<p>As the parent of a current freshman student athlete at Yale with almost two semesters completed, I can personally verify the points made in this recent story in the Yale Daily News</p>
<p>[JANES:</a> Revisiting the state of Yale sports | Yale Daily News](<a href=“http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/mar/21/revisiting-state-yale-sports/]JANES:”>http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/mar/21/revisiting-state-yale-sports/)</p>
<p>Ivyboundparent, what are some specifics that led you to the conclusion?</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the attitude expressed towards athletes isn’t much different at the other ivies, either.</p>
<p>In defense of Yale: Women’s XC team finished the season 3/8. That said, there is EXTREME frustration on the part of many athletes at Y over the limitations on recruiting. It’s a tremendous competitive disadvantage that every athlete is painfully aware of. They’re hoping for a change of policy, but are not optimistic.</p>
<p>And in rowing, the LW men won nationals last year, the OW women NCAAs a few years ago.</p>
<p>It seems like so far, Yale has lowered recruits numbers but has stayed very competitive in at least the higher-profile sports. Can someone point to where they are terrible? Because I looked up many sports and they were all at least average for the winter and fall sports, with a few much better than that. The spring sports are just beginning the Ivy seasons so we don’t know for sure about them yet. Ivy record is more important than anything else - you can’t expect to get the same recruits as a school with an 1100 average SAT score like some of the other schools they play. If Yale can raise academics while staying competitive it’s a win win.</p>
<p>Redman, I used to defend Yale’s recruiting policies, but having kept a close eye on things for four years, I’m convinced their teams have a significant disadvantage as they form their teams. They are held to lower numbers of recruits, and can’t go after kids with anything less than stellar academic stats. While you’d think this would lead to higher regard from non-athlete peers at Y. I don’t think this is the case, because non-athletes aren’t really aware of the recruiting policies, and may assume that athletes are underqualified academically (not true.) It’s really a numbers game: fewer total recruits is bound to impact competitive edge because all sports depend on sheer volume of healthy, skilled athletes to succeed. </p>
<p>I hope Yale cracks the door open a little wider so that more student-athletes can get the nod. They could hold the academic standard high, but just allow in a few more recruits to accomplish parity with the rest of the league.</p>
<p>Samriser
It’s more a summation of attitudes displayed towards student-athletes at Yale. These are shared with us by our son (and I will not share them on this forum). He, not you,… not us, is the one most qualified to verify whether or not this occurs. He experiences it first hand. He is resolved to “weather it” because he has given his all for the school (academically, as well as wearing a uniform that has Yale on the front). He went through the same process, the same academic standards, that are used for all students who apply to such a great school as Yale. To shun what he has to offer to the school because he is labeled an athlete is not creating an environment of support. Again, I would recommend reading last week’s Yale Daily News piece. But just as importantly the number and variety of comments that follow. </p>
<p>On a related note. As a result of the administration not spending money on field maintenance on which his team performs, a current sophomore (just last week) is now out for the season. He suffered a dislocated shoulder from shagging fly balls on his “Home” field. (there are numerous potholes and ruts in the outfield from a total lack of maintenance).</p>
<p>Yale is being short-sighted. Many companies prefer to hire athletes, especially athletes who achieved success in their sport while in college. Why wouldn’t Yale want equal placement relative to Harvard and Princeton of their students in banking and financial companies, for example? Athletes do very well getting jobs in that field. I know there’s disdain for investment banking on this forum, but bankers earn a lot of money, some of which can be donated to their alma mater. I wonder if Yale does as well as H or P in placing students in certain industries which prize teamwork and a competitive attitude, and if so, for how long that will continue.</p>
<p>My D was on the track for possible recruitment for the swim team-- she spent “Junior Day” and broke from the group to wander around. She started up a number of conversations with students-- when she said she was a possible recruit, there was a coldness, she told me, from the students she met-- she said it was as if they were looking at a lower life form. She didn’t even stay for the rest of the “Junior Day” but took off to visit with some old school friends before she left to return back to her school. She never even continued the process with Yale saying that she would be “damned” if she ever went there.<br>
When I was at Yale there was some of that snotty attitude, but Brewster loved athletics, Levin exacerbates the situation. BTW IvyBoundParent, I know for a fact that nearly 2/3 of the money to pay for a new pool was offered by two alums (I am a friend of one of them) but the Administration said no-- that they had no plans to expand athletic facilities–even though-- it would be paid for and in the case of the aquatics programs they are using a state of the art facility for 1940–but so bad for modern swimmers.</p>
<p>Her decision to go elsewhere has made me tell the development people to take a hike–and I will not (and I did) give another penny until Levin is long gone and his policies are reversed. I know that Harvard (my S) and Williams (my D) will be pleased. Go Crimson, Go Ephs!</p>
<p>Redman 995, you note, and some others concur that:</p>
<p>‘It seems like so far, Yale has lowered recruits numbers but has stayed very competitive in at least the higher-profile sports…’</p>
<p>It will take quite a few years for the withdrawal of support for athletics to obviously lower the competitiveness of the program. First, the ‘building blocks’ will suffer: recruiting restrictions will reduce the number and ultimately quality of recruits, as many simply refuse to consider Yale (check! already happening in some sports), development and maintenance of facilities and equipment will suffer (check! eg witness comments about refusing funding for a new pool, potholed baseball field), and student athletes will endure ignorant, prejudicial attitudes tolerated and even sanctioned by the administration (double, no, triple check!).</p>
<p>As the building blocks crumble, the entire athletics program begins to erode, and competitiveness declines. We’re entering that stage, and it is truly a shame. Whether or not one feels that athletics play too great a role at Ivy institutions (and I admit to lingering ambivalence about that), restrictions of that role must be made League-wide for fairness’ sake–just like the whole lot of them got together to form the League in the first place, not allow athletic scholarships, etc.</p>
<p>I didn’t read all of Sarah Levin’s book, but even in her first chapter she makes that very point…maybe her dad needs to re-read the book?</p>
<p>it really surprise me if/that people are really looking down at athletes. In my experience everyone wants to be friends with athletes; they’re usually the “cool” people.</p>
<p>Well, Redman995, I think they’re cool!</p>
<p>The thought here is that the “dumb jock” image is nurtured by many at Yale, relative to other Ivies. At least I’ve heard versions of that on this thread, and also from my D, a frosh at Yale–just for one example, other students shamelessly expressing surprise that she, an athlete, would be placed ahead (of them, in some instances) in some of her courses such as physics. </p>
<p>The reaction to this insulting attitude is one of reverse discrimination, in that the recruited athletes band together and identify less with the general student body. “Good riddance!”, in effect. On the surface, this is divisive. Clearly there are more subtle, insidious costs to all involved as well.</p>
<p>My S, a junior, same sport but at Harvard, was once told by his roommate (now of 3 years, and a good friend), “I thought you were just a dumb jock at first”…so obviously Yale has no monopoly on this lovely phenomenon. I suspect outside of the Ivy League the “dumb jock” image is much more prevalent and accepted, possibly with good reason, so we’re really just looking at relative levels of stereotyping.</p>
<p>I would like to think Ivy students and administrators, and Yale students and administrators in particular, are bright enough and big enough to reject out of hand such demeaning prejudices. Yes, I would like to.</p>
<p>When18% of the class are recruited athletes (Harvard) there are enough of them that the non-athletes see them for what they are–some brilliant, some very smart and some not so smart-- but then I have been around Harvard for lots of years and the same can be said for most of the student body–I am very glad there are great painters and dancers and politicos and debaters and singers and Phillips Brooks kids who may not all be candidates for the “24” (the initial junior intake for PBK)-- but who wants just kids who only have the skill to be academics (and I am one…). I’d hate to have them in a House or a classroom…it is the frisson between kids with different passions and skills that make for a exciting and dynamic class-- Levin doesn’t recognize it and he has imparted the same to the students-- as a Yalie of the early '70s, I can tell you that Kingman’s love of sports also infused the campus. </p>
<p>The poster above is spot on-- it will take time (there is always a lag…)but Yale will slowly but surely drift into the Ivy second tier–and once there will find that recruits will view it with the same distain as they do for Columbia, Brown and Cornell. It’s kind of amusing that Chicago has started up its football program and is actively recruiting (as much as a DIII school can) while yale is attempting to take on Chicago’s old mantle as “the place where fun comes to die.”</p>
<p>“I feel bad for those kids”, overheard at Ivy championships this year after Yale men’s and women’s teams came in last place again.
Never good when your arch rival starts to pity you.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, Yale has no monopoly on this. I have heard similar first-hand stories about Harvard and Princeton. Just read the comments whenever an article about student-athletes appears in the respective student newspapers. Yale and Harvard both have 20% of students participating in intercollegiate athletics (<12% of whom recruited at Harvard.) Another concern is that many athletes switch to a major that is perceived as ‘easier.’</p>
<p>I’m surprised people would automatically assume athlete = dumb, especially outside of the sports like football, basketball, hockey, and maybe lax at some schools. I’ve never heard female athletes thought of as “dumb jocks” either.</p>
<p>beenthere2, your numbers at Harvard are off–18% recruited athletes-- the numbers are higher than elsewhere because they offer the largest number of DI teams in the nation. Also, at Harvard if you knew Harvard, you would know that there are no majors, they are concentrations and having advised there for decades, I completely reject the idea that athletes switch to “easier” course work–there is a squash player in Math 55 this year for example–if you don’t know what Math 55 is, look it up. I can not speak for Yale or Princeton, but you certainly cannot speak about Harvard.</p>
<p>I don’t know if everyone has read the latest Yale Daily News article on the subject at hand:</p>
<p>[Recruitment</a> caps come at a cost | Yale Daily News](<a href=“http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/mar/26/recruitment-caps-come-cost/]Recruitment”>http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/mar/26/recruitment-caps-come-cost/)</p>
<p>It details rather nicely many of the issues we are covering here…especially the escalation of frustration with President Levin’s policies on the part of many alumni and friends of Yale. In fact, looks like folks are really taking the gloves off.</p>
<p>It is obvious and a little disturbing that Levin is profoundly and perhaps intentionally deaf to their concerns, if anything slyly gloating in his ability to do as he pleases.</p>
<p>He must have some monumentally redeeming traits.</p>
<p>…or embarrassing photographs of various Board of Trustees members ! Taking this position and shunning significant alumni donations to improve facilities (at no cost to the school or student body) does not bode well for a positive legacy.</p>