<p>Who cares?</p>
<p>We already did this topic to death in a previous thread - 12 pages of it. No need to type all over again. Just reread the previous one:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/632814-harvard-catching-positives-athletic-life-will-other-ivies-follow.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/632814-harvard-catching-positives-athletic-life-will-other-ivies-follow.html</a></p>
<p>And then, you have the Patriot League, a conference of excellent schools (Holy Cross, Lafayette, Colgate, etc.) who used the Ivy League as a model for their sports conference–competive with one another, great academics, true student athletes, D1 in football and basketball, but low-key, etc.</p>
<p>Grass is always greener on the other side, isn’t it?</p>
<p>
Indeed they are. For example, some Cornell coaches are displeased because Cornell’s inability to match the generous financial aid offers of other Ivy universities puts them at a distinct recruiting disadvantage.</p>
<p>To some that may sound like an uneven playing field. </p>
<p>[Financial</a> Aid Packages Threaten Cornell Athletics | The Cornell Daily Sun](<a href=“http://cornellsun.com/node/27969]Financial”>http://cornellsun.com/node/27969)
[Financial</a> Aid Threatens Ivy Competition | The Cornell Daily Sun](<a href=“http://cornellsun.com/node/28002]Financial”>http://cornellsun.com/node/28002)
[Questions</a> Remain With C.U. Financial Aid Packages | The Cornell Daily Sun](<a href=“http://cornellsun.com/node/28003]Questions”>http://cornellsun.com/node/28003)</p>
<p>Folks, the Ivies have been recruting athletes specifically for their teams for years. Virtually all the players on the teams sports [football, mens and womens basketball] are recruited. Very few freshmen athletes “walk on” at Ivy League schools.</p>
<p>Yes, the Ivy fans mostly like things the way the are, but like everyone, the love a winner even more. Ever been to the Harvard-Yale football game? That’s a big deal. And a wealthy alumnus [who was not an athlete] essentially underwrote the entire cost of replacing the ancient Columbia stadium (Baker Field) several years ago. By the way, the nation’s largest collegiate athletic program (in terms of expenditures and participation) exists at Harvard, as I recall.</p>
<p>God, who the **** cares? You think i signed up for my school to look at a bunch of adults throw balls around? Streaming UEFA matches is enough for me, thank you very much.</p>
<p>Sure, it would be cool to have good teams around. But if any of that requires biting even more into me and my friends’ financial aid I will pack up and go to a school that actually respects its ACADEMIC mission. And frankly, I don’t want to go to school with people who make their colleges choices based on how much sports they can watch live on campus. It’s like me choosing schools based on how many LAN games I could play on a given night. It’s absurd.</p>
<p>Seriously, there’s pro sports going on in the world 24/7, and they’re all more exciting than sloppy college sports. Do people, especially people who are supposed to study hard, really need this much sports? Or do people like college games because it’s a great reason to get drunk?</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>To each his own, I guess. Personally, I would never go to a school that didn’t have exciting sports programs. College sports are much more exciting than professional sports, because players are playing for pride instead of millions of dollars. Additionally, nothing beats the atmosphere surrounding sports at a big-name university. Tailgating during football season and being on the edge of your seat during basketball season, combined with celebrating (in our case, after beating Dook twice and winning the national championship) plays an integral part in defining the university and making it a fun place to be without detracting from its overall academic mission.</p>
<p>There is more to college than studying, and I’m glad that I go to a university that is balanced in and out of the classroom.</p>
<p>I’ve watched plenty of games played for pride. I’ve played games for pride. I can’t say the games played between the intramurals for local dominance ever matched the world cup. Sorry if I watch sports for, y’know, the skill involved.</p>
<p>And really, sports is not the only thing you can enjoy outside the classroom. My school is plenty balanced both academically and socially, but I guess since we don’t have big time sports programs that can’t possibly be true.</p>
<p>If you don’t think skill is involved in college sports, you are sorely mistaken. There is a big difference between playing for an intramural t-shirt and playing in a bowl game or in the final four.</p>
<p>And I never said that sports were the only thing you can enjoy outside the classroom. They are, however, a major part of the collegiate experience for most people.</p>
<p>“plays an integral part in defining the university”</p>
<p>This is exactly what we don’t want.</p>
<p>I agree that college is more than studying. At Harvard, it’s also orchestras, poetry slams, a student-run homeless shelter, rock bands, political debates, formal dances, South Asian cultural festivals, the Putnam competition, the Let’s Go travel guides, and yes, 41 varsity sports. They’re all important to us, and sports are just one part of the picture. Harvard is defined by that extraordinary mix. I hope that never changes.</p>
<p>There certainly seems to be a consensus among Ivy folks. Any dissenters? I won’t be starting any threads with suggestions for making Syracuse more like Yale. I assume that if you wanted to go there, you would.</p>
<p>ray,
My longstanding belief has been that what matters most is not the quality of the play nearly as much as it is the quality of the scene that surrounds the games. It can be an awful lot of fun for students and alums. It’s a party…And I would strongly contend that the crowd and the fun at a major college athletic event feels quite a bit different from a professional match. </p>
<p>Hanna,
No one, and definitely not me, is advocating that Harvard or any Ivy should do anything that would hamper the orchestra, poetry slams, etc. that you reference. The question is not either/or. The idea behind creating a more fun and energetic athletic scene is that it could be an additive experience for the Ivy campuses and undergrads/alumni who might enjoy it, just as they currently enjoy all of the other activities you reference.</p>
<p>Here’s an article from today’s LA Times that illustrates why the Ivy League is wise to avoid big time college athletics:</p>
<p>[USC</a> stays silent about NCAA investigation - Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/usc/la-sp-usc-silence31-2009may31,0,1313134.story]USC”>USC stays silent about NCAA investigation)</p>
<p>"Weeks have dragged into months, and months into years, since USC was rocked by allegations that star football player Reggie Bush broke rules by accepting cash, a car and free housing from two businessmen who hoped to profit from him after he turned professional.</p>
<p>Now, the still-unresolved case has become a clinic in the limits to self-policing in college sports. The lesson that has taken on greater significance with more recent accusations against Trojans basketball Coach Tim Floyd and his former marquee player, O.J. Mayo, which also involve purported payments and gifts.</p>
<p>USC finds its reputation on the line, not just as a sports powerhouse but as an institution whose academic achievements have come to eclipse its storied athletic traditions under the leadership of President Steven Sample.</p>
<p>And yet Sample and others at USC have maintained an enduring silence on the allegations and have chosen not to directly interview some of the key accusers.</p>
<p>The governing body of major college sports, the NCAA, has broadened its investigation to determine whether USC lost “institutional control” over its athletics program. It is examining whether USC administrators knew of any transgressions, or should have known by being vigilant.</p>
<p>The punishment could be severe…"</p>
<p>Hawkette – a lot of people, myself included, have told you repeatedly that what YOU personally consider fun – the big crazy tailgating scene, the nationally televised / relevant game, the actual caring about the score and trash-talking the opposing team – just aren’t fun to them. And you seem not to listen to them. You seem to think that if they just were all exposed to it, they’d wake up and smell the coffee and realize that it’s all great fun and additive to a college experience. </p>
<p>In fact, for some of us, it’s a decided negative. I wouldn’t <em>want</em> to go to a school where spectator sports were anything other than a pleasant diversion on a nice day and a light chance to socialize. I don’t want to be surrounded by people whose “pride” in their university comes from their classmates’ prowess on a football field or who actually take the results on the field seriously. </p>
<p>Why can’t you allow for different tastes? Some people like the big tailgate pomp and circumstance; others don’t. </p>
<p>Personally, as someone who went to more than enough Big 10 tailgating, I fail to see what you see so appealing about it. “Socializing”? Bahaha. You hang around your friends and maybe you chit-chat with a few friends-of-friends – nothing different from any other party or large campus event or even hanging out at a student center. Otherwise, the other thousands of people there are just a crowd as far as I’m concerned. I’m not inherently excited by being part of a large crowd and I find no “bonding” with other people just because we’re all watching the same football game.</p>
<p>You keep defining what you find as fun to be a universal definition of fun, and many of the Ivy alums on here (of which I’m not one) have told you repeatedly that what you consider fun isn’t what they and their college-mates considered fun.</p>
<p>And the thesis only works if there is something to show that Stanford/Duke/ND etc alums are <em>more</em> loyal to their schools than the Ivy alums are to theirs. Is there such data? Not to my knowledge.</p>
<p>if ivy’s try to open up recruiting more in order to improve their teams, people on CC will start complaining how people are getting in to top schools without truly “deserving” it.</p>
<p>they’ll whine that some football player or basketball player took their spot</p>
<p>“Tailgating during football season and being on the edge of your seat during basketball season, combined with celebrating (in our case, after beating Dook twice and winning the national championship) plays an integral part in defining the university and making it a fun place to be without detracting from its overall academic mission.”</p>
<p>On another thread of this nature, some Duke participants talked about how much they enjoyed talking trash to the fans of the opposing team and how they enjoyed blocking the view of a handicapped fan of the opposing team who was confined to a wheelchair. Oh yeah, that’s such a bonding experience!</p>
<p>I always find it more than a little stupid when people take athletic events that they aren’t personally participating in seriously beyond light-hearted “I hope my team / town / side wins” and light-hearted rivalry with others. I don’t know why I’d want to cultivate that atmosphere in what I’d hope is primarily an environment that rewards academics, not athletics.</p>
<p>And actually the Harvard/Yale rivalry - which is all light-hearted, things like the pranks where one side gets the other to hold up signs that say “Yale sucks”, the marching bands doing silly things – those strike me as far more fun / enjoyable and a “bonding experience” than a nationally relevant televised Big Championship Game that everyone’s talking about.</p>
<p>because part of the fun of sport is getting caught up in it. while I by no means think that fans should be obnoxious beyond the usual hearty trash-talking (your example about the opposing fan in the wheelchair is inappropriate conduct), getting yourself emotional and crazy about sporting events is what makes it so fun.</p>
<p>btw, Duke SUCKS.</p>
<p>As for Ivy recruiting…
[Study</a> of Elite Colleges Finds Athletes Are Isolated From Classmates - The New York Times](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/15/us/study-of-elite-colleges-finds-athletes-are-isolated-from-classmates.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1]Study”>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/15/us/study-of-elite-colleges-finds-athletes-are-isolated-from-classmates.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1)</p>
<p>The frequent response of those opposed to athletics is to trot out red herrings such scipio’s post above re USC. What is it that you people are so scared of? Do you think that the administrators and coaches at the Ivy colleges won’t have the integrity to properly manage these teams? </p>
<p>USC is a major college football power that regularly competes for national titles. By contrast, top academic institutions like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, and Vanderbilt have probably never been close to a national football title, but they still are able to present a very agreeable and fun athletic life and I don’t remember reading anything along the lines of the USC article. What’s wrong with the Ivies choosing to follow their practices and create something that might have appeal to a certain element of their student bodies and alumni? Must having a good athletic life, one that is nationally competitive and relevant, automatically debase the academic reputation of the institution? </p>
<p>Pizzagirl,
Thanks again for your consistent mischaracterization of my comments. Are you unable to defend your position without resorting to such tactics? </p>
<p>Let’s allow for and respect some differences of opinion. You don’t like the athletic scene. Fine. I accept that and have repeatedly acknowledged that. </p>
<p>On the other hand, some folks do enjoy the athletic life of a college, including me and some who attend/have attended Ivy institutions. Both I and the author of the WSJ article believe that there is some interest in Ivy colleges improving the athletic life at their colleges. Can you accept that or must you enforce complete censorship of arguments that you disagree with?</p>
<p>Hawkette</p>
<p>Nobody’s afraid, nobody’s scared, nobody’s even particularly defensive. You have now raised this topic innumerable times in order to make your own points about the importance of a big-time college sports scene. It appears that most of the people who went to Ivies or have children attending the Ivies don’t find your opinion particularly compelling or interesting and don’t agree with you. You seem to have a problem with that and seem to believe that if we only understood you better, we would have to agree with you.</p>
<p>But we do get your point and we don’t agree with you. Now I fully expect that you will start another ten or twenty threads about this topic, but you should save your typing fingers. Frankly, I was delighted that the Ivies handle athletics in the manner that they do, when I saw this quote in the original article
I don’t want to have standards lowered even more than they might be for athletes and I think that missing class time for postseason football games is unnecessary.</p>
<p>Most people who went to the Ivies don’t dislike “the athletic scene”. Rather, they believe that making the tradeoffs necessary to have a nationally ranked football or basketball team is not a good idea. In addition, most people who went to Ivies are happy when their classmates do well in any number of sports, including tennis, fencing, lacrosse etc. and are not insistent that basketball and football are the only sports worth mentioning.</p>