 or 4 game win streak at the end of the season, as opposed to awarding it based upon a season's worth of work.

It's magnitudes of order more ridiculous to skip the regular season than to award the autobid to the post season tournament winner.


See: 30 of 31 conferences award auto bid to post season tournament winner.

[Marcus Garvey]

It's magnitudes of order more ridiculous to skip the regular season than to award the autobid to the post season tournament winner.


See: 30 of 31 conferences award auto bid to post season tournament winner.

Well, my deliberately absurd analogy did at least get your attention! :D

Are you going to stick with the "Everyone else is doing it" defense?

[MplsBison]

Well, my deliberately absurd analogy did at least get your attention! :D

Are you going to stick with the "Everyone else is doing it" defense?

That's a legitimate argument when it's 30 out of 31 against.


But you also have no legitimate argument against not doing it. The "dilutes regular season" argument was shot down.

[brownbear]

That's a legitimate argument when it's 30 out of 31 against.


But you also have no legitimate argument against not doing it. The "dilutes regular season" argument was shot down.

My argument is that the Ivy League can send a GOOD team that will get a 13 or 14 seed and at least have a chance at winning in the first round, instead of having a streaky team that makes its way into the tournament, gets a 16 seed, and then loses by 50 points to UNC.

[MplsBison]

My argument is that the Ivy League can send a GOOD team that will get a 13 or 14 seed and at least have a chance at winning in the first round, instead of having a streaky team that makes its way into the tournament, gets a 16 seed, and then loses by 50 points to UNC.

That team doesn't deserve to be there if they can't win the conference tournament.

30 conferences agree.

[YaleFootballFan]

In, I think, 2002, there was a three way tie between Penn, Yale, and I believe Princeton. If memory serves, Yale beat Princeton at the Palestra. Then, Penn beat Yale at Lafayette to decide the tourney bid. It was a great game. I'm not sure how they determined who would get the bye.

It was a coin toss that determined who got the bye.

That '02 Ivy race was great. Yale, Penn and Princeton all finished with identical 11-3 records. Penn won the Ivy playoffs and went onto the NCAAs. Princeton and Yale went to the NIT. Yale beat Rutgers in the first round of the NIT.

[Marcus Garvey]

That team doesn't deserve to be there if they can't win the conference tournament.

30 conferences agree.

30 Conferences do it for the reasons I stated earilier: The great God Television.

Also, aren't you the guy who goes berserk over how everyone should use artificial turf? Can I safely assume you'll take a similar irrational stance over this issue?
xsmiley_wix

[MplsBison]

30 Conferences do it for the reasons I stated earilier: The great God Television.

Also, aren't you the guy who goes berserk over how everyone should use artificial turf? Can I safely assume you'll take a similar irrational stance over this issue?
xsmiley_wix

I've taken the stance that 30 out of 31 conferences take: a team doesn't deserve the auto unless they can prove themselves in the tournament.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

My argument is that the Ivy League can send a GOOD team that will get a 13 or 14 seed and at least have a chance at winning in the first round, instead of having a streaky team that makes its way into the tournament, gets a 16 seed, and then loses by 50 points to UNC.

Don't knock it until it happens to you.

In 1985, Lehigh was (I believe) the first team with a losing record to ever make the men's NCAA tournament, where they would lose 68-43 to the heavily-favored Patrick Ewing-led Georgetown Hoyas.

However, I think it's a rarity anyway for teams to get that opportunity. Fairfield had an under-.500 record out of the MAAC in 1997, largely due to their best player being out half the year with injury - when he returned, they surged into the playoffs and gave North Carolina everything they could handle.

Usually when a team comes from nowhere to win the tournament, it is for a good reason, especially with the smaller conferences. Right now, the Ivies have a boring regular season, followed by a first round exit. Wouldn't a tournament at least inject some life into the competition?

[brownbear]

Don't knock it until it happens to you.

In 1985, Lehigh was (I believe) the first team with a losing record to ever make the men's NCAA tournament, where they would lose 68-43 to the heavily-favored Patrick Ewing-led Georgetown Hoyas.

However, I think it's a rarity anyway for teams to get that opportunity. Fairfield had an under-.500 record out of the MAAC in 1997, largely due to their best player being out half the year with injury - when he returned, they surged into the playoffs and gave North Carolina everything they could handle.

Usually when a team comes from nowhere to win the tournament, it is for a good reason, especially with the smaller conferences. Right now, the Ivies have a boring regular season, followed by a first round exit. Wouldn't a tournament at least inject some life into the competition?

If you have a tournament, the regular season is absolutely meaningless. As is, every game counts and one or two losses can knock you out.

[Scumdog0331]

As for losing to "moron thugs" in an FCS playoff game, I doubt that's been on the top 5 list of "reasons" over the years. The players would be thrilled to knock heads with scholar-athletes from other conferences. Instead, it's been a contrived concern for academics and exams, as well as an oversized respect for "tradition,"among other things. I hope the new commish persuades the Ivy presidents to revisit the playoff issue from a fresh perspective.xpeacex


According to my sources (and they are second hand) it sounds like this is about 90% of the reasoning for staying out of the playoffs, and the "academics" and "tradition" is just lip service.

[DFW HOYA]

In 1985, Lehigh was (I believe) the first team with a losing record to ever make the men's NCAA tournament, where they would lose 68-43 to the heavily-favored Patrick Ewing-led Georgetown Hoyas.

It happened outside the PL at least twice before 1985, one being a 1961 George Washington team that had a 9-17 record but ran the table at the Southern Conference tournament and got the autobid.

(GW played football in the SoCon through 1966.)

[Ivytalk]

According to my sources (and they are second hand) it sounds like this is about 90% of the reasoning for staying out of the playoffs, and the "academics" and "tradition" is just lip service.

I'd really like to know your source for the claim that the Ivies are afraid of losing to "morons and thugs" as a basis for skipping the FCS playoffs. After all, the Ivies have been losing to non-Ivy schools in basketball, hockey and baseball playoffs for years, and nobody I know makes such an excuse in those cases.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

According to my sources (and they are second hand) it sounds like this is about 90% of the reasoning for staying out of the playoffs, and the "academics" and "tradition" is just lip service.


I'd really like to know your source for the claim that the Ivies are afraid of losing to "morons and thugs" as a basis for skipping the FCS playoffs. After all, the Ivies have been losing to non-Ivy schools in basketball, hockey and baseball playoffs for years, and nobody I know makes such an excuse in those cases.

I think the following.

The IL leadership doesn't think of non-Ivies as "morons and thugs", but they do think of themselves as separate from the rest of the college system in many, many ways. The PL are seen as "almost" or "close enough" to the IL, but not really: the IL's biggest competition is seen as being itself, especially in the academic arena. This philosophy carries over to sports.

Ironically, the Ivy League was founded on a basis of sports competition, and specifically football competition - NOT academic reputation. But the IL over time has been one of common union over academics over athletics. The Ivy's 1948 "charter document" basically codified it, with their own philosophies on running a football conference (it was later extended to all sports) - and it was in stark contrast to the other universities at that time. Amateurism was to be protected at all costs, and the pursuit of "big money" in terms of TV or bowls was to be eschewed.

But over the last 60 years, one by one the parameters of the Ivy Agreement have been whittled away. The ban on playing freshmen. TV deals. Bans on postseason play. All were part of the 1948 agreement, and ultimately pragmatism trumped dogma in most cases.

Football seems to be seen internally as the last embodiment of the ideals of the 1948 agreement. It seems like it's the final line that the IL leadership is not willing to cross - the tipping point to which all their high principles will mean nothing. Never mind that the FCS playoffs is hardly "big money", and that pretty much every other sport (most notably, and eye-raisingly, men's basketball) has compromised on the founding principles decades ago. Penn playing in the NCAA tournament, well, that's fudgeable - but Harvard playing in the FCS playoffs, that's against principles, man!

This is starting to sound like a blog posting... maybe I'll develop this and do just that. xsmiley_wix

[DFW HOYA]

The playoffs isn't an Ivy Agreement "line in the sand" issue inasmuch as the Ancient Eight presidents live for consensus, and Harvard and Yale don't want to sacrifice their own end of season rivalry for a forgettable game at Newark, DE or Durham, NH to end the Ivy season. (Whether or not the I-AA purists want to hear that, a first round loss is forgettable. A 10-0 Ivy season means inexorably more to these schools than a one or two round playoff bid.) There is support for the playoffs at places like Brown, Columbia, Penn, and probably Cornell, but there will be no movement without the brahmin on board.

Which, in a roundabout way, is why PL scholarships are in the dumper. Without presidential consensus, it goes nowhere, and the five presidents don't seem to be in any hurry to push the matter; besides, none of them are going to pull up their tent and march over to the Northeast Conference for football, anyway. And neither Fordham nor Georgetown has the leverage to force the five presidents to do much about it.

And a trivia question--how many of the PL presidents played college football?

[ngineer]

I think the following.

The IL leadership doesn't think of non-Ivies as "morons and thugs", but they do think of themselves as separate from the rest of the college system in many, many ways. The PL are seen as "almost" or "close enough" to the IL, but not really: the IL's biggest competition is seen as being itself, especially in the academic arena. This philosophy carries over to sports.

Ironically, the Ivy League was founded on a basis of sports competition, and specifically football competition - NOT academic reputation. But the IL over time has been one of common union over academics over athletics. The Ivy's 1948 "charter document" basically codified it, with their own philosophies on running a football conference (it was later extended to all sports) - and it was in stark contrast to the other universities at that time. Amateurism was to be protected at all costs, and the pursuit of "big money" in terms of TV or bowls was to be eschewed.

But over the last 60 years, one by one the parameters of the Ivy Agreement have been whittled away. The ban on playing freshmen. TV deals. Bans on postseason play. All were part of the 1948 agreement, and ultimately pragmatism trumped dogma in most cases.

Football seems to be seen internally as the last embodiment of the ideals of the 1948 agreement. It seems like it's the final line that the IL leadership is not willing to cross - the tipping point to which all their high principles will mean nothing. Never mind that the FCS playoffs is hardly "big money", and that pretty much every other sport (most notably, and eye-raisingly, men's basketball) has compromised on the founding principles decades ago. Penn playing in the NCAA tournament, well, that's fudgeable - but Harvard playing in the FCS playoffs, that's against principles, man!
This is starting to sound like a blog posting... maybe I'll develop this and do just that. xsmiley_wix


You are correct that football was/is the driving force behind the IL. The football scandals of the early 1950s I believe involving Penn and a few others is what drove the sanctimonious stake in the ground, that is yet to be removed. I thought the IL started in 1954???

[ngineer]

The playoffs isn't an Ivy Agreement "line in the sand" issue inasmuch as the Ancient Eight presidents live for consensus, and Harvard and Yale don't want to sacrifice their own end of season rivalry for a forgettable game at Newark, DE or Durham, NH to end the Ivy season. (Whether or not the I-AA purists want to hear that, a first round loss is forgettable. A 10-0 Ivy season means inexorably more to these schools than a one or two round playoff bid.) There is support for the playoffs at places like Brown, Columbia, Penn, and probably Cornell, but there will be no movement without the brahmin on board.

Which, in a roundabout way, is why PL scholarships are in the dumper. Without presidential consensus, it goes nowhere, and the five presidents don't seem to be in any hurry to push the matter; besides, none of them are going to pull up their tent and march over to the Northeast Conference for football, anyway. And neither Fordham nor Georgetown has the leverage to force the five presidents to do much about it.

And a trivia question--how many of the PL presidents played college football?



I would be "A.Gast" if Lehigh's did!!xeekx:D

[DFW HOYA]

And a trivia question--how many of the PL presidents played college football?

Here's one:

http://www.hoyasaxa.com/images/degioia.gif

[Ivytalk]

I think the following.

The IL leadership doesn't think of non-Ivies as "morons and thugs", but they do think of themselves as separate from the rest of the college system in many, many ways. The PL are seen as "almost" or "close enough" to the IL, but not really: the IL's biggest competition is seen as being itself, especially in the academic arena. This philosophy carries over to sports.

Ironically, the Ivy League was founded on a basis of sports competition, and specifically football competition - NOT academic reputation. But the IL over time has been one of common union over academics over athletics. The Ivy's 1948 "charter document" basically codified it, with their own philosophies on running a football conference (it was later extended to all sports) - and it was in stark contrast to the other universities at that time. Amateurism was to be protected at all costs, and the pursuit of "big money" in terms of TV or bowls was to be eschewed.

But over the last 60 years, one by one the parameters of the Ivy Agreement have been whittled away. The ban on playing freshmen. TV deals. Bans on postseason play. All were part of the 1948 agreement, and ultimately pragmatism trumped dogma in most cases.

Football seems to be seen internally as the last embodiment of the ideals of the 1948 agreement. It seems like it's the final line that the IL leadership is not willing to cross - the tipping point to which all their high principles will mean nothing. Never mind that the FCS playoffs is hardly "big money", and that pretty much every other sport (most notably, and eye-raisingly, men's basketball) has compromised on the founding principles decades ago. Penn playing in the NCAA tournament, well, that's fudgeable - but Harvard playing in the FCS playoffs, that's against principles, man!

This is starting to sound like a blog posting... maybe I'll develop this and do just that. xsmiley_wix

Thoughtful, rep-worthy post. The analogy that springs to mind is the hooker who has one sexual feat that she absolutely won't perform to preserve what's left of her "virtue."xcoolx