The Ivy League and Athletics

[dgreco]

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-DT747_ivy052_G_20090528220309.jpg
The Wall Street Journal had a front page article today about the Ivy League and the fall from athletics. They talk about Football in the article also.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203658504574193634290615534.html

[Ivytalk]

I read it. Not encouraging for supporters of Ivy playoff participation. Incremental progress, like next year's lax playoffs. But the ADs appear divided on hoops, and football? Fuhgeddaboudit. Same old tired canards about loss of valuable class time, etc.xmadxxnonono2x

[ElSissy]

Ivy faculties would almost certainly oppose a greater emphasis on athletics including extended seasons and post-season play. The faculties of most schools are either supportive of athletics or more likely, indifferent. However, Ivy faculties are often explicitly hostile to athletic programs and athletes. My cousin, until recently, was a Harvard soccer player. He knew that Harvard and other Ivies de-emphasized athletics but was surprised by the hostility he encountered from a number of his professors and their assistants. For a while he considered a transfer to Stanford. He remained at Harvard but the experience left a bad taste in his mouth.

[Syntax Error]

Sad, but let them stew in their own juice if they want. I hope the Patriot League doesn't follow them.

[Go...gate]

The reality is that the PL will probably follow the IL, especially given the present economics.

[danefan]

The reality is that the PL will probably follow the IL, especially given the present economics.

Monday is June 1st. We'll know soon thereafter, won't we?

[Go...gate]

Monday is June 1st. We'll know soon thereafter, won't we?

I think so, dane.... xpeacex

[colorless raider]

Ivy faculties would almost certainly oppose a greater emphasis on athletics including extended seasons and post-season play. The faculties of most schools are either supportive of athletics or more likely, indifferent. However, Ivy faculties are often explicitly hostile to athletic programs and athletes. My cousin, until recently, was a Harvard soccer player. He knew that Harvard and other Ivies de-emphasized athletics but was surprised by the hostility he encountered from a number of his professors and their assistants. For a while he considered a transfer to Stanford. He remained at Harvard but the experience left a bad taste in his mouth.

Commie pinkos and ,oh yeah liberals.

[bonarae]

I read it. Not encouraging for supporters of Ivy playoff participation. Incremental progress, like next year's lax playoffs. But the ADs appear divided on hoops, and football? Fuhgeddaboudit. Same old tired canards about loss of valuable class time, etc.xmadxxnonono2x

We can't change their minds. Sad reality. But I'm one playoff supporter though. IMO the Ivy football champion might get some more national exposure had they been allowed to be selected by the committee in the playoffs.


Ivy faculties would almost certainly oppose a greater emphasis on athletics including extended seasons and post-season play. The faculties of most schools are either supportive of athletics or more likely, indifferent. However, Ivy faculties are often explicitly hostile to athletic programs and athletes. My cousin, until recently, was a Harvard soccer player. He knew that Harvard and other Ivies de-emphasized athletics but was surprised by the hostility he encountered from a number of his professors and their assistants. For a while he considered a transfer to Stanford. He remained at Harvard but the experience left a bad taste in his mouth.

True. Division I is all after money nowadays, and the Ivies are somewhat resistant to the changes that are happening to Division I (e.g. BCS in the FBS, 12 game schedules in both FBS and FCS), that's why the people there are now hostile to such changes. xsmhx (See above.)

[ElSissy]

Commie pinkos and ,oh yeah liberals.

Has your school ever considered a merger with Elon? The new school could be called Elongate or Colon.

[Go...gate]

Has your school ever considered a merger with Elon? The new school could be called Elongate or Colon.

The probability of that merger ranks with that of The Citadel - VMI. xrotatehx

[ElSissy]

It seems someone was offended by the post you quoted. It has disappeared. Wow.

[Seawolf97]

We can't change their minds. Sad reality. But I'm one playoff supporter though. IMO the Ivy football champion might get some more national exposure had they been allowed to be selected by the committee in the playoffs.



True. Division I is all after money nowadays, and the Ivies are somewhat resistant to the changes that are happening to Division I (e.g. BCS in the FBS, 12 game schedules in both FBS and FCS), that's why the people there are now hostile to such changes. xsmhx (See above.)

Kind of sad . With the financial strength the Ives have even in bad times they could field power house programs in football, basketball and other sports. You just have to look at schools like Stanford and Northwestern to see what the possibilites are of balancing good academics with strong athletics.

[Syntax Error]

Division I is all after money nowadays, and the Ivies are somewhat resistant to the changes that are happening to Division I (e.g. BCS in the FBS, 12 game schedules in both FBS and FCS), that's why the people there are now hostile to such changes. (See above.)Ivy League is all about money. They are resistant to spend it on sports. FCS does not have a 12 game schedule. Ivy people are resistant because they could care crap about sports.

[Ivytalk]

Ivy League is all about money. They are resistant to spend it on sports. FCS does not have a 12 game schedule. Ivy people are resistant because they could care crap about sports.

This is just so wrong in so many ways. xsmhxHarvard has 41 varsity sports. No other college in America has as many. Are the Ivies psycho about sports? No. Do they "care crap about sports"? Yes, they do. They're not cutting teams in a recession. The football attendance has always been more than respectable for an FCS conference. Gimme a break.xrolleyesx

[bonarae]

Kind of sad . With the financial strength the Ives have even in bad times they could field power house programs in football, basketball and other sports. You just have to look at schools like Stanford and Northwestern to see what the possibilites are of balancing good academics with strong athletics.

True. Stanford and Northwestern really care about athletics because they are in household-name conferences and in a sea of household-name programs (the two aren't really household-names), the Ivies simply don't. However, both have respectable athletic programs.


This is just so wrong in so many ways. xsmhxHarvard has 41 varsity sports. No other college in America has as many. Are the Ivies psycho about sports? No. Do they "care crap about sports"? Yes, they do. They're not cutting teams in a recession. The football attendance has always been more than respectable for an FCS conference. Gimme a break.xrolleyesx

Correct.

[Redwyn]

Ivy League is all about money. They are resistant to spend it on sports. FCS does not have a 12 game schedule. Ivy people are resistant because they could care crap about sports.

Umm, yeah....

To shred this, ask coaches of the following varsity sports whether Harvard is considered a top tier nationally (not always ranked, but very competitive):

Men's Fencing
Women's Fencing
Men's Volleyball
Men's Waterpolo
Men's Crew
Men's Lightweight Crew
Women's Crew (they go by Radcliffe in this one)
Track and Field
Sailing
Men's Lacrosse
Women's Lacrosse
Men's Wrestling
Men's/Women's Squash
Men's/Women's Golf

These are just the beginning, but I'd like any FCS program to come forward saying they have consistently strong teams in 16 programs a year. Hell, half of the FCS barely fields 16 programs period. In addition, Harvard has an active JV program for most of its stronger (and weaker) sports. I counted 12 at least. I turned down Harvard for a reason, but it certainly wasn't a bad attitude regarding athletics.

Harvard simply doesn't do well in "traditional" ball sports, like Baseball, Basketball, and Football. However, seriously, how many of us really consider our program top tier in Football? We're a medium sized fish in a small pond, and we'd get stomped on by an aware BCS program (key word there is aware). And those BCS programs by and large sacrifice other aspects of campus life and academcis for a total investment in sports. Thus, while I understand where the article goes, and yes, if Harvard threw another 10 million into Football it'd likely become the new Ohio State, but seriously: unless you support Stanford or Cal Berkeley (and these two aren't good at nearly as many sports, just the big ones)....I don't see many schools with Harvard level academics as strong in as many sports as the Crimson....

Just my rant on the issue

[Scumdog0331]

I read it. Not encouraging for supporters of Ivy playoff participation. Incremental progress, like next year's lax playoffs. But the ADs appear divided on hoops, and football? Fuhgeddaboudit. Same old tired canards about loss of valuable class time, etc.xmadxxnonono2x

Any league that states an emphasis on keeping their athletes in class yet still sponsors baseball is disingenuous at best, but likely liars.

[DFW HOYA]

I thought Harvard had 43 sports.

[Seawolf97]

Umm, yeah....

To shred this, ask coaches of the following varsity sports whether Harvard is considered a top tier nationally (not always ranked, but very competitive):

Men's Fencing
Women's Fencing
Men's Volleyball
Men's Waterpolo
Men's Crew
Men's Lightweight Crew
Women's Crew (they go by Radcliffe in this one)
Track and Field
Sailing
Men's Lacrosse
Women's Lacrosse
Men's Wrestling
Men's/Women's Squash
Men's/Women's Golf

These are just the beginning, but I'd like any FCS program to come forward saying they have consistently strong teams in 16 programs a year. Hell, half of the FCS barely fields 16 programs period. In addition, Harvard has an active JV program for most of its stronger (and weaker) sports. I counted 12 at least. I turned down Harvard for a reason, but it certainly wasn't a bad attitude regarding athletics.

Harvard simply doesn't do well in "traditional" ball sports, like Baseball, Basketball, and Football. However, seriously, how many of us really consider our program top tier in Football? We're a medium sized fish in a small pond, and we'd get stomped on by an aware BCS program (key word there is aware). And those BCS programs by and large sacrifice other aspects of campus life and academcis for a total investment in sports. Thus, while I understand where the article goes, and yes, if Harvard threw another 10 million into Football it'd likely become the new Ohio State, but seriously: unless you support Stanford or Cal Berkeley (and these two aren't good at nearly as many sports, just the big ones)....I don't see many schools with Harvard level academics as strong in as many sports as the Crimson....

Just my rant on the issue

Excellent post about an excellent school !

[kardplayer]

Umm, yeah....

To shred this, ask coaches of the following varsity sports whether Harvard is considered a top tier nationally (not always ranked, but very competitive):

Men's Fencing
Women's Fencing
Men's Volleyball
Men's Waterpolo
Men's Crew
Men's Lightweight Crew
Women's Crew (they go by Radcliffe in this one)
Track and Field
Sailing
Men's Lacrosse
Women's Lacrosse
Men's Wrestling
Men's/Women's Squash
Men's/Women's Golf

These are just the beginning, but I'd like any FCS program to come forward saying they have consistently strong teams in 16 programs a year. Hell, half of the FCS barely fields 16 programs period. In addition, Harvard has an active JV program for most of its stronger (and weaker) sports. I counted 12 at least. I turned down Harvard for a reason, but it certainly wasn't a bad attitude regarding athletics.

Harvard simply doesn't do well in "traditional" ball sports, like Baseball, Basketball, and Football. However, seriously, how many of us really consider our program top tier in Football? We're a medium sized fish in a small pond, and we'd get stomped on by an aware BCS program (key word there is aware). And those BCS programs by and large sacrifice other aspects of campus life and academcis for a total investment in sports. Thus, while I understand where the article goes, and yes, if Harvard threw another 10 million into Football it'd likely become the new Ohio State, but seriously: unless you support Stanford or Cal Berkeley (and these two aren't good at nearly as many sports, just the big ones)....I don't see many schools with Harvard level academics as strong in as many sports as the Crimson....

Just my rant on the issue

Actually, Stanford was in the lead for the NACDA Director's Cup as of 5/27, because they are strong at a ton of the lesser-known sports. Cal was in 5th.

[Green26]

My take on the situation is as follows.

The Ivy schools are very committed to sports and spend a large amount of money on them. My guess is that the schools finance a huge portion of the athletic budget, as there is not much revenue coming in from most of the sports, including football. I don't know the revenue stats for hockey.

My impression is that a number of the schools and presidents are not committed to having championship teams in football. In fact, my impression is that a number of the presidents/deans/faculty wish that football--and maybe hockey and basketball--would disappear. However, dropping football and several of the other big sports is not policitically feasible among the alums. Besides not being overly excited about football, these presidents and deans hate that they have to "waste" so many admission slots on recruited football players (and other sports).

Thus, the schools, led by the presidents, continue to oppose participation in the football playoffs--as well as other things like athletic scholarships. Perhaps conference championships in basketball also fits in this category. I think they like to use this as one of the avenues of de-emphasis of football and sports.

Some of these anti-sport types are probably besides themselves that the admission of women in the Ivies and Title IX has resulted in even more athletes, sports, and recruiting slots. Note that the undergraduates at these schools is a fairly low amount. The smallest ones like Dartmouth have only about 1,000 students per class.

While I'm not close to this issue, I don't see the Ivy presidents reversing themselves on participation on the football playoffs. Not participating in the playoffs hurts recruiting--as does not having athletic scholarships. Nevertheless, I don't get as excited about not participating in the playoffs as some of you and other athletes from the Ivies do. I'm happy enough to just have the number of supported ncaa and club sports for men and women that the Ivies have.

Note that the Ivies didn't allow football post-season all-star play for seniors until after the 1970 season.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The first step in understanding the Ivies is understanding that monetary worries are the absolute least of their concerns. Yale's endowment is greater than the budget for the whole state of Connecticut, and if you took the endowment of all the MEAC and SWAC schools put together they wouldn't even come close to H, Y, or P's individual endowments.

With no spending concerns to speak of, next you have to understand that the Ivies are all about philosophy. IL sports to them is all about amateurs - with no academic favors - playing the game at the highest levels, and "paying students to play" or pursuing TV contracts are against what the IL "believes in". In 1948 the IL came into existence for the expressed reason that they thought college football was going off the rails in terms of paying "students" to play a sport with no thought on academics. The circumstances of the founding of the league colors everything they attempt to do, even today. It's also why football is the traditional "whipping boy" of the IL in terms of restrictions, though with the emergence of the money and corruption in men's NCAA basketball that comes a close second.

Ironically, it's the fact that the IL is so awash in money (and worldwide prestige) that so little ever gets changed. They don't need to worry about where the next cash is coming from for the most part - the limitations are really just what the institutions themselves choose to impose on themselves. If Harvard, Yale or Princeton decided "f-it" and just went after all the best college athletes with no academic standards and also went into the FBS world, all three would very, very likely be in the hunt for the crystal ball every year. That they're FCS reflects their own decision that they do not wish to pursue crystal balls, or NCAA basketball championships.

Having said all that, the realities from 1948 have fundamentally changed. IMO only true radicals these days consider the current landscape football scholarships "pay for play" - especially at the FCS level where scholarships are split up all the time. Many of the other self-imposed restrictions have either been gradually lifted ("no freshmen playing on the varsity teams"), have been given exceptions in pretty much every sport but football ("ban from postseason play"), or significantly changed since their inception (the academic index to ensure that recruits are academically qualified, and the unification of financial aid packages throughout the league as a whole).

It is true that some presidents and deans of admission have truly been anti-football over the years. But the truth is when push comes to shove the IL wants to be Division I in all sports, even if they'd love to be D-III in football and men's basketball. So they'll handcuff football and men's basketball, play all other sports at D-I and nothing will change.

[jmufan999]

more playoff spots for the rest of us. i'd love to see Ivy League schools in it, because there's always 1 in the top 25, but... yeah. i'm not going to complain too much about it.