Which school should be removed or added to the Ivy League?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Given the above, does this ultimately result in relatively mediocre athletes who are either rich or poor? If they're "that good," aren't athletes likely to opt to attend elsewhere for a chance at NIL money/pay for play? The Ivies were typically not getting athletes over the big-name D1 schools that offer athletic scholarships and play in more competitive leagues with televised games, but now even moreso... |
Anonymous
|
Cornell out, Duke in.
You're welcome. |
Anonymous
Depends on the sport. The Ivy League isn’t competitive for Football and was only minority competitive for Basketball (but no longer). They used to get some women’s volleyball players but likely no longer. For track and field they will still be competitive. Same for ice hockey and lax because they don’t make money on TV. Some Ivy sports may get more competitive if rosters are cut in the P4. |
Anonymous
| Duke and Stanford would be taking a big pay cut |
Anonymous
|
The Ivy League shouldn't change a thing. With the exception of Harvard hockey, the Ivy League has never really competed at the higher levels of D1 sports. That's not the Ivy "brand." No one ever goes to a Columbia vs Brown football game expecting to see the top athletes. It's like club sports. Which is fine. To change that entails a lot of other changes that would really alter the nature of the Ivy League. Not being competitive is part of its old-timey charm.
Smart student athletes who are capable of competing at the higher levels and students who want a more rah rah college experience have tons of options - Stanford, Vanderbilt, Duke, Notre Dame, Michigan, Northwestern, Berkeley. And the advent of NIL money is just going to further the separation between Ivy sports and the rest of D1. It's pointless to fight it. The Ivies should really compete with SLACs when they play out of league. |
Anonymous
| My new Ivy League is all about the most crusty and imposing names. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, and Dartmouth are all the epitome of crusty and imposing. But I'm getting rid of Brown (poop color), Columbia (the country?), and especially Penn (is it a public university?). I'm replacing them with Amherst, Swarthmore, and Duke, all of which sound fancy and aristocratic. |
Anonymous
Yes, and I am finding this discussion hilarious, keep it coming. Much needed levity. |
Anonymous
| ivy league is a sports league. There are rules to follow, such as can’t give sports scholarships but maintain D1 level. Duke and Stanford have too many paid players. MIT and uchicago can’t compete in that level. Unless some good universities want to completely change the culture. I don’t see much that can be changed. |
Anonymous
So you are asking which other colleges they should be playing sports against? i guess, other mid-sized schools in the region. |
Anonymous
|
The Ivy League would never dilute its brand by adding another college. Conference realignment and expansion have watered down competition and resulted in apple/orange clusters that have no rationale of geography, academic tiers, or athletic parity.
The only college that makes sense is MIT, but they don't need the added prestige, and their athletic program is sub-par compared to the other Ivies. |
Anonymous
| Somehow I doubt that OP was thinking about sports when they started this thread. |
Anonymous
| Remove Penn, add Penn State |
Anonymous
| None. There will always be only 8. Since 1900. |
Anonymous
I know, right? Wtf? |
Anonymous
10000+++++ |