<p>coureur, so, so true.</p>
<p>I think Harvard's actions are consistent with the step they took last fall in hosting their first-ever night football game at Harvard Stadium. Collegiate athletics are an important part of the undergraduate experience and add greatly to the social life of a school and keep alumni connected for decades after graduation. I think Harvard is realizing that students also want to have fun while they're in college and watching successful teams and creating more of an "athletic scene" enhances the average student experience. If this can be accomplished via a few marginal recruits (a la Duke), is this really such a bad thing. At the end of the day, I think this is a winning approach all around for the potential athletic recruit, the student body at large and the alumni. And to repeat a point made earlier-recruiters would love to interview a Harvard athlete. It's an extremely attractive combination to many employers, including Wall Street.</p>
<p>Duke isn't ivy league but a kid from my school got in for basketball with like a 2.9 gpa</p>
<p>hawkette:</p>
<p>The problem is not trying to build a winning program, with or without bending on academic standards. Frankly, given the prestige of the name, Harvard should be able to do that with any good coach (although Amaker, while always a great recruiter, has never proven that he can win consistently against teams with more or less equal talent). The problem is bringing in a coach who may be cutting corners on NCAA rules. Not only wrong in principle, but very bad for the Harvard image.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The problem is not trying to build a winning program, with or without bending on academic standards. Frankly, given the prestige of the name, Harvard should be able to do that with any good coach
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While Harvard may have the academic prestige, it does not have the Div.1 athletic prestige needed to compete for recruits with the big-time Div.1 scholarship athletic programs. The athlete culture at Harvard is very different in this respect. Athletes are treated the same as (and sometimes with less respect than) other students who have major ECs. There is no special housing, registration preference, unlimited free gear or overall deference that is accorded to athletes at other Div.1 schools. Therefore, it takes a special athlete to give up all the god-like treatment accorded athletes at other schools in favor of the academic prestige of Harvard.</p>
<p>I agree that breaking NCAA rules would not wash at Harvard. But this is just as true at other top academic colleges that play competitively on a national level. I mean, how often have you read about major rule breaking going on by coaches at places like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame? Not very often as the schools won't put up with that. It is my strongly held view that the two-academic excellence and athletic excellence done cleanly-are not automatically incompatible as so many seem to think. </p>
<p>As for Harvard or any other Ivy's ability to compete at the highest level athletically in major sports like football, basketball, and baseball, I think it would be interesting if they gave it a try. Right now, I think it is hard to argue that the Ivies offer a competitive "athletic life" product compared to any of the other top private colleges. If they could do it "right," then I guess that the students and the alumni would love it. I suspect that the faculty would see it differently. :eek:</p>
<p>They couldn't possibly do it unless they lowered the admissions standards for athletes still further (at least in football and basketball). The combination of talents is simply too rare.</p>
<p>Newmassdad: the graduation rates you are quoting are exactly what is behind the NCAA's push for more accountability at the D-1 level. Those rates are a few years old (hard for me to explain how it all works) and things have changed. Starting last year or the year before, each school was graded and given an API score. They have to meet a certain level or they start losing scholarships and post-season tournament berths. Some of the graduation rates that are still being published are dismal, but they include the NCAA's old way of calculating which included the practice of saying a student had not graduated even if he transferred to another school and graduated on time, among other things. All I know is this: the past three years have brought an increased focus on academics at the D-1 level, due to more stringent NCAA rules, along with punishments that will cost the schools dearly should they fail to meet them. We should all see better rates starting this year or next. Keep in mind that schools are all different: some cheat, others don't, some treat their athletes very well, others have a more sink or swim attitude. One thing I do know is that every day I see kids who would have never gotten into a top college working their butts off and graduating with their degrees while putting in unimaginable hours that would sink even the smartest of students. I also agree with Mini that these athletes are exposed to education at the highest level and many become inspired to finish their education when they are finished pursuing their athletic dreams. And the schools nearly always take them back so they can finish. I know first hand how strict the NCAA is: no exceptions, no matter how good the athlete. It is in everybody's best interest to have student athletes succeed. Do schools need to do a better job? Yes, and I think you will see that happening now that there is a carrot AND a stick involved. As a parent of a D-1 athlete who nearly chose the Ivy League over D-1 competition, I can assure you that many of these athletes do care about their education and choose their colleges accordingly. Heck, it took me nearly twenty years to go back and finish my last bit of college, if my kids finish in five, I will be thrilled!</p>
<p>bessie,</p>
<p>Yes, the NCAA is trying to raise the academic standards of athletes, but they are fighting strong headwinds to do so, at least for money sports. And for you or mini to tell me that these "scholar/athletes" are "are exposed to education at the highest level and many become inspired to finish ..." just does not square with what happens on the ground. I attended a big 10 university where the athletes had little contact with the rest of the student body, had little overlap in terms of classes, and received tremendous academic support denied to regular students. The same is true, BTW, at Harvard and other elite universities. </p>
<p>But perhaps the saddest is views like this:
[quote]
I think Harvard is realizing that students also want to have fun while they're in college and watching successful teams and creating more of an "athletic scene" enhances the average student experience.
[/quote]
Look, I loved going to football games. Hockey and basketball a bit less. But to say they "enhanced" my experience is just plain crazy. I have a daughter who is graduating from a college that has no sports emphasis. To say she has had less fun than me is just not true.</p>
<p>Yes, we have a society where much of our entertainment is built around watching sports. Teams extort local government to subsidize new stadiums for their own (team) private enrichment. To extend the same values to higher ed and argue that these essentially pro college teams enhance the "educational experience" is sad. JMHO. </p>
<p>Student athletes are a noble thing. I am the parent of one. But student/pro athletes are another thing all together.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The same is true, BTW, at Harvard and other elite universities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's a huge generalization. Some programs do NOT have seperate jock dorms. They insist on jocks taking real majors & attending classes. Many offer academic support knowing the huge time commitment of being an athlete requires great organization & the close contact with student & professor.</p>
<p>Unlike the extortion professional sports teams get away with (the taxpayer is extorted, not the government -- plenty of graft makes its way into the politicians' pockets) big college athletic programs are something a prospective student can choose or not choose. My D would not care one way or the other about a sports culture. She is an athlete, but not the kind of kid who wants to paint her school colors on her body or dress up for games. She rarely attends the h.s. football games of her sister school, which is routinely broadcast on national television with several thousand fans screaming in the stands. So her school choices will be quite different from S, who thoroughly enjoys being a spectoator in a loud, charged arena.</p>
<p>I hate when the rules are broken & I think shcools who do so should be penalized harshly. But I really hate when all athletic programs are assumed to be corrupt. They are not.</p>
<p>SS,</p>
<p>Who said anything about dorms in the antecedent to your quote? Who said anything about corruption? Not I. If you want to disagree, please, at least quote accurately.</p>
<p>Perhaps you are unaware of how Harvard, to use one example, manages its athletic programs and athletes. True they don't have separate dorms. But they do have many other things for athletes that regular students don't have. For example, the baseball team spends a good part of the late winter in Florida. You suppose they take a leave of absence from their regular studies??? You suppose a non-baseball player could also spend late winter in Florida?</p>
<p>Yes, money sports can be entertaining. So subsidize student tickets to local pro teams. What does entertainment have to do with education?</p>
<p>
[quote]
You suppose a non-baseball player could also spend late winter in Florida?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Absolutely! I know of two Harvard students (non-athletes) who are taking a late winter leave of absence to work on Obama's campaign in Texas.</p>
<p>News flash to newsmassdad: A huge portion of university student populations are sportsfans whose educational experiences are in fact, enhanced by watching college sports. Fun and entertainment mixed in with academics is a very important part of college life. I would count you in the minority if you think otherwise.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But they do have many other things for athletes that regular students don't have
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Would you list those things, please? I'm very interested to hear about them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I attended a big 10 university where the athletes had little contact with the rest of the student body, had little overlap in terms of classes, and received tremendous academic support denied to regular students. The same is true, BTW, at Harvard and other elite universities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is that better, now?</p>
<p>You speak of athletes not having contact with the student body & not taking classes with the student body. That's definitley not the case in many, many strong athletic programs. I also know of no school that "denies" academic support to any students. Really, this sounds absurd. I DO know that athletic programs at schools I respect have mandatory study sessions for athletes & will be on top of those kids. Not because they are "dumber" than the average student, but because their schedules are grueling & assignments sometimes must be completed in advance of travel commitments.</p>
<p>bay, yes, they can take a leave of absence. But the baseball team does NOT take a leave of absence. </p>
<p>
[quote]
A huge portion of university student populations are sportsfans whose educational experiences are in fact, enhanced by watching college sports.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Enhanced by watching sports? You're kidding right? </p>
<p>I can see their waistlines being "enhanced" by sports, but not their minds...and not their educations.</p>
<p>Things that athletes routinely get that regular students don't have the opportunity to experience:</p>
<ol>
<li>Bruises, broken legs and arms, concussions, knee or eye damage, operations. The joys of running down field and being hit by a 275 pound defensive player who can run a 4.5 40. Of course lets not mention some of the diet-related issues that female athletes experience.</li>
<li>Injuries sustained which limit your ability to work in your chosen field.</li>
<li>Exhaustion caused by being beaten up for days on end while trying to attend class, study, and hold down what amounts to a full-time job.</li>
<li>Being subject to different and stricter discipline policies.</li>
<li>Having your attendance in every class checked by a coach who also tells you what to do over the summer. Generally, having adults watching you all the time.</li>
<li>Being humiliated in the press and by your fellow students because you made a mistake in front of 100,000 people or when you behaved like a normal (and sometimes stupid) 20-year old.</li>
</ol>
<p>We could go on here if you want.</p>
<p>SS, you perhaps are not aware that many of the Division 1 sports machines will do everything they can to keep their athletes NCAA eligible (lest they be sanctioned) while they let "regular" students flunk out on a regular basis.</p>
<p>If you really believe these universities (indeed, any Division 1 place) offer the same academic support to "regular" students, then more power to you. I won't argue the point. </p>
<p>In fact, this discussion is rather a waste of time anyway. You might want to read any of several excellent books that have been written about the impact of big time athletics on higher ed. But I don't think you have or will, so I will politely step out of this debate.</p>
<p>I recently had the opportunity to meet three students at Harvard who were walk-ons on a very strong Varsity team. They clearly LOVED participating in their sport, were very proud of their team, and felt the experience of being on the team was deeply meaningful. And last but not least, they are really having fun!</p>
<p>PS I met a couple of recruited athletes who felt the same way. These guys work really, really hard at their sport and they love it. I got the sense that every athlete on that team felt it is a privilege to be a member of it.</p>
<p>Non athletes who flunk out are not taking advantage of available academic support; it's not being "denied." Big difference.</p>
<p>I know of no college that limits the opportunities for tutoring, writing labs, computer technical assistance, professor office hours, mentoring programs, etc. to ANY student. If you know of such schools, please name them so our kids can avoid them.</p>