Why can't the Ivies do what Stanford, Davidson, Duke, Vandy, ND do?

College Search & Selection
1

<p>With the ongoing excitement of March Madness for NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball, there are a few colleges that are creating an awful lot of FUN and POSITIVE ENERGY for their students at these colleges as these schools participate in the nationally televised tournament. </p>

<p>My question now is why aren't more of the academically prestigious colleges that participate in Division I sports also able to field teams that are nationally competitive? I'm not suggesting that the Ivies will be able to compete across the athletic spectrum with the major publics that play highest quality Division I sports-UC Berkeley, U Virginia, UCLA, U Michigan, U North Carolina. The Ivies can't compete with the athletic life on display at these fine state universities, but why not try to compete at a level similar to private colleges like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame? Or how about at the level of a little college like Davidson College with a student population under 3000 students?? </p>

<p>The last time that the Ivies were able to advance a team to the Sweet 16 was almost 30 years ago for the men (U Penn in 1979) and Never for the women. </p>

<p>For the record, here are the private colleges that are similar in academic quality to the Ivies, but also have placed teams into this year's Sweet 16 of either the Men's or Women's bracket. </p>

<p>Men's Tournament: Stanford, Davidson</p>

<p>Women's Tournament: Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame</p>

2

<p>"My question now is why aren't more of the academically prestigious colleges that participate in Division I sports also able to field teams that are nationally competitive? "</p>

<p>Because it's extremely hard to find stellar basketball and football players with the stats to qualify for a place like HPY who'd choose HPY over Stanford, Duke, etc. which have much stronger teams</p>

<p>However the Ivies are div 1 competitive in other sports such as ice hockey.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, Harvard has more Division 1 NCAA teams than does any other college in the country.</p>

<p>And, as a Harvard alum, I can say that I personally wouldn't have traded the Harvard cachet for attending a college with a nationally ranked football or basketball team. As is the case with probably most Harvard students, sports isn't what attracted me there. </p>

<p>In fact, I spent a year at Stanford and never bothered to go to a game. I never wanted to go to a big sports school. I hate all of that hoo ha.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, it's not as if the Ivies are having difficulty attracting applicants or getting high yields.</p>

3

<p>It's not that they can't, it's that they chose not to.</p>

4

<p>northstarmom,
I'm not asking you to trade your Harvard experience, but rather suggesting that it could be added onto with an athletic life similar to what can be found at these other top academic institutions. I think that the Harvard administration's move to host its first night football game ever last fall and the move to hire Amaker as men's basketball coach signal that perhaps the administration wants to upgrade the current Harvard athletic life offering. I personally think it would be pretty neat if Harvard or Yale or Princeton was in the Sweet 16 as I remember the great excitement of my Princeton friends a decade ago following their basketball win over UCLA. Why does this need to be a once–in-a-decade-or-more event for the entire Ivy League??</p>

<p>arbiter,
You sound like Bartleby and his "I would prefer not to." What's wrong with having nationally competitive sports teams in prominent sports?</p>

5

<p>While I apreciate the Melville reference (Bartleby has a fond place in my heart) its definitely misplaced here.</p>

<p>There is nothing wrong with having nationally competitive sports teams, if you recall from previous threads you've started I'm in favor of it. But it is not a necessary good- some people prefer not having it. If the current administration of Harvard likes the current campus culture, why change it? Do you see the point I'm trying to make? I could go on at some length trying to explain it, but it seems to be a plain enough idea that I think you'll have gathered my meaning.</p>

6

<br>


<br>

<p>Because Stanford and those other schools offer athletic scholarships and the Ivy League does not. If you were a blue-chip athlete with pretty good academic stats as well, would choose a perhaps slightly-sweetened finaid package at Harvard or Yale over a full ride at Stanford? Probably not, especially if your EFC at Harvard was high.</p>

<p>Back in 1940s the Ivy League gave athletic scholarships and they ruled big-time college athletics. But they underwent a reappraisal and decided as a league to refocus on their schools' true purpose - education, not semi-pro sports. They could reinstitute scholarshps if they wanted to. They could certainly afford it. But as was said, they choose not to.</p>

7

<p>Why pick on the Ivies for ... being in the Ivy League? The schools made a deliberate choice to be different and it seems to have worked. More than Olympic star has made the choice to attend an Ivy League school. </p>

<p>Harvard, Princeton, and the rest of the League don't have to be Michigan or Wisconsin. Excellence comes in many different flavors and ranges.</p>

8

<p>"I'm not asking you to trade your Harvard experience, but rather suggesting that it could be added onto with an athletic life similar to what can be found at these other top academic institutions. "</p>

<p>I like and liked Harvard the way it is. I don't see any reason for it to have a Michigan or Stanford type of athletic life. People who want that kind of existence are welcome to go to those kind of universities.</p>

<p>As we used to say, "Different strokes for different folks."</p>

<p>Incidentally, I live in a college town where football is king. I try to be out of town for the big games.</p>

9

<p>The Ivy League schools are not allowed to offer athletic scholarships. They also have pretty high standards for admission for recruited athletes...there's some sort of formula, but basically at a place like Harvard an athlete would have to have a solid GPA (high 3's) and above a 2000 SAT to get in. </p>

<p>I mean, I'm sure there are some really great athletes with those kind of scores, but...1. These standards are cutting out a lot of potential athletes and 2. A lot of the "very best" athletes with scores like those would take athletic scholarship at Cal or Duke. The Ivies just aren't THAT concerned with having a nationally competitive athletic program either...we enjoy sports, have a lot of school spirit, and see some fairly good competition within the pool of schools we compete in.</p>

10

<p>The true quadruple threat--football, basketball, academics and social life.</p>

<p>SportingNews.com</a> - Your expert source for NCAA Basketball stats, scores, standings, and blogs from NCAA Basketball columnists</p>

11

<p>If you aren't giving $$$ (although "need" gets defined a little loose for some Ivy-recruited athletes), you aren't going to be competitive with the Big Boys. The Patriot League has discovered that. They are D1 schools, and most do not offer athletic money. The ones that do excel in several sports and have some Kenyan runners etc.<br>
Rice isn't exactly a powerhouse athletic school except for baseball, but it sure didn't bother my daughter while she attended!
I think Vanderbilt is one of the schools that successfully combines top-notch athletics and academics.</p>

12

<p>I'm probably coming at this from a different perspective from most of y'all. I'd like to see the Ivies be competitive in these events as I think that the athletic life at a college is a positive influence and does not necessarily have to damage the academic reputation of a college. As I see it, the choice of great academics/great athletics need not be either/or. </p>

<p>When I look at schools like Stanford, Duke, et al, I see places that have great academics, but also offer an outlet for their students that can be enormously fun and can energize an entire campus for a game or a month or even an entire season (not to mention the positive emotional and financial benefits for/from alumni). I think that the students at Stanford, Duke, et al really enjoy and benefit from having this level of accomplishment by their classmates and I wonder why the Ivies don't choose to do the same. Why shouldn't they do more to compete in this arena? </p>

<p>Are the students/people really that different at the Ivies than what you'd find at these other terrific academic institutions and the Ivy students don't want to enjoy a fun athletic scene? I don't think so and I think it would enhance the undergraduate experience at the Ivies. IMO, having an example that combines the best in academics with the best in athletics would be truly great to see. Who wouldn't love to see a Princeton or a U Penn or some other Ivy do what Davidson is doing this year?? If Amaker has his way, maybe this will be the case with Harvard in a few years time. </p>

<p>As for the success of the Ivy teams in the past, that was truly a different era when the black athlete did not participate in major college athletics. I think it is clear that African-Americans have had a huge and positive influence on the quality of play in the major revenue sports of football and basketball. </p>

<p>northstarmom,
I'm not comparing this to the major publics (like a U Michigan) as I think that would be a major culture change for an Ivy college, but I am comparing it to schools like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame that are similar in size and have similarly strong academics and student bodies. I'm not suggesting that the Ivies be turned into athletic factories, but rather field teams in some prominent sports that are nationally competitive.</p>

<p>mochamaven,
I think you overrate the Academic Index requirements of the Ivy League (eg, scores of 560/560/560 and a 2.8 will get you a 171, good enough for Ivy admission) and underrating the quality of the student-athlete at places like Stanford and Duke. Granted, the NCAA requirements are less than the Ivy requirements, but it's not like every Ivy athlete who gains entrance is an academic star as well.</p>

13

<p>I'm aware that Hawkett ewas referring to "prominent sports that are nationally competitive," but Harvard has a diversity of students, many of whom care deeply about sports that aren't considered that important at colleges that don't build student bodies to represent all kinds of diversity including in sports interests. Folks like me would rather have attended a college that had students who participated in a large variety of athletics than to have attended a college where football or basketball was king.</p>

<p>Harvard's National Championships:</p>

<p>Harvard's All-Time National Team Championships
Courtesy: Harvard Athletic Communications
Release: 07/31/2006</p>

<p>Courtesy: NCAA Photos</p>

<p>Harvard Fencing - 2006 NCAA Champion
Updated through 2005-06 season</p>

<p>Breakdown
• 138 national team championships (110 men's/coed; 28 women's).
• Four NCAA championships (1989 men's hockey; 1990 women's lacrosse, 2003 women's rowing, 2006 fencing).
• Most National Championships: 31 in men's squash.
• First National Championship: 1880 in men's track and field.
• Most Recent National Championship: 2006 in fencing</p>

<p>Men's Heavyweight Crew (9)
1983, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1992, 2003, 2004, 2005.</p>

<p>Women's Heavyweight Crew (2)
1973, 2003.</p>

<p>Men's Lightweight Crew (6)
1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003.</p>

<p>Women's Lightweight Crew (5)
1991, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997.</p>

<p>Men's Fencing (9)
1893-94, 1894-95, 1895-96, 1896-97,1898-99, 1899-1900, 1922-23 (foil), 1923-24 (foil), 1930-31, 1933-34 (epee).</p>

<p>Men's and Women's Fencing (1)
2006.</p>

<p>Men's Golf (6)
1898, 1899, 1900, 1901, 1902, 1904.</p>

<p>Men's Ice Hockey (1)
1988-89.</p>

<p>Women's Ice Hockey (1)
1998-99.</p>

<p>Men's Lacrosse (14)
1881, 1882, 1883, 1885, 1886, 1887, 1905, 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912, 1913, 1915.</p>

<p>Women's Lacrosse (1)
1990.</p>

<p>Men's/Co-ed Sailing (6)
1952, 1953, 1959, 1974., 2002 (Team Racing), 2003 (Team Racing)</p>

<p>Women's Sailing (5)
1968, 1969, 1970, 1972, 2005.</p>

<p>Men's Soccer (3)
1913, 1914, 1930.</p>

<p>Men's Squash (31)
1950-51, 1952-53 (co-champion), 1953-54, 1955-56, 1959-60, 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66, 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73, 1975-76, 1979-80, 1982-83, 1983-84, 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98.</p>

<p>Women's Squash (11)
1984-85, 1986-87, 1987-88, 1989-90, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1998-99, 2000-01.</p>

<p>Men's Tennis (1)
1927 (indoor).</p>

<p>Men's Track (13)
1880, 1881, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1885, 1886, 1888, 1890, 1891, 1892, 1901, 1909.</p>

14

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/sports/ncaafootball/27ivy.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/sports/ncaafootball/27ivy.html&lt;/a> </p>

<p>
[quote]
One of the Ivy League’s founding principles is that its members do not offer athletic scholarships. Furthermore, prospective athletes’ classroom performance in high school is rated with the Academic Index, a complex equation that factors in SAT scores and grade point average, to ensure that they meet the same requirements as nonathletes in the highly competitive applicant pools.

[/quote]
</p>

15

<p>


</p>

<p>What is the best evidence of what most people think about this?</p>

16

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

17

<p>tokenadult,
I hear you and others about the non-scholarship aspects of the Ivy League and the admission requirements, even of its athletes. But I am trying to compare the quality of the student-athletes at the Ivies with those at other highly regarded academic colleges, eg, Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame. Is it really that different? Do you really think that these colleges have ruined their academic reputations by also having top-flight Division I athletes enrolled? I would bet that the non-Ivy colleges have some student-athletes who might not reach the Ivy AI level, but I also would bet that they are a small minority and that the overall student-athlete pool is pretty good academically. Furthermore, I know that the graduation levels for the student-athletes at these colleges are, in most cases, very similar to that of the larger university. </p>

<p>Let me also ask one very hypothetical question-why shouldn't the Ivy League start offerring athletic scholarships again? I mean, keep the admission standards with the AI, but why not use some of those billions in endowment dollars and give scholarships to some of their student-athletes? If the Ivies want to attract the low-income student, maybe one of the ways to attract them would be though athletic scholarships.</p>

18

<p>The answer is that being a very selective private school does not put you out of contention. Look at Stanford. They have one of the two or three best sports programs in the entire nation. They have won 13 straight Sears Cups (the best athletic program in the nation). Duke has a very strong basketball program. Notre Dame has a traditionally powerful football program. Really only Northwestern has troubles athletically. They only have 3 national championships total (all in women's lacrosse). On the Division III level, Williams has won 11 Sears Cups (note: only 14 have ever been awarded).
I think that the reason that these private schools are successful could be because they have far more funds than any public school. They don't have to worry about the state cutting their funding or anything like that. Sure, it would be easier not to worry about the academic abilities of the athletes, but there are plenty of very good athletes with good enough grades.</p>

19

<p>
[quote]
The answer is that being a very selective private school does not put you out of contention.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It doesn't put you entirely out of contention, for sure. My hometown NFL football team has starting veteran players who are Ivy League graduates. But the colleges mentioned in this thread that have much more outstanding athletics than the Ivy League dig much deeper into the applicant pool (in academic rankings) to find their star athletes. That's as true of the "Ivy-plus" non-Ivy colleges as it is of the colleges that are by no means academically equivalent to Ivy League colleges.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Oh, yes. I'm surprised you haven't heard that. Parents in this state shopping for colleges for their student-athlete children are well aware of the difference in academic standards in the Ivy League.</p>

20

<p>I may also have gotten off on somewhat of the wrong foot as my point is not directly related to national championships. This is great if it can be achieved (Go Cardinal!), but just making the college nationally relevant is what I'd be aiming for. Today, regardless of the first-round opponent for the Ivy League in the men's and women's basketball tournament, it is almost a foregone conclusion what the result is going to be. The Ivy college will lose and perhaps badly. I don't think it has to be this way. </p>

<p>What can happen with a successful athletic team in a high profile sport like football and basketball or even baseball? Draw a crowd, get the campus involved and energized, cheer for your classmates and for your college team, travel to the games and participate in some silliness or tailgating, connect the alumni to the school on an additional plane, go to the local sports bar and watch your college compete on national TV, etc. The winning and losing is almost an afterthought as there can only be one national champion and chances are it won't be your college, no matter where you go. What I'm after is the experience, the excitement, the energy, the fun. </p>

<p>I'm suggesting that we dream a little, just as Davidson students are today. Dream about knocking off perennial powers Gonzaga and Georgetown and then playing Big Ten U Wisconsin on CBS national TV. And maybe even going a little further….</p>

<p>Or dream a little, just as the students at Stanford are after beating Cornell and Marquette and going into their next game against U Texas. And maybe keeping their season alive for another few days…or more. </p>

<p>Or dream as some of the students are that follow women's basketball at Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame. Seeing their school reach the Final Four (or more) would be pretty cool and, on their campuses at least, is a big deal. </p>

<p>Why can't the Ivy League colleges do the same thing???</p>