Harvard is catching on to the positives of athletic life..will other Ivies follow?

<p>In 2007, Harvard installed lights at Harvard Stadium and played their first-ever home night game in the 100+ years of Harvard football. An appreciative crowd of 19,000, by far their biggest of the season, showed up.</p>

<p>This season night Harvard continued to break tradition with its first-ever Friday night home game under the lights. A very enthusiastic crowd of over 20,000 attended. </p>

<p>With basketball season now in full swing and lots of outstanding private colleges with terrific teams (Duke, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Wake Forest, Davidson), is Harvard now trying to give a boost to that program as well? Harvard hired a high profile men’s basketball coach who recruited a lot of hotshot players and they just beat Boston College, the 17th-ranked team in the USA. This is sure to inspire interest and excitement in Cambridge, around Boston and perhaps throughout New England.</p>

<p>I’m not suggesting that Harvard is going to sacrifice its academic reputation and become an athletics powerhouse. But IMO Harvard is definitely making an effort to enhance the student experience by improving their athletic scene and creating an enjoyable environment for their students and alumni. And why not? It’s fun! </p>

<p>So, the question is whether this will affect the balance of power of Ivy athletics and will the other Ivy colleges follow Harvard’s lead and try to improve on the athletic life and social scene offered at the school?</p>

<p>What Harvard pulled to put together their new basketball team has gotten a lot of attention. I do think this signals an ivy move to prioritize athletics again as they did in the past. Dartmouth just got a new Director of Admissions because alumni demanded the ouster of the old one who did not believe in bending for athletes. And my belief is that this is more about alumni donations than current student's social lives.</p>

<p>Critics of good sports programs fail to see that well-attended sports events offer benefits to the entire student body, not merely those on the playing field. Football, especially, offers a theraputic break from studying, in fresh air, with a great opportunity to mix with students beyond one's usual social circle--at the game itself or in pre-game "tailgating." It also offers the band and the cheerleaders a chance to show their stuff. Also offers alumni a focal point for re-connecting with their alma mater (either by watching on TV or attending games in person). At some schools, even faculty members attend games. I have a cousin who's a full professor at a Big 10 school, and she'd never been to a football game in her life. I bought her a sweatshirt with her school's name on it, and took her tailgating and to a game, and she loved it. She no doubt feels more connected with her students now that she's had a taste of their social life.</p>

<p>I hope more Ivies catch on; it's great to see that Harvard's using its money to put more focus on the social aspects of college and help its students get a well-deserved break.</p>

<p>A friend of mine is going to Harvard for football, they didn't have to bend the academic rules for him either (URM with a 3.9, Class President)</p>

<p>When I was at Penn in the dark ages (mid 70's-early 80's) football was big. Everyone went to the games. I remember Dartmouth being the ivy team to beat yet DS, a freshmen at Dartmouth, reports no one goes to football games today! Sad because it was such a spirit builder.</p>

<p>Harvard and the Ivy league used to rule the world of big time college athletics, so they are certainly well aware of the positives. But it was all the negatives of the athletic life that caused Harvard and the Ivy league to abolish athletic scholarships and forbid their teams to play in post-season bowl games. I don't see them reversing that decision any time soon.</p>

<p>harvard basketball also lost to ****ing rice</p>

<p>^ woah there buddy. Easy on the language. But yes, Rice beat Harvard in basketball.</p>

<p>But Hahvahd beat Bahstin Cahledge tonight, their first win over a ranked team.</p>

<p>rsxwheeeee. I love a new england accent!</p>

<p>This will be an interesting basketball season for Harvard. In 54 years of Ivy League competition, they've never won an Ivy League title. I don't believe they've ever come close. And, the rest of the league doesn't look too strong this year. But interestingly, the richest school that the planet has ever known has a basketball arena that's probably below the median in quality of most high schools' gyms.</p>

<p>The Ivies have always kept athletics in proper perspective. It is far more important to be a participant than a spectator. The question is not whether the Ivies will catch on but whether the division I football and basketball programs will catch on, make academics the top priority instead of entertainment and profit, and focus their resources on student fitness and participation.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is sure to inspire interest and excitement in Cambridge, around Boston and perhaps throughout New England.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Admittedly, I have never really been into the whole high-profile college sports thing, but why would the rest of New England, or for that matter anyone not associated with Harvard (as a student, alum, employee, etc), care what Harvard's b-ball team is doing? I live in metro Boston and this was the first that I'd heard about this.</p>

<p>I'm not anti-high profile college sports teams - they obviously work for a lot of people, and they do have their benefits. I certainly hope that not <em>all</em> the Ivies will go for them though, because a range of choices is important.</p>

<p>I do wonder, as the sports teams become stronger and higher-profile, how many students who could have walked on to varsity teams in the past and played a sport that they had little experience with, and had the joy of representing their school and being an athlete, will now be shut out of intercollegiate sports because they aren't good enough for the new high-caliber teams.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I do wonder, as the sports teams become stronger and higher-profile, how many students who could have walked on to varsity teams in the past and played a sport that they had little experience with, and had the joy of representing their school and being an athlete, will now be shut out of intercollegiate sports because they aren't good enough for the new high-caliber teams.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Its called intramurals. Life isn't fair, and if someone isn't good enough at a sport to make the team them they shouldn't be on it.</p>

<p>Life isn't fair. If someone is not academically qualified, they should not be admitted to a college.</p>

<p>I've always thought, "If Harvard were only just a little more like Duke!"</p>

<p>No one was walking on to (most) Ivy teams no matter how bad the team might be. They still recruit and you still have to be pretty decent- not Florida football decent, but pretty darn good.</p>

<p>We've argued this topic ad nauseum on this forum, but I believe there is a LOT to be said for a strong athletic program. Neither my daughter nor son in law are huge sports people, although they enjoy a good game. Now that they have landed at Vanderbilt (grad school for her and he's a medical resident) they are absolutely thrilled with Vanderbilt sports and the SEC. My son in law was blown away by the basketball arena and the jumbotron. They are really enjoying going to the games. His undergrad school was a very weak sports school and she went to Rice, which ebbs and flows in most of the sports.</p>

<p>The hiring of Tommy Amaker (a Duke grad) certainly sends a message that Harvard takes the success of its men's basketball team seriously -- within the Ivy League. I am highly doubtful, however, that this signals Harvard's intent to 1) compete head-to-head with the Connecticuts and Syracuses of NCAA basketball or 2) lower admissions standards in order to compete on an equal basis with the big basketball powers. Congrats to Harvard for knocking off Boston College! It won't happen too often.</p>

<p>Last year I read a number of articles about how Harvard had compromised their academic standards to the max in order to recruit basketball players. It's not a good precedent.</p>

<p>From the NYT:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Harvard has never won an Ivy League title in men’s basketball and has not reached the N.C.A.A. tournament since 1946. This season, the team won only 8 of its first 28 games. Like all the universities in the Ivy League, Harvard does not award athletic scholarships.</p>

<p>...</p>

<p>Yet the group of six recruits expected to join the team next season is rated among the nation’s 25 best. This is partly because Harvard Coach Tommy Amaker, who starred at Duke and coached in the Big East and Big Ten conferences, has set his sights on top-flight recruits. It is also because Harvard is willing to consider players with a lower academic standing than previous staff members said they were allowed to. Harvard has also adopted aggressive recruiting tactics that skirt or, in some cases, may even violate National Collegiate Athletic Association rules.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The article goes on to describe how the minimum academic index allowed by the Ivy League is 171--astonishingly low compared to the rest of the student body, I might add--but that the previous Harvard coach required an average index of 202 among bball recruits, which meant that they could not go below 195 for any single player. One of the prize recruits in the article had not yet been able to scrape a 171.</p>

<p>No, I don't think that adding a permanent underclass of semi-pro athletes is going to add anything positive to H.</p>