Ivy Athletics: Can they be relevant again in the major sports?

College Confidential Community
81

<p>Eh, let him ramble. What do I care what he thinks of NU? That’s about as sophisticated as arguing “well, OTHER people prefer X to Y, so X must be better!” It’s the follow-the- crowd mentality for people who aren’t secure enough to have their own opinions.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think that’s another VERY good point that Hawkette overlooks. In some parts of the country, college sports are the only game in town (so to speak). In other parts, there are already pro sports franchises and that’s where people fulfill their sports interests and they simply don’t need to have a college do it for them. </p>

<p>It’s not much of a surprise that the college football scenes that have the most attendance are also typically located away from professional sports teams’ headquarters. The SEC’s a good example of that, and the Big 10 to a lesser extent. The Ivies are, for the most part, right on top of professional sports team locations.</p>

82

<p>I don’t know, pizzagirl. I initially thought that about SEC, too, but Atlanta has professional teams and still is hugely behind UGA and GT. Nashville has pro football and still is also all about SEC competition. </p>

<p>ring of fire needs to go back to the SMU thread. Oh wait, SMU sports have sucked ever since they got busted for the huge recruiting violations back in the early 80s.</p>

83

<p>Corbett,
I did some analysis on a sport-by-sport basis of that website you linked to. As expected, the Ivies do well, but what surprised me was how well some of the top privates compared. </p>

<p>From the tone of some comments in this thread, one could get the impression that the Ivies perform at a much higher rate than the schools which I believe are the premier combination of great academics and great athletic life (Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown). I think that the results below confirm that the student-athlete lives, even at colleges that play in athletic leagues and venues far more competitive than anything in the Ivy League.</p>

<p>For comparison purposes, I included many prominent publics. Here are some of the sports that were listed:</p>

<p>Football , College</p>

<p>993 , U Penn
991 , Yale
988 , Brown
987 , Dartmouth
986 , Stanford
986 , Cornell
983 , Harvard
982 , Princeton
978 , Columbia
977 , Duke
969 , Northwestern
969 , Notre Dame
967 , UC Berkeley
964 , Penn State
962 , U Florida
961 , Georgetown
959 , Vanderbilt
951 , U Virginia
951 , U Michigan
944 , U Wisconsin
942 , U Texas
941 , UCLA</p>

<p>M Basketball , College</p>

<p>1000 , Columbia
996 , Yale
991 , Princeton
987 , Harvard
986 , Brown
985 , Vanderbilt
984 , Duke
984 , Dartmouth
984 , U Penn
972 , Northwestern
971 , Notre Dame
968 , UCLA
966 , Cornell
964 , Penn State
954 , Stanford
945 , Georgetown
942 , UC Berkeley
941 , U Virginia
938 , U Wisconsin
929 , U Texas
927 , U Michigan
919 , U Florida</p>

<p>Baseball , College</p>

<p>1000 , Yale
997 , Columbia
997 , Princeton
993 , Brown
990 , U Penn
989 , Harvard
985 , Northwestern
982 , Duke
979 , U Michigan
976 , Cornell
975 , Georgetown
975 , Dartmouth
974 , Stanford
974 , Vanderbilt
974 , Notre Dame
971 , UC Berkeley
967 , U Florida
967 , Penn State
963 , U Virginia
943 , UCLA
928 , U Texas</p>

<p>Ice Hockey , College</p>

<p>1000 , Yale
998 , Brown
998 , Harvard
994 , Notre Dame
989 , Princeton
988 , U Michigan
980 , Dartmouth
977 , Cornell
959 , U Wisconsin</p>

<p>M Lax , College</p>

<p>1000 , Yale
998 , Dartmouth
996 , Cornell
996 , Harvard
995 , Princeton
994 , Notre Dame
994 , Brown
993 , Duke
989 , U Penn
985 , Georgetown
978 , U Virginia
971 , Penn State</p>

<p>W Basketball , College</p>

<p>1000 , Dartmouth
1000 , Harvard
1000 , Princeton
1000 , Yale
996 , Brown
992 , U Penn
990 , Stanford
985 , Columbia
984 , Duke
984 , Cornell
981 , Northwestern
977 , Notre Dame
975 , U Florida
974 , U Texas
970 , UC Berkeley
969 , Georgetown
968 , U Wisconsin
965 , Vanderbilt
955 , U Michigan
953 , Penn State
943 , UCLA
928 , U Virginia</p>

<p>W Lax , College</p>

<p>1000 , Northwestern
1000 , Dartmouth
1000 , U Penn
1000 , Princeton
1000 , Penn State
998 , Notre Dame
997 , Vanderbilt
997 , Brown
995 , Cornell
995 , U Virginia
993 , Stanford
992 , Duke
991 , Yale
991 , UC Berkeley
989 , Georgetown
989 , Columbia
985 , Harvard</p>

<p>Special acknowledgement should go to the Northwestern women’s lacrosse program which achieved very high marks in this survey and also recently won their 5th straight national title.</p>

84

<p>Hawkette</p>

<p>The APR measures a few things–graduation rates and whether or not student-athletes flunked out or had the grades necessary not to flunk out when they tranferred out. While there is some attempt to discuss appropriate courses, I could not find anything that requires a student-athlete to take hard courses rather than all guts or discusses the use of special tutors by certain programs. So all that it’s saying is that at Duke or Princeton, for example, most student athletes had passing grades (which could be a C minus average) in whatever courses they chose to take (which could be the easiest possible courses) and they even could have received special help to get those grades.</p>

<p>It seems to me a pretty minimal standard and I’m not exactly sure what these numbers show about the academic life of the student-athlete or how to compare programs. </p>

<p>As almost everyone who went to an Ivy League school or has a child in an Ivy League school has posted on this thread, we are perfectly satisfied with the blend of academics and athletics at these schools. You are the only one who seems to be insisting that the Ivies change their policies to be more akin to your favored schools of Duke, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest etc. and that somehow life at the Ivies isn’t as good as it could be.</p>

<p>You are certainly welcome to your opinion and as many others have said, people who agree with you should go to those schools. However, I wonder whether there is any need for you to repeat your opinion in so many threads. Including this one, here is the list of threads you have started which infer or specifically state that schools with big time sports programs are better than schools without:</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&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/562352-fun-starts-again-college-football-top-colleges.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/562352-fun-starts-again-college-football-top-colleges.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/481786-why-cant-ivies-do-what-stanford-davidson-duke-vandy-nd-do.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/481786-why-cant-ivies-do-what-stanford-davidson-duke-vandy-nd-do.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/460941-winter-athletic-excellence-campus-enthusiasm-usnwr-top-30-national-universit.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/460941-winter-athletic-excellence-campus-enthusiasm-usnwr-top-30-national-universit.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/389224-athletic-life-college-football-scene.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/389224-athletic-life-college-football-scene.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/425236-winter-athletic-life-usnwr-top-30-natl-unis.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/425236-winter-athletic-life-usnwr-top-30-natl-unis.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/359084-collegiate-sports-should-part-college-search-process.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/359084-collegiate-sports-should-part-college-search-process.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/363898-academics-social-life-athletic-achievement-usnwr-top-20-a.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/363898-academics-social-life-athletic-achievement-usnwr-top-20-a.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

85

<p>midatlmom,
I don’t understand your (and Pizzagirl’s) need to shut hawkette down on this subject. If you don’t care about Ivy League sports, then don’t read this thread! Personally, I enjoy this discussion, as I have all the other times hawkette brought up the subject. :)</p>

86

<p>…and I don’t see the “need” to keep retreading the same subject. </p>

<p>Sometimes when a topic comes up that’s been dealt with before, I respond by simply providing links to all the past threads that dealt with it.</p>

<p>At least in those cases, the newly repeated topics were posted by new people who were not previously aware of the prior threads. </p>

<p>I would suggest that in the future the most economical use of CC bandwith is to respond “affiliated individuals post that they prefer things as is” and post the links in #84 above, plus this thread. Period.</p>

87

<p>midatl,
The data that I referenced above comes from a site that Corbett presented in praising one of the Ivy colleges. In digging deeper into the data, one sees that many top colleges, including non-Ivies, do an excellent job with their athletes. By providing the data as I did, one can see that. IMO, that is better than speculation about the difficulty of courses at a given college or repeated, self-serving commentary about how the Ivies are so pure that they don’t offer scholarships while the student-athletes at the others are a bunch of hired guns who don’t deserve to be there. As is frequently the case, the truth is a lot more interesting and revealing than these caricatures. </p>

<p>As for the threads, I have multiple purposes:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Present a vision of a college experience that many top students might enjoy if they were more aware of it and appreciated the differences it could make in their undergraduate experience and in their alumni lives.</p></li>
<li><p>Inform about some differences outside of the classroom between what one will experience at a variety of highly ranked colleges. College athletics is one area of difference and I have attempted to quantify this rather just provide subjective remarks on what is on offer at various colleges. </p></li>
<li><p>Broaden the awareness of what is going on at many top colleges. In many of the threads that you reference, I have usually posted information on 30 highly ranked national universities. As you know, there are only 8 Ivy colleges. Many readers might enjoy or benefit from reading comparisons between non-Ivy colleges.</p></li>
<li><p>Expand the college search criteria to things beyond the classroom. I have a view that the 150+ hours per week that a student spends outside of the classroom will significantly affect one’s enjoyment of their undergraduate years and should sometimes be even more important to prospective students. Most of the top colleges will offer a great variety of clubs and organizations and perhaps some will be unique to only a few colleges. My view is that such an activity, like high quality and nationally relevant athletics, should be highlighted for its differentiating benefit. </p></li>
<li><p>Explain the undergraduate benefits that a great athletic life can provide. Most who have experience with colleges that provide a good athletic life know that the differences with those that do not are palpable. My impression is that many prospective students (and some of their parents or others) don’t understand the collegiate athletic experience that is available at places like Stanford, Duke, et al. Also, IMO, comparisons to professional events are ill-conceived and miss the differences in the environments and the experiences. Furthermore, I think many don’t appreciate the regular, lifelong connection that college athletics can provide for many alumni, sometimes even extending into the workplace. </p></li>
<li><p>And let’s not forget that there are always new readers on CC. If you’ve read something on this topic before and don’t want to participate, then don’t. But most of these threads have gotten a lot of viewings and comment and perhaps some have benefitted from the discussions. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>I can probably think of other reasons why I’ve created these threads, but most of all the objective is to spur discussion and comparison and learning. There ARE differences among the undergraduate life at the top colleges, but these can get stamped out if a discussion focuses solely on the historical prestige of a college. My hope is that students actually consider the full student experience, in and out of the classroom, and evaluate all of the ingredients that will affect their lives as college students and as alums.</p>

88

<p>

</p>

<p>To each his own. Personally, I love reading 10 different threads on the same topic here on CC. Each one will inevitably provide a new POV from some new posters.</p>

89

<p>Sports like sailing and crew aren’t very huge in the public eye; however, they are really big at a lot of the top elite schools in the country.</p>

90

<p>Most of the individual Ivy schools are very old, but the “Ivy League” itself is not. The Ivy League and its athletic policies were not formally established until the 1950s. So what was the result?</p>

<p>Pretty darn impressive. The term “Ivy League” is now recognized and respected around the world as a synonym for academic quality – even in places that don’t follow NCAA sports. League members currently occupy 5 of the top 10 spots in the USN&WR National University” rankings. It’s fair to suggest that the creation of the “Ivy League” was the single most successful “branding” initiative in the global history of higher education.</p>

<p>Should the Ivies change their policies to match those of other top private universities, as hawkette suggests? Um, maybe a better question is: should other top privates change their policies to match the unbelievably successful Ivy League model? </p>

<p>Does #4 Stanford really benefit from being in the same league as third-tier Oregon State? How about #17 Rice and fourth-tier UTEP? Or #18 Vandy and fourth-tier Southern Mississippi? </p>

<p>Maybe, just maybe, the non-Ivy Division I schools should consider the Ivy approach. They could drop the affiliations with less selective schools, band together under a catchy name, enforce tough academic standards for all students – including athletes – and refocus on athletic competition with each other. Granted, this would certainly mean a drop in athletic standards and attendance. It’s the diametric opposite of hawkette’s proposal. </p>

<p>But it seems likely to me (though probably not to hawkette) that these losses would be outweighed by the benefits in other respects. Maybe I’m crazy, but I would bet that a hypothetical Division I-AA “Ivy West Conference,” composed exclusively of selective private universities like Stanford, NU, Vandy, Rice, Duke, etc. would immediately generate and sustain a great deal of interest, publicity, and prestige for the schools involved. You can bet that the discussion boards on collegeconfidential.com would flood overnight.</p>

<p>It seems like there are enough great schools in the US to give the “Ivy League” some competition as the brand name for university academic excellence. There are solid efforts in Division III (NESCAC holds 4 of the top 10 spots in the USN&WR LAC rankings, the “Seven Sisters” was once a powerful brand, and UAA has some notoriety as the “Nerdy Nine”), but they don’t have the same visibility as the Division I schools.</p>

91

<p>corbett,
Thanks for a very constructive response. I want to think about this, but it’s good to have such challenges. </p>

<p>I’m trying to identify differences in colleges and athletic life is different at many top colleges. Is it a positive differentiator for the school with its students, its prospective students, its faculty, its staff, its alumni, its local community, its region? I think it’s a stimulating topic. Thanks for throwing it out there.</p>

92

<p>With all due respect, Hawkette, I wouldn’t list Duke as a school that has a great athletic scene. Compared to the Ivy League schools, Duke is in a different league, but compared to most sports schools, Duke has been lacking in recent years. The football team has always been a bottom-feeder, and the basketball team has struggled in the two areas that are most important to Duke fans: beating UNC, and going to the Final Four. Duke hasn’t been able to do much of either for the past few years.</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, hawkette, the data (which I suspect I read more closely than you), doesn’t show that at all. What it shows is that schools are doing a better job of not allowing their athletes to flunk out. This can be achieved by many different mechanisms–private coaching, easy courses, members of the team getting different assignments or possibly, athletes taking harder courses and doing better. We simply don’t know.</p>

<p>For example, take a look at this story, [APR</a> punishes the have-nots of college sports - Columnist - ESPN](<a href=“Rachael Heyhoe Flint Trophy - Sunrisers bow out on top as sun sets on the Rachael Heyhoe Flint Trophy - ESPN”>APR punishes the have-nots of college sports - ESPN) which notes that the wealthier schools do better on the APR. As the author states</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Or here is a blogger, [College</a> Sports Reform: Putting More Focus on Academics | New America Blogs](<a href=“http://www.newamerica.net/blog/higher-ed-watch/2008/college-sports-reform-academics-5296]College”>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/higher-ed-watch/2008/college-sports-reform-academics-5296) who makes some valuable points</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m all for college athletes graduating and getting a good education. But to suggest that increased APR scores says a lot about the quality of the student-athletes at a given school is misleading.</p>

<p>As to your numerous threads, I am deeply impressed with your selfless tenaciousness, particularly in light of the unwillingness of Ivy parents and students to agree with your oft-stated points about the need for big time sports at the Ivies. Why or why won’t they understand that you know best and agree to “emulate the athletic practices of the colleges that offer the best combination of great academics and great athletics–Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame”, rather than stubbornly cling to their views that their schools are wonderful the way they are.</p>

94

<p>

</p>

<p>I saw this differently. The posters on this thread aren’t saying that the Ivies perform at a much higher level than your favorite schools. They’re saying that they have enjoyed (as spectators) their games and traditions just as much as the people at your favorite schools have enjoyed theirs. That while 50,000 in the stadium, the community-gone-wild and a game that is watched in bars all over the country and commented on is more enjoyable and fun to <em>you</em> than 5,000 in the stadium and a game that doesn’t make that night’s rundown on ESPN, their preferences and tastes are different. </p>

<p>And how is that something you can disagree with? If Chad Cornell says he really has fun following the ice hockey team, and Helen Harvard says she’s enjoyed the light-hearted rivalry at the Harvard/Yale game even though two minutes after the game is over she couldn’t tell you what the score was, how can you suggest that they aren’t really having the same amount of fun that you’re having at, say, a nationally televised game with 50,000 in the stands? Fun is subjective.</p>

95

<p>Cuse,
I view the issue of a college’s athletic life a little differently. I care about which team wins, but I care a lot more about the scene and the energy and the impact that this has on a campus and its undergraduates. I think that there is a world of difference in the nature and quality of the experience that is available at Duke’s basketball stadium (even if their teams don’t qualify for the championship) than what you might find in Dartmouth’s or Yale’s gym. So, while I will agree that Duke’s football scene is lacking, I think that they are pretty terrific in most other sports.</p>

<p>Midatlmom,
I’m puzzled by your latest post and have several questions. Please respond so that I can properly understand your thinking on this:</p>

<ol>
<li>Not entirely sure what you’re saying in your statement,</li>
</ol>

<p>“What it shows is that schools are doing a better job of not allowing their athletes to flunk out. This can be achieved by many different mechanisms–private coaching, easy courses, members of the team getting different assignments or possibly, athletes taking harder courses and doing better. We simply don’t know.’</p>

<p>Are you saying that they do these things or that you don’t know? </p>

<ol>
<li><p>Do you have anything that shows, for the issues you raised above, that the student-athletes at Stanford, Duke et al are treated in a meaningfully different way from other students at their school or in a way that is meaningfully different from Ivy student-athletes? </p></li>
<li><p>As you think about Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, do you reject my belief that their student-athletes may be as academically talented as their Ivy peers in the same sports? If you reject my belief, on what basis do you reach that conclusion?</p></li>
<li><p>Do you believe that the Ivy athletes/teams are competitive with the athletes/teams at Stanford, Duke, et al in all sports where both sets of schools compete?</p></li>
</ol>

96

<p>

</p>

<p>Agreed. But that already takes place. As an example, anyone who applies to NU understands that it’s part of the Big 10, the stadium’s right there in Evanston, they’re going to play football against a bunch of large public midwestern state universities, and they can decide for themselves whether that falls under “that’s really motivating and differentiating for me to be able to attend Big 10 games, great” or “shrug, couldn’t care less.” Ditto for any of the other schools mentioned. </p>

<p>Your concerns would only be relevant if students were being promised X but the schools actually delivered Y. As far as I can tell, all that information is out there in the open.</p>

97

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, I reject that belief. Because I don’t think it’s a big state secret that a school like NU dips down lower in the pool versus the Ivies, because they offer athletic scholarships and the Ivies don’t. I don’t care for it, but I’m not going to make a national case out of it. I don’t think they’re dipping down to the level of blithering-idiots-who-can’t-put-a-sentence together, and I think it’s few enough people that it’s not that it makes a meaningful difference to the caliber of the student body, but still … Of course it happens.</p>

98

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, hawkette, when I said I don’t know I meant I don’t know. I have stated twice that I believe that the APR awards don’t give us any insight into the academic quality of the athletes that are recruited or the academic quality of their courses of study. You are the one who has claimed that the APR tells us that “many top colleges, including non-Ivies, do an excellent job with their athletes. By providing the data as I did, one can see that.” </p>

<p>Do you base your claims on anything more than the fact that many schools have bumped up their graduation rate for athletes? Why do you feel that the APR data proves that student-athletes are better prepared or more academically inclined than they were in the past rather than simply receiving more services in order to graduate?</p>

99

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes. That may be true that they are DIFFERENT types of experiences. That does not make one inherently WORSE than the other, though. It’s just different tastes. Your continued insistence that the one experience is uniformly better, and if only the others knew what it was like they’d love it too, is what we don’t understand about you.</p>

<p>It’s like arguing chocolate vs vanilla.</p>

100

<p>P’girl,
If I had a nickel for every time that some Princeton alum told me about their basketball upset of UCLA or some U Penn alum told me about their great basketball arena or some Cornell alum crowed about their hockey and lacrosse, then I’d be rich. I guess we know different folks as many Ivy alums (and current students) that I know get this conversation a lot better than you and some do wish that they had had more of these fun opportunities.</p>

<p>For example, many months ago, I told an anecdote about a couple of Cornell grads who attended a football game at Vanderbilt (which their child had chosen over Cornell). They were blown away by the fun and the energy and the spectacle and that was at Vanderbilt (I can only imagine what they’d have said if they’d gone to a place like Notre Dame). They’d never seen anything like it and really wished that they could have had something like that in their college experience. </p>

<p>I also found this in the “Change isn’t always bad” file. In 2007, Harvard played its first night football game…ever. Over 100 years of football history and this was their first night game. They didn’t have to do it. I don’t know whose idea it was or if the students or alumni even supported the idea in advance of them installing the lights. But they did it and every report that I’ve heard indicates that it was a big crowd with a lot of energy and very fun for students and alums. Amazingly, the planet didn’t stop turning and Harvard today is still Harvard and not some football factory.</p>