Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 2 of 3 ALL<123
Username Post: NBA Draft        (Topic#19039)
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
05-20-16 03:05 PM - Post#207158    
    In response to mrjames

Mike-- I think that's uncalled for. People are allowed to criticize your alma mater's basketball recruiting approach.

 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
NBA Draft
05-20-16 03:25 PM - Post#207163    
    In response to Silver Maple

I personally think AI was borderline racist. Its net effect was definitely racist.

For the record I'm fine with Harvard recruiting at the deep end of the pool, I'm just saying that a) there will be a backlash about one-and-dones and b) the league would be somewhat hypocritical in condoning one-and-done after forcing AI on us. Yes, I understand the difference between the two but there are also a number of similarities - including impact on minority recruiting now that we've broached the subject.



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32682

Reg: 11-21-04
05-20-16 03:30 PM - Post#207165    
    In response to Silver Maple

Of course they are---but I tend to agree with the point of his criticism here.

Harvard is subject to some criticism in its attitude toward sports by promoting the traditional Ivy line (and preventing any other Ivy from having a game as valuable as The Game by blocking playoff participation) while clearly gunning for serious athletic excellence. But hypocrisy on an administrative level does not equate to the kind of abuse that some posters are accusing Harvard of committing. About all that can be said is that a group of athletes cheated on a test where lots of non-athletes also cheated...something that has occurred at every school at one time or another. Beyond that, there have been lots of accusations and no proof. So it's fair to criticize Harvard for promoting its brand while doing everything possible to maintain that advantage over everyone else by insisting on the enforcement of rules that really only benefit Harvard. But that's it.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
05-20-16 04:13 PM - Post#207171    
    In response to palestra38

I have accepted that people who have an incomplete window into the workings of Ivy recruiting are allowed to have opinions (often stated as fact) about Harvard's basketball program. That's just the cost of doing business.

What I will not accept is the continued racism in singling out basketball players from any Ivy institution.

When Harvard's sweeping cheating scandal broke, the ONLY Harvard students that were named were two basketball players. As it became evident that many other sports (including many more predominately "white" sports) had student athletes withdraw from the college, those athletes remained unnamed and when they returned even The Crimson went through some gymnastics to avoid indicating why those student athletes withdrew.

Nobody seems to bat an eye when hockey players, whose rights are owned by NHL franchises and can and do frequently leave early, decide to commit to Harvard or any other Ivy. I didn't observe a lot of hand-wringing over Louis LeBlanc coming to Harvard even though it was very likely he would leave early at some point. He was already a first-round draft pick, not even just an expected one.

The racist part of this is assuming that, say, these student-athletes wouldn't return to Harvard and complete their degrees over time, and that they have no intention of doing so. Or assuming that they would "nuke" the Ivy agreement, when you have no clue how they stack up academically.

I choose to focus on the positive. The Ivy League is DESPERATE for diversity. What if these student athletes came to Harvard, went to the NBA, achieved success on and off the court and provided the Ivy League with a platform to reach a more diverse set of applicants. What if these student athletes want to be doctors, businessmen, lawyers and they realize that associating with an Ivy brand now will provide them with the opportunity to come back, finish their education and pursue a career, post-basketball.

You don't know what these kids and their families are thinking, but you heard basketball and one-and-done and just threw all of these pejorative assumptions upon them.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32682

Reg: 11-21-04
NBA Draft
05-20-16 05:12 PM - Post#207175    
    In response to mrjames

That last sentence was not in response to me, was it? I did not say any of those things. I was agreeing with you("his criticism" was yours).

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
05-20-16 06:52 PM - Post#207178    
    In response to palestra38

Not at all. The you wasn't even necessarily directed at this board. I've been having this disagreement in multiple places, and it's disappointing to keep hearing it. I don't think that people even realize what they're saying until you go a level deeper and see... oh yeah, for some reason we only bristle when it's about a particular set of athletes.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
05-20-16 07:55 PM - Post#207180    
    In response to mrjames

Mike--

You're making two assumptions here:

1) It's OK for a university to admit a student who specifically intends to participate in an extracurricular activity for one year and then depart without a degree. That student may eventually return to complete a degree, but also may not. You might feel that this is an appropriate thing for a university to do, and it's your right to hold that opinion. But not everybody shares that POV, and they are allowed to disagree with you without being called racist.

2) That the feeling that this sort of thing isn't OK only extends to basketball. I'm not sure where you get that. I'd be uncomfortable with my alma mater doing this in relation to any sport.

Do you think it's possible that you're beginning with the desire to see Harvard recruit NBA-level talent to its basketball team and then rationalizing your way back to it? People often form opinions on the basis of tribal impulses, and then construct justifications after the fact, so this wouldn't exactly be unprecedented.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2801

Reg: 11-23-04
05-20-16 08:34 PM - Post#207181    
    In response to mrjames

Not sure what got your undies in a bunch. I don't doubt that Harvard Admissions assumes that applicants are planning on the full four year commitment. If, along the way, they take a leave to engage in other pursuits, academic or non, more power to them. Princeton has had at least two high profile basketball players who left to play in the NBA and later returned to complete their studies and graduate. If an applicant uses his athletic talent to enhance his chances of admission to a fine academic institution like any of the Ivies, I see no problem. As long as the league makes the same demands of all students, athletes or otherwise, the integrity of both student and school is intact. If/when any of the Ivies starts to accept a higher rate of failure among recruited athletes over the total student body, I shall begin to worry that we have lost our way.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
05-20-16 09:08 PM - Post#207182    
    In response to Silver Maple

I love the convenient fallback "homer" claims that get thrown my way any time I make an argument on these boards. Ad hominem attacks are super convincing.

Harvard and other Ivies have accepted students in the past and will continue to do so in the future where their professional prospects make it such that they will be unlikely to finish their degree or at least not finish it in a remotely timely fashion. I think that Harvard and the other Ivies are better off for accepting these students regardless of whether they ever finish their degrees. My contention is that, while people are quite alright with this happening in tech or music or even some sports, having it happen in basketball elicits a visceral reaction rife with racist overtones.

I believe that so long as these students don't make a mockery of the institution and put a priority on being a student while they are there, that it is completely okay not to finish one's degree or to take a long time to do so. But I believe that regardless of pursuit, not just for pursuits dominated by certain classes, gender and/or races.

When it comes to the sports side, good luck fielding a competitive hockey team if you won't take players who have been drafted by an NHL team and could easily leave early. Yet I've never heard any such claims about taking a top hockey prospect.

I've had this argument in all different flavors over the years. That Kyle Casey and Brandyn Curry were singled out from amongst 100+ students as the only ones named was in some respects racist, but everyone was quick to write it off as "Mike defending Harvard basketball." That (on a different board) someone kept repeating that because Harvard basketball had more black players it was evidence that it had lowered its academic standards was explicitly racist, but my efforts to point that out were met with "Mike defending Harvard basketball." And again, that the potential for a lottery pick to choose Harvard because the education and athletic offerings resonated with him was viewed as "advancing Harvard to the lofty heights of the University of Phoenix" and "nuking the whole stated Ivy commitment to academics" is also racist, but once again my view is invalid because I'm just being a shill for Harvard basketball.

Nobody knows anything about these kids. And yet we're so damn sure they'd destroy the Ivy commitment to academics.

Based on what, exactly? I have an idea.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
05-20-16 11:55 PM - Post#207183    
    In response to mrjames

Ad hominem? Somebody called another poster a racist earlier today, and I'm pretty sure that was you.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32682

Reg: 11-21-04
05-21-16 06:40 AM - Post#207184    
    In response to Silver Maple

He didn't call anyone a racist. He called out what he thought were racist comments (and again, I would tend to agree). Stating that comments focusing on the recruiting of black players negatively are racist is not an ad hominem attack.

 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1842

Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
05-21-16 11:50 AM - Post#207186    
    In response to mrjames

It is not surprising that there will be some skepticism that Harvard or any other Ivy League basketball program has the 10th rated recruiting class. A number of my non-Ivy League friends have asked me questions as to what is going on at Harvard.

My reply is that Harvard has a strong BB program with a very good coach and they are maintaining standards/ethics. Time will tell if my opinion is right but the program will be under scrutiny especially if they achieve elite level on the court. The scrutiny will be the same if the recruits were black, white, yellow or green. Other Ivy League teams need to rely on each other that academic standards will be maintained.

Some of your comments really seem over the edge and rather defensive. I would hope that the rhetoric from all of us gets toned down.

 
CrimsonHoops 
Freshman
Posts: 24

Age: 70
Reg: 10-30-10
05-21-16 02:02 PM - Post#207187    
    In response to bradley

While I may open myself to being accused of a “homer” bias, I want to provide some additional perspective related to MJ’s sensitivity to potential racial overtones and/or addressing implications that certain coaches are cutting academic corners in their recruiting process.

Over the years, selective talented Ivy Coaches seem to be able to recruit an impressive number nationally ranked recruits (equivalent in basketball to 4 and 5 star recruits) who are ranked in the top 50 in the country for their team sport. Examples are Princeton lacrosse coach Bill Tierney, Cornell wrestling coach Rob Knoll, Princeton women’s basketball coach Courtney Banghart, and Penn women’s basketball coach Mike McLaughlin. Each built nationally ranked teams that attracted among the best players in the country in their sport. Yet, you rarely ever heard any complaints about their recruiting methods.

In terms of team sports, the best comparable recruiting situation would be Ivy League ice hockey recruiting. For those of your actively involved in the admissions process, you will find that Ivy ice hockey recruits have very comparable AI and academic recruiting profiles to the Ivy basketball recruits. Keith Allain at Yale, Mike Schafer at Cornell and Ted Donato at Harvard each have built national ranked powerhouse teams stacked with recruits who were ranked in the top 25 in their respective recruiting classes. This can be illustrated by looking at the US Hockey National Development Team Program (NDTP), which typically attracts the top 25 players in a respective age group. Yale, Harvard and Cornell are loaded with recruits from the NDTP national teams (Yale with Mark Arcobello, John Hayden, Ryan Hitchcock, and Alex Lyon; Cornell with Cole Bardreau, Ryan Bliss, Jared Fiegl and Gavin Stoick; and Harvard with Michael Floodstrand, Michael Lackey, and Sean Malone). On the current NTDP teams, Adam Fox, Oliver Wahlstrom and Bode Wilde already have committed to Ivy hockey programs. Again, no one seems to question how Yale, Cornell or Harvard ice hockey coaches are attracting these superstar hockey recruits to our Ivy campuses or complaining how these coaches are lowering academic standards.

My interpretation of some of MJ’s feelings is rather than trying figure out how a successful Ivy coach is gaming the system and/or lowering Ivy standards, we should applaud talented coaches like Knoll, Banghart, Allain, Amaker, etc. who can somehow attract some of the nation’s very best athletes to our campuses, while also adhering to the Ivy’s rigorous AI academic standards. If an Ivy coach is shown to truly game the AI system and bring in academically unqualified recruits, then that is a different story and this coach should be criticized.


 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
05-21-16 09:23 PM - Post#207189    
    In response to CrimsonHoops

Mike's suggestion of racism is uncalled for here. It reads as an attempt at a shout-down. The comparison with hockey or music or software prodigies is irrelevant, as none of those are revenue sports where universities have a history of massive cheating g to garner prominence. The suggestion that a spurt of one-and-done white hoopsters would not also ruffle feathers is unsupported.

That said, my feathers would be completely unruffled by a surge of serious-student early-leaving basketball prodigies in the Ivies. I would hope that class sizes would be adjusted to avoid excluding more-scholarly types who wanted to finish their degrees in normal order.

 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1842

Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
05-22-16 08:53 AM - Post#207193    
    In response to CrimsonHoops

Reality is that Harvard's 10th rated recruiting class in a revenue sport will raise eyebrows just because it is so outside of the norm -- simple reality. Non-Ivy League fans eyebrows will probably be raised even greater because they have less knowledge of the Harvard BB program and Coach Amaker. My suggestion is get used to the sketicism especially if the Harvard freshmen reach great heights in a few years. Some of my non-Ivy League friends reaction, especially the younger ones, has been that Harvard is simply doing what other schools do. I can debate them all I want to but only time will change their opinion if Harvard does not experience any "glitches".

As to one and done, I have no issues. Coach K did receive some criticism with Kyree Irving and Okafor but that comes with the terrain when you recruit top rated players.

My problem with some of the comments by Mr. James is when you do not agree with him, there is something wrong with you -- you are irrational, simply do not know, or something far worse.

 
CrimsonHoops 
Freshman
Posts: 24

Age: 70
Reg: 10-30-10
05-22-16 04:10 PM - Post#207202    
    In response to bradley

Your points are well taken that the rapid change in Harvard’s basketball fortunes has raised some eyebrows. I also happen to love the banter and diversity of viewpoints on this message board, which has given me new perspective on many topics. Thus, I hope we continue to challenge and even poke fun of each other.

That said, I do think it is fair to make comparisons to the Ivy League attracting national level prodigies in other fields for both athletic and non-athletic endeavors. I also find it especially ironic that ice hockey prodigies are not considered a good comparison since hockey is perceived to not be a revenue sport like basketball. While that clearly is true on a national level, the Ivy League is based in the New England/Northeast region where ice hockey rivals basketball as a key revenue sport. In fact, hockey is a superior revenue sport in the Ivy League for at least the six Ivy schools with men’s varsity ice hockey programs. These 6 Ivy schools achieved average attendance of 2,519 for their 72 home hockey games, which is nearly 70% higher than the average attendance of 1,493 for the 80 home basketball games at these same six Ivy schools. Cornell, Yale, Harvard, Dartmouth and Brown all achieved significantly higher average attendance for their ice hockey games compared to basketball. Only Princeton has slightly higher average attendance for basketball (Princeton basketball only averages 7% higher average attendance compared to hockey).

Accordingly, I feel it is very fair to compare how Keith Allain has completely transformed Yale hockey since he became head coach in 2006 to how Tommy Amaker has transformed Harvard basketball since he took over in 2007. Coach Allain has won 7 Ivy League championships in his first 10 years and won the 2013 national championship. He also has dominated his rival Harvard hockey during this period, which historically had a much stronger program than the Bulldogs. I believe that Keith Allain has deserves the accolades resulting from this remarkable success due to his superior coaching and recruiting skills. While I root against him when he competes against the Crimson, he has earned my deep respect and even admiration. I happen to enjoy following all of the Ivy coaches who achieve impressive results.


 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2801

Reg: 11-23-04
05-22-16 04:25 PM - Post#207206    
    In response to CrimsonHoops

All this fuss and Harvard will probably be the pre-season choice for RUNNERUP if Princeton can pick up where it left off last season with its entire rotation intact plus Hans Brase returning from medical leave of absence. And, who will get the next super class? Probably not Harvard, with its roster already overcrowded with young talent. Long runs as Ivy Bball Champ are a thing of the past IMHO.

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 847

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
05-22-16 04:39 PM - Post#207207    
    In response to CrimsonHoops

I take your points & appreciate your comments. My school no longer plays varsity hockey so I am not following collegiate hockey on any real basis; I was aware that Yale had won a national title in the past few years; but pretty blind to what they have accomplished and couldn't name any of the hockey coaches.

This is a basketball board & I suspect that many, if not most of the Penn posters have a similar level of (lack of knowledge) about the status of Ivy hockey recruiting. It's Harvard's surge in our sport of choice that draws our attention.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
05-26-16 09:25 PM - Post#207306    
    In response to section110

Interesting point about hockey attendance; I was unaware. It doesn't really change my point that the institutional impact of success in men's basketball is immensely larger than for hockey. For example, University of Denver was strong in hockey but it wasn't doing enough for their image so they invested a lot in ex-Princetonians Tierney and Scott's programs. One for two, but I'd bet the Administration would gladly exchange their hockey and lacrosse successes for similar success in the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. Does anyone doubt that?

In any case, most of the static the Crimson hoops program is likely to face if it loads up on five-star one-and-dones will be from inside the Harvard community.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2801

Reg: 11-23-04
05-27-16 09:40 AM - Post#207312    
    In response to SRP

Yes, I would trade Harvard level basketball prospects for national caliber hockey and lax programs. Of course, under Tierney, we had the latter. But, we have never had a national champ level hockey program in recent history and, as I learned during the woeful Scott era, a good hockey game has a lot more constant action and excitement than any basketball game. Love them Canadians!

 
 Page 2 of 3 ALL<123
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

8719 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: 0.24 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 12:53 PM
Top