Comprehensive Ivy League v. non-Ivy League Thread

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 12:06pm

The_prestige,
As weve had parts of this discussion before, I think you know my ambivalence with regards to some of the athletic practices at some of the prominent publics. But for the major privates, I have no such qualms. Thus, for your question,

What other group of schools uphold the highest academic standards and at the same time field competitive collegiate sports programs while refusing to kneel at the altar of big time collegiate dinero?

let me give you and others a very clear answer:

Stanford
Duke
Northwestern
Rice
Vanderbilt
Notre Dame

And there may be others depending on how characterize their athletic practices (Georgetown) or their relative academic/student strength (Wake Forest).

This group of six (or eight) are the colleges that I continually refer to as the best colleges in the country for delivering the premier undergraduate experience for top college academics and top, nationally-relevant, college athletic life (and please remember that I define athletic life less in terms of wins and losses and more by the scene that exists at a school and the impact that sporting teams play in the social life of an undergraduate). I would also like to add that many students at top publics like UC Berkeley, U Virginia, UCLA, U Michigan, and U North Carolina have a similar opportunity.

My point earlier about the Princeton-UCLA basketball game or the Harvard-Yale football game was that it was fun for the students to be a part of that and enjoy that scene. But rather than these being once-a-year or once-a-decade occasions, students choosing these non-Ivy colleges may get to enjoy these on a regular basis during their four years. Im not mocking the Ivy colleges, but it is clear that they operate at a deficit in the athletic excellence/athletic scene to the colleges listed above and I would hope that even you could accept that fair description.

adf8,
Youre right that you cant compare the single event success versus a school like Notre Dame, which even in a 3-win season, filled its stadium with 80,000+ for each of its home games. That is the point. Notre Dame is a great academic institution (as are Stanford, Duke, et al) and they ALSO give you a consistently great time in the athletic realm. None of the Ivies can do this.

the_prestige · December 30, 2007, 1:26pm

Well, I guess ambivalence is better than ignorance – at least you acknowledge that it goes on… the fact that you cannot accept the good with the bad is, frankly, a bit disingenuous. You cannot have a nationally ranked powerhouse program (in the big revenue sports such as football and basketball) without getting your hands at least a little dirty. And it’s like being pregnant – you either are or you are not.

I absolutely do not accept that as a fair description. As I said before, the Ivies, on balance, provide as broad an offering of Div I sports as any school in the nation. Just because one doesn’t have the pleasure (or should we say displeasure) of attending classes with a 350 lb linebacker (thug) that runs a 4.6 / 40, will play on Sundays, but doesn’t know his multiplication tables –> that constitutes being in a “deficit”? Au contraire.

I beg to differ. Give me a school that offers top notch academics, top notch faculty, top notch student body, top notch facilities, top notch reputation –> over and above (and I mean WAY, WAY over and above) a top notch football program, with a shiny stadium, top notch booster program, top notch national TV deal.

Out of the schools you’ve listed, really only Stanford and Duke come close. But even then, Stanford lacks a perennially competitive football or basketball program (though I would acknowledge they are absolutely competitive in many other Div I sports) and Duke really only has its basketball program (its football program is a joke as I’ve written many times before)…

Northwestern lacks a big time sports program on the football / basketball level, the best that they can claim as a “sports” school is that they are part of the Big 10 and can watch their teams get their butts whooped every weekend –> that’s a deficit if I’ve ever heard of one.

Here is a particularly insightful snippet from Wiki:

I presume nothing creates a spirit of school solidarity than getting your arse handed to you on a consistent basis. Rah Rah.

Rice? Its won a grand total of one single national championship at any sport in its entire school history and that was in baseball in 1993 – that’s it. That’s weaker than any Ivy by a long shot. Each Ivy has won multiple national championships in different sports. Talk about a deficit.

Vanderbilt? Here is a quote from Wiki:

Vanderbilt football was 2-8 this year and near dead last in the SEC. Rice was 3-9 near dead last in Conference USA. Ivy League sports run circles around Vanderbilt and Rice, are you kidding me?

Here is a final point: just because your school has the pleasure (or displeasure) of getting its butt whooped by Michigan / OSU (i.e. Northwestern) or by Alabama or Auburn (i.e. Vanderbilt) doesn’t make you a sports powerhouse. What it makes you is a sports doormat. And I’d rather be affiliated with a sports program that has parity rather than a bunch of powerhouse programs that run roughshod over the others.

Bay · December 30, 2007, 2:28pm

I attended a public u. with no football team, my H attended a private football powerhouse, and my D attends an Ivy. All are academically well-regarded. In hindsight, I’ve got to agree with hawkette that H’s alma mater wins hands down for the all-around American college experience. Of course, to each his own.

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 4:54pm

svalbardlutefisk,
Nice to see you here again.

You raise a completely valid point if one were centrally focused on the sports aspects of these top colleges in making their college choice. Please understand that while I frequently compare the athletic excellence and the athletic scenes of various colleges, I have not forgotten for an instant that academics are what should ultimately drive college selection. But if students can find institutions that offer academics on par with any in the country (Ivy or not) AND they can get the athletic piece thrown in (and possibly a superior social environment as well), then what’s not to like???

As for your comments about the student quality, do you really think that the Ivy students are materially different than what you find today at Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, etc? A very large percentage of the students who go to these colleges likely had Ivy acceptances or resumes that would have gained them admission if they had chosen to apply. They, too, are great debaters, are great newspaper workers/writers/publishers, are great musicians, etc. As you note, such talents are definitely not limited to those who attend Ivy colleges. The fact is that these are the same students who were high school classmates of the Ivy matriculates, but who chose a different non-Ivy college for personal fit reasons, not because they were inferior students (or debaters, musicians, etc.).

Re the point about athletic participation, I concur that it is much easier to play a major sport at an Ivy college and I suspect that their football and basketball rosters are full of students who weren’t good enough to play Division I, but still wanted to leverage their talent for acceptance to a great college. Great for them and that is probably the right individual choice. But that choice reflects the quality difference that I have mentioned. And don’t think for a second that the club and intramural teams at many of the mentioned non-Ivy colleges aren’t extremely broad and active. It’s not like the students at these non-Ivy schools are all a bunch of blobs sitting around eating Doritos (not to mention the fact that students at Stanford, Duke, Rice and Vanderbilt have much better weather and can exercise outside almost year-round).

Finally, and probably most important to me, is the scene surrounding the athletic events. I like the fun, the colors, the sounds, the roar of the crowd, the singing of the alma mater (as handyandy mentions), the tailgates, the marching bands, the quality and intensity of the competition on the field or court, etc. No matter what choice the individual athlete might make on where he/she wants to compete, there is no comparison in the scene between what you will find at a Pac 10 or SEC or Big Ten football game or an ACC basketball game and what you will see in any sport at any Ivy college. And I would bet that the Ivy athletes would be the first ones to acknowledge that very large difference.

I think you will agree that college selection should be about the combination of top academics and personal fit. If a good athletic life is something that a student thinks would be nice and fun to have as part of the undergraduate experience (not to mention the lifelong connections that it often provides), then these colleges could well be the better choice.

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 4:57pm

College_go,
My apologies to you, Barrons and other U Wisconsin faithful as I think that is a terrific college, a very fun school, and an environment with an outstanding athletic scene. The only reasons that I am not including it (and Boston College) with my comparisons is that I had to draw the line somewhere (so I drew it at the USNWR Top 30) and also wanted to focus on colleges that see the largest overlap with the Ivy League colleges.

danas · December 30, 2007, 7:18pm

the_prestige…
I’ve been beating poor hawkette about the ears with posts very much like yours for a while now. It sounded like you were quoting me.
I went to the University of Florida, and if my kid were considering Vanderbilt, I would consider the sports scene there a definite minus for the school. Who the heck would want THAT experience? Similarly, I now live in Chicago, and ditto for Northwestern. Just ego-busting for sports fans. At least there is the satisfaction of knowing that the Wisconsin and Ohio State students will be working for you some day.
IMO the only program at elite schools in a sport people care about where success doesn’t come as a surprise is basketball at Duke. And let’s face it, that’s like ancient Rome with its gladiators. The Duke basketball players resemble other Duke students not at all.

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 8:06pm

danas,
I understand your argument about the strength of football at Vanderbilt (they were 5-7 this year, not 2-8 as the_prestige posted) vs a school like U Florida. Likewise for Northwestern (6-6) vs Ohio State or U Michigan. Given the strength of the SEC and the passion for college football in the southeast, you’d have to be an incredible optimist to think that Vanderbilt could ever make a move to the top of that conference. But not that long ago, Northwestern won the Big Ten so it’s not like that is such an impossibility.

My football arguments, however, for Vanderbilt and Northwestern (and probably Stanford as well) are less tied to whether they will be national title contenders and more to the scene that they can offer their students, alumni and fans. Win or lose, the SEC and Big Ten and Pac 10 games and the scenes they provide are a hoot for the students and the fans. People who have experienced first-hand the scene at a Pac 10, Big Ten, SEC or Notre Dame football game or an ACC or Pac 10 or SEC basketball game know that it is very different then the same at an Ivy football or basketball game. I think even a blind man would easily know the difference.

For other sports, I think you may currently underrate Northwestern and Vanderbilt, both in their conferences and nationally. Northwestern finished 30th last year in the Directors Cup standings and ahead of several much bigger Big Ten colleges, eg, Michigan State, Purdue, U Illinois, Indiana U. And Vanderbilt (Directors Cup #33 and ahead of conference foes U Alabama, U Kentucky, U Mississippi), had some high profile wins last year (including a football victory on the road at U Georgia and a 20-point win in basketball over your national champion Gators) and some outstanding teams (the baseball team spent much of the year ranked #1 in the country). Granted, Northwestern and Vanderbilt are not sports juggernauts like a U Florida, but they are two exceedingly fine colleges (certainly the best in their conferences) with some very good, nationally competitive teams in some very important sports and they can put on a good event for their students, their alums and their local fans. What more could an undergrad ask for?

Probably the one college where my arguments leak a little is Rice. With just over 3000 undergrads, Rice really is in a difficult position to compete in major sports with the likes of U Texas and other southwestern powers. But they have made their mark in baseball (which is played by nearly 300 Division I colleges) and they are a fixture in the national rankings, including being preseason #6 in the USA for the 2008 season. BTW, their home baseball opener will February 26th when I suspect those in Ivy locales will be digging out from the latest snowstorm. :)

the_prestige · December 30, 2007, 9:01pm

My bad about posting the wrong Vanderbilt record, I must have been looking at their conference record, be that as it may, its still a losing record.

As for the Director’s Cup, let’s take a look at the latest standings:

[National</a> Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics - National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics](<a href=“http://nacda.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/nacda/sports/directorscup/auto_pdf/DIStandingsDec20]National”>http://nacda.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/nacda/sports/directorscup/auto_pdf/DIStandingsDec20)

Northwestern - no. 81
Rice - no. 101
Vanderbilt - not ranked

let’s compare that to the Ivies:

Princeton - no. 70 (higher than NU, Rice and Vandy)
Brown - no. 81 (tied with Northwestern, higher than Rice and Vandy)
Harvard / Dartmouth / Penn - no. 103 (two spots below Rice / higher than Vandy)
Yale / Cornell / Columbia - not ranked

So, while these only include fall sports, its not clear to me that Northwestern, Rice and Vanderbilt are these overwhelming sports meccas. Looks like they just about go head to head with the best of the Ivies – nothing more.

Lastly, I don’t buy the rationale that it doesn’t matter if your team gets their tails whooped every year – that the experience of it all is more than enough to make up for the fact that the powerhouse football programs basically use your team to wipe its cleats off of you – that your team basically serves as a sports doormat.

That would really suck. I don’t see it. Who cares if you get to see OSU beat you by 50 points every year (actually it was 51 points this year: 58-7)? Call me crazy but I’d rather not go to a game to watch my team get its arse handed to them every weekend. That would really get old. Fast.

So where do we stand? Stanford, I’ll accept as well as Duke. Notre Dame’s academics aren’t Ivy League level, but I will say that their athletics are a notch above.

But NU / Rice and Vandy? I’ll take my chances with the best of the Ivies. Those three schools just aren’t that much better, don’t offer a more prolific sports experience (in fact I’d argue they offer a pretty depressing one).

Gimme Ivy all the way. Rah Rah.

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 9:57pm

Ok, let’s do a comparison. Pick a college from the non-HYP Ivies and then I’ll pick one of Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt or Notre Dame. So, name your choice among Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, and U Penn and I’ll respond and others can chime in. We can measure on academic factors, student quality factors, athletic quality factors, athletic attendance factors, social life factors, weather factors, anything one thinks might be relevant to a student making a college selection.

svalbardlutefisk · December 30, 2007, 10:01pm

As for your comments about the student quality, do you really think that the Ivy students are materially different than what you find today at Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, etc? A very large percentage of the students who go to these colleges likely had Ivy acceptances or resumes that would have gained them admission if they had chosen to apply. They, too, are great debaters, are great newspaper workers/writers/publishers, are great musicians, etc. As you note, such talents are definitely not limited to those who attend Ivy colleges. The fact is that these are the same students who were high school classmates of the Ivy matriculates, but who chose a different non-Ivy college for personal fit reasons, not because they were inferior students (or debaters, musicians, etc.).

Hawkette, whatever the relative quality of the students at each of these schools may be, it’s simply a factual statement that many of the Ivies have better opportunities in a lot of extracurriculars. Perhaps my perception is skewed on account of the fact that Y+P were the only Ivies I applied to, and thus looked at in depth, but it’s true that in a wide range of areas, they easily outperform schools like Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, etc (and even Stanford and Duke to an extent).

Perhaps we disagree less than I sometimes think - your final statement that “these colleges could well be the better choice” is something I agree with far more than

Frankly, other than Stanford (and perhaps Duke), the non-academic opportunities at the schools on that list don’t really come close to HYP. If you think that athletics should put Stanford ahead of HYP for many students, perhaps you’re right (though I made the opposite decision at least in relation to Yale v. Stanford in my college choice). But to say that it makes USC, Notre Dame, or Georgetown a better choice is not only to degrade the importance of academics, but to ignore the other non-academic non-athletic opportunities at HYP. Similarly, while Columbia or Penn may not have quite the level of opportunities of HYP, for most students they will easily exceed many of the schools you listed above. Obviously for the things I’m talking about, being a member of the Ivy League doesn’t matter (in fact, athletics, your primary focus of discussion, are the only thing for which being in the Ivy League matters), but many of the Ivies happen to do better than some of your favorite schools. </li>
</ol>

I guess, when it comes down to it, what I don’t like about your posts is that you present your “ranking” as some sort of compilation of the best undergraduate experience. If you want to call it an academic ranking of the schools with major athletic programs, perhaps I could agree, but for most students, I don’t think your list correlates with overall undergrad experience any better than the US News rating. And your list doesn’t just shortchange the Ivies, which from what I’ve seen on this board could use a little shortchanging anyway, but also denies well deserved respect to schools like MIT and Caltech, UChicago, WashU, Emory, Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, Pomona, William and Mary, etc. There are so many factors that should go into choosing a school, that to make athletics a central factor - even if you do admit it comes behind academics - when for most students applying to schools of the caliber we are discussing it is more like a nice bonus (a “tip factor” if you will) produces a skewed ranking. And I’m not saying this because I don’t understand the passions that college sports produces; I was a huge sports fan growing up, I’ve been to bigtime division 1 football games, I get excited when UCLA beats USC in football or makes it to the Final Four in basketball. But, it was not important to me in choosing a college, and for the vast majority of students who care about sports less than I do, it is probably even less important. And I realize that sports events produce a big social scene (though at most schools this is mainly tied to football and thus only relevant in the Fall) but if you think that Ivy League students sit around doing nothing on Friday nights because there’s no big game the next day, you are completely wrong.
But, as I said, perhaps we disagree less than I think. Fetishizing the Ivy League is certainly silly, partly because each school in it is different, partly because there are plenty of other great schools, but I think we should be careful about going too far in the other direction.

tokenadult · December 30, 2007, 10:16pm

That’s what I think is odd about putting a big thumb on the scale for big-stadium athletic programs when comparing colleges. I don’t disparage watching athletics (I have the Colts game on on TV downstairs) and I definitely don’t disparage playing sports–all my children are soccer players. But I think a college where the major element of college life is watching people play sports must be a mighty dull college. There are so many interesting things to see and do at the Ivy League colleges that, indeed, have nothing to do with their extensive sports programs that I feel sorry for the people who go to those colleges without cool newspapers, student clubs, travel opportunities, and art museums on campus. (What the Ivies gain by wealth, some other colleges gain by sheer size, and some of the Big Ten universities offer wonderful activities for the sports-ignoring.) Sports are wonderful (as I have grown to think) but many other activities are wonderful too.

Handyandy58 · December 30, 2007, 10:37pm

I still think that people are still denying the ability of sports to bring a campus together. Sure, art museums, school newspapers, traveling, clubs, etc are nice, but none of them will make a campus surge like athletics will.

I know anecdotal evidence doesn’t count for much, but I’ve been on the admitted ND students forum, and I’ve seen some interesting stuff. Kids, both American and international, are on there talking about how they’ve never really seen a football game and really know nothing about the sport. Nevertheless, they admit that they are psyched for football next fall. They can’t wait to get caught up in the rush.

the_prestige · December 30, 2007, 10:39pm

OK. Easy:

Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, UPenn > NU, Rice, Vanderbilt, ND.

Cornell and NU are kind of a toss-up, let’s call them equal, but regardless Cornell > Rice, Vandy and ND.

hawkette · December 30, 2007, 10:44pm

svalbardlutefisk,
Perhaps you missed some comments that I have made recently, but I place HYPSMDu at a different level than virtually any other college in the country and believe that the brand power and the experiences that these schools can offer and the doors that they can are more compelling than anywhere else. I would expect in the great majority of cases that students would choose to attend these colleges if accepted (Duke being the only exception and I concede that mine is a minority view on this).

But for the next tier of colleges, I think that a very strong argument that the academic and student quality differences are quite small to non-existent at the next 15 or so colleges. The differences are in the nature of the full undergraduate experience encompassing the academic life (perhaps with particular focus on a field of study), the social life, and the athletic life (which I define more in terms of social benefits than necessarily how many national championships your school plays for-if one wants that, then go to UCLA and have a great four years).

As I have made clear, my personal favorites are those colleges that can offer top academics and student quality along with a great social environment and an athletic environment that is fun and nationally relevant. This leads me to Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, et al, but I also understand that this argument gets a bit stretched when we extend it as far to privates like USC and Wake Forest and also for the top publics (UC Berkeley, U Virginia, UCLA, U Michigan, U North Carolina).

As for the role of athletics (and particularly football) in the social life of an undergraduate and the impact that this has on a college campus, I probably place a higher value on this than you, but it’s certainly not as if I am alone in believing that this could be a real tipping point in choosing between academically-comparable institutions. The benefits of a good athletic scene are many and long-lasting.

Tokenadult and others,
You’re dead wrong if you think that having a good athletic scene crowds out all other activities? I mean, it’s not like that is the only thing going on these campuses. Have you ever visited Northwestern or Rice or Vanderbilt or Notre Dame or Georgetown? Do you really think that athletics is the defining aspect of these colleges??? If that is your view, then I can’t encourage you strongly enough to talk with students and alumni of these colleges. There is a TON of undergraduate activities going on at these colleges in much the same way that lots of things are going on at Brown or Columbia or Dartmouth.

the_prestige,
Are you going to try to back up your comparisons or are we just supposed to accept your view and lie down? I can assure you that I am not going to lie down.

Let me restate-pick a college and I’ll pick a college and then we can compare on the metrics mentioned above or anything else you want to throw in.

the_prestige · December 31, 2007, 12:42am

Athletic attendance factors? Frankly, who gives a toss?

When you walk into a job interview, do you think that the person doing the hiring gives a crap that the last football game you attended had 50,000 people watching it?

I can think of dozens of other factors that really matter to a perspective student looking at colleges – including things like post-graduate success (grad school placement, job placement, graduate salaries, alumni giving rates, etc.)

But I digress. There is a fundamental difference in the way you view sports and the way I do. You believe that its some huge determining factor and that having a prominent national sports program is nothing but a net positive. I argue the exact opposite. That as the focus, money, resources of a university steers towards a high profile athletic program, that this is a net negative. There are reputational issues, recruiting scandals, etc.

Bottom line? I’d rather go to a school known for its academics rather than whether it gets a lot of airtime on ESPN.

ilovebagels · December 31, 2007, 2:55am

ESPN DOES get you the acknowledgment and support of the vital “idjit” population. While this population is substantial, it does not really handle recruitment at Bain.

While the number of people who think Penn is Penn State far outnumbers those who know better, they don’t control my employment future.

tokenadult · December 31, 2007, 3:52am

I’ve had occasion to visit the campuses of (in approximate west to east order, not chronological order) U Dub, UPS, Willamette, Berkeley, S.F. State, Stanford, UCLA, Cal State L.A., UC Irvine, Cal State Fullerton, UCSD, SDSU, Arizona State, U of Arizona, BYU, U of Utah, U Nevada Reno, Montana State, U Wyoming, University of Denver, U of CO Boulder, Air Force Academy, U of New Mexico, UTEP, UT Austin, KS State, U Nebraska Lincoln, Iowa State, Gustavus, U of MN, Augsburg, Macalester, St. Olaf, Carleton, Northwestern College (MN), Bethel U, Concordia U, UW Stevens Point, UW Madison, Marquette, UW Milwaukee, Northwestern, U Chicago, UIUC, Indiana, U Memphis, Rhodes, Tennessee Knoxville, U Alabama Huntsville, NC Central, Duke, UNC, NC State, Georgetown, GWU, American, Catholic U, U MD College Park, Towson State, Anne Arundel Community College, Naval Academy, Princeton, N.Y.U., Columbia, West Point, Yale, Harvard, MIT, Bowdoin, and at least a few others. I did a lot of travel related to education policy, and still do.

hawkette · December 31, 2007, 10:12am

the_prestige,
I think you fail to grasp the idea that having fun at a college athletic event is not mutually exclusive from having a superior academic experience and getting beaucoup opportunities in the post-graduate world. The problem is that you’ve been conditioned to think that a strong athletic (and probably social) life at a college somehow discredits it academically and damages one’s professional prospects. That’s too bad (not to mention being flat-out wrong) because the college experience can be an academic journey AND fun, including the fun you can find at major college athletic events. And for students who like having the excitement and the fun associated with college sports as part of their undergraduate experience, the colleges that do this the best are not found in the Ivy League.

tokenadult,
Glad that you have visited a lot of colleges, but sorry that you have not yet made it to Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt or Notre Dame. I encourage you to visit these colleges the next time you are in their neighborhoods as they are pretty terrific places. And I assure you that while they may have sports as part of their undergraduate experience, these universities are most certainly not defined by the excellent athletic life that they provide.

the_prestige · December 31, 2007, 1:34pm

I think you fail to grasp the idea that having fun at a college athletic event is not mutually exclusive from having a superior academic experience and getting beaucoup opportunities in the post-graduate world. The problem is that you’ve been conditioned to think that a strong athletic (and probably social) life at a college somehow discredits it academically and damages one’s professional prospects. That’s too bad (not to mention being flat-out wrong) because the college experience can be an academic journey AND fun, including the fun you can find at major college athletic events. And for students who like having the excitement and the fun associated with college sports as part of their undergraduate experience, the colleges that do this the best are not found in the Ivy League.

Hawkette, as I’ve said a number of times, you fail to grasp the idea that having fun at college does not necessarily EQUAL sports. There are plenty of other activities that are equally important and appeal to a diverse, broad group of people (political activities, cultural activities, community / charity, technology, music, theater, film, arts, media, and the list goes and on). The irony of your stance is that while you accuse others of being narrow-minded when not acknowledging how important sports are, the most myopic view is one that sees sports as the be all and end all of non-academic collegiate activities – it absolutely is NOT. The fact that you cannot see this hypocrisy is what is extremely ironic.

That is not to say that I don’t enjoy sports – I absolutely do. That is not to say that I do not acknowledge sports can rally a community – it absolutely can. But, at the same time, you fail to address or acknowledge the fact that when it comes to a high profile, nationally ranked powerhouse sports program in the big $$$ sports (football and basketball), there is a seamy, darker underbelly to that beast. At least acknowledge this – you can either stick your head in the sand while you wave your pom-poms or you can at least accept this. Otherwise, we can just agree to disagree on this topic.

Finally, hawkette, with all due respect, that is an incredible presumptuous and offensive statement. Who the hell are you to know what I’ve been “conditioned” to?

I’ll say it clear. I’ve respected you in my previous exchanges, but if you want to go down the road, then so be it – the gloves are coming off.

You don’t know me from a hole in the wall. You don’t know anything about me or what I have been “conditioned” to. I have strong opinions, yes (as do you), but please don’t presume to know what I have been “conditioned” to. I know what I know. I see what I see. I have friends who have gone to Ivies and friends who have gone to community college and everywhere in between. I am smart enough to look at things objectively and draw my own conclusions. Just because my view doesn’t jibe with yours, please don’t try and belittle my own view as being wrong due to being “conditioned” to something. Perhaps we just disagree, is that an impossibility? Are you 100% correct in every view that you have? Some things are factual – things like Harvard is a harder school to enroll into than a community college – and some things are a matter of personal opinion – things like “I like sports”. So what? Some people don’t. You are damning an entire community of students and alumni with a stance like that. You are basically saying that noone ever has fun at a school that de-emphasizes or doesn’t have big time sports – premier, elite places such as MIT, Caltech, Chicago and many of the elite LACs. You somehow know what’s better for them than they do? Again, very presumptuous. Hawkette, you don’t speak for everyone. In fact, you only speak for yourself. Don’t act as though you have some kind of mandate to force down the throat of others if their view departs from yours.

So please, we can respect one another’s opinions or otherwise we can start getting ugly quickly.

system · December 31, 2007, 1:42pm

I think when all else equal sports makes the difference, since it results in a more entertaining climate

which is why I’d take Duke over Columbia, Chicago, Brown, etc. in a second. And no, its not just because I’m doing finance…

Comprehensive Ivy League v. non-Ivy League Thread

CONNECT WITH US