Former Columbia women’s basketball phenom Abbey Hsu, CC ’24, who was drafted by the WNBA’s Connecticut Sun in spring 2024, understands the challenges of competing at a high level within the conference and the difficulties surrounding the league’s decision.
“It’s a disappointing one,” Hsu said on the decision. “I think as Ivy League athletes, we’re constantly trying to prove ourselves—that we’re at par with the Power Five and other schools.”
The Florida native, who helped clinch Columbia’s two Ivy League titles and its first NCAA tournament appearance last year, highlighted the desire for recognition among Ivy League student-athletes.
“We want to be treated the same as well,” she said.
Others view the decision through a different lens. Robert Boland, CC ’87, former athletics integrity officer at Pennsylvania State University and a current professor at Seton Hall Law School, pointed to the league’s long-standing approach to athletics as a potential factor.
“The House settlement imposes fairly stringent scholarship limits and roster limits for athletes,” Boland explained. “For the Ivy League, I don’t think they want to be under that draconian roster limit. I think the Ivy League looks at their rosters as a flexible opportunity to have more highly qualified athletes who they can admit in any given year and want to maintain control of that.”
Because the Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarships, teams don’t have the same financial incentives as other programs. However, they do benefit from the ability to admit more athletes who meet their academic and athletic criteria. By opting out, the league ensures it can continue operating under its own rules rather than conforming to external restrictions.
Boland also pointed to a separate key concern: the potential for unequal compensation among athletes.
“The Ivy League doesn’t want to be in the business of compensating some athletes and not others,” he said. “They want to treat all their athletes with some egalitarian effect.”
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks