But that NESCAC statement kicking the can down the road was 3 weeks ago. Seems like they have to say something definitive soon. (Although by not saying anything, it’s looking like they have effectively decided.)
@Chico Escuela posted:But that NESCAC statement kicking the can down the road was 3 weeks ago. Seems like they have to say something definitive soon. (Although by not saying anything, it’s looking like they have effectively decided.)
that's how my son (and I) are viewing it.
This is a bold public statement from an employee, I applaud him.
@old_school posted:This is a bold public statement from an employee, I applaud him.
Now we can watch for his firing or unexpected resignation. I’m guessing the Brown president won’t care for the public statement and not being on board with the consensus. What surprises me is I expected to see a more senior baseball coach being this bold. The coach is in his thirties.
@RJM posted:Now we can watch for his firing or unexpected resignation. I’m guessing the Brown president won’t care for the public statement and not being on board with the consensus. What surprises me is I expected to see a more senior baseball coach being this bold. The coach is in his thirties.
It's a bold statement, and IMO opinion an admirable one. He's standing up for his players and his program. And my perspective is that of a parent who has been fairly conservative throughout the year, particularly last spring when this was all new and the science was far hazier. Now, it's very clear. Baseball is an outdoor sport, one which can be practiced and played safely. This will only continue to be more true as vaccination distribution increases over the Spring. If, for whatever reason, variants cause a reversal of this situation, programs and schools can adjust accordingly. Their Coach had the stones to say this publicly, and if Brown does take punitive action against him I'm sure he will get snapped up elsewhere.
I applaud Brown’s coach for speaking up. The coaches have been muzzled for way too long.
I realize now that the season was cancelled last summer as every school announced their plans for the school year, none of which were allowing all students on campus. To announce this prematurely was an indication the season was not going to happen. Not a single Ivy team would have all their players on-campus. I knew then it was over but was strung along because coaches told players if Ivy announced a season the schools would do everything within their power to get kids on campus. But that is simply ridiculous as it would not be an easy thing to do once the wheels had been set in motion.
UPenn already has a player in the transfer portal and I cannot blame him for being there as he was listed as a top 10 round pick this year. No season makes it tough to maintain your draft stock.
As hard as last season’s cancellation was, it was NOTHING compared to this season’s Ivy cancellation.
its one thing to miss out on a season like everyone else, it is an entirely different thing to watch your peers play while you cannot.
Yep, the only way it could have worked would be if everyone did the Cornell thing and tested students both on and off campus. I'm sure that is true at most D1 schools, many of which have mostly off-campus housing. That isn't the case for most Ivies.
Did the coaches not tell the players this back in November? I think it's one thing to speak out publicly (whether that was wise or not), but surely the coaches had figured this out long ago. What were they telling their players? We were told that as long as there was a chance that some students could return to campus, there was a chance that sports could happen, but both coach and school were pretty honest that it was unlikely, and many players took the semester (or year) off from school.
I am sure ALL the Ivies test both on-campus and off-campus students. Definitely true for the ones I am aware of. For example, at Dartmouth, off campus kids get tested even though they currently are not allowed on campus, which of course excludes them from athletic participation.
Because of policies like this, most students, including athletes, opted to stay away if they were not approved to be on-campus for the term.
I believe coaches were optimistic schools would do everything within their power to get students on campus if Ivy announced that athletics would be played.
I believe most coaches are guilty of assuming that the schools would act like grownups and make mature decisions like every other conference in the entire country...but nope that didn’t happen.
The new Ivy saying is, “You may be beating us now. But we’ll be watching you play later.”
The irony is the reputation for developing leaders of all fields and yet the actual leaders have collectively failed to lead. Unless you call sitting at home and learning via zoom leading.
@RJM posted:Now we can watch for his firing or unexpected resignation. I’m guessing the Brown president won’t care for the public statement and not being on board with the consensus. What surprises me is I expected to see a more senior baseball coach being this bold. The coach is in his thirties.
that would be a hell of a story considering the some of the extreme teachings by So many professors.
I saw Cressey is marketing to guys whose seasons were cancelled. Great place to go to get better if your team/school isn’t playing.
An Ivy pitcher who has was throwing weekly bullpens to my son left for the Cressey program almost 2 weeks ago. The way he was throwing pre-Cressey was impressive...excited to hear how he looks post. LHP sitting 91-92 who touched 95 in his last couple of pens. Might get drafted before throwing an inning for his Ivy!!!
On the plus side... I was watching some nice performances by Ivy league grads this weekend. One got a win and a hold over #1 Florida. Another pitched 4 solid innings for Rice. Another homered for Duke. And another Ivy grad pitched 4 scoreless innings for BC.
There were a handful of Ivy guys hitting and throwing pens when we were there a couple weeks ago. I thought it was odd because most of the college guys had gone back to school by then
I think everybody can agree the Ivy Presidents have handled the Covid-19 communication, leadership, etc poorly for Ivy athletics. I was giving them a slight break in their 2020 Covid policy, but there are no excuses for lack of communication in 2021.
I've read everybody's post in this thread and I think the real point has been missed. The bottom line is the Ivy Presidents really don't rank athletics high on their big-picture priority list. There I said it, and this isn't the first time I've kicked the hornets nest. They view and treat students and student/athletes as the same.
Athletics play a very minor role on an Ivy campus. Most programs are self funded. Athletics do not bring in revenue. Tens of thousands of people aren't flocking to an Ivy athletic event...it is nothing like an Ohio State/Michigan football game or an ACC baseball game. Almost all of the Ivy recruited student athletes that attend one of these schools is focused on their studies, and they have a competitive passion for a sport that will end when they graduate. My son and I knew this when he committed...there was going to be no hoopla with regards to Ivy athletics. If my son wanted hoopla, he would have selected a different D1 school. Frankly I'm a lot surprised that some folks are expecting an "Ivy leopard to change its spots". Covid has changed lives across the globe. It sucks and we've all had to adapt to a new way of life. My heart goes out to those that have worked hard to get that Ivy baseball opportunity and they are still waiting to play.
I'm not defending the Ivy Presidents actions or inactions but I'm pointing out what is real. In my world, actions speak louder than words and the actions of the Ivy Presidents tell me everything I need to know about how they view Ivy athletics relative to the rest of the student body...they are one and the same and treated as one and the same. Their minds are about making money, managing a pile of money, corporate partnerships, research and bringing in the best professors and students they can get.
Again, just my two cents.....
Fenway dropping the truth bomb.
The Ivy has finally officially confirmed what everyone has always known.
@fenwaysouth posted:.... In my world, actions speak louder than words and the actions of the Ivy Presidents tell me everything I need to know about how they view Ivy athletics relative to the rest of the student body...they are one and the same and treated as one and the same. ....
Fenway, I definitely agree that the timing and (lack of) communication about spring 2021 athletics has been abysmal, and not just at the Ivies (looking at you NESCAC and Centennial...). But I'm confused by parts of your post: Do you think the Ivies ought to treat athletes differently than other students? Or put another way, should they treat other student activities differently than sports?
I think it's understandable (but unfortunate) that at schools that make millions of dollars on basketball and football, sports are a bigger priority than just about anything else. And because of Title IX and some other issues, non-revenue sports are going to get a leg up at those schools, too. But IMO colleges aren't (or shouldn't be) in the business of big-dollar athletics promotion. If the orchestra, debate team, etc. aren't being allowed to travel to off-campus venues (and I have no idea whether they are), then I wouldn't expect Ivy or D3 athletic teams to do so. Granted, baseball is outdoors; so maybe the comparison ought to be to the marching band or ultimate frisbee club. My point is that comparable activities being treated comparably doesn't seem to me like grounds to complain--and I say that as someone whose kids all chose athletics as essentially their only activities outside of classes.
I understand criticizing university leaders for not allowing their students to engage in activities that other schools in their regions deem safe. But I don't get complaining that athletics aren't given more favorable treatment than other activities (if that is what are arguing).
I'll just toss this out there, too: The Ivies are among a small handful of schools that don't need sports to raise their profiles, and don't have to worry about alienating applicants by closing their campuses. (Ivy applications set records in 2021. So did a lot of other highly selective schools that closed their campuses in 2020.) These schools also have huge endowments, notwithstanding their attempts to plead poverty lately. Seems to me that if anyone is making decisions for the right reasons, it should be the schools that don't have to worry about negative fallout from cancelling parts of the normal college experience. Every school presumably faces essentially the same pressures of potential liability, bad PR, etc. But some schools also need to stay open to keep applicants and tuition dollars coming in. The Ivies and a few other institutions are much freer from those latter pressures than other schools. Maybe they made the wrong decision anyhow, but seems to me their motivations ought to be less suspect than other institutions. The president of XYZ University gets advice from his medical school, his lawyers, his alumni association and his admissions department--then also factors in the sports revenues and applicants s/he stands to lose--and makes a decision about whether to participate in athletics. The president of an Ivy gets similar advice, but without sports dollars or applicant stats in the calculation. Again, the Ivy may come to the wrong conclusion, but purely on the basis of motivations, I don't see a reason to expect them to do worse than other schools.
Just sayin'... I honestly do not have a strong opinion about playing spring sports in 2021. (I also have no dog in the fight, because my son took a gap year.) And before you argue with me about legal liability and media coverage of the pandemic and so on, I will reiterate: My point is that the Ivies face the same environment (however skewed you think it may be) as other schools, but without the pressure of athletic revenues or applicant stats, which don't seem like they ought to figure into public health questions.