<p>I agree with you. If the rest of the Ivy League has no problem with what Princeton or Harvard is doing, then it’s really of no concern to anybody else. I also agree that the other Ivies probably scrutinize football more than anything else. Of course, they may all be taking the most generous possible interpretations of the rules for football–and if they are, so what?</p>
<p>How awful is a 1300 out of 1600 score at Harvard? Last Common Data Set I saw the 25th percentile for Math & CR was 1390. So this student in in the bottom quartile? What’s the big deal. He’s down there with a boatload of other athletes, URMs, legacies and development cases. Maybe even a lucky violin virtuoso or quirky inventor to boot.</p>
<p>Actually, I don’t think the legacies are down there. They are more likely to occupy more than their “share” of the middle tier.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good catch fishy…!</p>
<p>oh wow…fishymom is very cool…but as long as im being a ■■■■■…can i be one with green hair?</p>
<p>The rules for financial aid and admissions, Ivy or otherwise, are always overflowing with loopholes, caveats, qualifiers, and disclaimers. Those who claim Ivies and Division III schools don’t offer athletic scholarships seem to have naive faith in the “no athletic scholarships PER SE” concept, and fail to recognize the “DE FACTO athletic scholarships.” I’m sure Ivy administrators would claim to be shocked…SHOCKED! to find that a few of their star athletes are getting some sort of break on their tuition or room and board even though their parents are quite well off.</p>
<p>And businesses invest money in order to make money. Sure, their official, general rule is probably that they only offer “need-based” scholarships, but they make those rules, so they get to bend them whenever they like! A kid from my high school (Lee Kurfis was his name, probably not the same guy) was not a very good student either but he was offered a full ride to Harvard because he was a stellar WR. Think about this from Harvard’s perspective, though: they are the best at everything except athletics. They have the best professors in the world, the best alumni in the world, the most respected name, the best facilities, the most reputed studies, everything that could possibly lure the best students…except athletics. There only real area for improvement is their sports team, and they have the funds to improve it. So they gave this kid a scholarship not because they cared whether he deserves it more than someone else, but because it’s an investment: lots of people pay to watch good football teams, and their numbers-crunchers probably figure this kid will pay for himself. Lets not allow our jealousy to interfere with the fact that all private universities exist, in the first place, for profit. I personally don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is a WR with that name playing at Lehigh. If he got one of those super-secret, under the table, athletic full rides from Harvard, why the heck did he pick Lehigh?</p>
<p>^ Stuff happens. And even if stuff didn’t happen, Harvard doesn’t have a 100% yield last I checked. A friend of mine turned down an athletic opportunity at Harvard for Virginia Tech (and was in fact closer to picking schools like St. John’s and North Carolina State than he was to choosing Harvard).</p>
<p>^Of course. H isn’t for everyone and Lehigh is fine school. I was just illustrating that 11Dorisa’s tale of H attempting to increase revenue by giving secret full-ride athletic scholarships to talented athletes is utter BS.</p>
<p>No, middleschool8. Green is an ugly color for hair, and Dartmouth would no more give secret full athletic scholarships to your friends than Harvard or Princeton.</p>
<p>Just adding that the kid at Lehigh wouldn’t have gotten an <strong>athletic scholarship</strong> there, because they don’t have them for Football. He may have gotten a good package of FA.</p>
<p>“Think about this from Harvard’s perspective, though: they are the best at everything except athletics. They have the best professors in the world, the best alumni in the world, the most respected name, the best facilities, the most reputed studies, everything that could possibly lure the best students…except athletics. There only real area for improvement is their sports team, and they have the funds to improve it.”</p>
<p>Wow! That most certainly sounds like a “Harvard perspective”. I would dispute all the non-sports claims and not dispute the sports claims. Harvard does just fine holding their own in almost all sports in the Ivy league. They do not need any help, or need to cut any corners. The endowments at these Ivy schools is huge. How schools spend their resources is up to them. I looked at the 2008 numbers for 3 schools, and they are just about the same in the grand scheme of things.</p>
<p>Harvard Recruiting Expenses - $932,125
Harvard Operating Expenses- $3,638,876
Harvard Revenue - $19,249,971</p>
<p>Princeton Recruiting Expenses- $1,005,504
Princeton Opex -$3,490,384
Princeton Revenue - $19,168,018</p>
<p>Cornell Recruiting Expense - $764,5555
Cornell Opex - $3,365,835
Cornell Revenue - $18,716,962</p>
<p>The bottom line is these numbers are fairly close to one another. The Athletic Directors and Coaches decide where the resources are going, and possibly what sports may increase their budget depending on where is the biggest return. For Cornell that may be basketball, hockey, and lacrosse where they have done significantly well in recent years in these revenue generating sports. For Harvard, they have done extremely well in Football and in a lot of the non-revenue sports. I don’t think for a minute that they want to throw all kinds of money into athletics because they think they are lacking in that area. I do think they want to maintain their dominance in a particular sport, because they have built a successful program around it. Cutting corners on the Ivy recruiting rules is certainly going to be a losing proposition in the long run as it will damage their reputation.</p>
<p>Nice to know someone thinks I’m cool, haha!</p>
<p>I’m a pretty cynical guy, so I’m prepared to believe that Ivies bend or stretch the rules in order to get athletic recruits they want. But they’re only going to stretch them so far–they’re not going to give a full ride scholarship to a rich athlete, because it would come out and cause a big scandal. Similarly, they’re not going to take an athlete with super low stats, because again, it will come out. They just don’t need to do that. They may, at the margins, goose the need-based aid a bit, or fiddle with the stats calculations a bit, but only at the margins. Anything beyond that is probably a misunderstanding or a myth.</p>
<p>^^^Now, that’s an explaination I can believe!</p>
<p>Umm green is an awesome hair colour- and since wen were we talking about dartmouth- and fishy…go fry urself</p>
<p>^^ Now that wasn’t nice from someone hardly old enough to not need a babysitter!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with this. Not only does the IVY league have an agreement about the AI abands and no athletic scholarships … they have a enforcement mechanism. The academic info and financial aid info for all recruits is reported to the league and any outliers are flagged. For those of you who “know” the IVYies give full rides to rich kids for sports about the only way to get to that outcome is if all 8 schools in concert are running a shame enforcement mechanism so they can claim the high ground while really being more like all the other DI schools … which seems to me would have ended up in the lead article in a mjor newspaper by now … personally I think Hunt hit it dead on.</p>
<p>I haven’t had a babysitter since I was five…and nice diss polyanna :p</p>