<p>When's the last time you visited an Ivy League campus? I was at Harvard the last weekend of February this year. I don't think the Ivy students I know lacked for fun things to do while they attended college, and certainly current students don't.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Let me also ask one very hypothetical question-why shouldn't the Ivy League start offerring athletic scholarships again? <<</p>
<p>Why can't the Ivy League colleges do the same thing???<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Because it's simply not the kind of school they want to be. They did the semi-pro athlete thing in decades past and they found it not to their liking. It's their choice.</p>
<p>It's kinda like asking why doesn't BYU allow drinking alcohol like all those other schools. It would be a lot more fun at parties there. Maybe so. But it's not the kind of school they want to be.</p>
<p>BYU doesn't want booze. Ivy League doesn't want ahtletic scholarships. It all a qustion of what sort of atmosphere you want on campus. Not everybody shares your view of what constitutes fun or a desirable campus spirit.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When's the last time you visited an Ivy League campus? I was at Harvard the last weekend of February this year. I don't think the Ivy students I know lacked for fun things to do while they attended college, and certainly current students don't.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly. My D is at an Ivy, and college sports are of little to no interest to her or to many of her friends. It was the same for me at a different Ivy 30 years ago. I went (as did my D) for the academics, the chance to be with other intellectually engaged kids, and for the marvelous variety of things there were to do on campus. The only team I cared about at all was Ultimate Frisbee, because they were friends of mine.</p>
<p>Sure it's exciting if you win the big game or something, but so what? School spirit, at least at the two Ivies I know about, is very high...it's just based on things other than sports.</p>
<p>And the take-home point is that any student today who enrolls at Ivy League </p>
<p>Ivy</a> League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia </p>
<p>colleges does so with eyes open, aware that other colleges have different approaches to college sports. Ivy League colleges lead the country in high graduation rates and low rates of transfering out, so the students who go to the Ivy League colleges must like what's on offer, and they certainly could have enrolled elsewhere if they were able to be admitted to an Ivy. </p>
<p>The</a> Fox and the Grapes. Aesop. 1909-14. Fables. The Harvard Classics</p>
<p>one, do you really think ivy league league administrators want to open the can of worms that would be offering athletic scholarships? </p>
<p>its easy to say that a school would improve in sport x if it offered scholarships. its much harder to argue that a world-renowned school should begin providing every athlete in a major sport (say, basketball) a full scholarship while NOT providing full scholarships to the thousands of other immensely talented students on campus. what does doing such say about the mission of the university?</p>
<p>...this WAS the issue when my patriot league alma mater (bucknell) was considering the move to scholarships in basketball several years ago. much of the faculty were furious, but a final compromise was found when the current merit aid program was introduced to provide merit-based opportunities to non-athletes and athletes alike. problem is, its much harder to sell that argument at harvard, where nearly everyone is deserving of a merit award.</p>
<p>two, the academic index IS a major barrier to athletic competitiveness in 'revenue' sports. the average sat score of a hyp football player is in excess of 1300. the average sat score of a patriot league football player is in excess of 1100. and i would be be very surprised if ANY d1a program (be it notre dame, stanford, nothwestern, wake forest or vanderbilt) posted an average close to, let alone higher, than that.</p>
<p>"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"</p>
<p>I've been to one tailgate in my life, and hated it. I also think the silliness that goes with many colleges that LOVE their football teams -- painting their faces and bodies, etc. -- is just plain dumb. I despised that kind of stuff in high school, and I was glad to go to a college where most people felt as I did.</p>
<p>I have plenty of fun heading to the local sports bar and seeing the Harvard-Yale football game every few years.</p>
<p>What you consider must-have fun during college is the type of collegiate atmosphere that I would find repulsive. I live in a college town in which many of the locals live and die by how their football team does. I find them to be big bores, and I try to get as far away as possible from their home games.</p>
<p>I know there are plenty of people who love the rah rah school spirt that goes with having big, revenue-enhancing sports, and there are plenty of colleges to meet their desires. My older S is like that, and chose a college based on the reputation of its hockey team, which to his delight won the national championship during his brief time in college.</p>
<p>My younger S, however, is like me, and looked for and found a LAC that's not sports-happy, and he is happy there.</p>
<p>tokenadult,
You're missing the point. Creating a fun athletic scene would be an additive experience for the Ivies. Talk to your Princeton friends about the excitement on that campus after their win over UCLA in 1998 or to your older U Penn friends who still, to this day, talk about their run to the Final Four in 1979. Or even to your Cornell friends about their excitement at winning the Ivy men's AND women's championships this year. It wasn't Duke-Carolina, but it's a start. </p>
<p>Heck, many of the Ivy students and graduates I know are among the most ardent sports fans out there. Wall Street is full of 'em. Many of them would love for their Ivy college to have some of the excitement that goes along with this as long as they felt it wouldn't damage the institution's academic reputation. I'm saying that the two-academic excellence and a great/exciting/socially fun athletic scene-need not be mutually exclusive. It's not at Davidson. It's not at Stanford. It's not at Duke, Vanderbilt, or Notre Dame. So why not at the Ivies?</p>
<p>And, as for Harvard, why do you think they played their first night football game there last fall? That was a first in 122 years. Or why do you think they hired Tommy Amaker and were excited about his great recruiting class (although certainly not excited about his possible NCAA violations)? You may not care personally, but some students enjoyed that first night game and some students will enjoy it in the years to come if the Crimson can become a factor in Ivy basketball and perhaps more. </p>
<p>I'm not saying that Harvard and the Ivies have to choose between being a great school and creating a fun athletic scene; I'm saying that I think it is possible to have both and that I think it would be neat if the Ivies were able to do both. </p>
<p>coureur,
I'm sorry that I may come off as thinking that having a great athletic scene is the only kind of college scene that is desirable. I agree that it's not (northstarmom's comments above would be good evidence of that!). And given the power and academic prestige of the Ivy colleges, perhaps it is too risky to make any changes to the no-scholarship policy. But my point is that I think that most (but not all) students would enjoy the athletic scene, just as is the case at Stanford, Duke and the others. </p>
<p>booklady,
I'm not making a blanket statement about all students at your daughter's Ivy, your Ivy or any Ivy or even about those non-Ivies with great athletic scenes. We all know people at these colleges who are great fans and others (like northstarmom) who could not care less. But please understand that school spirit, based on academic strength first and athletic prowess second, is as strong at places like Stanford, Duke, Notre Dame, etc. as any school in the Ivy League. </p>
<p>ericaatbucknell,
I would love to see any data you can provide about average SAT scores at any of the Ivies for football as well as for the non-Ivy colleges that I have mentioned. As far as I know, the data is not available. </p>
<p>However, the graduation data is available….at least for the non-Ivy colleges. For the colleges that you mentioned (and a few others), it is as follows:</p>
<p>Graduation Rate for Football, Men's Basketball, Women's Basketball</p>
<p>93%, 91%, 100% Notre Dame (All students: 96%; All Student-Athletes: 90%) </p>
<p>93%, 67%, 92% Stanford (All students:95%; All Student-Athletes: 95%)</p>
<p>94%, 89%, 100% Northwestern (All students: 93%; All Student-Athletes: 85%)</p>
<p>91%, 83%, 100% Vanderbilt (All students: 89%; All Student-Athletes: 86%)</p>
<p>90%, 100%, 100% Wake Forest (All students: 88%; All Student-Athletes: 77%)</p>
<p>93%, 67%, 90% Duke (All students: 94%; All Student-Athletes: 90%)</p>
<p>85%, 85%, 100% Rice (All students: 93%; All Student-Athletes: 81%)
The big sport at Rice is baseball. The graduation rate was 93%. </p>
<p>Here is the link for the data:</p>
<p>Hawkette, it seems like you really like sports yourself, and so <em>you</em> think that all or most of the kids at the Ivies really want to have that fun athletic scene. I'm with the other posters here. If they wanted to change and take steps towards creating those powerhouses, they would. I went to NU during its horrible-football-time-period (mid 80's). Didn't bother me in the least that we had a bad football team, because I wasn't at NU to rah-rah at football games, I'd have gone to my own state's U if I wanted that experience. </p>
<p>I think you're projecting your own love of sports to these other places.</p>
<p>The proof is in the pudding, Hawkette. Students know that they can apply to the Ivies without the big sports tradition, or to other equally fine schools such as Stanford or Duke that have the big sports tradition. The Ivies don't appear to be hurting for applications, far as I can tell. Obviously it's not something they find important.</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. "</p>
<p>YOU don't think so. Obviously those students who are there disagree - else they'd have chosen Stanford, Duke, etc. It enhances an experience to YOU. Personally, it wouldn't have enhanced my undergrad experience at all to have a good football team. I don't care one bit and the only reason I went to NU football games was to hang out with my friends, not because I cared about what was going on on the field.</p>
<p>"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??"</p>
<p>What's neat about Davidson doing it (disclaimer: my niece goes to Davidson and is a varsity athlete there) is that Davidson is a small, very good but relatively unknown school. Princeton and Penn don't need publicity.</p>
<p>And frankly as someone who watched NU go from bottom of the barrel football to the Rose Bowl in 1996, I am <em>bothered</em> by the fact that all of a sudden NU got notoriety for sports -- as if our academic offerings weren't impressive enough, but the moment a handful of our students can toss a football, everyone notices. It's a reflection on society's warped priorities, IMO.</p>
<p>Hawkette, allow me to ask you again, </p>
<p>
[quote]
When's the last time you visited an Ivy League campus?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Seriously now, I know various alumni of various Ivy League colleges, and they don't complain to me that they lacked fun in college. One lawyer I know in town (partner in what is arguably the top firm in Minnesota) was a member of the Harvard marching band. He certainly saw plenty of athletic activities up close and personal when he was at Harvard. A LOT of the Ivy alumni I know were participating athletes themselves in their college days. You have to keep in mind that Harvard has more Division I NCAA athletic teams than any other college in the country, period. People go to Ivy League colleges, in general, as much to play sports as to watch them.</p>
<p>Hawkette, you said: "You're missing the point. Creating a fun athletic scene would be an additive experience for the Ivies. "</p>
<p>Would it make sense for me to find some highly selective LAC someplace and suggest that they should add a Greek scene, that it would be an additive experience for them; after all, look at all the fun I had at NU with my pledge class and at formals and exchanges and so forth? Some campuses don't want to have that particular culture or flavor; and it's not for me to suggest that students who go to a campus without a Greek scene are missing out, just because I enjoyed my own experience.</p>
<p>"But please understand that school spirit, based on academic strength first and athletic prowess second, is as strong at places like Stanford, Duke, Notre Dame, etc. as any school in the Ivy League."</p>
<p>And school spirit, conversely, is as strong at the Ivies as it is at Stanford and Duke.</p>
<p>BTW, I think you're making a *big leap in thinking that for the majority of students at Stanford and Duke, that they chose those schools precisely for a combination of academics and athletics. I feel quite confident that there are a good chunk of them for whom it was still primarily the academics, and the athletics were icing on the cake. And I also feel quite confident that there are kids choosing between, say, Stanford and Harvard, for which athletics never comes into play at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
People go to Ivy League colleges, in general, as much to play sports as to watch them.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yup. There are two ways for students to become involved in college sports. One way – which seems of particular interest to hawkette – is to cheer for your college’s team. The other way – which hawkette hasn’t yet acknowledged – is to actually play for your college’s team. </p>
<p>Most people who have done both believe that playing intercollegiate sports contributes far more to one’s personal growth than watching intercollegiate sports. This isn’t to say that watching college sports isn’t fun – it’s just that playing them, while harder, is ultimately more rewarding.</p>
<p>The problem with most Division I athletic programs – even academically strong ones like Vanderbilt or Notre Dame – is that the opportunities for average students to participate are greatly diminished or lost entirely. First, real Division I programs are dominated by scholarship athletes; walk-ons are rare. Second, real Division I programs generally have fewer teams to choose from, because it costs so much to run nationally competitive programs. For example, Vanderbilt (one of the schools listed by hawkette) has about 50% more undergrads than Dartmouth. Yet Dartmouth offers 16 men’s varsity sports (or 18, counting the coed equestrian and sailing teams), while Vanderbilt offers a grand total of...6. Sure, the quality of the Dartmouth men’s teams may well be lower – but the Dartmouth participation rate must be far higher. Which is more important?</p>
<p>At some schools (like Dartmouth) intercollegiate sports are perceived as a valuable opportunity that should be broadly available to all students, and not limited to a small pool of recruits. This point of view is particularly common at LACs (which may have 30 - 40% participation rates), but the Ivies are philosophically in tune with it as well. Most Division I schools have low rates of athletic participation, and lots of spectators. The Ivies would rather have high rates of athletic participation; they don't care if this means less competitive teams and fewer spectators.</p>
<p>If hawkette evaluated the "fun athletic scene" in terms of participation rates, rather than by student ticket sales, the Ivies would probably rank at the top of Division I.</p>
<p>Corbett- excellent points! Also- Pizzagirl. You got it! I personally think Reed should add fraternities and sororities to enhance the college experience for the Reed students (not)! </p>
<p>Vanderbilt- one of my favorites- does not even have a men's track team, so it wasn't an option for my son. The money goes to the big sports. My son was recruited by a lot of top LACs and Ivys which didn't have to support big football programs. </p>
<p>Hawkette- there are a few situations where you really "can't have it all" and don't even WANT to have it all. Sports at Ivys is one of those situations. Yes, there are some fun stretches like Penn basketball, but these are gravy and not the meat of the experience. My kid does miss Big Sports, but not enough to have picked a state u over his Ivy (much to the dismay of my bank account).</p>
<p>Pizzagirl,
I don’t think you need to be quite so defensive about this. I’m glad that Northwestern was fine for you and for the Ivy folks who have also posted. </p>
<p>As I have said many times before, I am much more a fan of the fun that surrounds sports than of the games themselves. Like you, I go to the games because they are an event and it is fun to be with a lot of friends at a football or basketball or baseball game and I find it especially exciting when the event has some important, national consequences. </p>
<p>I will completely accept your contention that not all students care about the athletic scene if you will only accept my contention that some do. And that this is so for students at both the Ivies and the Stanford, Duke, et al group of schools. </p>
<p>As for Davidson, they are now in the Elite 8 after beating U Wisconsin today (sorry barrons). Davidson is a perfect proxy for this discussion. Are all of the students who go there sports nuts? Of course not. Is their academic reputation jeopardized by their athletic success? Certainly not. Is the entire campus stoked about what is going on? I have no doubt that this is the case. Heck, the whole country is probably pulling for the school. And it’s fun. For the students, for the faculty, for the school’s employees, for the alumni, for the city of Davidson, etc. And I think that the same excitement would be occurring if the school were Brown or Dartmouth or some other Ivy. </p>
<p>Maybe we’ll just agree to disagree, but all I am saying is that there are several darn good academic schools that play Division I athletics at a high level and which provides a nice boost to the social life of its students, provides energy to a campus and keeps alumni connected over the years. I think that the Ivies might benefit by copying some aspects of what they are doing. </p>
<p>Finally, re your statement about college choices,</p>
<p>“there are a good chunk of (Stanford/Duke students) for whom it was still primarily the academics, and the athletics were icing on the cake. And I also feel quite confident that there are kids choosing between, say, Stanford and Harvard, for which athletics never comes into play at all.”</p>
<p>I agree. I’m not an absolutist in my argument. Academics will come first at all of these schools, and for some students, the athletic life considerations will be a factor and an extra benefit to those attending Stanford, Duke, et al. </p>
<p>Corbett,
I actually agree with nearly everything you wrote. If a student wants to play college sports, then his/her chances of doing so is much greater at the Ivy colleges. </p>
<p>A few points:
1) I believe that the average quality of Ivy athletics, particularly in the major sports of football, basketball (men and women) and baseball is closer to the Division III level than it is to the nationally competitive level of the non-Ivy privates. I don’t think playing football for Columbia or Cornell is comparable to playing football for Vanderbilt, much less Notre Dame. </p>
<p>2) For the amount of Division I sports available at a college, if you want to measure on the basis of sports like squash or crew or sailing or fencing, then very few of these are even offered as varsity sports at the non-Ivy colleges. Point to the Ivies. </p>
<p>But if you include the club sports, then the comparison balances out. You mentioned Vanderbilt has only 6 men’s varsity sports while Dartmouth has 16. I checked the Vanderbilt and Dartmouth websites. Are you aware that Vanderbilt has clubs in the following 32 club sports:</p>
<p>Aikido, Aussie Football, Badminton, Baseball, Billiards, Bowling, Cricket, Cycling, Disc Golf, Equestrian, Fencing, Field Hockey, Ice Hockey, Karate, Kung Fu, Lacrosse, Racquetball, Rowing/Crew, Rugby , Running, Sailing, Soccer, Squash, , Table Tennis, Tae Kwon Do, Tennis, Track, Triathlon, Ultimate Frisbee, Volleyball, Water Polo, Wrestling </p>
<p>Dartmouth, meanwhile, has 26 club sports covering many of the same sports:</p>
<p>Badminton, Boxing, Cheerleading, Cricket, Cycling, Dartmouth Poms, Dressage, EMS Club, Fencing, Figure Skating, Ice Hockey, Kendo, Kung Fu, Lacrosse, Polocrosse, Rugby, Soccer, Table Tennis, Tang Soo Do, Tae Kwon Do, Tennis, Triathlon, Ultimate Frisbee, Volleyball, Water Polo, Wrestling</p>
<p>I think it can be argued that there are plenty of chances for athletic participation at both colleges, although more chances for varsity participation at Dartmouth. </p>
<p>One last point about participation, please know that the non-Ivy colleges all have active intramural programs. In some cases, the intramurals are so rabidly supported that they actually involve an even higher number of students than do the Ivy colleges. Notre Dame is famous for this. </p>
<p>3) A part of my argument is for the alumni who enjoy watching their college compete in athletics. For example, many Duke alumni are still ga-ga over their basketball teams (men and women) decades after their graduation and follow the teams intently in person or on ESPN or via internet radio. I doubt that the Ivy alumni have the same passion for their sports teams. In a national context, the games didn’t really matter much when they were students and they don’t matter much after they graduate. </p>
<p>MOWC,
Sorry your son couldn’t do track at Vanderbilt-was that another Title IX casualty? </p>
<p>While I concur that one can’t have it all at a single college, I think it is possible to have great academics and great athletic life and, for some students, this is a pretty appealing combination. Frankly, I suspect that most of the Ivy folks have no idea what a Vanderbilt-U Tennessee football or basketball or even baseball game looks like and the fun that goes with these types of events and thus they have no idea what they are missing. My guess is that some would find it engaging, fun, and stimulating lifelong passions.</p>
<p>Harvard is being investigated on recruiting violations in men's basketball. Haha.</p>
<p>Just for perspective, I'm a Princeton alumn (undergrad) and a Notre Dame alumn (grad school). I strongly agree with Corbett, and I think the analysis applies to activities beyond just sports. My daughter wants to play her French horn in an orchestra, but wants to major in math. She was very concerned about applying to schools with music conservatories, where she might not be competetive enough to participate. As for sports, I liken the argument to that made by serious baseball fans. The major leagues are great, but there is a completely different and absolutely wonderful experience to be had as a fan watching the minor leagues. Some would argue the game is more pure at this level. I attended every Princeton football game, but can only remember two Irish games I attended (both against Florida State where my brother was an alumn). Princeton games were fun, but it was the half time show put on by the scatter band that was the big draw for me. In fact, we stood for the entire halftime and all eyes were on the field. </p>
<p>I now teach at Siena College. Division 1 basketball, NCAA Tournament first round win against Vandy. And I miss the days when the team played on campus in our bandbox of a gym. Every game was a sellout, and students wouldn't miss it for the world. Now we play miles from campus in the Times Union Arena in downtown Albany. Yes, the team is much better, and I like the players I have in class (Siena recently won an award from the NCAA for athlete graduation rates), who are given no academic advantages and are pretty darn good students. But it isn't the same. Moving into the big time has fundamentally changed the dynamic of the relationship between the team and the students body.</p>
<p>Just for perspective, I'm a Princeton alumn (undergrad) and a Notre Dame alumn (grad school). I strongly agree with Corbett, and I think the analysis applies to activities beyond just sports. My daughter wants to play her French horn in an orchestra, but wants to major in math. She was very concerned about applying to schools with music conservatories, where she might not be competetive enough to participate. As for sports, I liken the argument to that made by serious baseball fans. The major leagues are great, but there is a completely different and absolutely wonderful experience to be had as a fan watching the minor leagues. Some would argue the game is more pure at this level. I attended every Princeton football game, but can only remember two Irish games I attended (both against Florida State where my brother was an alumn). Princeton games were fun, but it was the half time show put on by the scatter band that was the big draw for me. In fact, we stood for the entire halftime and all eyes were on the field. </p>
<p>I now teach at Siena College. Division 1 basketball, NCAA Tournament first round win against Vandy. And I miss the days when the team played on campus in our bandbox of a gym. Every game was a sellout, and students wouldn't miss it for the world. Now we play miles from campus in the Times Union Arena in downtown Albany. Yes, the team is much better, and I like the players I have in class (Siena recently won an award from the NCAA for athlete graduation rates), who are given no academic advantages and are pretty darn good students. But it isn't the same. Moving into the big time has fundamentally changed the dynamic of the relationship between the team and the students body.</p>
<p>I had seen something posted that Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice football teams had avg SAT scores that ranged from 970-1070 and all other D-I football teams had an avg SAT below 970. From articles about AI for the Ivys, I had gotten the impression that their SAT avg were in the 1200-1300 range depending on the school.</p>