Ivy basketball is at a crossroads.
There is no other way to say it. Could the Ivy be Division III in five years? Although it’s highly unlikely, it’s not impossible like it was 10 years ago.
The triple whammy of no sanctioned NIL, opting out of revenue share and no graduate transfer eligibility has cast a shroud over the league – one which is perceptible on the recruiting trails and on the court.
After a series of player and coach interviews, it is clear that there is no consensus on the direction of Ivy athletics but a clear consensus that the Ivy presidents and some athletic directors are clueless about the current landscape of college athletics.
Call it ignorance. Call it arrogance. It is both and more.
Now is there leakage? Of course there is.
One Ivy has an active collective. Others have paid out high-level NIL, and most offer high-level financial summer jobs for players.
There are some easy fixes. Fixes to which players, alumni and donors subscribe.
The notion propagated last year by some in power that the Ivy presidents spent 70% of their time in the fall on NIL is utter nonsense.
Want some fixes?
How about one year of grad transfer eligibility?
Or how about the Ivy stops the strong warnings to member institutions against NIL?
Have the presidents read the NCAA v. Alston decision, which held that antitrust law prohibits the NCAA from keeping its Division I schools from offering “education-related compensation or benefits” to student-athletes (men and women) who play basketball and football? It is the law of the land by a 9-0 Supreme Court decision. It applies at Yale and Harvard like other schools in the United States.
How about permitting two weeks of supervised summer practices? You will get better quality of play in the fall and fewer early injuries.
Changes need to be made. Quickly.
You are not nurturing kids like they are nurtured at the 356 other Division I programs.
It’s time.
Having been associated with Ivy League basketball for 58 years (Yale basketball player from 1967-1971, Yale coach from 1971 – 1975, Yale Basketball Association supporter, and frequent attendee at Yale games), I couldn’t agree more with Richard’s sentiments and suggestions. The athletic landscape has changed dramatically as has the concept of amateurism. The Ivy League administrations and Athletic Departments need to wake up or they risk losing any chance of competing successfully in Division I basketball.
I won’t pretend to understand all of the ramifications of the NILs, the transfer portal and the Ivy self imposed limitations on eligibility. I do understand that we have arrived at this point because of the differences in priority between athletics and the classroom set by colleges and universities and their conferences as well as the vast inflow of revenue to college sports and the equitability of its distribution between athletes and institution. Unfortunately, the substitution of athletes paid for their role in generating income for an institution to replace those we once called “amateurs” for their love of sport and their (unpaid) loyal representation of the institution has taken most of the fun and loyalty out of college sports for this fan. How can I get as excited about some athlete who comes to Princeton and develops into an attractive prospect other schools will pay big $ for? Will the 4 year star cease to exist at all but the few highest tier schools that can milk unlimited funds from their large athletics addicted fan bases?
I’ll take DIII over that any day.
Is Richard Kent an Ivy alum? If not, what business is it of his how Ivies confront the professionalization of college sport?
Tiger69:
Are you suggesting that an Ivy League degree is required to be a fan of Ivy League basketball or a specific Ivy League school. I don’t believe so. Richard Kent has been rooting for and supporting Yale basketball well before I entered Yale (1967), and his knowledge of Yale basketball history and the history of Ivy League basketball is unsurpassed. Why does one have to possess an Ivy League degree to express an opinion about the conference and the sport? Richard’s game analysis is spot on, and his deep knowledge of the financial issues affecting colleges and the college game itself provide enlightenment that is specific to the Ivy League. I find that to be very valuable and appreciate that he shares his insights with “Ivyhoops” readers.
Tiger69
Your comments about Mr. Kent are totally out of line. Mr. Kent grew up in New Haven, CT where he closely followed and attended Yale sports particularly basketball and football. He attends almost every Yale home basketball game and some away games, and is well known to the coaching staff. He represents both coaches and athletes. While he did not attend an Ivy League school,(but graduated Phi Beta Kappa) he is a well known attorney expert in the field of sports law, which he teaches at a number of schools including Rutgers Law School. He has devoted considerable time to learning about NIL , anti-trust issues and other aspects of modern sports law. You don’t have to agree with his opinions, but to levy a personal attack on him and dismiss him because he did not attend an Ivy League School is not only incorrect but reflects an arrogance that does not speak well for you.
Greetings fellow Ivy fans, Louie and the legendary Jim Morgan,
First I must disclose that Jim Morgan was one of the dozen or so truly outstanding players in the Ivies in the late 60s, early 70s. He is also one of the very few to have outscored “Pistol” Pete Maravich 35-34 in a great upset in which the underDOG Elis came from 20 points behind to defeat LSU 97-94).
Although we may disagree, I am humbled by his reply. I erred if I implied that Richard Kent is not entitled to his own opinion of how the Ivies should react to recent events introducing Big $ to college basketball. Also, as Louie pointed out above, he is an educated and respected authority in sports law. I meant no disrespect to him and I have learned much from his comments in the past. OTOH, I do find his characterizations of Ivy presidents and athletic directors as clueless, ignorant and arrogant as condescending and ignorant as well. The reason I questioned his business to comment as a non Ivy Alum is because he is a fan, not a policy maker. One could argue that as an attorney who can advise players contemplating NILs and transfers he also has a conflict of interest. The purpose of my post was to question whether the sacrifices necessary to maintain a successful DI college basketball program are consistent with the educational role of the Ivies. Is not DIII, at least in basketball and football, more fitting for the Ivies?
I’ll leave it at that for now.