<p>In undergrad ed, one has Yale, Brown and Cornell, and then the lesser Ivies: H,P,D,Col and Penn. Would the Ivies WANT a couple of Dukes? Doesn't this destroy the mystique?</p>
<p>the_prestige, what evidence do you have to the contrary re Colgate vs. Brown of a generation ago? At least, I have cited several people's perspectives who all seem to be consistent and one common application. Schools do change, especially over the course of a lot of years. Looking at these boards, a lot of current Penn students mock how bad a school Dartmouth is compared to their own. This certainly would not be close to the case in the time of my apps, which wasn't that long ago (and I was from PA) and I'm sure makes Dartmouth alums of more than the past ten years cringe.</p>
<p>so was that before or after the toothpaste brand?</p>
<p>poster Collegehelp apparently has, or had the 1964 Cass & Birnbaum college guide:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=220552%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=220552</a></p>
<p>If you ask him nicely maybe he'll post detailed stats for Colgate & Brown.</p>
<p>Brown really took off after the change to an open curriculum in 1969.</p>
<p>Folks, the ivy league is a regional college sport league. If you must add 2 more schools to ivies, then</p>
<p>From N to S</p>
<p>ME <a href="University%20of%20Maine">b</a>**
NH (Darty)
MA(The Big H)
RI(Brown)
CT(Yallie)
NY(Cornell, Columbia(NYC))
NJ(Princeton)
PA(Penn)
DE<a href="University%20of%20Delaware">b</a>**</p>
<p>The equal justice for all </p>
<p>according to Collegehelp's data:</p>
<p>in 1964</p>
<p>Brown 30% acceptance rate
Colgate 33% acceptance rate</p>
<p>So Colgate being superior to Brown doesn't hold - at least in '64...</p>
<p>
[quote]
There is a huge difference between scheduling games and attempting to join a new conference. Was the athletics department trying to “de-emphasize big revenue athletics”? Maybe, but this is VASTLY different from attempting to join the Ivy League.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And there was another reason for NU to have scheduled games with the Ivy League (the game with Princeton was the 1st in 33 years btwn the Big10 and the Ivy League), much less an AWAY game? </p>
<p>And it's pure happen-stance that NU hasn't schedule a Princeton or Penn since then?</p>
<p>Btw, nice job in totally not addressing any of my rebuttals.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Again, just like it’s pretty well documented that Notre Dame sought admittance into the Big 10 in the late 90’s, there should be some sort of record stating something to that end about Northwestern and the Ivy League, and yet, again, there is nothing. Why? Because it never happened, that’s why. Was the school trying to get rid of its focus on big-revenue sports? That’s a huge possibility. Does this in any way mean that it wanted to be in the Ivy League? No it does not.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You got that backwards. The B10 wanted ND to join as the 12th team.</p>
<p>Right - and everything that has ever occurred is documented on the net (has it ever occurred to you that NU wanting to leave the B10 was something that the school's admin wasn't exactly keen on advertising? Especially if any alternatives didn't pan out?).</p>
<hr>
<p>As for a comparison of academic requirements for recruits at the Ivy League and prestigious schools in major power conferences - it's fairly similar for athletes in non-revenue sports (male or female) and somewhat different for the large revenue sports (fb and bb).</p>
<p>For instance, the average SAT score for lacrosse players at Duke was in the mid/low-1300s (old format) which is comparable to that of lacrosse recruits at the Ivy League or prestigious LACs.</p>
<p>Otoh, bb recruits at Duke had significantly lower SAT scores than the overall general student body (from 1994-97 - the average SAT score of bb recruits at Duke was 968).</p>
<p>Of all the schools in power conferences - Stanford has the highest academic requirments for recruits in revenue sports - rarely accepting anyone with less than a 1100 (old format) with NU having the next stringent standards (generally, only a few "gifted" athletes are acceptanced with these scores).</p>
<p>The Ivies generally have a higher cut-off for bb and fb recruits - probably in the 1200s - but they have been known to give "special consideration" for athletes with particular talent.</p>
<p>Btw, two of the most celebrated fb players of recent memory in the Ivy League, QB Gavin Hoffman (Penn) and RB Clifton Dawson (Harvard) initially suited up for NU before they transferred.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the average SAT score of bb recruits at Duke was 968
[/quote]
</p>
<p>and even that seems high</p>
<p>...seeing as I've actually taken classes with some, I'm glad I wasn't the only person thinking that. :p</p>
<p>Think about that...968 was the AVERAGE score. Anybody think it's a little cruel to take guys who are unable to even break 1000 (I'm sure some didn't even break 900!) and make them try to compete at a place like Duke (which a reputable source says is nearly as good as Brown) for 4 years? Coach K ought to be ashamed of himself.</p>
<p>Ah, but they have special tutors to help them cope. </p>
<p>(Yes, that's true. My intro geology class was full of football players.)</p>
<p>I'm sure Coach K can barely sleep at night. :p</p>
<p>But seriously, who says they have to compete? They just have to graduate. Pick a cake major and add in the special considerations they get and that's not as hard as you'd think.</p>
<p>i thought jj redick was BME...I think Sheldon was applied Math with econ minor...</p>
<p>As mentioned earlier, the Ivies already have their closest football rivals in Holy Cross(lost to Harvard Saturday in the 60th game in the series) and Colgate(beat Dartmouth Saturday). These 2 schools play the Ivies in all sports on a regular basis and like the Ivies have very strong alumni networks with giving rates of 50% at HC and Colgate. There is a long tradition of competition between HC and Colgate and the Ivy League.</p>
<p>Another example of the chasm that separates Holy Cross and Colgate from Georgetown and Duke-in 2005, Colgate had 6 unfunded (at the school by choice and not as a NMS requirement) and Holy Cross 3 unfunded National Merit Scholars.</p>
<p>Duke had 117 and Georgetown 42. (Cornell had 35, Brown 62, and Dartmouth 64 by comparison)</p>
<p>There must be something in this for the present Ivy League members and assimilating peer institutions like Georgetown and Duke rather than non-peer institutions like Holy Cross and Colgate makes sense.</p>
<p>(All figures are from the 2005 NMS Annual Report.)</p>
<p>the_prestige, you can't really determine a superior school solely by acceptance rate. Otherwise, Lafayette would look stronger than UChicago and Bucknell stronger than Johns Hopkins and I think most people would agree that's not the case. Especially, such a small difference in acceptance rate, which at least indicates to me that both schools were in the same ballpark, which it seemed like you were refuting. Does he have avg SAT for that time period? I think that would be more telling.</p>
<p>Also, the Ivy League wasn't formed and shouldn't be based on which schools had the highest number of NMSs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
which at least indicates to me that both schools were in the same ballpark, which it seemed like you were refuting
[/quote]
</p>
<p>gellino, talk about moving goal posts - and not a few inches, a few counties...</p>
<p>here is your direct quote to which i was contending:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Colgate was considered a stronger academic school than Brown until the 1970's
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Now they maybe "in the same ballpark"? Look, i really don't want to beat this horse until it's dead - but if you insist - basically, you stated that Colgate was SUPERIOR to Brown UP UNTIL 70s (that is quite a bold statement indeed and theoretically covers over 150 years of superiority given that Colgate was founded in 1819) and then provided anecdotal evidence to back such a bold and broad claim up. Now given that Brown was founded a full half century earlier than Colgate, I was just wondering, when did Colgate experience this amazing "Renaissance" that noone has ever heard of?</p>
<p>I then (upon the suggestion of monydad) I come back with some admission numbers from 1964 and low and behold, Brown has a lower admission %-age.</p>
<p>Now you brush that off as - "well, it shows that they were at least in the same ballpark"... Now if your earlier statement had stated, "you know in the period of the 1970s (not UP UNTIL THE 70s) Colgate's academics were much stronger than they were now and were likely in the same ballpark as, say, Brown's..." I probably would have let that slide.</p>
<p>If you want to back down from that earlier claim, then we can all let this silly debate rest.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ah, but they have special tutors to help them cope. </p>
<p>(Yes, that's true. My intro geology class was full of football players.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In order to try to make the football program more competitive - Duke "lowered" the academic requirements for football players a couple of years ago (the admin. pointed out that they didn't really lower their requirements, but that they were just going to accept more FB recruits who were at the lower end of the scale for recruits).</p>
<p>With the new ACC, however (even with a down UMiami), it's going to be a tough road to hoe for the Duke FB program.</p>
<p>middlebury and stanford.</p>
<p>the_prestige, I didn't mean for you to take offense and interpret 'superior' so harshly in a comparing Harvard to South Dakota State sort of way; more of it was quite reasonable for someone to choose Colgate over Brown back then. I forget now what even caused the initial response, but I think I was trying to say that it wasn't an obvious choice that Brown should be initially chosen to be in the Ivy League over Colgate because it was a better academic school because the spread between the two today was not the same as what it was in the 1950's. Your second to last sentence makes it seem like Colgate has gotten monumentally worse in the last 40 years, which I don't think is true at all. I think it's about stayed the same in the time period, but more think Brown has had an astronomical rise. If you want to cite acceptance rates, Brown has gone from 30% to 13%, while Colgate has only gone from 33% to 27% over the last 40 years. I still would be curious to see those SATs from back then to see how the relative order how schools have changed and to satisfy myself of certain notions and predispositions. When people at Colgate used to cite the hearsay of Colgate being asked to join the Ivy League (before the days of Internet searches), my response used to be if this was the case we would all be at Brown, Cornell or Penn instead (whichever school wasn't included).</p>