Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: Ivy AI        (Topic#20542)
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3329

Reg: 11-23-04
10-09-17 06:51 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: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 06:47 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: 2186

Reg: 11-23-04
10-10-17 09:36 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: 2186

Reg: 11-23-04
Ivy AI
10-10-17 09:36 AM - Post#233687    
    In response to mrjames

.

Edited by Tiger69 on 10-10-17 09:38 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 09:53 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: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 09:54 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: 3329

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

Amen, P'38.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3012

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
10-10-17 11:00 AM - 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: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 12:07 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: 1288

Reg: 02-15-15
10-10-17 12:14 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: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
Ivy AI
10-10-17 12:15 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: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 01:18 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: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 01:39 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: 3628

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 02:49 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: 157

Age: 37
Reg: 01-08-11
10-10-17 03:12 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: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 03:16 PM - Post#233726    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Double Yup

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 03:17 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: 3628

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 03:34 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: 3368

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
10-10-17 03:44 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: 3348

Reg: 02-04-06
10-10-17 04:31 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.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3628

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 04:41 PM - Post#233742    
    In response to SRP

it's annoying to read you be dense about how seemingly indifferent you are to knock on effects. more students can attend - COOL. You've now given yourself an advantage in athletics - NOT COOL.

You understand this right? You changed something major for a very good reason and then held everything else constant.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3348

Reg: 02-04-06
10-10-17 04:48 PM - Post#233743    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Because athletics aren't exactly the top priority here. Tail wagging dog, etc. Anyway, doesn't Penn do about the same thing now?

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
Masters Student
Posts: 933

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-10-17 04:49 PM - Post#233744    
    In response to mrjames

Mike, are you insinuating some imminent recruiting news?

Do tell!

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-10-17 04:59 PM - Post#233745    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Expanded FA has made the league better across the board. I cheer on the day when essentially only those for whom a $70K bill per year is nary a concern have to pay the $70K and everyone else pays a small fraction (if anything) of it. All else equal we would be an insanely good league (consistently multi-bid) in that case.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3628

Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 07:09 PM - Post#233750    
    In response to SRP

why would you be so obtuse as to think we want you to stop giving out aid to lower income people. we want you to adjust the rules of the game to reflect your unequal advantages. you're like a guy born on 3rd base who thinks he hit a triple.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3348

Reg: 02-04-06
10-10-17 07:41 PM - Post#233754    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Isn't Penn also on 3rd base?

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 738

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
10-10-17 08:51 PM - Post#233757    
    In response to SRP

Yes. But Penn hit a double after it was born & stole third base.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3012

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
10-11-17 06:56 AM - Post#233760    
    In response to section110

Also, the pitcher's at bat right now, and the third base coach seems to be paying no attention to us at all.

Anybody want to push this metaphor a little further?

 
QHoops 
Junior
Posts: 273

Reg: 12-16-04
10-11-17 07:20 AM - Post#233762    
    In response to Silver Maple

Here's the throw, here's the play at the plate

Holy cow, I think he's gonna make it!

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 07:34 AM - Post#233763    
    In response to QHoops

Stop right there.

 
rbg 
Masters Student
Posts: 592

Reg: 10-20-14
10-11-17 08:54 AM - Post#233770    
    In response to palestra38

Since the subject took a turn towards the issue of cost of attendance, I figure I would put some IL money issues for people to review. I'll let more enlightened members discuss how these numbers fit into the discussion of recruiting.

I apologize, in advance, for the formatting errors. I tried to improve it, but this was the best I could do.

In 1/2017 the Equality of Opportunity Project accumulated data on the percentages of students from different socio-economic groups at US colleges and universities. Here is how the IL schools fared:

Soc-Ec% Bro Col Cor Dar Har Pen Pri Yal
Top 1% 19% 13% 10% 21% 15% 19% 17% 19%
Top 10% 60% 48% 48% 58% 53% 58% 58% 57%
Top 20% 70% 62% 64% 69% 67% 71% 72% 69%
Top 40% 82% 79% 80% 86% 80% 84% 86% 84%
Bot 60% 18% 21% 20% 14% 20% 16% 14% 16%
Bot 20% 4% 5% 4% 3% 5% 3% 2% 2%

Med Inc 204K 151K 152K 200K 169K 196K 186K 193K

For 3 of the last 4 years, the NY Times has produced its College Access Index, which is suppose to show which schools are doing the most for low and middle income students. For the 2015 and 2017 surveys, it looked at schools with a 5 year graduation rate of 75% or higher. In 2015 that number was 179 school, but it dropped to 171 in 2017.

The Access Index looks at the % of first-year students that receive Pell Grants, the cost to attend for students whose families earn between $30K-$75K a year, and the percentage of those students to graduate.

2017 Bro Col Cor Dar Har Pen Pri Yal
Pell% 15% 16% 13% 13% 15% 13% 16% 14%
Cost 10K 9K 14K 10K 5K 10K 6K 7K
Score 1.19 1.26 0.99 1.10 1.36 1.10 1.34 1.22
Rank 27 19 80 44 10 46 13 21

2015 Bro Col Cor Dar Har Pen Pri Yal
Pell% 16% 15% 14% 12% 15% 14% 13% 12%
Cost 11K 9K 17K 12K 7K 13K 7K 8K
Score 1.21 1.23 0.98 1.04 1.30 1.10 1.24 1.18
Rank 22 21 73 55 11 39 18 26




 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 738

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
10-11-17 09:33 AM - Post#233772    
    In response to palestra38

Love a good Meatloaf reference.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 10:28 AM - Post#233773    
    In response to rbg

I think you continue to miss the point. Nobody thinks that expanding financial aid is a bad thing. A lot of people think that the impact on basketball has created de facto athletic scholarships for some schools while not for others. So the original intent of banning scholarships to provide a level playing field has been perverted to one which creates an inherently unbalanced one. Keep the financial aid high---end the ban on athletic scholarships.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3329

Reg: 11-23-04
10-11-17 10:54 AM - Post#233778    
    In response to palestra38

And get rid of the AI.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 11:18 AM - Post#233781    
    In response to palestra38

Yeah, I know a lot of people think that, but it's not true. While things were a little in flux when the first huge FA moves were made and other Ivies reacted, FA has stabilized and isn't really a differentiator.

There is zero reason why Penn shouldn't be hauling in top-of-the-Ivy classes. It's kind of mystifying that it isn't. Other schools with smaller recruiting budgets, not as good facilities to sell, etc, I get, but Penn should be recruiting at the top of the league.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 12:00 PM - Post#233782    
    In response to mrjames

That just isn't true. While just about all the Ivies give free tuition up to $60K in income,and Harvard is either free or a pittance up to $150, Princeton charges no tuition to $140K and Yale only a small percentage up to $200K. These amounts are far more than the other schools. Being able to match is no substitute for making the best and highest offer, especially where the 3 schools offering the most have the best "brands" to begin with.

 
rbg 
Masters Student
Posts: 592

Reg: 10-20-14
Ivy AI
10-11-17 12:09 PM - Post#233785    
    In response to mrjames

If Penn (and, possibly, Brown, Columbia, Cornell and Dartmouth) is losing recruiting to Harvard, Princeton and Yale, do you believe that these students have decided to choose a school with a better chance of being in the NCAA Tournament and/or becoming a pro - even if that athlete is going to have to wait his turn to play or be part of a larger rotation of highly rated teammates?

If competing against non-IL schools, does the cost of attendance, even with improved financial aid, make it too difficult for many qualified lower income athletes to attend an IL school? (According to the NYT Access Index info above, an average low/middle income Penn student coming from a family making $30-$75K a year will have to pay $40,000 for his/her undergraduate schooling).

Or, do you believe that these qualified students are going to non-IL for a different set of reason(s)?

Thanks for the comments

Edited by rbg on 10-11-17 12:11 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
QHoops 
Junior
Posts: 273

Reg: 12-16-04
Re: Ivy AI
10-11-17 12:15 PM - Post#233786    
    In response to rbg

I don't believe the kind of kid that has succeeded on the court enough to be a highly sought after recruit (hardly) ever thinks he is going to have to wait his turn.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2186

Reg: 11-23-04
10-11-17 12:54 PM - Post#233792    
    In response to SRP

Amen, SRP. I, for one, was influenced in my annual giving decision by the high loan component of an undergraduate's cost when our endowment reached such gigantic amounts. When Princeton led the Ivies, especially h and y, in loosening its pursestrings to make it more affordable to students from lower and middle income families, I applauded the decision and upped my modest giving. I believe that the decision was driven primarily by the conclusion that Princeton was losing increasing numbers of talented students as a result of its high net cost relative to good state institutions. So, although it was a self-serving decision, the effect, if one believe as I do, that an Ivy education is something special, was very positive. If it has also made a Princeton education available to some bright students who are also fine athletes, so much the better, But, unlike athletic scholarships, FA based on need has no strings -- like staying free of injury or continued athletic participation. The coaches are out of it once a student gains admission. Which, IMHO, is how it should be. P's large endowment does put a few smaller Ivies and/or those with less generous or affluent alumni/ae at a disadvantage in potential FA. But, I shed only crocodile tears for all but B and D. Life ain't fair.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
Ivy AI
10-11-17 01:05 PM - Post#233796    
    In response to Tiger69

It has little to do with generous alumni and everything to do with the Ivy Agreement. The Ivies were formed by persuading Cornell and Penn to drop high Division 1 football programs and give up athletic scholarships by promising that all 8 schools would have a level playing field to compete financially, going so far as to coordinate financial aid until the Feds stopped that collusion. So now, 3 schools are able to use their general FA policies to create a substantial advantage over the other 5. I think it's great that they are doing that. However, we need to revisit the Ivy Agreement and decide whether each school can determine it's own standards on academics (as HYPr are doing with FA), whether athletic scholarships are warranted or whether we make permanent the current advantages for those 3

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 01:37 PM - Post#233801    
    In response to palestra38

I understand that you don't think it's true, but in practice, FA reads are more complex than your income and trying to reduce a school's read to just that is silly.

FA reads are incredibly complicated and include income, investment assets, savings, real estate, number of other kids in college, etc. Each school independently assesses how much each impacts ability to pay. If your point is that HYP consistently give more favorable reads across all of those dimensions, then that's incorrect. If your point is that HYP give better reads across certain dimensions, worse across others, but tend to give more favorable reads than other Ivies on average, that may very well be true.

But this sort of reminds me of statistical and economic significance. Just because we can prove something is statistically different from zero doesn't mean its magnitude matters for what we're talking about.

Blaming FA for Penn's recent struggles might be convenient, but it's not accurate.

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 738

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
10-11-17 01:55 PM - Post#233803    
    In response to mrjames

Nobody has pointed to recent women's recruiting. Princeton has been bringing in high level, now top 150 recruits, for a good while & Harvard has joined them in the last couple of years. Mike McLaughlin has been competing very well for top talent, thank him very much & has the highest rated player in the incoming class. While I think that H/Y/P have some institutional advantages, the biggest hurdle that Steve Donahue & his staff have is probably the dismal record since 2007. Not only are Corky Calhoun, Ron Haigler & the final four team meaningless to recruits; but so are Allen & Maloney & the Dunphy years. We're going to have to have a sharper eye for talent that will develop(e.g. Betley) and the local awareness (at least Philly area & North Jersey & DC kids know what the Big 5 is or can see it at the St. Joes game) to get competitive. Nationally, right or lucky evaluations are necessary. Mike did find Alyssa Barron & Syd Stipanovich & get them to come to Penn. If Steve can do the same & we win one title, the advantages of the best facility, excellent training facilities & an exciting rising city can do the rest to restore the program.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 02:45 PM - Post#233814    
    In response to mrjames

I didn't blame FA for Penn's 10 year trek through the desert. Their recruiting is on a serious uptick. But it's willful blindness to pretend that we have a level playing field in the Ivy League. Penn, which is 5 times larger than Princeton and has a smaller endowment simply is not on a FA level playing field with Princeton. Of course, the Harvard and Yale endowments dwarf Princeton's. So it doesn't matter what the individual student can get after all is said and done---on the face of the matter, the coaches at HY and Pr are reasonably certain they can offer just about anyone who otherwise cannot easily afford to pay a free ride and the others cannot. Historically, Penn and Cornell, in particular, could reach well below Harvard and Yale to get students H and Y could not admit. Your prior coach moaned about that all the time.

Look at it this way-James Jones struggled for years at Yale, having one co-title to show for his first 12 years, in which he won more than 15 once. He has won more than 18 5 of the last 6. Did he suddenly become a coaching genius? The Amaker winning years at Harvard started 2 years earlier. Did Harvard stay with Sullivan for 16 years because he was a terrible coach?

Princeton was walking in the darkness for 5 years before they suddenly started bringing in 20 win seasons at the same time as Harvard's ascendance.

So what do you attribute for the fact that the 3 schools who have dominated the Ivies since about 2008 have significantly upped their FA during this period to a level not capable of being matched by the others? Sure, there are other factors but IT IS NOT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD and the advantages of the others in admissions criteria has been whittled away to almost nothing.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 03:46 PM - Post#233820    
    In response to palestra38

Ah, the old ice cream consumption leads to shark attacks logic...

Penn's not losing kids to Yale because Yale's offering better FA packages.

EVERY Ivy has benefited from expanded financial aid. That's why the talent in the league is better across the board. Some Ivies have leveraged the expanded FA better than others. Some had the right coaches in place to catch the wave and ride it in. Others were struggling to find the right coaching fit at the time and missed the wave and now are trying to find another one to catch up.

Coaching turmoil both at the top and with assistants is deadly when recruiting is heating up. If you want to know why Harvard fell from its perch, take a look at when its turnover occurred and what those related classes have produced. Last year, Harvard's 2013, 2014 and 2015 recruiting classes combined for 4.9 win shares. Its 2016 class produced 11.1 alone.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
Ivy AI
10-11-17 03:57 PM - Post#233822    
    In response to mrjames

You have to tie the timing of what happens with coaching instability to the HYPr recruiting run (which I know you agree with). During this period, only Cornell and Dartmouth had a vacancy. I have long believed that the worst aspect of the Jerome Allen hiring was that the assistants who were passed over would not stay--and when they left, he was exposed. But Donahue has had a stable coaching staff for 3 years--so why suddenly is he having trouble recruiting? Your logic is just as much correlation over causation as mine. So I'll believe that the FA is a factor, since it has gone way up, especially during the relevant time period for the same 3 that are now succeeding.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-11-17 04:03 PM - Post#233824    
    In response to palestra38

As Josh has already said - Penn shot the moon with this class and didn't land anyone. It was a strategic choice, and it didn't pay off.

Steve's recruiting had been getting better each year until he decided to roll the dice with this class.

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 738

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
10-11-17 04:24 PM - Post#233826    
    In response to mrjames

Turned out to be a losing gamble; but w/the quantity as well as quality of the last two classes, I think it was a good bet to make. Having 2 to 4 decent but not great players to go along w/ the 15 or so players on the roster who are equally or more highly considered is no addition. Of course they have to nail the 2019 recruiting class with real quality.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16959

Reg: 11-21-04
10-12-17 08:04 AM - Post#233836    
    In response to section110

Who knows, there always may be a transfer lurking

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 738

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
10-12-17 08:10 AM - Post#233837    
    In response to palestra38

Your lips to God's ear.

 
Bears03 
Freshman
Posts: 55

Reg: 02-23-12
Ivy AI
11-07-17 02:23 AM - Post#235567    
    In response to section110

I’m all for leveling the playing field, but to identify the problem we may want to hear what they are. It would be really interesting if a journalist talked to every ivy mbb recruit over the past 10 years to find out what the top factors were in their decision.

How many were influenced by FA? How many even knew what their AI number was, and did that prevent them from particular schools? The perceived ability to get immediate playing time or to win a championship? Facilities, city/rural, academics, other?

And then what would be really interesting is to find out why ”gettable” recruits chose non-Ivy’s. I’m guessing that answer is much more unanimously scholarships. No algebraic formulas necessary to know their cost is $0.

Absent any of that information, I’m in the camp that Ivy’s should allow scholarships, but retain and level the AI across all schools to maintain the academic integrity of the league.

Edited by Bears03 on 11-07-17 02:27 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4956

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
11-07-17 08:04 AM - Post#235569    
    In response to Bears03

I can’t speak for myriad recruits over the past decade, but I can tell you this:

There were a LOT of quality players that went non-Ivy due to financial aid not being full or near enough to full for the family’s liking. There were even more that were lightly pursued or ignored due to likely being full ride players.

The AI will always be limiting and require some juggling, but I’d wager that coaches would rather have full scholarships than even go back to the AI of 15 years ago (169).

 
hoopsfan 
Masters Student
Posts: 518

Reg: 12-26-04
11-07-17 09:09 AM - Post#235577    
    In response to mrjames

I believe if you asked Ivy coaches for one step they'd take to improve their recruiting and that of the conference, allowing for scholarships would be the overwhelming choice.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1288

Reg: 02-15-15
11-07-17 10:45 AM - Post#235591    
    In response to hoopsfan

I would love to see the league go to scholarships. It would propel us to a top 10 league and regular 2 bid league almost instantly I would argue. Without it, we can get there but the path is longer and more circuitous

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3329

Reg: 11-23-04
Ivy AI
11-07-17 10:52 AM - Post#235593    
    In response to hoopsfan

The AI isn't really an issue to the recruit like FA is, either he qualifies or he doesn't. But the AI does limit the pool of recruits and HYP, because they usually win the head-to-head recruiting battles with the other 5, are advantaged. Football has an AI Banding factor which doesn't seem to have helped the inequality very much. Certainly scholarships would help in recruiting against non-Ives and Ivy Coaches would all be in favor of them.

Edited by Old Bear on 11-07-17 10:55 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2186

Reg: 11-23-04
Re: Ivy AI
11-07-17 03:07 PM - Post#235615    
    In response to Old Bear

Well, OB, the Republicans (God ,to think I started off life as one of them!) are bringing you some good news with their ...uh ... Tax Plan. Among other things, it taxes the earnings on the endowments of the filthy rich institutions like hyP, thus reducing the funds that they waste on providing financial aid to the sons and daughters of those folks not clever enough to be millionaires. Perhaps, this is their ingenious way of helping to level the playing field among the Ivies between the "haves" and the "have nots". BOOLA BOOLA!

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3368

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
11-07-17 03:57 PM - Post#235618    
    In response to Tiger69

Does that help when Columbia consistently earns more on their endowment investment than Harvard? Probably YP as well though I'm too lazy to check.

The new tax plan also takes away the tax deduction for paying for college so there's that too.


 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2186

Reg: 11-23-04
11-07-17 04:26 PM - Post#235625    
    In response to TheLine

Yes, if Columbia earns more $ on its endowment. But, I expect (hope) that this populist provision will disappear from the Bill when the 'Pubs figure out another way to offset the giveaways to their wealthiest supporters.

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

1736 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: 0.116 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 06:02 PM
Top