mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
10-10-17 02:18 PM - Post#233709
In response to palestra38
When we're discussing systematic advantage, I'm referring to the Ivy Agreement's rules, not external advantages (such as school "brand", athletic facilities or other investments in the program, etc.).
HYP and Penn all have an advantage (of varying degrees) over the other four when it comes to the amount of resources they put behind the program (recruiting, facilities, coaching, etc.). I leave that out of "systemic advantage" because a school could choose to change that if it wanted to.
What it can't change is what's baked into the Ivy agreement. And that is that a school has to offer need-based aid similar to what a regular admit would receive and can't recruit a player below the AI floor and must meet an average AI standard, varied by school, across the department. When it comes to those factors, HYP still have the highest average to hit and are somewhat restricted at the floor. Though with the floor at 183, that is far less space of restriction than it was when the AI was 171, 176 or 178. And FA packages across the league are pretty even now.
So, I guess your point is that Harvard, Yale and Princeton have better brands than the other five and thus get all the recruits. I don't think that sentiment is shared by others in the league.
|