There’s a great piece out in “The Dartmouth,” America’s oldest college newspaper, about new legislation that could put to an end efforts by Ivy League and other athletic coaches to recruit student-athletes for their teams prior to the junior year of high school. For those scratching their heads because they think that Ivy League and other college coaches across America are currently not allowed to contact student-athletes before junior year as per NCAA regulations, you have reason to scratch your heads. You’re right. But there are technicalities that many coaches capitalize on to circumvent these very regulations, to gain a competitive advantage.
As per Alex Leibowitz’s piece for “The Dartmouth” entitled “Ivy League proposes new legislation to combat early recruiting,” “On Sept. 21, the Ivy League proposed new legislation to the NCAA to combat early recruiting. If approved, the legislation would close the various loopholes that allow coaches to make contact with recruits before their junior year. Instead, recruiting, especially through phone calls and conversations at sports camps or clinics, would be prohibited until Sept. 1 of a student’s junior year of high school…The legislation would prevent coaches from giving young recruits promises about financial aid and help with admission. Furthermore, coaches may not talk to players about recruiting at camps and clinics, call or receive a call from younger players. The concept behind this legislation is that it tightens up the rules about early recruiting already on the books, which differ among NCAA Division I sports but allow early recruits to visit campuses through an ‘unofficial visit not paid for by the institution’ according to the NCAA.”
We firmly stand behind this proposed new legislation to close these loopholes that allow college coaches to recruit 13 year-old quarterbacks (hi Lane Kiffin of Alabama!). These coaches are exploiting the system, and they’re giving themselves an unfair competitive advantage. Let’s even this playing field and make it so that no coach — no matter their sport or school — can make contact with a student athlete before their junior year of high school. It simply isn’t necessary and the number of coaches exploiting these loopholes is one too many.
“Inc.” has an interesting article out entitled “Your Next New Hire Should Be From One Of These 10 Universities” by Jessica Stillman that we figured we’d share with our readers. ViewsOnYou, a London-based startup, has apparently been gathering data on the topic of what universities the best new hires hail from. According to the article in “Inc.,” “The company has amassed a trove of data on students, employees and companies on both sides of the pond, turning up some surprises in the process. Among them: where to look for the most ambitious young folks. What exactly does ViewsOnYou mean by ambition? CEO Ab Banerjee explained the term as ‘a desire for success and career advancement’ as distinct from drive or ‘a passion for something or obsessiveness to complete something.'”
We have no idea how ViewsOnYou is aggregating this data and drawing these conclusions but we figured we’d share with you their results anyway. Why not, right? Well, apparently, the eight Ivy League institutions don’t all top this list. That would leave little room for ViewsOnYou’s voice if the Ancient Eight schools were the entire answer, right? Anyhow, the schools that do top the list are as follows: University of California, Berkeley, University of California, Los Angeles, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Stanford University, Vanderbilt University, London School of Economics, University of Oxford, University College London, and Boston University.
So there are indeed a couple Ivy League universities on the list and a number of other highly selective colleges in the United States. This list isn’t such a big surprise after all! We’re still curious how they’ve come up with this list. Give us a look under the hood, ViewsOnYou.
Did you know that Ivy League graduates make more money than do the graduates of just any college? We imagine that this doesn’t shock you.
Want an Ivy League athletic recruiting tip? Do your research. What do we mean? Well, let’s say that you’re a rising high school senior who hopes to swim in college. Specifically, you’d like to attend Princeton. You’re a backstroker who goes a 1:02 in the 100 back and a 2:12 for the 200 back. Alright, so we’ve got some data points. Let’s start researching!
At Princeton University, the all-time varsity record in the 100 backstroke is held by Lisa Boyce. She swam the event in 54.10 (quite a bit faster than 1:02). But just because the record-holder has a faster time than you doesn’t mean in itself that the Princeton coach wouldn’t be interested. That would be quite foolish. But we’re just trying to give you some benchmarks to better understand where you fit in. With a time of 56.52, Karen Wang has the tenth fastest time in Princeton’s history. It’s still a far cry from 1:02, but at least we’re getting closer. In the 200 back, the all-time record is held by Meredith Monroe with a time of 1:55.58. Ming Ong went the tenth fastest time in Princeton’s history with a time of 2:03.02. So you’re nine seconds slower in the 200 than the tenth fastest swimmer in Princeton’s history.
Alright, but that’s just the fastest times in Princeton women’s swimming history. For the really great information, it’s important to check out the schedule / results. Under the results, you can see how your times compare to other Princeton swimmers in actual meets. You should literally be going through the heat sheets! We dove through a few meet results and after reviewing seed times and results of Princeton women’s swimmers, a 1:02 isn’t that far off the pace. But it’s not good enough to warrant getting recruited.
In a few meets, Princeton’s slowest 100 backstroker went a 1:01. In the 200 back in the few heat sheets we scanned through, Princeton’s slowest female swam a 2:10…so you’re definitely not that far off the pace. Again, not good enough to get recruited but, if you improve your times a little, you might be able to hold your own on the team.
Was this helpful as you begin to think about the Ivy League athletic recruiting process? Let us know your thoughts and ask your questions about Ivy League athletics here!
Yale athletic recruiting isn’t like athletic recruiting at other Ivy League colleges. Why not? Well, it can all be traced to the actions of Yale’s president, Richard Levin. If you’re familiar with “Moneyball,” one could well argue that Richard Levin is in some ways the Billy Beane of Ivy League sports. The Oakland A’s are a small market team with a payroll that simply doesn’t compare to teams like the Yankees. And yet for many years, Beane’s teams found a way to compete by going after players that other teams undervalued. He found a way to transform a subjective scouting system into an objective system built on the foundation of data-driven analytics. Richard Levin hasn’t gone this far but he has certainly put his stamp on Yale athletics.
When Yale’s athletic director, Tom Beckett, took office in 1994, Levin charged him with trimming athletic rosters across the board. He simply didn’t want so many admissions slots reserved for recruited athletes. Said Levin in 2010 to the “Yale Alumni Magazine,” “I have wanted to maintain a strong athletic program, and I believe we have demonstrated this can be accomplished without admitting quite so many athletes. We now admit significantly fewer recruited athletes than the Ivy League allows.”
Go to a swim meet, a volleyball match, a field hockey game at Yale and you’ll notice the disparity. There aren’t as many Yale athletes on the teams. Sometimes, you’ll see ten Yale athletes on one team and 20 Princeton athletes on another. The disparity is a big one! And yet Yale’s athletic teams are generally still all competitive. Many of the teams are in fact Ivy League champions. So the university is able to admit more students with grades and SAT scores to make the school one of the most academically competitive colleges – if not the most competitive college – in the country and at the same time field competitive athletic teams with fewer recruited athletes whose academic numbers are, overall, generally lower.
Fencers, wrestlers, and women’s skiers interested in applying to Brown University, you may want to think twice in choosing your first choice college. For these sports, Brown University athletic recruitment is coming to a halt due to budget cuts (which with athletic teams typically centers on Title IX). The teams would be discontinued for the 2011-2012 academic year. Brown has the third largest athletic program (i.e., the number of teams the university supports) among Ivy League colleges and yet they also have the third smallest budget in the Ivy League, according to a report “Equity in Athletics Disclosure” on the U.S. Department of Education website.
If all goes to plan, Brown University will now be able to better focus its athletic recruitment on its remaining teams. If you recall in a previous blog post, we discussed how Brown University in particular has a difficult time attracting middle class student athletes to matriculate. These cuts are consistent with Brown University athletic recruitment difficulties. According to a “Bloomberg” article by Curtis Eichelberger, “The committee’s report also says that Brown’s coaches and staff are underpaid and should be brought into line with other Ivy League schools; the number of admissions slots for recruited athletes should be reduced by 30 to 195; athletic facilities need to be upgraded.”
“According to the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Report, Brown had the least athletic department revenue in the 2009-2010 academic year: Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut ($36.5 million); University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia ($30.4 million); Princeton University in New Jersey ($19.5 million); Columbia University in New York ($19.3 million); Cornell University in Ithaca, New York ($19 million); Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire ($18.5 million); Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts ($17.9 million) and Brown ($15.2 million).”
Check out Curtis Eichelberger’s “Bloomberg” article here.
And check out our related post on athletics and Harvard Admissions.
There is an article in today’s “Brown Daily Herald” that discusses how elite consulting, banking, investment, and law firms target Ivy League students. In a study conducted by Lauren Rivera, an assistant professor of management and organization at Northwestern University, it was found that graduates of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and Wharton (UPenn) have the highest hiring rates. The fact is that many elite firms such as a Bain or a McKinsey will only hire from top schools. Often times, they’ll only hire from the Ivy League or from a school such as Stanford, Duke, Caltech, or MIT.
According to the article in “The Brown Daily Herald: “‘My sense is that Brown gets a little bit less attention than some of the other schools from other firms — but they get a lot of attention from us,’ said Chris Bierly, head of North America associate consulting recruiting at Bain and Company, which recruits from 40 colleges and universities in North America. ‘We think of Brown as a core school — one of the three or four best sources of talent in the Ivy League.’
Barclays, Bank of America and Merill Lynch have stepped up their recruiting efforts at Brown, while Goldman Sachs is a ‘regular participant,’ Simmons said. ‘From what I hear, they like Brown students and their entrepreneurial spirit, ability to work independently and think critically, their analytical skills and high level communication skills.’ There is no national survey comparing job prospects after graduation across top-tier schools, he added, ‘But in terms of employment, I think our school does very well because of the attributes that (Brown graduates) bring to the table.’ ‘Whether that has to do with the Brown degree or the attributes of Brown students — I don’t know,’ he said.”
Are there incredibly smart people who attend colleges outside of the Ivy League and the few aforementioned colleges? Of course! And there are plenty of top colleges that these firms traditionally don’t recruit as heavily from such as Northwestern, Rice, or Georgetown. It’s absurd. And yet it’s how it is. It’s one of the reasons why many believe an Ivy League education is money well spent. Even if, as some allege, the in-classroom learning experience may not be that different from a state school, there is no arguing with where these elite firms are recruiting their job candidates from.
Check out the article in “The Brown Daily Herald” here.
And check out our post on the Ivy League’s influence on career.