Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 1 of 3 ALL123
Username Post: Ivy AI        (Topic#20542)
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3274

Reg: 11-23-04
10-09-17 07:51 PM - Post#233665    

Here I go again. Does anyone else think there is an Ivy League pecking order that un-levels the recruiting field? It is most apparent in BB because the numbers are smaller. Does anyone believe that any Ivy, in today's world would take a student athlete who couldn't do the work academically, just to improve their athletic success? Why do we need the AI?

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4729

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 07:47 AM - Post#233674    
    In response to Old Bear

I'd love to see the AI abolished. That being said, I don't think you'll make meaningful change in the order of priority for incoming recruits unless certain schools can explicitly take lower AI kids than others. If we just expanded the pool, then everyone would get better, but the ordinal rank would be the same.

I'd prefer to see athletic scholarships, which would really open up the talent pool without touching the AI.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2046

Reg: 11-23-04
10-10-17 10:36 AM - Post#233686    
    In response to mrjames

You are a great numbers guy, MRJames, but athletic scholarships IMHO violate the reason that the league was formed. Athletic achievement may indicate something exceptional about an applicant (e.g. self discipline or his/her ability to work toward a goal). But the Ivies are first educational institutions and athletics are extra curricular. Athletics are, therefore, subordinate to educational achievement. With athletic apscholarships we run the risk of creating a separate class of undergraduates.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2046

Reg: 11-23-04
Ivy AI
10-10-17 10:36 AM - Post#233687    
    In response to mrjames

.

Edited by Tiger69 on 10-10-17 10:38 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4729

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 10:53 AM - Post#233690    
    In response to Tiger69

You do realize that coaches are basically using FA reads as a screen and focusing an inordinate amount of attention on kids that essentially get full rides, right?

We can philosophize all we want, but pragmatically, de facto athletic scholarships are already commonplace. Ivy recruiting is not need blind, whereas the normal admissions process is. Athletic scholarships are the only way to make Ivy recruiting need blind to match the overall policies of our institutions.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16043

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 10:54 AM - Post#233691    
    In response to Tiger69

That already exists in the major sports. Princeton, of course, is unique in having a far higher percentage of its student body who participate in varsity sports, but the basketball, hockey and football players spend much more time on their sports than other athletes and are not as integrated into the student body as you make out. Moreover, the financial aid policies of HYand Pr (and to a lesser extent, Penn) essentially act as athletic scholarships at least as compared with the 4 smaller and/or poorer schools. The real idea behind the abolishment of athletic grants in aid was not to integrate athletes but to create a level playing field untarnished by unwarranted "professionalism" (which in those days meant Cornell and Penn football). More than anything else, we need a new 'Constitutional Convention" to re-draft the Ivy Agreement in light of the world of 2017, not 1955. I doubt it will happen, though, because the Big 3 (and especially Harvard and Yale) like it exactly the way it is.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3274

Reg: 11-23-04
10-10-17 11:43 AM - Post#233698    
    In response to palestra38

Amen, P'38.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 2870

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
10-10-17 12:00 PM - Post#233699    
    In response to palestra38

They do like it exactly the way it is-- that's why they've written the rules the way they have. This systemic advantage is not going to have as big an effect on other sports, but in basketball, unless the other five force a change somehow, HYP will dominate. None of the rest of us are going to be able to recruit, and therefore play, on the anything close to the same level.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4729

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 01:07 PM - Post#233700    
    In response to Silver Maple

While I disagree with the concept that there's a systematic advantage for HYP, I don't believe the rest of this week will help my point.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1043

Reg: 02-15-15
10-10-17 01:14 PM - Post#233703    
    In response to Tiger69

  • Tiger69 Said:
Athletics are, therefore, subordinate to educational achievement. With athletic scholarships we run the risk of creating a separate class of undergraduates.



You mean like Northwestern and Stanford, who we regularly lose athletes to that are also top scholars? I think that's an antiquated paradigm as MrJ has said.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16043

Reg: 11-21-04
Ivy AI
10-10-17 01:15 PM - Post#233704    
    In response to mrjames

Leave aside the fact that those schools have continually gotten the best recruits ever since they went to the free for everyone under $125K (or so) policy, we all know that they have the best academic "brand" with Harvard having the greatest advantage followed by Yale and then Princeton and the AI creates a level playing field that in all likelihood is not representative of the 8 schools. So how can you argue that there is not a systematic advantage? List for me all the advantages that the other 5 have on HY and PR

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4729

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.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16043

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 02:39 PM - Post#233714    
    In response to mrjames

Then they are ignoring the obvious. Certainly, few in here would disagree with that statement.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3445

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 03:49 PM - Post#233722    
    In response to palestra38

yeah i was talking with someone and said I didn't see why Cotton went with Yale and then backed up... he's a pretty thoughtful kid and the idea that Yale is a better school than Penn both on and off the basketball court, it's a reasonable decision.

I hate you Bilsky.

 
westphillywarrior 
Sophomore
Posts: 138

Age: 36
Reg: 01-08-11
10-10-17 04:12 PM - Post#233725    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Of course. I'd bet that most of the Penn posters here would also have chosen Harvard or Yale if they'd had the choice. And now H & Y are better basketball programs also.

But we don't need to be as good as they are. If the league tournament stays at the Palestra we've got as good a shot as anybody.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16043

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 04:16 PM - Post#233726    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Double Yup

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16043

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 04:17 PM - Post#233727    
    In response to westphillywarrior

but the minute we win a tournament out of the 3 or 4 spot, it will be moved out of the Palestra

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3445

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 04:34 PM - Post#233729    
    In response to westphillywarrior

at the age of 18, I can honestly say I never even thought about applying to Harvard and Yale and the thoughts I had about Princeton were "God, wouldn't that be the worst place in the world"?

Now I guess you could argue that other 18 year olds could also think the way I did, but I'd maintain I was influenced by a basketball culture that's not there anymore.

Disclaimer: I probably couldn't get into H/Y and if I had, maybe my father would have forced me to go to H/Y.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3089

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
10-10-17 04:44 PM - Post#233730    
    In response to palestra38

Mike's post above on FA is spot on. The Ivy Agreement is antiquated because of the way FA now works. AI just makes it worse.

If you want to have fun then go visit a Patriot League board. They hate how many recruits they lose because Ivies are able to give out de-facto athletic scholarships. They probably like the AI tightening though.

In the non-athletic world FA has made Ivies a far cheaper alternative than even the large public Universities. I guess that's progress.



 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3114

Reg: 02-04-06
10-10-17 05:31 PM - Post#233741    
    In response to TheLine

Princeton alums had started to go on a de facto donation strike when the endowment got to a certain size while undergraduates were still being put in debt. The status quo ante was not sustainable and the administration wisely broke the Ivy mold and got rid of loans, inducing Harvard to follow. I don't know if that change has managed to create a broader income distribution of students (a goal of the change), since wealthy students still have advantages in gaining admission, but it couldn't have hurt. Any impact on athletics of the FA change was barely an afterthought. It's annoying to constantly read carping about what I think most would consider a very positive step by the schools involved.

 
 Page 1 of 3 ALL123
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

747 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.027 seconds.   Total Queries: 8   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 02:59 PM
Top