<p>circle your calendars for the nationally televised Cornell-Duke basketball game from Cameron this season…</p>
<p>45 percenter, </p>
<p>“Ivy League sports are NOT about big money, big media, national-spotlight.” </p>
<p>Hey, I understand your comment above and others about the quality and nature of play in the Ivies. That’s great and all, but I’m not with you if your point is that top academics is incompatible with top athletics. The Ivy League colleges may have chosen to take a lower profile route, but because Stanford, Duke et al have chosen an alternative course does not mean they can’t still provide great academics and great sports. So go easy on the way you’re implicitly characterizing these other schools. They have academics like the Ivies AND some future pro athletes and great nationally competitive teams and they do college athletics the right way. </p>
<p>I’m sure the folks at Cornell are proud of their lacrosse team or hockey team (and I’m also pretty sure that some of those students would not have been admitted without their athletic skills) and rightfully so. This same approach is being performed at other outstanding academic schools for major sports in the toughest sports leagues and these schools are producing nationally competitive teams. It really is an extraordinary combination that you can’t find at many colleges. </p>
<p>Re your posts about participatory sports, if you would like to measure athletic programs by student participation rates, this is a far different standard. I think it is a valid response (and I find it interesting that so many are quick to condemn Stanford because their football team stinks, but they continue to win the Directors Cup or people will ridicule Northwestern sports but their women’s teams have been terrific). IMO, student participation in some type of sporting or physical endeavor is an important part of undergraduate life. As they say, sound body, sound mind. I would also suggest that you would need to incorporate intramural athletics into this as well.</p>
<p>But even so, for me, it’s not as much about the winning and the national prominence and the championships as much as it is about the scene. It’s fun and it makes for great memories and it also keeps you connected to the school. And I think that the Best Combination colleges provide a great, unique, and differentiating scene.</p>
<p>You people are ridiculous.</p>
<p>1) They would not add Stanford - Stanford is much times superior in most athletics. Do you really think a Californian school is going to be in the same sports league as NE? Think of the traveling that would necessitate.</p>
<p>2) Georgetown could have been Ivy if they wanted. They are Jesuit, so they didn’t. And wouldn’t.</p>
<p>Edit: I’m guessing much of this has already been discussed but I didn’t feel like browsing 60 pages of discussion.</p>
<p>padfoot—certainly right about Stanford. Certainly wrong about Georgetown. No other school “could have been an Ivy if it wanted.” All those who were invited joined when the conference formed. No others have been invited since, nor is it likely to happen. The conference was formed by like-minded schools in the Northeast based on traditional athletic rivalries. Georgetown had no significant history of athletic competition with any of the Ivies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“The right way” to do college athletics is a matter of opinion. 50,000 kids at the Ivies don’t feel that nationally-ranked sports teams are all that essential to their college experience, and they “voted” that way with their feet. For you, obviously, it WAS important. But don’t assume that the same is true for others. Many, many people prefer a college scene that does NOT emphasize big-money, big media, “semi-pro” sports teams as a major source of institutional identity and pride. For many (50,000 at the Ivies, thousands more at LACs, etc.), NOT having that kind of sports scene IS “do[ing] college athletics the right way.”</p>
<p>'Nuff said.</p>
<p>45 percenter,
I guess I touched a nerve. Sorry. </p>
<p>First, I never said that the great academics/great athletics schools are for everybody and I have not attacked the academic quality of the Ivy League schools, so please don’t distort my arguments. </p>
<p>Second, I’m just trying to suggest a different way of approaching the college search process than saying college X is an Ivy or college Y is ranked higher than college Z so it must be better. So much about college search is a search for fit. Too often on CC I read comments that are more about the search for prestige without any real thought given to the actual experience that one will have as an undergraduate. </p>
<p>Third, I have assumed nothing about individual preferences. Rather I pointed out that great academics and great athletics with a large athletic scene can be blended, and for students who might want that environment, then there are some pretty fine schools out there, but none of them are in the Ivy League. </p>
<p>Fourth, re doing it the “right way”, this was in response to earlier suggestions that these schools are athletic factories that are little more than breeding grounds for the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. They most certainly are not. </p>
<p>Fifth, of course 50,000 students made a choice to attend the eight Ivy League colleges. Just as about 40,000 chose to go those six other Top 20 privates that have great sports and another 135,000 chose to attend those eight other schools ranked 20-30 that have great sports. I’m not sure that how many went in one direction or another is really relevant. These are all great schools and people can have excellent experiences at all of them. As they can also at the non-Division I schools (where they probably feel purer than the Ivy and the others in their approach, or lack thereof, to sports). I am not expressing a judgment on the choice, I am expressing a judgment on what is available at various colleges and each person can decide for him/herself. </p>
<p>People (including me) constantly give praise to the Ivy League and its member schools but unfortunately, I rarely see Ivy Leaguers returning the favor and the respect, particularly if there is an area that these other schools might do better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s actually being a bit generous – the IL is probably a “middle of the pack” mid-major conference.</p>
<p>The IL would be hard pressed to beat teams in the A10, Conf-USA, MountainWest, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sometimes? Make that RARELY and it usually entails beating a bottom-dweller.</p>
<p>Last season Harvard got whooped by a middling B10 team, Michigan (82-50); Dartmouth got annihilated by Kansas (83-32); Brown lost to a horrible NU team (64-40); Princeton lost to a bad Seton Hall team (79-41); Columbia got annihilated by Duke (86-43) and Providence (81-55); Yale, the 2nd best IL team, lost big to BC (72-56); and Penn, the IL champ, lost big to Syracuse (78-60) and got totally destroyed by UNC (102-64);</p>
<p>And yes – Cornell, the 3rd best IL team did barely beat a horrible NU team (64-61; the worst NU team in 4 years, which had to rely on a frosh), but Cornell also lost to a middling B10 team – Iowa (65-50).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For sports like lax and soccer, the admissions requirements for the Ivies is similar to that at schools like NU, Duke and Stanford.</p>
<p>For FB and BB, the admissions requirement is higher – but not that different (maybe a 100 point diff with schools like NU and Stanford; Duke and ND, otoh, have lower standards).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not to the top 1/3 or so of Div 1-AA teams – these teams could beat lower-rung Div 1 – A teams.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a laughable statement. The top IL team is maybe comparable to a 15-16 seed team.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>prestige – the difference is that others make arguments using FACTS, instead of the lame “you’re jealous you didn’t go to an Ivy school” retort you posted.</p>
<p>Just to put this athletics discussion in a new light, let’s reverse the point of view. If the Ivy League were to break up, what athletic conferences would their schools go to? I very highly doubt it would be the Big East or the Big 10. Maybe the Patriot League? Or the Atlantic 10? Or the NESCAC? Or the Northeast Conference?</p>
<p>America East.</p>
<p>Not the A-10 with regard to BB (well, maybe Penn).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>hawkette, you didn’t touch a nerve–no need to apologize. I was just responding to your implications throughout this thread that the big-time college sports scene is always desirable, and that highly ranked academic schools that have it (e.g., Duke Basketball) are necessarily superior to schools that don’t, because they have the “whole package” (my words, but your implication). My point is that many people not only DON’T see the presence of a big-time sports scene on a college campus as a POSITIVE, they actually see it as a NEGATIVE. It’s clearly a matter of preference, and lots of people come down on both sides.</p>
<p>And although the Ivies don’t excel nationally in the marquee televised sports of football and basketball (even though both Penn and Princeton HAVE made it to the NCAA Men’s Basketball final four within the last 30 years), their other teams aren’t exactly losers in the national arena. They may not be sports of which you’re a big fan, but Ivy athletes still continue to win NCAA national championships virtually every year in sports like rowing, fencing, track and field, swimming and diving, skiing, wrestling, and lacrosse. Maybe you weren’t aware of this:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/documents/ncaa2.asp[/url]”>http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/documents/ncaa2.asp</a></p>
<p>
As you probably know, Penn regularly plays three A-10 teams (St. Joseph’s, Temple, and La Salle) as part of Philadelphia’s famous “Big Five” Basketball, and often beats them:</p>
<p><a href=“http://philadelphiabig5.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/pbg5-m-baskbl-sched.html[/url]”>http://philadelphiabig5.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/pbg5-m-baskbl-sched.html</a></p>
<p><a href=“even%20though%20both%20Penn%20and%20Princeton%20HAVE%20made%20it%20to%20the%20NCAA%20Men’s%20Basketball%20final%20four%20within%20the%20last%2030%20years”>quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The scene of collegiate bb has changed significantly since 1979 when Penn made it to the Final 4. (Btw, it’s been more than 40 years since Princeton made it to the Final 4 (w/ Bill Bradley).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that has already been well-established.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which is why I said maybe Penn.</p>
<p>Otoh, last year, UMass beat Dartmouth and Yale; GW beat Dartmouth; Fordham beat Penn; RI beat Brown; St. Joe’s beat Penn; Dayton beat Yale; etc. (Penn did beat Temple last year.)</p>
<p>“The scene of collegiate bb has changed significantly since 1979 when Penn made it to the Final 4. (Btw, it’s been more than 40 years since Princeton made it to the Final 4 (w/ Bill Bradley).”</p>
<p>Waits patiently with popcorn to see if anyone comments on basketball during the days of Bill Bradley and how the change hasn’t been so great for the sport itself.</p>
<p>
My mistake. But Princeton did win the NIT in 1975 (so within the last thirty-TWO years). :)</p>
<p>45 percenter,
Points well made and taken. I’m a very obvious supporter of schools that have great academics and great social scenes and great athletic scenes. But great social and athletic scenes can mean different things to different people as you rightly point out. </p>
<p>The interesting thing to me is that many (actually, nearly all of them) of the Ivy people that I have known over the years like sports a lot, like my next door neighbor who played football for Princeton back in the 1960s. They have known how to keep it in balance with other priorities in life, but many are avid fans and appreciate excellence. But they also love going to the sporting events at places like Stanford or Cal and appreciate that there is a pretty big difference in what you will experience there and what you might get in Princeton or Ithaca. </p>
<p>Over the last several decades, we’ve all seen big changes on the college scene. One is the expansion of academic excellence across the country and larger numbers of top students enrolling at universities that have less relative historical prestige than the Ivies. Places like Stanford and Duke, and more recently Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame are more and more frequently coming on the radar screens of top students all over the country. The Ivies retain a huge advantage in visibility, but demographics are also have a large role in pushing students to expand the universe of schools that they are looking at. </p>
<p>A second trend is that the Ivies, while certainly expanding their diversity of matriculates, continue to attract many students who have a keen interest in sports. It is this universe of students that I am communicating to and suggesting that they may want to also consider other excellent academic schools that can also quench their interests in a larger and potentially more fun sporting environment. </p>
<p>ramses 2,
Don’t choke on your popcorn as I’m sure it was not your intention, but your post above could be interpreted as a racist statement.</p>
<p>Hawkette? Explain your smear against me dear. Surely you’re aware that some in the sport miss the days of strategy and Walt Frazer.</p>
<p>^Yeah! Clyde and Willis Reed and Bill Bradley and Dave DeBusschere and the rest–I hated them because I was a Bullets fan, but that was a team!</p>
<p>That’s okay, just as long as you didn’t like the Celts…they were just evil:)</p>
<p>Wes Unseld, Earl “The Pearl” Monroe, Gus Johnson (backboard breaker), Jack Marin, Kevin Loughery–that was my team. 
</p>