Tuesday, March 26, 2013

News and Notes: Tuesday Edition

Below, news and notes for Tuesday...

  • The Chronicle Herald notes that Syracuse walk-on, Noel Jones, had Cornell on the top of his college choice list before choosing to join the 'Cuse.
  • The Sun Times writes, "[Bo Ryan] won four Division III national championships at Wisconsin-Platteville in the 1990s. His Wisconsin teams have generally overachieved in his 14 years as head coach. But his team’s have lost to a lower-seeded team in the tournament five times in the last seven years — in 2007 to No. 7 UNLV as a No. 2 seed; in 2008 to No. 10 Davidson as a No. 3; in 2010 to No. 12 Cornell as a No. 4; in 2011 to No. 8 Butler as a No. 4; and to No. 12 Ole Miss as a No. 5 this year."
  • Daily Pennsylvanian writer contends, "It was good for the Ivy when Cornell went on a run in the NCAAs, and it is good that Harvard did the same this past weekend. Wins like that put pressure on the Ivy administrators (Bilsky included) to raise the league's visibility, and that's always good."

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

A couple questions/comments about your twitter postings on Harvard's admissions:

1. Many of Cornell's schools are at the very top of their specialties and have admissions standards that reflect that (ie close to Harvard's etc.). Yet, the vast majority of our team is admitted through the less selective Ag school (and not Dyson). Is that gaming the system just because Cornell channels its basketball players into less competitive schools/majors? I don't think it is, but it's not an unfair question.

2. Every school admits what amounts to AI floor kids as part of a comprehensive admissions package. Some kids come from lower income families and didn't go to Exeter but demonstrate potential not reflected in a score. Other kids might be a student athlete and bring a component to the university that a kid with a perfect SAT score may not. Every elite school admits kids who fall below a certain GPA/SAT profile.

One could argue that their lowering of admissions standards is basketball specific, which is a fair point. But as long as every kid in the league passes the AI threshold, I'm not sure I'm seeing why this is such a big deal.

Also, what Harvard is doing is different because of its use of boosters. From what I understand (and I could be wrong), it's all atmospherics to make Harvard's administration happy, so that seems like an internal Harvard issue.

Many of Harvard's kids could have gone to less demanding academic schools to focus on basketball. They went to Harvard in part for the name and the education. And some of their key players aren't in cream puff majors (Rivard is a computer science major, Steve M-M is a math major, Kenyatta is an econ major).

Anonymous said...

What are the chances the league scraps AI averaging anyway?

Unknown said...

Exactly to ANON 2:32.

Cornell has used Ag school as parking lot for athletes for decades. The entire hockey team was in there when I went to school. And we have by far the largest student population. So if anything we're the ones who had an unfair advantage in past years. Heaven forbid someone else comes up with a competitive advantage that games the system in a comparable way to Cornell's state school advantage.

In light of that advantage, and Cornell's Pennsylvania-adjacent location, I've never understood why we can't be more competitive in football.

With the Ag school, our Big Ten atmosphere, and mid-western almost neighbors like Indiana and Ohio, we should also have an advantage in Basketball recruiting. Only 5 guys play at a time. There are plenty of kids to go around.

The Cornell Basketball Blog said...

Wait a second. The Ag program at Cornell existed long, long before the invention of basketball.

You mean to tell me you have a problem with Cornell Athletes choosing to enroll in the Ag School?

Are you kidding?

The Ag School is a legitimate academic program which also umbrellas the Dyson School of Business, one of the top 5 undergrad business programs in America.

There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with Cornell athletes studying in the Ag School just as there would be no issue of Harvard students studying any major offered at Harvard.

Anonymous said...

I would have no problem with any of the four following scenarios:

(1) We go back to "the old days" before Amaker's arrival. Harvard, Yale and Princeton held themselves to a higher range of AI scores for their athletes, but compensated for that disadvantage in recruiting with more prominent brand names.

(2) We get rid of AI targets and ranges for each Ivy and just let everybody admit as many low AI recruits as they want, right down to the AI floor.

(3) We treat basketball like football, instituting a system of AI bands.

(4) We say "to hell with it." For basketball and basketball alone, you can admit whomever the hell you feel like.

Any of these scenarios would at least present a fair competition among Ivy competitors. The problem with the current situation is that Harvard is following Scenario 2 while the rest of us are following Scenario 1.

Harvard is admitting as many low AI recruits as they want, right down the the AI minimum, while the rest of us are trying -- trying -- to adhere to AI targets and ranges for our schools. Pity Yale and Princeton, sticking to the old HYP range while their direct competitor basically says, "See ya later, suckers!"

The issue is simple fairness, making sure that all members of any conference follow a common philosophy and set of guidelines to ensure as fair a competition as is possible, given differences in the schools themselves.

Unknown said...

As usual in your rush to disagree you missed the point. Do you really think 90 percent of the hockey team (stats from my time there - may be slightly different now) has a profound interest in entomology as opposed to etymology? Even if its the best dagum entomology in the world? I doubt it. ILR school fits this scenario as well.

I think the central reasons they are there are because 1. The tuition is cheaper and therefore the financial aid they receive gets them closer to zero, and 2. the admissions standards are not as stringent as the arts school. 3. Once there, you can manipulate your major to take many of your classes in the private colleges anyway.

As you've said (and why that tall kid did not attend) there are an extremely limited number of seats in the Dyson school. The others are in all parts of more general majors, and paying approximately half the tuition of any other Ivy League school in a non-scholarship conference. You don't think that's a competitive advantage? Then you're not listening.

Anonymous said...

The tuition is only halved if you're from New York State though. I doubt all or even most of the athletes are from New York State.

The Cornell Basketball Blog said...

Correct, in recent years, Cornell's statutory/land-grant grant colleges began to charge the same tuition for out-of-state students as the endowed colleges.

http://www.finaid.cornell.edu/cost-attend

Also, Cornell's Ivy matching policy is here:

http://www.finaid.cornell.edu/cost-attend/financial-aid-initiatives

So, in other words, Galal Cancer is the only Cornell player with a reduced tuition since he is a New York State resident.

Cornell's College of Human Ecology is generally the least selective of Cornell's undergraduate colleges for males. The Agriculture College is generally next in line of least selective with one exception. The Dyson School of Business, which is under the umbrella of the Agriculture and Life Sciences College, is highly selective. Cornell generally is not able to place all of its recruits in the business program.