Can Ivy League Basketball be Competitive Again?
by Jay Pearlman
Those of you who have followed these columns will recognize the general theme that the caliber of play in the Ivy League has deteriorated noticeably in recent years, to this writer resembling Division III ball during the 1980’s. Now, I’ve found very few people in the league willing to talk about it publicly (and some of you readers have e-mailed to dispute the view). Princeton’s Gary Walters chaired the NCAA committee that made Penn a No. 14 seed, implying that at least 8 weaker teams made the tournament. Readers of this column know I respect (and like) former Princeton Coach Joe Scott, but also that I’ve called the personnel on his team this past winter the worst in the history of Division I. Well, safely back in Colorado, Joe is reluctant to discuss the issue. And down the road at perennial conference power Penn, well, we’ll just have to wait and see the level of player Glen Miller can bring in to replace graduating seniors Ibrahim Jaaber, Mark Zoller and Steve Danley.
Off the record, coaches and former coaches concur. And quite rightly, some have mused about admissions being tougher than ever, tuition, room and board approaching $50 thousand per year, even the “trickle-down effect” of so many underclassmen (and high school players) joining the NBA. There’s one more reason for this, perhaps bigger than all the rest. It’s been staring me in the face throughout the two years I’ve covered Harvard basketball on radio, and I haven’t noticed; at least, I didn’t see it for the truly powerful reason it really is. Former Harvard Coach Frank Sullivan mentioned it, but I didn’t really get it; Harvard AD Bob Scalise acknowledged it, but I didn’t get it. I guess one would have to be coaching and out on the recruiting trail to truly get it, and it has been more than a couple of years for this writer. It is the simplest reason of all: just a date on the calendar.
As some of you know, two weeks ago I interviewed Scalise for a column on his hiring of Tom Amaker, surely Harvard’s most credentialed head coach ever. During that interview, dutifully I asked about Harvard’s enforcement of the league’s unrealistic deadline for admission applications, January 1, and I reported as positive Bob’s answer that for athletes that deadline has been (or will be) extended to March 15. Well, it has taken two weeks to sink in – and this is about the conference, not just Scalise’s program – but from a basketball perspective, moving the application deadline to March 15 simply won’t do the job.
Here’s the problem. March 15 should be late enough to allow recruitment of football players who earlier in their careers thought they were Ohio State or Florida material (ok, for academic kids, Michigan or Notre Dame). Football is a fall sport with a single winter signing period, and good high school football players and their parents probably know before March 15 that the big-time schools have backed off, perhaps – though just barely – providing time to refocus on I-AA schools, including those in the Ivy League. That’s simply not the case for basketball players.
I can tell you from personal experience that through his junior year and into that summer, every single good basketball player in America is talking scholarship; in fact, just about all are talking Big East, ACC, and the like (and that includes Division III-caliber players). Well, given the sheer volume of letters college basketball coaches send out to high school players, it’s no wonder those kids – and their parents – think they’re being “recruited” by the majors. And even when a good player isn’t signed in basketball’s fall signing period, invariably he continues to be romanced by big schools, promised spring signing consideration, a “summer look,” invitations to enroll, walk-on, and win a scholarship. So at the earliest, only after not being signed during the April signing period might a good player begin thinking about Ivy League schools – and of course by then it’s too late. Now, every thesis has exceptions: legacy kids, rich kids that don’t need scholarships, local kids who grew up in the shadow of a league campus. But by and large, it is clear to this writer that most of the academic kids good enough to play at the Division I level don’t adjust their sights downward soon enough to apply on time. And if not most, still lots.
This is more complicated still, as I was reminded yesterday by my first head coach, who I worked for on the Division III level. Since the Ivy League doesn’t offer athletic scholarships, need-based financial aid is paramount, and both coaches and families need aid packages in hand prior to talking commitment. And of course, the financial aid process comes with its own deadlines, both national and institutional.
So assuming we’ve identified the biggest problem (or one of them), how do we fix it? Well, at the very least, we begin by talking about it, making public this horrible timing problem. Assuming for the moment that Penn is following the same “calendar rules” that everyone else in the conference follows, the issue is really more basic, more fundamental: do Ivy League Athletic Directors, Deans of Admission, Presidents, Trustees, and alumni care – really care – whether or not there are Division I-caliber basketball players in the league? Surely the coaches care, a good group joined in the last week by Amaker and Princeton’s Sydney Johnson. Well, if anyone else really cares, then somehow they’ll be able to figure out a way to adjust the application deadline so as to allow Division I-caliber players to be considered by Ivy schools at a point in time when they’re ready to listen. Only then will these two new coaches in the league, and the other six, really be bona fide Division I coaches, have the opportunity to coach bona fide Division I players, and have a real chance to occasionally win a first round NCAA Tournament game, or be selected for the NIT.
