Impressive! Chicago should continue to do well, as it’s quite strong in M and W Tennis, Swimming & Diving and, (very recently), W Lacrosse.
I wonder if they’ll end the year in the top 5 - a first for the program (and a far cry from the top 40 or 50 finishes from decades back).
With the recently reported 60% of the incoming class being varsity athletes in high school this performance level should continue or improve. We are in good company (Johns Hopkins and MIT) at this highly ranked level.
Hey Cue7, maybe you should reconsider your description of UChicago as the “Academic Ivy” to the “Athletic Ivy”!
Love the transformation that is going on at Chicago, last year Chicago finished 9th in the D3 Directors Cup final standings, its best showing ever. Now going for Top 5. The original Monsters of the Midway are hopefully back for good!
@Zoom10 - I’d consider that if Chicago goes D1 and succeeds. It’s not fair to the D1 ivies to call D3 Chicago the Athletic Ivy!
For now, Academic Ivy is still the best title.
Now that would be the ultimate, if Chicago decides down the road to go back to being D1 and rejoining the Big Ten. I know it’s a pipe dream, but of all the high academic D3 schools out there, you can make a case that Chicago is the only one (other than Hopkins, which already is D1 in lacrosse) for which that could be a realistic possibility given its previous Big 10 membership, large class size as a full fledged university compared to small LA colleges, etc.
In fact, Chicago’s class size is on par with all the Ivys and Stanford and Duke so why not consider D1? It will take time and money to complete that transformation, but I’ll be happy to make a contribution. Going D1 wouldn’t mean that athletes would comprise a larger percentage of the entering class, but it would mean that the Maroons would start being noticed on ESPN. If only Hutchins didn’t end football in 1939, think what Chicago could be like today!
@Zoom10 - Don’t hold your breath waiting for a D1 designation. However, if you want to make a contribution to College Athletics so that UChicago can maintain its rightful title as the “D3 Ivy” they will likely be very grateful. Capital Campaign is running till the end of the calendar year.
@Zoom10 - I agree with @JBStillFlying - don’t hold your breath. Also, D1 sports (and D1 sports facilities) are incredibly expensive. They also don’t tend to make money, and can take away from the resources available for academic pursuits.
But, as opposed to what JBStillFlying says, Chicago certainly can’t have the “D3 Ivy” title. If you really want a D3 Ivy experience, look to Amherst or Williams - they have much better (recent) athletic traditions.
Chicago is a newcomer to the athletic scene.
It’s academic tradition, however, is decades-old.
Academic Ivy is still the best title, for now.
American football is such a monstrosity, it is not dying quick enough!
Please stay D3, and be proud.
And women’s soccer too. That sport needs to die ASAP, since it has the 2nd highest concussion rate among sports.
“Chicago certainly can’t have the “D3 Ivy” title. If you really want a D3 Ivy experience, look to Amherst or Williams - they have much better (recent) athletic traditions.”
UChicago is a newcomer both to the “ivy” scene (per @Cue7) as well as the athletic scene. That’s why “D3 ivy” would fit well, assuming such a designation is needed.
All colleges have a decades-old academic tradition so UChicago isn’t alone. However, it is distinctive in its long term commitment to and tradition in the liberal arts. It’s probably the most liberal-artsy of the R1’s at this point. So perhaps it can also be known as the “LAC ivy.”
@JBStillFlying - if you’d like for Williams and Amherst then, how about D3 Little Ivy?
Also, you’d know more than I, but I feel like Chicago’s academic tradition (and reputation for academic focus that exceeds virtually all of its peers) is still more of its identity than its D3 athletic programs. Also, per a quick glance at their athletic website, Chicago still doesn’t have that many D3 sports - it’s a very small part of its institutional focus.
I’m much more comfortable affixing the “academic” label to Chicago, rather than anything that implies sports (like D3).
Maybe that’ll change down the road, but right now, do you really think Chicago is more sporty than academic?!
My my, that would be quite the change! I wonder what @marlowe1 would say…
Put another way, “Academic” comes to my mind before “D3” when I think of Chicago.
“if you’d like for Williams and Amherst then, how about D3 Little Ivy?” - Not at all. Being D3 is part and parcel with being a “little ivy.”
“Also, you’d know more than I, but I feel like Chicago’s academic tradition (and reputation for academic focus that exceeds virtually all of its peers) is still more of its identity than its D3 athletic programs. Also, per a quick glance at their athletic website, Chicago still doesn’t have that many D3 sports - it’s a very small part of its institutional focus.” . . . “Put another way, “Academic” comes to my mind before “D3” when I think of Chicago.”
Otherwise, you aren’t really shooting for “identity” as much as just a quick way to distinguish one “ivy” from another. After all, they are mostly all the same right? You are looking for distinctions, not differences. That’s why “D3 ivy” works so well - unless you are planning to add MIT or JHU to the “ivy” group?
However, if you are still into a one-word “identifier” - try “bookish.” That seems to tie up more neatly all those rather awkward descriptions I’ve included here.
Well, @JBStillFlying - the descriptors should offer a way to distinguish the schools from one another. Certainly, while UPenn has been called the “social ivy”, or Brown is the “hippie ivy”, that doesn’t mean other schools are NOT social, or hippie. Those schools just have reputations characterized by that word.
Similarly, Penn, Dartmouth, etc. are definitely academic. But, they don’t have the reputation for concentrated focus in quite the same way as Chicago.
It’s why I’m still comfortable with “Academic Ivy.” “Bookish Ivy” might work, but I don’t think it’s as comprehensive as the “Academic” tag.
Chicago does have the very un-ivy-like habit of prioritizing intellectual growth over all other aspects of college life. They may have broadened the “other” offerings and made undergraduate living a bit more fun or bearable, but they haven’t lost that singular focus, nor do they plan to do so in the future from what I can observe. UChicago - if indeed it’s “ivy-like” in at least some respects - is absolutely distinct from the others in this one key respect.
That’s why the College won’t become a D1 school anytime soon (and likely will never). If the faculty, alumni and student communities were sorely conflicted about expanding the size of the college and trimming 30% from the Core Curriculum for fear of destroying the very identity of the place and having it become “like everyone else,” one can only imagine what sort of conflict would arise from any attempt to turn the athletic program into a nationally-ranked D1. (Building up a D3 program is simply not the same thing and anyway, the College had joined up with a D3 conference decades ago - long before these recent and notable wins).
Of course, if someone were to step in with $800 million just for the athletic program, that might be a different story. Still, such a gift would cause major issues and, very likely, another “year of reflection” similar to what happened when @Cue7 attended.
Chicago has 20 varsity sports. That’s fewer than many, Harvard sponsors about 35, but more than most D1 schools. U of Texas only has 18 varsity sports. To be a D1 school, the school has to sponsor 14 teams (with a few additional rules m/f teams).
Chicago will not go D1. The Ivies have each other to compete against and set their own recruiting rules. UC would have to be an independent (not going back to the B1G 10) and how would they compete in recruiting while maintaining their admissions criteria?
Agree completely with @twoinanddone and @JBStillFlying - Chicago would never go D1. They’ve spruced up their D3 program very nicely, and it might be fun to see some other improvements (start a Bowl Game with MIT or Johns Hopkins in football?).
Relatedly, building a truly great D1 sports program (in the big D1 sports) would take more than $800M. The going rate for a top-flight football stadium/facility these days would probably be $500M alone.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/us/expensive-college-football-stadiums/index.html
It’s pretty crazy.
I think Chicago was much better served spending $125M on their relatively new arts center. I’ve heard that was a shot in the arm for student creative/arts life, and is a great venue.
If they have more to spend, I’d like to see more student social spaces pop up around campus (live music venue? more bars? what’s needed to spruce up student life?)
OR - what about the admin subsidizing and promoting more of these little dining clubs:
https://www.chicagomaroon.com/2013/06/04/under-the-table/
It’d probably cost 0.5% of a D1 football team, and would probably do more for the student community!
I have no dog in this discussion, but I have been lurking around the UChicago threads, as my son has been hemming and hawing over sending in an application. My $.02 is this. Without a Billion dollar donor who is focused on athletics there is no way to enter the rarefied air of the B10. Facility costs, coaches salaries, and fully funded scholarships with COA is absolutely ridiculous. Annual budgets in the B10 range from a “low” of $85M (Purdue) to nearly $200M for OSU and Michigan. Most would consider Northwestern, UChicago’s peer (at least in the B10), and although I couldn’t find Northwestrn’s budget, it appears they are running a deficit in athletics. Even with a budget deficit Northwestern is nearing completion of a $270 million dollar indoor practice facility!!! It is a thing of beauty if you haven’t seen the renderings.
UChicago could, go the route of a non-football D1 school, join the Big East with similarly aligned private schools that are in that conference. While UChicago would easily have the highest academic profile in the Big East, followed by Georgetown, the member institutions are widely considered strong national/regional universities where academics take priority over athletics. The footprint would fit with schools as close as DePaul, Marquette and Butler. I’m guessing facilities would still need an upgrade, especially basketball, and in Chicago I’m guessing the price would be in the range of $250M.
That’s a lot more than two cents, but the reality of the D1 sports landscape. Now if UChicago leadership is interested in hiring an unqualified consultant to show them how to spend money on athletics, I’m their guy!!
@roper1313 - hopefully your son enjoys success applying to Chicago!
Building successful, big D1 sports programs gets harder - and more expensive - by the day. Northwestern has clearly prioritized this, and it will probably spend about half a BILLION dollars in pursuit of this goal.
Remember, along with the the $270M new athletic facility, NU also spent $110M renovating its basketball arena. They’ve also made myriad other upgrades to the program, and will certainly invest more in recruiting top-flight athletes. Again, this will easily be $450-$500M in investment.
That’s a huge sum of money, and none of it goes into the academic/research plant for the U.
I’d much rather Chicago keep a good D3 program, and focus as many resources as possible on its academic functions.
Perhaps, if they wanted to go D1 in a less expensive sport, like M/W soccer or tennis, that could be fun. Even upgrading “lesser” sports to the D1 level is expensive though. D1 coaches typically earn more than D3 coaches, recruiting costs are more substantial, you still need good facilities to get good talent, etc.
And, most likely, without many millions in investment, the squads would be fairly mediocre. I’d rather have top 5 D3 soccer and tennis programs, as opposed to middling D1 programs.
The benefits just don’t outweigh the substantial costs.
Again, I’d rather see modest investment in other student life outlets, and am curious to hear what other posters think could be worthwhile. More bars? More bookstores? More bookstores with bars?
(One opened in Hyde Park a while back, but closed recently: https://chicago.eater.com/2019/9/12/20862747/bibliophile-hyde-park-closed-boozy-bakery-bookstore )
“Again, I’d rather see modest investment in other student life outlets, and am curious to hear what other posters think could be worthwhile. More bars? More bookstores? More bookstores with bars?”
@Cue7 - when was the last time you were in HP?