Ivy league cancels all Fall sports
- Thread starter UR Fan 2
- Start date
Saw a comment from the superintendent of Dallas Tx schools, that no HS football in Texas this fall. HS football in Texas is a pretty darn big deal, so if true, not a good sign. Ivy was out in front of this in the Spring and got lampooned for shutting down their tournarment, only to have the rest of college basketball follow a few days later.
When the smartest guys in the room - the Ivy League - cancels their sports, you got to wonder - what do they know that everyone else doesn't?
It absolutely pains me to say this, but given the uncertainy of the pandemic and the NCAA'S lack of leadership (and lack of leadership in our government, but that's a different topic), I just don't see how there is college football or basketball this year. This pandemic is going to get worse before it gets better and there are just too many unknown variables and risks to responsibly move forward. Major corporations are working from home indefinitely. Major cities are regressing back to Phase 1 opening. If schools are saying it's too dangerous for students to attend classes in person (and it's trending that way), there's no way those schools can also justify flying student athletes across the country to participate in physical sports. Talk about bad optics. Not to mention all the what-ifs the NCAA must plan to address... What happens when the president of Duke goes rogue and announces their team sports are cancelled? Or the Butler president prohibits the team to play @ Florida. Or the entire MAAC conference premptively pulls the plug midseason? That would have all kinds of scheduling/playoff implications. And what happens when a player tests positive? Will the entire team self quarantine for 14 days and forfeit games? What if it's in the tournament? Championship game? Just too many dominos in an uncertain time. All eyes are on the NBA right now. If they can't get it right w/ 22 teams in a bubble (and my gut tells me there will be issues), then there's no way NCAA basketball can pull it off w/ student athletes on 347 teams across the country. Hope I'm wrong!!
If they are cancelled - do you allow Seniors to return? Especially for our basketball team - can we return everyone and still bring in the recruiting class? I think you have to let that happen.
Basically - until a vaccine is out there, we will continue to see surges and continue to be in phases.
Basically - until a vaccine is out there, we will continue to see surges and continue to be in phases.
Well, here in the U.S. at least. Most other modern countries have got their cases under control. We are still arguing over wearing masks and going to the barber.
If you think they are the smartest guys in the room, you need to turn in your UR diploma.
Having 2 kids in college in the Fall, I am more concerned about classes than sports. I have already have seen the "online" alternative and it isn't even close to the same thing. College presidents and Boards know it is going to be challenging enough without worrying about athletes' travel schedules.
We are talking about student-athletes here and for the vast majority, they are students first as the name implies. Of course, the coaches and staff are worried as they should be, but the true issue for them is program termination versus likely a one more season impact by the virus.
The economic strain of the virus has simply put the microscope on a model that was already feeling pressure and it looks like another sea change is coming. It is interesting to me that the termination of sports is generally being met with a "who cares" when athletes in fact add to the student diversity as well, just in a different manner than what is currently being highlighted. Being an decent athlete gave students opportunities to be admitted to colleges that they otherwise would not be able to attend. Seems to me that this will ultimately have a significant impact on the lower age group travel team circuits as well and end the positive economic impact in certain geographies.
We are talking about student-athletes here and for the vast majority, they are students first as the name implies. Of course, the coaches and staff are worried as they should be, but the true issue for them is program termination versus likely a one more season impact by the virus.
The economic strain of the virus has simply put the microscope on a model that was already feeling pressure and it looks like another sea change is coming. It is interesting to me that the termination of sports is generally being met with a "who cares" when athletes in fact add to the student diversity as well, just in a different manner than what is currently being highlighted. Being an decent athlete gave students opportunities to be admitted to colleges that they otherwise would not be able to attend. Seems to me that this will ultimately have a significant impact on the lower age group travel team circuits as well and end the positive economic impact in certain geographies.
yeah, that's a big question.
another ... what if a coach gives you as an incoming freshman the option to redshirt due to the uncertainty? you have to take it, right? I mean, do you risk burning a year of eligibility with the higher than normal chance of having the season cancelled at some point?
I agree the online version of school this past spring was not good on many levels, not only higher education. But I think that is because education in general has failed to evolve with the times. The world is progressing at a fast pace and this pandemic has accelerated some of that - yet education, even from the K-12 levels to college has relatively stayed the same - sit in classes, sometimes all day, etc. The main change that has occurred is taking textbooks and making them electronic.
But colleges should be looking at this online learning and trying to make it the best possible. Its an easy way to increase enrollment and get more money with little to no infrastructure costs. Imagine if UR could increase enrollment to 4,000 students instead of 3,000 cause you have 1,000 taking classes online. Sure - the online kids maybe pay a little less but that is still money in the door. I agree - face to face is better. But gone are the days where face to face is the only option or how education is done 100% of the time. Schools need to catch up and the ones that do the best and quickest will be the ones who survive.
But colleges should be looking at this online learning and trying to make it the best possible. Its an easy way to increase enrollment and get more money with little to no infrastructure costs. Imagine if UR could increase enrollment to 4,000 students instead of 3,000 cause you have 1,000 taking classes online. Sure - the online kids maybe pay a little less but that is still money in the door. I agree - face to face is better. But gone are the days where face to face is the only option or how education is done 100% of the time. Schools need to catch up and the ones that do the best and quickest will be the ones who survive.
Like it or not, this is a purely political issue now. That the Ivy League are the smartest people in the room is certainly a debatable point. That they represent the apex of power and prestige among the Globalist set is self evident. There was zero chance the Ivy League was going to allow Fall sports as a political matter, and you will soon see the rest of the University Presidents fall in line. The memo has been put out. Collegiate Fall Sports is simply not happening anywhere in America this year.
Who is going to pay 40-60 grand a semester for an online degree? The thing that allows the top tier schools such as Harvard and Yale to charge such inflated tuitions is their ability to provide the networking and prestige than an in person experience surrounded by the children of the Global Elite provides. Take that away and the entire business model collapses.
Last edited:
I personally don't think the Ivy decision is political. the only real justification for starting up sports during an escalating pandemic is economics. the Ivy doesn't make money on sports. it's a lot easier for them to make that call than say the SEC.
Who is going to pay 40K for online education - everyone will, when all the Universities ban together and all start charging that for an online education. Same way they all inflated their prices for in person education. Unless kids stop going to college or the government stops backing the student loans - the model will continue.
My son just turned 8. Before all this hit, my wife & I were having conversations about college. I'm of the position that I'd rather him go travel the world for a year, taking online courses during his travels. Live life, gain some experiences, come back and then start a company. Give it a year before declaring failure.
Worst case, after two years, he's earned an on-line associates degree, has developed soft skills, seen and experienced the world and started a company.
COVID has only accelerated the foundational changes that are occurring in this country. The educational model is obsolete and frankly, will soon be dead. The ROI from college is not what it once was.
BTW - here's a plethora of free courses from MIT if anyone is interested. Really great stuff.
Worst case, after two years, he's earned an on-line associates degree, has developed soft skills, seen and experienced the world and started a company.
COVID has only accelerated the foundational changes that are occurring in this country. The educational model is obsolete and frankly, will soon be dead. The ROI from college is not what it once was.
BTW - here's a plethora of free courses from MIT if anyone is interested. Really great stuff.
you make "starting a company" sound so easy.
He didn’t say a successful company!
Starting a company is extremely easy. Having a successful company that you build is very difficult. I don't care if he fails. It's about getting the experience first-hand. You own the production/marketing/sales/HR/finance/IT/janitor roles.
Heres an idea a friend of mine, who is a UR grad told me jokingly when we were discussing the outrageous price of college (including UR) and the amount of debt kids are coming out with. Instead of sending your kids to college - try as early as possible to save $1,000 a year for them and increase a $1,000 each year to an extent possible. So in K - save a $1,000. In first grade - try to get to $2,000. 2nd grade - $3,000, etc. We both laughed and said maybe only able to get to $5,000. But point being - this amount being saved is much cheaper than many private schools these days (St. Christopers is over 20K by the way). Then when they graduate high school - if this money is invested conservatively - you would likely have around 80K - maybe more (depending on how much you saved) and then you could do something like 05 mentions above - let them travel a year, take online courses, etc.
In my mind - its becoming less and less attractive to go to college and rack up dept. Especially when the model says now once you graduate college - you need your masters (more money) or your Doctorate (more money) or you need to go to law school, medical school etc. The education system has found a good way to keep their customers returning - saying you need it or you won't get ahead. But that only works if you have a rich family who can afford it, you get scholarships, or you work in your chosen field and make good money and maybe when your 45 years old - you will reap the benefits once all your loans are paid off. But I wonder how much better off yo you have been working a low salary job right out of high school with no debt where you could keep all that money in your pocket from Day 1.
In my mind - its becoming less and less attractive to go to college and rack up dept. Especially when the model says now once you graduate college - you need your masters (more money) or your Doctorate (more money) or you need to go to law school, medical school etc. The education system has found a good way to keep their customers returning - saying you need it or you won't get ahead. But that only works if you have a rich family who can afford it, you get scholarships, or you work in your chosen field and make good money and maybe when your 45 years old - you will reap the benefits once all your loans are paid off. But I wonder how much better off yo you have been working a low salary job right out of high school with no debt where you could keep all that money in your pocket from Day 1.
if you handed me $80k out of high school with a low paying job, within 5 years I'd have $0 and a low paying job. and no degree.
For what it's worth, most of the rich and super successful people I know either didn't go to college or are doing something where their degree is not used.
Anecdotal I know, but I think unless you are planning to be a doctor, lawyer etc. or have a specific passion to teach for example, the time spent and cost of a degree vastly outweighs the benefits in many cases and this virus could be the impetus for a huge change in how colleges will have to operate to stay relevant.
Anecdotal I know, but I think unless you are planning to be a doctor, lawyer etc. or have a specific passion to teach for example, the time spent and cost of a degree vastly outweighs the benefits in many cases and this virus could be the impetus for a huge change in how colleges will have to operate to stay relevant.
I agree Spidersgo - I think colleges need to revamp their system and come up with better virtual options as well as maybe more subject matter specific programs that are maybe 2 years in duration and you skip over a lot of these general education requirements. Do I really need Biology and English Literature History of the 1800's if I am going to be in the banking field? Or marketing?
I like the thinking outside the box on here. The old method of school is racking up debt for doubtful return, a bit like staying with the match up zone year after ineffective year.
On average people with college degrees earn about 2x as much over the course of their life as people without college degrees, Obviously there are a wide variety of outcomes for both situations, but generally getting a college degree is worth the investment.
The Ivy league schools will continue to succeed through this as the pandemic will only help them. Their model is built on "exclusivity" - as they can justify their high prices say they are the best of the best because they reject over 95% of the students who apply (Harvard rejects about 96%). And this pandemic will help that rejection status - it might even go up as I can imagine you have some HS students take a gap year or delay applying.
But the other schools below the Ivy - where the common folk go to school - you might be seeing a shift of kids and parents asking - is it worth the price?
But the other schools below the Ivy - where the common folk go to school - you might be seeing a shift of kids and parents asking - is it worth the price?
I read a quote on Twitter just yesterday that said that academically the Ivies aren’t that superior, but they are worth the money because they offer such fantastic networking opportunities.
That being said, and I tend to agree, the socialization of students on a campus are as important to education as the academics themselves.
Depends on the career. Lots of school districts now have CTE programs and kids are graduating and stepping right into jobs as mechanics, electricians, etc. My nephew graduated high school and took essentially an apprenticeship as an electrician, they pay for some type of industry-specific certification classes if he stays with them for three years, which he’s almost done, and he’s now making decent money, which will only increase if he keeps at it.
HVAC, Plumbers, Electricians, Mechanics and more can make excellent incomes, as well the possibility of spinning off and starting their own companies. Often our politicians plant a fools gold perception that college is the end all to be all. Not so.
The politicians always seem to be at fault. Sometimes I think it’s the parents, I know I wasn’t motivated to go to college by Dan Quayle or Michael Dukakis.
I would agree Ivies are not that significantly better than the upper half of colleges and Universities. What you are paying for is that name and the network. You put Princeton in your resume - your getting an interview. And if you run into other Princeton grads - your helping each other out.
And I agree - there is a social aspect to education you gain on campus. But what that is worth depends on the person. Should I really be paying 50k a year to get social with others? For some - it will be worth it. For others - it will not.
And I agree - there is a social aspect to education you gain on campus. But what that is worth depends on the person. Should I really be paying 50k a year to get social with others? For some - it will be worth it. For others - it will not.
If the average earnings factor is 2x for a college grad vs non, based on UR's $70k+ tuition, what earnings factor can a UR grad and their parents expect?
What exactly is the current educational model and if it will be dead soon, what new model do you envision? Traveling the world and living life while paying for online classes is not something most people can afford, so that will not be the main model. Same goes for starting a company.
Those free MIT courses are great, but I don't see many 18 year olds that have the foundational skills to really benefit from watching videos. You're assuming they know how to look stuff up, write and communicate orally. Trust me, less than 1% of them have these skills at 18 in the US. Let's not even discuss social skills.
What consumers need to do is start choosing colleges for the right reasons: overall cost (fees and room and board is just insane most places), availability of faculty to student, academic programming and quality of the average matriculant. Instead, consumers choose based on brand (which employers blindly adhere to) and how the campus makes them feel. The consumers can fix this problem by paying attention to the parts that matter. No school needs to cost 50,000 per year. That's the power of unchecked capitalism in America, you pay for the brand.
I agree. I'm a college science professor and I make less than my car mechanic. He never went to college, I have a PhD. The bigger question is, who has it better?
We both do. He's suited for his job, and I for mine. Income past a certain comfort level means very little. We both like going to work most days and our families are happy.
College is but one path. Trust your gut and don't borrow too much money for anything.
The one big thing you left out: work really hard in school and college can be free. That takes parent involvement at home big time. Saving a few thousand a year for college is great, but I'd argue taking less money at work for the flexibility to be at home with your kids would be worth more. We all have different situations though.
Regardless how you got to UR, you are a better man. I'm certain you can spell...potatoe.
To this point, my neighbor's son didn't go to college became an auto mechanic directly out of high school His girlfriend went to a 4 year private college here in Virginia with a liberal arts degree, she works retail now. They decided to buy a house together. Bank wouldn't let his girlfriend on the mortgage, so, he owns his own house under the age of 25.
The cost of college has become exorbitant and a college degree doesn't get you the job it did a generation ago.
I will say the one thing college's do is provide a fantastic life experience that encourages critical thinking and exposure to diverse viewpoints. I think that is so important in this day and age. I think everyone one of who went to UR, probably are very thankful for the social/emotional development that occurred during our college experience and wouldn't trade the for the world. However, the cost of that experience is frankly way out of bounds with what it ultimately provides you now.
