HARVARD SUCKS

[Rita]

I heard waaaay too many times about how Harvard "relaxed" its admission standards to get better basketball players.

Worked for Brown hockey in the early 90's.  1-21-0 in 1989, 13-7-2 by 1993.

Of course, once you admit them, you have to somehow keep them eligible.

You just don't have them take that Government class called "Introduction to Congress".

[Trotsky]

Submitted without comment.

OK, maybe one comment.

[nyc94]

If Harvard is indeed skewing its AI numbers to benefit men's basketball, it will be interesting to see which other teams there take the hit. You're going to have to have a sparkling academic record to be on the sailing team.

I thought each team (or at least each sport, M + W) had to conform to the AI.  So, for instance, you couldn't field a wrestling team of Joe Rockheads and balance it with giving everybody on the chess team an épée.

I have no source to quote but I was under the belief that only football was analyzed separately and that the rest of the athletes were looked at as one group so that yes, you could offset one team with other athletes.

[Weder]

If Harvard is indeed skewing its AI numbers to benefit men's basketball, it will be interesting to see which other teams there take the hit. You're going to have to have a sparkling academic record to be on the sailing team.

I thought each team (or at least each sport, M + W) had to conform to the AI.  So, for instance, you couldn't field a wrestling team of Joe Rockheads and balance it with giving everybody on the chess team an épée.

I have no source to quote but I was under the belief that only football was analyzed separately and that the rest of the athletes were looked at as one group so that yes, you could offset one team with other athletes.

I thought the same thing. There is speculation on this USCHO thread about how some Ivies are handling AI issues.

[BMac]

OK, this is amazing. The best part is that this will obviously get picked up by more prestigious publications because everyone loves making fun of Harvard.

[phillysportsfan]

If Harvard is indeed skewing its AI numbers to benefit men's basketball, it will be interesting to see which other teams there take the hit. You're going to have to have a sparkling academic record to be on the sailing team.

I thought each team (or at least each sport, M + W) had to conform to the AI.  So, for instance, you couldn't field a wrestling team of Joe Rockheads and balance it with giving everybody on the chess team an épée.

I have no source to quote but I was under the belief that only football was analyzed separately and that the rest of the athletes were looked at as one group so that yes, you could offset one team with other athletes.

I thought the same thing. There is speculation on this USCHO thread about how some Ivies are handling AI issues.

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

[ugarte]

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

I'm trying to parse this:

Harvard brings in high AI kids (who would not meet Harvard's usual standards to sit at the end of the bench / get cut) along with low AI kids (who are farther from Harvard's standards but can actually play) as a way of gaming the system ... and you APPROVE!?

[Trotsky]

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

I'm trying to parse this:

Harvard brings in high AI kids (who would not meet Harvard's usual standards to sit at the end of the bench / get cut) along with low AI kids (who are farther from Harvard's standards but can actually play) as a way of gaming the system ... and you APPROVE!?

That was my reaction.  It's as if the perspective is that the AI is some niggling regulation that we should be trying to get around.

That's wrong.  For one thing, the AI itself is a requirement the Ivies levy upon themselves; we can stop any time we want to.

But for the more important thing, the academic integrity the AI represents is waaaaaaaaaaaaay, waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important than college athletics.  I'd rather disband our athletic teams than wind up like an SEC school, or for that matter wind up like the functional equivalent of an SEC school with an extremely sophisticated PR department like Stanford or Duke.

[phillysportsfan]

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

I'm trying to parse this:

Harvard brings in high AI kids (who would not meet Harvard's usual standards to sit at the end of the bench / get cut) along with low AI kids (who are farther from Harvard's standards but can actually play) as a way of gaming the system ... and you APPROVE!?

That was my reaction.  It's as if the perspective is that the AI is some niggling regulation that we should be trying to get around.

That's wrong.  For one thing, the AI itself is a requirement the Ivies levy upon themselves; we can stop any time we want to.

But for the more important thing, the academic integrity the AI represents is waaaaaaaaaaaaay, waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important than college athletics.  I'd rather disban our athletic teams than wind up like an SEC school, or for that matter wind up like the functional equivalent of an SEC school with an extremely sophisticated PR department like Stanford or Duke.

Yes I approve, has Stanford really hurt the academic strength of the overall school by letting in ~100 kids out of 7000 undergrad students that would not get in otherwise? Bill Gates kid could probably not know how to read/write and Cornell would let them in for all the money Gates has donated. Would all the sons/daughters of big donors really get in if their parents had not donated a bunch of money?

I hate Harvard as much as the next Cornell fan but we shouldnt lower their accomplishment because they played some AI games since those low AI kids are still probably smarter and better students than the rest of the schools in the tournament

[ugarte]

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

I'm trying to parse this:

Harvard brings in high AI kids (who would not meet Harvard's usual standards to sit at the end of the bench / get cut) along with low AI kids (who are farther from Harvard's standards but can actually play) as a way of gaming the system ... and you APPROVE!?

That was my reaction.  It's as if the perspective is that the AI is some niggling regulation that we should be trying to get around.

That's wrong.  For one thing, the AI itself is a requirement the Ivies levy upon themselves; we can stop any time we want to.

But for the more important thing, the academic integrity the AI represents is waaaaaaaaaaaaay, waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important than college athletics.  I'd rather disban our athletic teams than wind up like an SEC school, or for that matter wind up like the functional equivalent of an SEC school with an extremely sophisticated PR department like Stanford or Duke.

Yes I approve, has Stanford really hurt the academic strength of the overall school by letting in ~100 kids out of 7000 undergrad students that would not get in otherwise? Bill Gates kid could probably not know how to read/write and Cornell would let them in for all the money Gates has donated. Would all the sons/daughters of big donors really get in if their parents had not donated a bunch of money?

I hate Harvard as much as the next Cornell fan but we shouldnt lower their accomplishment because they played some AI games since those low AI kids are still probably smarter and better students than the rest of the schools in the tournament

At least admitting Gates' kid is net-profitable. I'd be stunned if the athletic department as a whole is in the black.

Root for professional sports. The players are better at sports and you don't have to feel conflicted about the money at all. If you are going to root for college sports you should care about what the school you are rooting for stands for more than winning.

[Swampy]

Yeah Harvard tends to bring in high AI kids to balance out their real recruits. Then they cut them freshman year, they have had 21 players get cut/leave the men's basketball program since 2008. The high AI kids get into Harvard when otherwise they would not have and the basketball team gets their recruits, everybody wins. I dont mind it, Cornell and the rest of the league should do the same.

I'm trying to parse this:

Harvard brings in high AI kids (who would not meet Harvard's usual standards to sit at the end of the bench / get cut) along with low AI kids (who are farther from Harvard's standards but can actually play) as a way of gaming the system ... and you APPROVE!?

That was my reaction.  It's as if the perspective is that the AI is some niggling regulation that we should be trying to get around.

That's wrong.  For one thing, the AI itself is a requirement the Ivies levy upon themselves; we can stop any time we want to.

But for the more important thing, the academic integrity the AI represents is waaaaaaaaaaaaay, waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important than college athletics.  I'd rather disban our athletic teams than wind up like an SEC school, or for that matter wind up like the functional equivalent of an SEC school with an extremely sophisticated PR department like Stanford or Duke.

Yes I approve, has Stanford really hurt the academic strength of the overall school by letting in ~100 kids out of 7000 undergrad students that would not get in otherwise? Bill Gates kid could probably not know how to read/write and Cornell would let them in for all the money Gates has donated. Would all the sons/daughters of big donors really get in if their parents had not donated a bunch of money?

I hate Harvard as much as the next Cornell fan but we shouldnt lower their accomplishment because they played some AI games since those low AI kids are still probably smarter and better students than the rest of the schools in the tournament

At least admitting Gates' kid is net-profitable. I'd be stunned if the athletic department as a whole is in the black.

Root for professional sports. The players are better at sports and you don't have to feel conflicted about the money at all. If you are going to root for college sports you should care about what the school you are rooting for stands for more than winning.

What he said! +1

[nyc94]

I hope Arizona beats them by 50.

It's like 25-7 or something with about 7:00 to go first half.

Edit: 40-22 at the half

[phillysportsfan]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/03/22/harvard-stripped-four-quiz-bowl-championships-after-student-improperly-accessed-information/ZZorJiqz91QRF6b5ocUcoL/story.html

You cant make this up, Harvard stripped of quiz bowl titles after student stole questions

[Rita]

I hope Arizona beats them by 50.

It's like 25-7 or something with about 7:00 to go first half.

Edit: 40-22 at the half

Not 50 pt, but losing by 23 pts does put you in the woodshed. Final: AZ 74 - Harvard 51.

[Ben]

I hope Arizona beats them by 50.

It's like 25-7 or something with about 7:00 to go first half.

Edit: 40-22 at the half

Not 50 pt, but losing by 23 pts does put you in the woodshed. Final: AZ 74 - Harvard 51.

Order is restored in the universe.