Haverford

D3 ball varies greatly across the country.  A few years ago I sat and watched a Beloit College vs St Norbert game and both starting pitchers were throwing in the mid to high 70's... St Norbert had a 3B who really stood out (forgot his name, doesn't matter) with great bat speed compared to the rest of the field that day.  Later in talking to one of the St Norbert coaches he said that the kid had numerous mid major D1 offers but preferred to stay closer to home where he knew he would start and bat 3rd in the lineup from the first game of freshman year through his entire career...

the D3 teams that go to the college World Series would whup a heckuva lot of D1 teams.  The worst D3's in the nation would get destroyed by the best high school teams in Illinois, let alone Texas or Florida.  It really varies

If my son ends up going D3, I would look at the potential of him being drafted as a lottery ticket.  There would be a multitude of other considerations that would come into play as to choosing the right fit

Haverford has quality pitching depth coming back next year and some experienced position players.  Shortstop was 2X conference defensive POY and they develop players.  Coaching is top notch and good players will see field, depending on depth chart needs, immediately if they can help.

Student body is very diverse, team is close knit bunch.  Academics are challenging and school has great reputation from all top grad schools.  

“Decent HS Players” Does not apply.  Small roster for D3, as program is not used to bolster admission. School has thousands of applicants annually and admits < 20%. 

If Coach has a spot with “support”, give it a good look.  It’s an invaluable opportunity for the right “fit”.  And that doesn’t mean that all of the players are cut from the same mold, as they are very diverse as well, but they have exceptional chemistry. Seems like the team chemistry and coaching are a big part of what keeps them competitive, year in year out.  

The overall record can be thrown out as the coach schedules good teams and gives all players an opportunity to prove it on the field.  

CollegebaseballInsights posted:

Kimb27 posted:

Smitty28 this is one of the selling points for us.  My S wants to go into Sports Journalism. collegebaseballinsights, that's great info! I always look at the diversity of the roster as a huge plus. Thanks for taking the time to answer!

No problem.

Here is there 2018 Equity in Athletes Insights.

"The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act requires co-educational institutions of postsecondary education that participate in a Title IV, federal student financial assistance program, and have an intercollegiate athletic program, to prepare an annual report to the Department of Education on athletic participation, staffing, and revenues and expenses, by men's and women's teams. The Department will use this information in preparing its required report to the Congress on gender equity in intercollegiate athletics."

 

 

Here is a comparison of schools within the Conference.

2019

2018

Note, you will see some subtle difference between current and previous year.

Roster Size (Website/EADA)- what the school maintains on their official website vs what they report to Department of Education

 

Financials

Operating (Game-Day) Expenses

All expenses an institution incurs attributable to home, away, and neutral-site intercollegiate athletic contests (commonly known as game-day expenses), for (A) Lodging, meals, transportation, uniforms, and equipment for coaches, team members, support staff (including, but not limited to team managers and trainers), and others; and (B) Officials.

Total Expenses

All expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.

Equity in Athletics for the reporting year in question is released in February of following year.

I do not know enough about Haverford to know if this makes a difference. However if I was looking at schools and found out a schools head coach was not Full time, I would pause. Does a good coach that is part time stick around? If he is successful does another program cherry pick him? 

However maybe the other teams in the conference/region are the same way. Capitol in the OAC had a part timne coach for many years, and they just had trouble competing, until they went with a Full time coach and were able to upgrade. They have struggled the last couple of years however.

Trying to check now, but I believe all the head coaches in the NCAC are full time.  

Coach Beccaria is full time as far as I know.   That has got to be bad info.

tzer posted:

Coach Beccaria is full time as far as I know.   That has got to be bad info.

It may be that he is full time but he has other duties outside of baseball. So coaching is a part time Gig and his other duties make it so he has a full time position. 

Beccaria has been at Haverford 20 years and is also Assistant Athletic Director. I don’t think he’s part-time. 

it is REALLY tough to go from D3 to pro ball.  I know about this kid because he grew up near us.  Hit .378 with a .495 OBP & .692 SLG pct as a Senior at a good D3 with 10 HR's, All Conference, honorable mention All American, all time leader in SB's in school history, and didn't get drafted...

https://www.denisonbigred.com/.../johnson_tanner_cqvs

Honestly, I can't believe thoughts of pro ball or "being seen" are used in the same sentence as D3 or low D1.  This should absolutely not be a consideration when making a college decision.  I hear this way too much, not just here but amongst dads of players my son played with.  I've seen more than a few kids college education derailed because they didn't see the big picture.

3and2Fastball posted:

it is REALLY tough to go from D3 to pro ball.  I know about this kid because he grew up near us.  Hit .378 with a .495 OBP & .692 SLG pct as a Senior at a good D3 with 10 HR's, All Conference, honorable mention All American, all time leader in SB's in school history, and didn't get drafted...

https://www.denisonbigred.com/.../johnson_tanner_cqvs

 

The problem judging D3 hitters is the pitching they face over the course of the season. It’s better for their chances if they can get in a summer league with D1 prospects. With pitchers if the gun says 93 it doesn’t matter if it’s in the CWS or a hayfield. 

I’m gonna be honest,

Anyone talking about draft position as a major consideration in deciding between D1 and D3 baseball is likely wasting their time.  Baseball players are like water, they find their level, but anyone entering college as a first year player should have a pretty good idea about their pro potential since the MLB draft was 6 weeks ago and your kid was eligible.  If he didn’t get a call, and didn’t get a P5 offer outta HS, pro ball is the last thing that I would consider when evaluating D1 at a Patriot League school (per se) or D3 at a NESCAC or Centennial school...

Chico Escuela posted:

Beccaria has been at Haverford 20 years and is also Assistant Athletic Director. I don’t think he’s part-time. 

That's exactly why I said I dont know haverford well. Those are all things I would look at if I had a sin being recruited. 

However he is  part time coach, but also AAD. Those responsibilities together make him a FT employee. But he has other responsibilities, besides baseball. 

Plus since he had been there since long my concern would be unjustified. 

My point is if I saw a coach was PT, it would give me pause. And would require more research. 

tzer posted:

Haverford has quality pitching depth coming back next year and some experienced position players.  Shortstop was 2X conference defensive POY and they develop players.  Coaching is top notch and good players will see field, depending on depth chart needs, immediately if they can help.

Student body is very diverse, team is close knit bunch.  Academics are challenging and school has great reputation from all top grad schools.  

“Decent HS Players” Does not apply.  Small roster for D3, as program is not used to bolster admission. School has thousands of applicants annually and admits < 20%. 

If Coach has a spot with “support”, give it a good look.  It’s an invaluable opportunity for the right “fit”.  And that doesn’t mean that all of the players are cut from the same mold, as they are very diverse as well, but they have exceptional chemistry. Seems like the team chemistry and coaching are a big part of what keeps them competitive, year in year out.  

The overall record can be thrown out as the coach schedules good teams and gives all players an opportunity to prove it on the field.  

 

This post was written by someone that has intimate knowledge of the program. The content should carry more weight than other posts. 

Now I understand why HS Web Baseball is one of the best forums for College Baseball.

Thank you for sharing the knowledge.

3and2Fastball posted:

D3 ball varies greatly across the country.  A few years ago I sat and watched a Beloit College vs St Norbert game and both starting pitchers were throwing in the mid to high 70's... St Norbert had a 3B who really stood out (forgot his name, doesn't matter) with great bat speed compared to the rest of the field that day.  Later in talking to one of the St Norbert coaches he said that the kid had numerous mid major D1 offers but preferred to stay closer to home where he knew he would start and bat 3rd in the lineup from the first game of freshman year through his entire career...

the D3 teams that go to the college World Series would whup a heckuva lot of D1 teams.  The worst D3's in the nation would get destroyed by the best high school teams in Illinois, let alone Texas or Florida.  It really varies

If my son ends up going D3, I would look at the potential of him being drafted as a lottery ticket.  There would be a multitude of other considerations that would come into play as to choosing the right fit

Agree with all of this. There can be a wide variance of quality within D3. Some teams are really good, and can give some D1's a good game. Most aren't, and can't, but still play good baseball. As always, there are teams that are not the greatest, and struggle to fill their roster, for a variety of reasons.

Kimb27 posted:

SMOKEMEINSIDE that made me laugh!  May be making a visit there too.  Thanks for the insight.  My son really likes the coach and his candor. He seems to really want him there, so we will see how it goes after the overnight.  We picked the perfect weekend, there's an intrasquad game and then an alumni game and BBQ. so, we will all get a great feel for the team and culture.

Are you going to drop by Swarthmore on your way to or from Haverford?

adbono posted:

tzer posted:

Haverford has quality pitching depth coming back next year and some experienced position players.  Shortstop was 2X conference defensive POY and they develop players.  Coaching is top notch and good players will see field, depending on depth chart needs, immediately if they can help.

Student body is very diverse, team is close knit bunch.  Academics are challenging and school has great reputation from all top grad schools.  

“Decent HS Players” Does not apply.  Small roster for D3, as program is not used to bolster admission. School has thousands of applicants annually and admits < 20%. 

If Coach has a spot with “support”, give it a good look.  It’s an invaluable opportunity for the right “fit”.  And that doesn’t mean that all of the players are cut from the same mold, as they are very diverse as well, but they have exceptional chemistry. Seems like the team chemistry and coaching are a big part of what keeps them competitive, year in year out.  

The overall record can be thrown out as the coach schedules good teams and gives all players an opportunity to prove it on the field.  

 

This post was written by someone that has intimate knowledge of the program. The content should carry more weight than other posts. 

Adbono, I thought my post was pretty ok, too.  

smokeminside posted:

adbono posted:

tzer posted:

Haverford has quality pitching depth coming back next year and some experienced position players.  Shortstop was 2X conference defensive POY and they develop players.  Coaching is top notch and good players will see field, depending on depth chart needs, immediately if they can help.

Student body is very diverse, team is close knit bunch.  Academics are challenging and school has great reputation from all top grad schools.  

“Decent HS Players” Does not apply.  Small roster for D3, as program is not used to bolster admission. School has thousands of applicants annually and admits < 20%. 

If Coach has a spot with “support”, give it a good look.  It’s an invaluable opportunity for the right “fit”.  And that doesn’t mean that all of the players are cut from the same mold, as they are very diverse as well, but they have exceptional chemistry. Seems like the team chemistry and coaching are a big part of what keeps them competitive, year in year out.  

The overall record can be thrown out as the coach schedules good teams and gives all players an opportunity to prove it on the field.  

 

This post was written by someone that has intimate knowledge of the program. The content should carry more weight than other posts. 

Adbono, I thought my post was pretty ok, too.  

I’m sorry you are offended. Did I refer to you using the wrong pronoun? 

No offense taken!  Appreciate your comments on the board, and to me personally.

The Centennial Conference just announced that they are playing baseball this spring - as they should.  Haverford and Bryn Mawr announced that they will not play. Absolutely disgusting.

With their decisions, Bryn Mawr, Haverford, and Swarthmore (they were first!!),  attempt to cement their self-absorbing elitist-ness (!!).  I don't know if that's a word, but you get my point.

(oh, full disclosure: many of you know this but if you don't, I'm a Swarthmore parent)

Exactly how does the leading authority on COVID (Johns Hopkins), a fellow Centennial Conference member, decide that it is possible and these 3 decide otherwise?   I know Swat doesn’t have everyone on campus and decided not to play before the school year began.   But how does HC and BM bring everyone back for the fall and spring and then not follow through with the conference decision based on “science”?   Wouldn’t Hopkins have a decent understanding of the science such that HC could follow their lead(?)

it is unconscionable really...

And in the spirit of elitism, baseball should be CANCELED!!!!

@smokeminside posted:

With their decisions, Bryn Mawr, Haverford, and Swarthmore (they were first!!),  attempt to cement their self-absorbing elitist-ness (!!).  I don't know if that's a word, but you get my point.

(oh, full disclosure: many of you know this but if you don't, I'm a Swarthmore parent)

That's really such a shame.  Swarthmore had developed a very strong program, I feel awful for the upperclass athletes who committed to go there that they can't participate when even other schools in the conference have.  Just awful.

full disclosure here.   I have a Son that plays at HC and decided to stay home and take a leave year due, in part, to Swat’s decision and the belief that they wouldn’t play.   He had no idea that things would improve and the conference would play and HC would opt out.   That said, most all of his teammates did attend this year to burn a year of their HC eligibility with the hopes of being able to play some sort of competitive season.   While it would have been difficult to stay home and watch teammates play, it is even more difficult to have your teammates (especially seniors) lose their only remaining chance while the rest of the conference (minus Swat) plays baseball.   This is hard on him as these seniors were teammates for 2 years and his best friends on campus.   Very hard to have a good feeling for your eventual alma mater when it makes a decision that is so unjust.   My son will be fine, he’s got 3 to play 3 somewhere, likely 2 more at HC and 1 postgrad if he wants.   However, if it weren’t for the love that he has for the rest of the teammates and the coaches (who are OUTSTANDING), he would be looking for somewhere else to play all 3.  

***now if someone wants to hire a very accomplished coach, he’d be first on my list😉

@tzer posted:

full disclosure here.   I have a Son that plays at HC and decided to stay home and take a leave year due, in part, to Swat’s decision and the belief that they wouldn’t play.   He had no idea that things would improve and the conference would play and HC would opt out.   That said, most all of his teammates did attend this year to burn a year of their HC eligibility with the hopes of being able to play some sort of competitive season.   While it would have been difficult to stay home and watch teammates play, it is even more difficult to have your teammates (especially seniors) lose their only remaining chance while the rest of the conference (minus Swat) plays baseball.   This is hard on him as these seniors were teammates for 2 years and his best friends on campus.   Very hard to have a good feeling for your eventual alma mater when it makes a decision that is so unjust.   My son will be fine, he’s got 3 to play 3 somewhere, likely 2 more at HC and 1 postgrad if he wants.   However, if it weren’t for the love that he has for the rest of the teammates and the coaches (who are OUTSTANDING), he would be looking for somewhere else to play all 3.  

***now if someone wants to hire a very accomplished coach, he’d be first on my list😉

Very well said my friend. Student athletes that go to Centennial Conference schools, Ivies, etc. don’t choose those schools only for the education or only for the sports. It’s a place where they can do both - and those schools mentioned have taken both away for 2 years, unnecessarily I would argue. IMO it’s unconscionable - especially since they are collecting full tuition before announcing their ridiculous decisions. If Johns Hopkins is playing spring sports no school in the nation has a leg to stand on claiming it’s not safe to play.

To begin by undermining my bona fides: My son deferred at a Centennial school (not Swat or Haverford) for what would have been his freshman year in 2020-21...

Hopkins certainly is a medical authority. But the Ivies have some pretty good medical schools as well, and decided not to play. But I think this decision isn’t really driven by medical concerns so much as equitable ones—or one view of equity, anyway.

Seems to me the issue driving the cancellation of spring sports at the relevant schools is mainly the desire to avoid creating special rules for athletes. I don’t know what the rules are this semester at Centennial schools, but my daughter’s smallish private university has COVID-era rules that prohibit students from, e.g., leaving town and returning to campus. Spring break was cancelled, and while students may leave campus to go grocery shopping, etc., they are not supposed to travel. (Yeah, a lot of them are doing so anyway.) My daughter’s school is playing sports this spring, which means athletes don’t have to abide by these travel restrictions.  Now, this is a P5 school so maybe this isn’t surprising. But I can see how Haverford and the Ivies could conclude that they don’t want to allow athletes to do things that are forbidden to other students—and other student groups.

I’m not trying to defend the decisions (really). But I understand them. If my kid were told the debate team couldn’t leave campus for tournaments, but his roommate on the baseball team got to travel, I’d wonder about that. (Yes, baseball is played outdoors. Just tossing out an example—and baseball players ride buses together, share the weight room, etc.)

Easy for me to say—my kid wasn’t going to play this spring anyway. I do feel badly for the athletes affected.

I am personally sickened that we lowered the bar so much that we now applaud schools for allowing students to play a low risk sport in the spring outdoors...really bold move woohoo, standing ovation for doing their jobs!  It would have been nice and probably restored my faith in our elitist higher education system to see schools with pandemic-proof resources set an example for this country and play sports with all the extra and very costly bells and whistle testing to prove to the world the pandemic did not beat us...image that kind of leadership and forward thinking.  Where are our Churchills and Roosevelts? 

@2022NYC posted:

I am personally sickened that we lowered the bar so much that we now applaud schools for allowing students to play a low risk sport in the spring outdoors...really bold move woohoo, standing ovation for doing their jobs!  It would have been nice and probably restored my faith in our elitist higher education system to see schools with pandemic-proof resources set an example for this country and play sports with all the extra and very costly bells and whistle testing to prove to the world the pandemic did not beat us...image that kind of leadership and forward thinking.  Where are our Churchills and Roosevelts?

Our Churchills and Roosevelts are turning over in their graves.

You cannot draw a comparison between intercollegiate athletic competition and ANY other extracurricular activity.   That is ludicrous.   The opportunity to play intercollegiate athletics is a finite opportunity, which is obtained through countless sacrifices.  Do not try to tell me that debate is a similar endeavor.   Further, I am sure that debates are being conducted over online platforms (zoom) as are musical events, etc.  But, even if it were an equivalent endeavor, it would be unconscionable to withhold opportunities to those that found a safe way to compete regardless.   To not play an outdoor sport in the current environment because of the risk of travel is an abomination.   Travel will always involve risks.   Are you advocating that we keep the sports teams locked down next year to prevent a bus crash?   Obviously debate wasn’t your thing!

We have nothing to fear but (some) high academic administrations.

@smokeminside posted:

We have nothing to fear but (some) high academic administrations.

Outstanding! My man smoke delivers again!

@tzer posted:

You cannot draw a comparison between intercollegiate athletic competition and ANY other extracurricular activity.   That is ludicrous.   The opportunity to play intercollegiate athletics is a finite opportunity, which is obtained through countless sacrifices.  Do not try to tell me that debate is a similar endeavor.   Further, I am sure that debates are being conducted over online platforms (zoom) as are musical events, etc.  But, even if it were an equivalent endeavor, it would be unconscionable to withhold opportunities to those that found a safe way to compete regardless.   To not play an outdoor sport in the current environment because of the risk of travel is an abomination.   Travel will always involve risks.   Are you advocating that we keep the sports teams locked down next year to prevent a bus crash?   Obviously debate wasn’t your thing!

No, intercollegiate sports are not incomparable (and I say that as the father of an athlete). And I assure you most HA schools don’t view their sports teams as more important than the arts, the science students competing for prestigious international prizes, etc.  Various universities’ glossy alumni mags come to my household—sports do not get outsized mention in the ones from the Ivies and similar institutions  

I did debate in college and HS. (My baseball career ended when I was 15.  Loved the game, but wasn’t good enough.)  Debate involved national competition (including flying to tournaments in some cases), quite a few all-nighters researching and preparing, and was very important to those of us engaged in it (even though, like baseball, it was just a game). I won a state championship, was offered a debate scholarship (yeah, they exist), and ultimately the activity was important in getting me into college. I know many friends who also were passionate about their own extracurriculars, sacrificed for them, and used them to support their college applications.  Frankly, my time might have been better spent on charitable activities or music or science.  But, like trying to master throwing a ball 60’6”, sometimes a particular pursuit just captures a person’s attention even though it has little extrinsic value.

If you want to argue spring sports are uniquely safe, have at it.  (I’m not interested in joining that discussion, but others may be).  As I said earlier, I think permitting sports is inevitably going to mean allowing athletes privileges not granted to other students and other student activities.  I can see why schools might not want to do that.  (Didn’t say I agree—honestly I am not sure what I think.)  But if your position is that Haverford, Yale, et al. ought to regard sports as more important than the other things their students pursue outside class, then I think those university’s faculties and administrations would disagree  

@Chico Escuela posted:

No, intercollegiate sports are not incomparable (and I say that as the father of an athlete). And I assure you most HA schools don’t view their sports teams as more important than the arts, the science students competing for prestigious international prizes, etc.  Various universities’ glossy alumni mags come to my household—sports do not get outsized mention in the ones from the Ivies and similar institutions  

I did debate in college and HS. (My baseball career ended when I was 15.  Loved the game, but wasn’t good enough.)  Debate involved national competition (including flying to tournaments in some cases), quite a few all-nighters researching and preparing, and was very important to those of us engaged in it (even though, like baseball, it was just a game). I won a state championship, was offered a debate scholarship (yeah, they exist), and ultimately the activity was important in getting me into college. I know many friends who also were passionate about their own extracurriculars, sacrificed for them, and used them to support their college applications.  Frankly, my time might have been better spent on charitable activities or music or science.  But, like trying to master throwing a ball 60’6”, sometimes a particular pursuit just captures a person’s attention even though it has little extrinsic value.

If you want to argue spring sports are uniquely safe, have at it.  (I’m not interested in joining that discussion, but others may be).  As I said earlier, I think permitting sports is inevitably going to mean allowing athletes privileges not granted to other students and other student activities.  I can see why schools might not want to do that.  (Didn’t say I agree—honestly I am not sure what I think.)  But if your position is that Haverford, Yale, et al. ought to regard sports as more important than the other things their students pursue outside class, then I think those university’s faculties and administrations would disagree

It is obvious you quit when you were 15.

@tzer posted:

It is obvious you quit when you were 15.

Yep. Settled for a full-tuition ride to a school in USNews’ top 10 and then an Ivy professional degree. I don’t think my life woils have been better if I had managed to eke out a spot on the HS Varsity baseball bench instead of pursuing something I was better suited for. My son, on the other hand, gravitated to baseball early and was much better at it than his old man.  So he pursued his own passions.  Nothing wrong with that.  But I don’t think my son being a pitcher is inherently superior to other kids who may be dancers or musicians or science prize winners.

I have not uttered an unkind word to you; you, however, certainly cant say the same.  

(For the record,  I fought forest fires to earn money during college summers. So despite my lack of baseball skills, I was not (though may today be) a completely pencil-necked geek.)

100% agree, Chico.  Anyway, the only people's business this is is students and parents of students.  If you don't like it, don't send your son there.  It's a business, capitalism works.  Maybe in the future they will get fewer students who don't approve of this kind of cancellation; obviously they don't think so (or don't care).  Why does anyone else care what these schools do?

I say this as a parent whose son's season is also cancelled; I'm disgusted and frustrated too.  I wrote to his school's administration.  My son is taking the opportunity to do new things (coaching at his HS!), so we have to move on.   I'm hoping summer ball happens.

@Chico Escuela posted:

Yep. Settled for a full-tuition ride to a school in USNews’ top 10 and then an Ivy professional degree. I don’t think my life woils have been better if I had managed to eke out a spot on the HS Varsity baseball bench instead of pursuing something I was better suited for. My son, on the other hand, gravitated to baseball early and was much better at it than his old man.  So he pursued his own passions.  Nothing wrong with that.  But I don’t think my son being a pitcher is inherently superior to other kids who may be dancers or musicians or science prize winners.

I have not uttered an unkind word to you; you, however, certainly cant say the same.  

(For the record,  I fought forest fires to earn money during college summers. So despite my lack of baseball skills, I was not (though may today be) a completely pencil-necked geek.)

Not at all trying to be unkind.  It is just obvious in your posts that you were not a high level competitive athlete.   I didn’t do debate, and I wouldn’t think it unkind if you said it was obvious that I didn’t.   Not trying to ruffle anyone’s jimmies.   I’m not at all surprised that those “elite” institutions that you mention equate debate and sports to be equal (I don’t know if they do or not), but I don’t think any debate team should be kept  from competition if they can find a way to do it safely.   To keep sports from playing when they have found a safe way to do it, in the spirit of “fairness”, is typical of those in the “elite” “academia” that don’t understand the value of competition. I applaud schools like Hopkins that get it and I’d sure as hell send my aspiring doctor there over some Ivy resting on reputation.   Hopkins has been a lot more visible in the real world during the pandemic than any of your esteemed Ivies...

@anotherparent posted:

100% agree, Chico.  Anyway, the only people's business this is is students and parents of students.  If you don't like it, don't send your son there.  It's a business, capitalism works.  Maybe in the future they will get fewer students who don't approve of this kind of cancellation; obviously they don't think so (or don't care).  Why does anyone else care what these schools do?

I say this as a parent whose son's season is also cancelled; I'm disgusted and frustrated too.  I wrote to his school's administration.  My son is taking the opportunity to do new things (coaching at his HS!), so we have to move on.   I'm hoping summer ball happens.

I agree with you too.   In the real world, if you tell someone something that you know to be false in order to get someone to provide consideration ($$) and then it is apparent that you did so with intent to deceive, there are consequences as well...

@tzer posted:

Not at all trying to be unkind.  It is just obvious in your posts that you were not a high level competitive athlete.   I didn’t do debate, and I wouldn’t think it unkind if you said it was obvious that I didn’t.   Not trying to ruffle anyone’s jimmies.   I’m not at all surprised that those “elite” institutions that you mention equate debate and sports to be equal (I don’t know if they do or not), but I don’t think any debate team should be kept  from competition if they can find a way to do it safely.   To keep sports from playing when they have found a safe way to do it, in the spirit of “fairness”, is typical of those in the “elite” “academia” that don’t understand the value of competition. I applaud schools like Hopkins that get it and I’d sure as hell send my aspiring doctor there over some Ivy resting on reputation.   Hopkins has been a lot more visible in the real world during the pandemic than any of your esteemed Ivies...

A post that will sound defensive (I suppose because it is):  I spent a tremendous amount of time and money on my son’s pas soon of baseball. I loved (almost) every minute of it, and it was great for him. Sports can be a terror occurs builder of men and women.

But I’d submit that the only reason you can tell I wasn’t a high-level athlete is because I don’t give sports the same priority you do. I have worked on death penalty appeals and litigated cases in the US Supreme Court. I worked and sacrificed for years to be able to do it, and routinely had to perform under pressure. I never pitched an inning of a college game (not could I have)—but I don’t believe I missed out on some crucial component of strength of character because of it. My point is not that I’m All That. (I’m a chubby middle-aged guy with a bad shoulder.  Never been in combat, never ran into a burning building to save someone.). But there are lots of paths, and I don’t think sports has a monopoly on any of the virtues.

@Chico Escuela posted:

A post that will sound defensive (I suppose because it is):  I spent a tremendous amount of time and money on my son’s pas soon of baseball. I loved (almost) every minute of it, and it was great for him. Sports can be a terror occurs builder of men and women.

But I’d submit that the only reason you can tell I wasn’t a high-level athlete is because I don’t give sports the same priority you do. I have worked on death penalty appeals and litigated cases in the US Supreme Court. I worked and sacrificed for years to be able to do it, and routinely had to perform under pressure. I never pitched an inning of a college game (not could I have)—but I don’t believe I missed out on some crucial component of strength of character because of it. My point is not that I’m All That. (I’m a chubby middle-aged guy with a bad shoulder.  Never been in combat, never ran into a burning building to save someone.). But there are lots of paths, and I don’t think sports has a monopoly on any of the virtues.

I commend your achievements.   However I differ from you in my belief that if an activity can be done safely, it should not be prohibited because ALL activities cannot  be done safely.   I don’t think “fairness” is an appropriate reason to prohibit all activity.

My point is...

just because the French kissing team can’t find a way to compete safely due to Covid doesn’t mean that the baseball team shouldn’t be able to compete safely due to Covid