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

College Search & Selection
141

<p>Hunt,
A few questions on your statement,</p>

<p>“If the school wants athletes to graduate, they graduate. But do they know anything? What happens to them after that?”</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Would it be accurate to interpret your statement as implying that there is a separate standard for athletes when it comes to the classes that they take at Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame? Do you believe that there is a separate standard for Ivy athletes?</p></li>
<li><p>Are you saying that the Stanford/Duke/Northwestern/Rice/Vanderbilt/Notre Dame student-athletes don’t deserve to be at that school? Do you believe that this is true at the Ivy colleges?</p></li>
<li><p>Are you also saying that the student-athletes at Stanford, Duke et al are unprepared for postgraduate life in comparison to other Stanford, Duke, et al students? How about in comparison to Ivy athletes?</p></li>
</ol>

<p>If I am interpreting the comments accurately, I really am astounded at the antipathy shown by some Ivy posters toward the student-athletes at peer academic universities which achieve at a higher athletic level. </p>

<p>Cellardweller,
I don’t know how much you know about athletes and their passion to pursue their sport while in college, but if you are familiar with them, then you must know that transferring from one college to another is common. These kids have a tight window in which to utilize their eligibility and most don’t want to sit on the bench. They’re in college, not in a penal colony. For many of these student-athletes, the right move is to transfer to a place where they can get onto the playing field or court and reach their personal athletic goals while pursuing their undergraduate degree. I’m not sure why you would think that these unique transfer circumstances should work against the institution. I strongly agree with the NCAA’s adjustment in their calculation of GSR rates.</p>

142

<p>Hawkette,</p>

<p>Stop trying to associate Duke, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, etc. with Stanford. You’re making Stanford look bad.</p>

143

<p>There was a USA Today article earlier this month on the disparity in SAT scores between athletes and other students at major college campuses. The University of Florida had the largest disparity. Fine by most U of F students, in my experience.
The “athletic” schools discussed here are of a piece. This is a story of athletic gladiators who resemble the rest of the student body not at all. Bread and circuses for the students. Do you think Duke students mind so long as their basketball team rules? Of course not.</p>

144

<p>Hawkette:</p>

<p>It doesn’t matter what metric you use. College athletes in revenue sports at Division 1 A schools have much lower graduation rates than the school average and also than athletes in non-revenue sports. Even Stanford athletes pay a price. Hardly a model for others to follow. </p>

<p>There definitely is a different standard at Div 1AA schools (Ivy league) where they cannot offer athletic scholarships. There is virtually no difference in graduation rates among athletes and non-athletes. They field two to three times as many varsity teams than typical private Division 1A schools but simply don’t expect to compete at the same level. Division 1A schools (with the possible exception of Stanford) have simply compromised too much academically. A former coach at Vanderbilt famously said the school aspired to be Alabama on weekends and Harvard during weekdays and achieved neither.</p>

145

<p>I feel like people get way too worked up over the academic credentials of 125 students, out of student bodies composed of thousands, and in some cases tens of thousands.</p>

146

<p>Cellardweller,
We’re unlikely to convince one another of our arguments, but I would like to at least set the record straight.</p>

<p>Here and elsewhere, I have consistently stated that Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame provide a level of athletic life that cannot be found at the Ivy colleges. Others have challenged me on the strength of athletic life at Rice and, to a lesser extent, Northwestern, but I think that there is pretty broad acceptance of the idea that the athletic life of a college, which I interpret as the vibrancy and level of fan support, is superior at Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame than at the Ivy colleges. </p>

<p>Some may challenge my definition of athletic life. Fine, but let’s at least try to understand where we are disagreeing. For those who measure via the number of sports offered, I would concur with the claim that the Ivy colleges offer more varsity sports opportunities than Stanford, Duke et al. However, I think one must quickly add that the club and intramural offerings at Stanford, Duke et al make this a moot argument and that there are not material differences in the athletic activity rates of the student bodies at any of these colleges. </p>

<p>Re the quality of play that exists at the Stanford, Duke et al group, I think that most will accept that the athletic level is stronger than in the Ivy League. While not at the football level of Alabama (very clever quote :slight_smile: ), I think that all of these colleges acquit themselves well in other sports, including challenging for national championships in several major and revenue producing sports (men’s and women’s basketball, baseball). </p>

<p>Finally, you are incorrect in your assumption that the Ivy League does a materially better job at graduating its student-athletes, even in revenue sports. I have consistently posited that the student-athletes within the Stanford, Duke et al group graduate at a level close to (and in some cases exceeding) the student bodies at these colleges. This includes revenue sports and there is the data found on ncaa.org to support this (I can happily post it if you like). </p>

<p>The most recent evidence of this occurred this week when the American Football Coaches Association awarded its 2008 Academic Achievement award to Vanderbilt for its 6-year football graduation rate of 95% (vs. 91% for overall student body). Vandy’s win this year was preceded in 2007 by a tie between Northwestern and Notre Dame (also at 95%). I hope that you will agree that these are excellent accomplishments and achieved in high profile, revenue sports in the USA’s most competitive leagues. </p>

<p>[Football</a> program receives AFCA Academic Award - College Football - Rivals.com](<a href=“Rivals: Football & Basketball Recruiting”>Rivals: Football & Basketball Recruiting)</p>

<p>[Academic</a> Achievement Award - News - AFCA.com—Official Site of the American Football Coaches Association](<a href=“http://www.afca.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9300&SPID=7865&SPSID=69272]Academic”>http://www.afca.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9300&SPID=7865&SPSID=69272)</p>

147

<p>ok seriously who cares?</p>

<p>all schools should be focusing on ACADEMICS FIRST and then athletics second</p>

148

<p>pierre,
No one is disagreeing with this. The point is that some schools are uniquely able to offer both on a nationally competitive scale.</p>

149

<p>my problem is that the ivies don’t need to put more money into athletics, some schools need athletics to boost their national “name” but schools like Harvard are already so well known it dosen’t matter. </p>

<p>And secondly, there are different types of schools. If every school had big-time athletics where would the people who hate sports want to go to school?</p>

150

<p>“I think that there is pretty broad acceptance of the idea that the athletic life of a college, which I interpret as the vibrancy and level of fan support, is superior at Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame than at the Ivy colleges.”</p>

<p>And if that were IMPORTANT to most people, then you’d see people not applying to the Ivies, and applying in droves to S/D/V/ND.</p>

<p>Yet that isn’t the case. All of these schools have more than enough applicants knocking on their doors. What does that tell you? What YOU think is a “disadvantage” of the Ivies isn’t the great disadvantage / demotivator for application that you think it is. </p>

<p>I would find it a loss overall if all the Ivies started having the same sports culture as the other schools. Why should everything be the same? That’s like saying every school should have a Greek system. Whatever for? Let those who like the Greek system apply to schools that have one and let those who don’t want a Greek system apply to schools that don’t have one. Easy enough. Why the desire to have it all be uniform big-time athletics?</p>

151

<p>Hawkette, since you have great access to stats, could you compile a number-of-applicants-for-each-spot for each of the Ivies and the other schools you like for their balance? Thanks in advance. I think that’s the data that tells you how much people value or not-value the athletic scenes already in place on a campus.</p>

152

<p>"My personal frustration is the categorization by some of the Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame group as institutions marginalized by their participation and success in major college athletics. "</p>

<p>IYO, who is “marginalizing” these schools? These are all top 20 schools, no? There isn’t anyone seriously saying that these schools don’t offer excellent educations, is there? I’m unclear whom you feel you are defending these schools against.</p>

153

<p>If I went to Harvard I would give a rat’s ass how good my football team was. Who cares? We go to Harvard!</p>

154

<p>I don’t understand the point of all of this.</p>

<p>The Ivies have no problem attracting far more student applications than they really want to deal with resulting in their ability to be extremely selective in creating the class they want with no shortage of top students.</p>

<p>If this is the case, why should they be looking towards another model right now? Their model and their trajectory is working for them.</p>

<p>The best argument for increasing the quality of athletes at any Ivy is to bring in more money, period.</p>

<p>As someone at an Ivy right now, there is no great call amongst the student body or amongst our applicants to become Duke or Stanford. That’s their thing, we have our thing. Unless this is what students really want across the division, why bother?</p>

<p>I hate to break it to you, Hawkette, but some people purposely don’t apply to places that have the environment you’re suggesting.</p>

<p>Notre Dame, from the stats above, pay more to it’s four coaches than Brown pays anybody except the person who handles our endowment, the president of the university, and one or two other members of the administration. I’m quite happy to say we’re not spending half a million dollars on a football coach.</p>

<p>I guess the point is this-- hawkette, for many students a good social life and strong athletic teams do not go hand in hand. From a school where our student body is overwhelmingly pleased with their experience, I can tell you first hand no one is clamoring for sports to save our dismal social lives. Some people have fun without it. Hell, I have fun with it. I love going to games and we’re competitive with the teams we’re facing-- that’s enough for me.</p>

155

<p>

I don’t know, but I suspect that athletes in revenue sports get help choosing easy majors and easy classes, and probably free tutoring as well. I certainly know that at any school, includng the ivies, some majors and classes are easier than others, and there have always been “gut” classes that were notorious for being full of athletes. It may not be the case, but the motive and the opportunity are both there to help athletes graduate with the least possible academic effort.</p>

<p>

If their academic qualifications are substantially below those of typical students, and especially if they can’t graduate without a lot of extra help, then yes. I don’t think it’s the case at the Ivies now, but I have to say that it certainly seems to be the case at some of the schools you name.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not saying, I’m asking. It would be interesting to know what kind of jobs revenue athletes have 10 years out as opposed to the average student. They may do very well. But how many of them go on to graduate or professional school?</p>

<p>Edited to modify my answer: I think the revenue athletes at Duke et al. “deserve” to be there as paid gladiators. It’s a fantasy to think that many of them are really “students,” though.</p>

156

<p>“I guess the point is this-- hawkette, for many students a good social life and strong athletic teams do not go hand in hand. From a school where our student body is overwhelmingly pleased with their experience, I can tell you first hand no one is clamoring for sports to save our dismal social lives. Some people have fun without it. Hell, I have fun with it. I love going to games and we’re competitive with the teams we’re facing-- that’s enough for me.”</p>

<p>I think Hawkette’s thesis is that big-time nationally relevant college sports are really more fun than you think you’re having, and that if you only knew the greatness that is tailgating at a hugely attended football game, you’d want to be part of it too. That you just can’t help but be swept up in all the fun. That it’s inherently more fun to be in a crowd of 40,000 with a game being televised / making the sports news than a crowd of 5,000 with a game that isn’t televised / making the sports news. That’s a big reason why she cites attendance figures – under the assumption that “higher attendance” = “more fun for the participants.” That’s HER taste, not everybody’s. I like Hawkette a lot, but she doesn’t always get that her tastes aren’t everybody’s, and right now, the people who want excellent academics and big-time athletics have places to go, and the people who want excellent academics and don’t care if their teams are nationally relevant have places to go, too, and it’s all good.</p>

157

<p>Anyone who ardently touts one model over others from the assumption that if you don’t agree you just don’t know enough information is a moron.</p>

<p>There’s no reason to be nice about it Pizzagirl-- what we have on our hands here is a blind zealot who assumes their experience is uniquely complete and their conclusions universal, if what you’re saying is true, and the result is a load of nonsense.</p>

158

<p>I don’t think Hawkette is laying down a universal prescription for every college, just that there are schools for those who don’t care about bigtime sports…Williams, Bowdoin, Wesleyan, Wellesley, NYU, Carnegie Mellon, Chicago, Washington U., Hopkins, etc. But it’s a little two-faced for the Ivies, who strive to be the best in everything, to pretend to be completely academic-based while still giving de facto sports scholarships to athletes who’d never stand a chance as non-athletic applicants, so that they can compete in Division I sports. I think she’s saying the Ivies should stop the hypocracy and openly compete like Stanford, Rice, et al, or drop the facade and drop to Division III.</p>

159

<p>Frankly, I don’t think the Ivies are dropping D1 for the sports where they are quite competitive – i.e. not football or basketball. </p>

<p>Also, I don’t think they’re striving to be the best in everything, and the sports scholarship thing is something that’s not so black and white. 98% of the help Ivy Athletes get is with admissions, not with financial aid packages.</p>

<p>The Ivy League is not being hypocritical because they don’t want to spend a ton of money and resources to develop sports to the level of Stanford or Duke.</p>

160

<p>hawkette: "People who do “get it” know that sports can be a positive force on a college’s campus, both in terms of the participation opportunities AND in the social opportunities at events that can be bonding experiences and which can enhance school spirit. That is the beauty of colleges like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame. "</p>

<p>Also: "Those schools have sterling academic reputations and yet recruit, educate, and graduate very high numbers of their student-athletes. Furthermore, the efforts of these student-athletes, played out in the USA’s most competitive athletic conferences, create a unique entertainment/bonding/school-spirit enhancing experience in the midst of an outstanding private university.</p>

<p>What is so unique about the bonding/school spirit at S/D/N/R/V/ND compared to the Ivies? Look, I’m an NU alum and I bleed purple and white, but I have no reason to believe that there is greater school spirit among NU grads than there are at the Ivies, just because we’re Big 10. Hawkette, what is your source that leads you to believe that school spirit at the Ivies is somehow lacking compared to S/D/et al?</p>