VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Observer
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 16:09:25 07/12/17 Wed

http://www.gocrimson.com/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/20170711fwj945

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Diogenes
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:22:09 07/12/17 Wed

HYP & Columbia made the list. Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth & Penn didn't.

Notice anything?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: What I Notice


Author:
Son of Eli
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 07:30:45 07/13/17 Thu

What I notice is that the basketball team, the baseball team and many other Ivy League teams are receiving awards for acedemic performance while being allowed to particiate in post season play. It belies the argument that the football post season ban is necessary for acedemic success.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
KC
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:59:45 07/13/17 Thu

Yes. Grade inflation endures at HYP.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: 4 years in a row for Harvard and Yale


Author:
Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:03:32 07/12/17 Wed


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Perhaps alternatively


Author:
Calvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:47:55 07/13/17 Thu

They sign up for "Introduction to Congress" and "Introduction to Computer Science I".

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/education/harvard-forced-dozens-to-leave-in-cheating-scandal.html

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/5/3/cs50-cheating-cases-2017/

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Dartmouth should bring back Ballet


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:37:51 07/13/17 Thu


http://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/17/nyregion/campus-life-dartmouth-these-athletes-get-up-on-tiptoes-before-the-games.html?mcubz=1

I got an "A."

:)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Dartmouth should bring back Ballet


Author:
L et V
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:22:06 07/13/17 Thu

I love the caption, "Harvard basketball players are smart." Reminds me of Nixon's "I am not a crook."

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Isn't the implication of the headline


Author:
Calvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:39:36 07/13/17 Thu

That this is atypical of Harvard students? Or of other Harvard athletes? Or that this is a change for basketball players from times past?

Who else among us feels it necessary to post on an ivy board that his fellow schoolmates are supposedly smart?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Sure you love it. You're a bitter Yalie!


Author:
Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:30:38 07/13/17 Thu


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Sure you love it. You're a bitter Yalie!


Author:
Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:56:25 07/13/17 Thu

A "delifghful embarrassment" in fact!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Uptown
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:45:44 07/13/17 Thu

Introduction to Congress? Seriously?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
L et V
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:13:41 07/13/17 Thu

Poor O; if he didn't exist we'd have to invent him. Such a delifghful embarrassment to the school to which he implies he's affiliated. Wonder how he sugars off on today's big news on H's clubs. Great tempest; great teapot.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: L et V ....


Author:
Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:54:20 07/13/17 Thu

.... "Such a delifghful embarrassment" to the Home of the Hamburger.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
John Harvard
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:08:58 07/13/17 Thu

HYP + C is predictable and consistent with the fundamental math between their AI floors/calculations. By rule, HYP + C have to recruit to higher AI standards than their brethren.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart. BUT they weren't smart four years ago.


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 00:06:25 07/14/17 Fri

The Harvard men's basketball team is to be commended for earning an academic excellence award. They are to be further commended for receiving four in a row.

But in the interest of the full context, it should be noted that, immediately before beginning a streak of four years with academic accolades, the Harvard basketball team had such a low team Academic Progress Rate that, had it continued for two more years, the Crimson would have been deemed ineligible to participate in postseason tournaments, per NCAA rules. No other Ivy basketball program has ever been in danger of being disqualified due to NCAA academic underperformance.

At the time, the Harvard men's basketball team had the lowest APR of any single varsity team in the Ivy League, with the exception of Penn men's fencing and some of those fencers are Eastern Europeans who don't speak English as a first language.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart. BUT they weren't smart four years ago.


Author:
John Harvard
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 00:26:23 07/14/17 Fri

Wasn't that due to the Intro to Congress suspensions. If so, that makes your comparison an easily explainable anomaly.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Harvard APRs Crashed BEFORE The Cheating Scandal


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:37:04 07/18/17 Tue

JH, yours is a reasonable hypothesis. But the data actually shows that Harvard's Academic Progress Rating began to fall dramatically in 2011, before really accelerating downward in 2012. The Introduction to Congress scandal affected the 2013 season and the three seasons afterward, as the numbers are now reported as rolling four-year averages.

Note that there are two sources of grade inflation here:

First, the scale up to 1000 is a joke, as 930 is a failing grade which precludes participation in NCAA postseason tournaments. Secondly, in order to hide failing scores for individual years, the NCAA now only reports rolling four-year averages, whereas previously scores were reported for individual years.

That's how we knew that, for both 2011 and 2012, Harvard men's basketball scored below 930, the threshold for tournament participation.

HARVARD MEN'S BASKETBALL ACADEMIC PROGRESS RATING (four-year rolling average)

2005 982
2006 988
2007 987
2008 995
2009 991
2010 991
2011 974 beginning of downward movement
2012 956 nadir of rolling four-year average
2013 963 Harvard cheating scandal
2014 959 second lowest score, now including cheating scandal
2015 976
2016 987

I wouldn't be too impressed by the high GPAs at Harvard. The Crimson are still squarely in the bottom half of the League in APR scores.

IVY LEAGUE APR SCORES 2016


Columbia-Barnard 1000 (note to Tod Howard Hawks: that's the NCAA nomenclature)
Dartmouth 1000
Princeton 993
Cornell 992
Harvard 987
Yale 987
Penn 979
Brown 976

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Harvard APRs Crashed BEFORE The Cheating Scandal


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:41:16 07/18/17 Tue

Note that, except for Harvard's high water mark in 2008, the Crimson have NEVER scored as high as Columbia-Barnard, Dartmouth, Princeton or Cornell did just this past year.

Further note that Harvard really turned downward in 2011, perhaps not coincidentally the Crimson's first Ivy championship ever, though they were denied an NCAA tournament bid by Doug Davis' buzzer beating personal APR calculation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Harvard APRs Crashed BEFORE The Cheating Scandal


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:57:24 07/18/17 Tue

If you look at all the League APRs over the twelve-year sample, team scores are definitely trending downward.

Thus, I would assert that, in addition to the widely reported improved financial aid packages, the League is also getting better the old fashioned way, by recruiting and matriculating weaker students.

The Ivy League has set academic standards for its student-athletes so far above other conferences that loosening academic standards remains the best way to win more basketball games. Just as it always was.

Here's another way to cut the twelve-year sample. And kudos to Columbia-Barnard for dominating this competition. Maybe that's why the Lions don't win championships on the court.

NUMBER OF 1000 SCORES POSTED OVER 12 YEARS

Columbia-Barnard 7
Cornell 2
Dartmouth 2
Brown 2
Penn 1
Princeton 1
Yale 1
Harvard 0

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:36:44 07/19/17 Wed


That the most common grade at Harvard is an "A."

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-mode-a/

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
JD
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:36:42 08/07/17 Mon

I wish that, in the interest of educating prospective varsity athletes on what issues are most likely to trip them up, the League would compile and publish a list of the reasons why Ivy students fail to make progress on the APR evaluation.

To me, virtually any score south of 1000 should raise a red flag in our conference. Of course, there will always be kids to get homesick or have a family need call them home. But the conference office should track and publish these statistics.

As Go Green points out, it's not as if grade inflation is unheard of on our campuses. Why are so many Harvard athletes not making academic progress when the most common grade is an "A"?

This problem should be subject to statistical analysis so that all eight schools can improve their performance.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Don't raise the bridge, lower the river


Author:
Calvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:58:15 08/07/17 Mon

The Harvard solution will be to assign greater weight for their A's - one of theirs equals two of yours.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:01:39 08/07/17 Mon

The APR is not an evaluative metric for the grades or the specific in-classroom performance of student athletes.

It is a simplistic measure that merely gives two points per student: 1 if they are still in school and 1 if they are academically eligible. Divide by total points possible, multiply by 1000 and there's your APR score.

Thus, if you have a team of 13 basketball players (probably what the APR is based on, since that's the NCAA basketball scholarship limit), if you lose one point, that's a 962 or two points, that's a 923.

I'd argue that I care more about the median performance of athletes in the classroom than the outlier-based system that is the APR. The league should be far more interested in ensuring that the performance of athletes on metrics like GPA, class attendance and participation and the like than merely, "are you still here and are you doing the bare minimum to pass." And I'm sure that they are doing more of this type of analysis in the background.

While I do think that an Ivy program spending a significant spate of time in the 800s or even low 900s might be a cause for concern, the APR doesn't tell us much about the difference in actual classroom performance of a school getting a 95% (950) or a 98% (980).

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
JD
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:15:37 08/07/17 Mon

Yes, I agree with you that the APR is rather crude measure of how our athletes are doing academically. But it does force us to ask ourselves uncomfortable questions.

As Observer has noted, Harvard's basketball team has been cited for its fine team GPA over the past four years. But as An Observer has, well, also observed, Harvard has over the course of Amaker's tenure in our conference, posted by far the lowest APR performance of any Ivy hoops team.

How do these two facts co-exist?

I suspect that there is some survivor bias in the calculations. In other words, Harvard only reports the GPAs of the athletes who are actually still in school. Thus, Harvard can have more athletes who are either not in school or otherwise not eligible, while still posting a good team GPA, as long as the guys who are still on the team get good grades.

This seems like a bit of a flaw in the system. If you've got an athlete who has poor grades, you almost want him to get such bad grades he has to withdraw from school, so that his GPA does not get included in the team average.

It's like the reverse of the Camden McRae situation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:45:19 08/07/17 Mon

It's pretty easy for those two facts to co-exist. The APR is exclusively a highly-sensitive measure of continued progress toward graduation with ZERO concern for whether that progress is straight C's or straight A's. It's a silly metric that, at this point, basically exists to keep many HBCUs from being postseason eligible.

I don't really know that I trust raw GPA metrics either, even irrespective of the charges of grade inflation. I'd like to know what classes each student took and how they performed against the general curve of those classes. Maybe things have changed in the last decade, but I worked harder for some of my lowest grades in certain classes than I ever did for much higher grades in others.

In other words, I wouldn't use any of this data to extol the academic performance of a team or to denigrate it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
JD
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:03:48 08/07/17 Mon

Yes, I further agree with you.

Getting high grades does not mean that any student is necessarily being challenged to think or learn. However, getting low grades is, at a minimum, something of a red flag which invites further scrutiny.

Neither the APR scores or team GPAs are conclusive. And neither is immune to being gamed. Getting a 4.0 in Advanced Basketweaving is not reflective of a meaningful academic experience. We need look no further than the scandal which continues to unfold in Chapel Hill.

But, for the time being, the APR scores and the team GPAs are the data we have. So it's reasonable to use them to the extent we can, especially if we're using them to ask questions rather than answer them.

A low APR or a low team GPA should invite questions in a conference like ours.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Awful numbers, considering...


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:40:10 08/07/17 Mon

Bad data is not necessarily better than no data at all. Often it can be dangerous...

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Serious question


Author:
Calvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:22:19 08/07/17 Mon

"In other words, Harvard only reports the GPAs of the athletes who are actually still in school. Thus, Harvard can have more athletes who are either not in school or otherwise not eligible, while still posting a good team GPA, as long as the guys who are still on the team get good grades."

Is this allowed?

(Not meaning to target Harvard only here, if other schools do the same thing)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Serious question


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:29:44 08/07/17 Mon

Pretty sure this was presented as a hypothetical, not as a factual representation of what is actually happening in reality.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Serious question


Author:
JD
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:35:12 08/07/17 Mon

I was suggesting survivor bias as a possible for explanation for how Harvard could simultaneously be cited for a favorable team GPA while also having had a relatively low APR during Amaker's tenure.

Survivor bias distorts many data averages. If you only measure the GPA of the guys still on the Harvard roster, you're missing the guys who are out of school or otherwise not eligible. Obviously, this latter group is likely to have a lower GPA.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Serious question


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:42:58 08/07/17 Mon

Survivor bias would need more "non-survivors" to be weeded out of the pool than are at play here. Again, one player can cause an APR to fall by 80 points. One player's low GPA being taken out wouldn't bias up the GPA of the survivors that much.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: To quote John Lyons...


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:03:56 08/07/17 Mon


"Harvard basically does whatever the hell they want."

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Harvard APRs Crashed BEFORE The Cheating Scandal


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 00:20:31 07/19/17 Wed

To be fair to all parties, this data needs to be interpreted in the context of League scores generally trending downward, especially in the last five years.

But Harvard's APR scores really began to crash in 2011, which was the Crimson's first championship ever AND the senior year of Tommy Amaker's first recruiting class. The Harvard APR scores bounced off their nadir sub-930 scores of 2011 and 2012, but have never fully recovered, even though the two players who withdrew due to the 2013 cheating scandal subsequently returned and graduated a year late.

Then the rest of the League scores started to head downwards, a trend which continues today.

The operating hypothesis seems to be that Amaker's arrival at Harvard coincided with the Crimson beginning to recruit substantially weaker students academically. The rest of the League watched Harvard win its first championship in 2011 with those weak students and then its first NCAA bid in 2012 with an even weaker cohort academically.

The rest of the League woke up and smelled the coffee, starting the race to the bottom which continues as we speak.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Boston Lion
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:27:43 08/07/17 Mon

. . . and, make no mistake, it IS a race to the bottom when Harvard, HARVARD!, starts taking its cues from factory schools like, e.g., Penn State, instead of the Penn States of the world taking their cues from schools where (1) academics come first and athletics are given proper priority and not allowed to insanely warp the system, and (2) the football coach reports up through the ranks to the University President and not the other way around.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:01:37 08/07/17 Mon

This is nonsense. The AI floor has risen 14 points in 15 years. From
an AI perspective, Ivy athletic classes, including Harvard's, are as strong as they've ever been.

Increased Financial Aid, greater means to recruit nationally and the snowballing effect of success have allowed Ivy basketball teams to have a higher hit rate with their desired targets. This has maximized the ability to recruit for academic and athletic quality rather than having to deprioritize any focus on academics other than clearing the floor and hitting averages when it was hard to convince even low-end D1 talent to come to the Ivies.

It may seem counterintuitive, but the better you get and more recruiting power you have, the fewer sacrifices you need to make.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:50:46 08/17/17 Thu

If the only data point we had were an increase in the minimum AI floor over time, then yes -- one would probably feel comfortable that our improving league competitiveness in men's basketball were not coming at the expense of decreased academic standards.

But we have much more information than merely the rising AI threshold.

We know about many of the aggressive strategies which Harvard has embraced in its recruiting. These strategies include accepting transfers from junior colleges, recruiting high school players who at the time have an AI score below the league minimum, recruiting players years before they have any AI score at all, recruiting a player off a high school JV team to include his AI score in the team average and then dismissing him from the team in addition to the secondary violations which got Coach Amaker sanctioned and penalized by the NCAA. Et cetera, et cetera.

We've discussed all of this as well as other questionable tactics before. Earlier in this thread, we covered the data which revealed that, earlier in this decade, Harvard was at risk of being prohibited in accepting a bid to the NCAA tournament because the program's APR score was below the national minimum.

None of this was happening at Harvard during the Frank Sullivan years.

So here's how it looks to many observers.

Prior to the Amaker administration, Harvard (as well as Yale and Princeton) followed self-imposed academic policies which were materially more restrictive than the league AI minimum.

After Amaker's arrival, Harvard began to recruit aggressively right down to the league minimum.

So while the league minimum AI might have increased somewhat during Amaker's tenure, the fact that Harvard previously operated well above the minimum but no longer does leads to the fact that Harvard may be leading a race to the bottom academically. Boston Lion has plenty of reason to believe what he believes and many other observers share his suspicions.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 18:26:41 08/17/17 Thu

I always like to be clear on the specific arguments that are taking place here.

If the argument is that Harvard used to have super-restrictive academic policies relative to the Ivy League floor and now those self-imposed policies have loosened to the point where Harvard's standards are still more restrictive than the Ivy floor but not as restrictive as they used to be, then there's no argument to be had. Other schools that you mentioned (Princeton and Yale) with self-imposed restrictions above the floor have loosened theirs too, and frankly the steep rise of the AI floor hasn't left a lot of room to be that much more restrictive than the floor itself.

If the argument is that Harvard can do anything it wants above the floor (which I think all Ivies should be allowed to do), that's just not the case. Harvard continues to have AI-eligible players not make it through admissions, and certainly any of HYP would love to be able to do what, not going to mention any names, but other Ivies have been able to do in recent years.

And while you cite all of these aggressive things Harvard has been doing in recent years, other Ivies have recruited JuCo transfers since Amaker brought in Cem Dinc a decade ago. They've (even the sanctimonious ones) accepted commitments from kids while below the AI floor. They recruit kids on a wait and see basis that haven't tested yet (though they're pretty good at guessing if the kid has a chance to index or why waste their time), they've leveraged boosters that aren't close to D1 caliber to hit AI averages, they've had kids dismissed from school due to academic and non-academic transgressions and they've incurred secondary violations (which teams self-report a lot, by the way).

I'd caution against the availability bias that's running rampant here. That Harvard's journey (good and bad) is well-documented while the lumps other programs take aren't is what it is. I wish Harvard (and all Ivies) lived in the free-for-all world that many accuse it of. While FinAid is much more important, freedom to explore the AI space fully and without further restriction would accelerate this league's rise to a Top 10 basketball conference nationally.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:50:38 08/25/17 Fri

I think that you agree completely with at least one thing that I'm saying, which you expressed in your first full paragraph. Namely, Harvard under Sullivan was operating under self-imposed restrictions which have effectively been abandoned under Amaker.

But in your next two paragraphs, you raise a straw man which is a diversionary tactic. Nobody here is saying that no other Ivy program has ever accepted a JuCo transfer or ever accepted an academic booster. I personally can't think of another JuCo transfer in the Ivies, but I believe that it must be technically allowed since non-athletes can and do transfer from junior colleges. Furthermore, all Ivy programs in all sports likely accept some academic boosters because they need to keep their averages up.

The belief here is NOT that no other Ivy program ever does what Harvard under Amaker has done. That's your straw man.

Rather, the belief here is that Amaker pushes all these dimensions simultaneously and to the extreme. Camden McRae is not a typical booster. He was a kid who had no business being on a Division I roster even as a benchwarmer. Amaker acknowledged as such when he dismissed McRae prior to the start of practice freshman year. McRae is almost certainly the least qualified athlete ever recruited for any Ivy sport whose parents have not donated millions to the university.

I recently watched on ESPN an excellent short series called "Being P.J. Fleck" about the new head football coach at Minnesota. He is exactly the kind of smart, disciplined, energetic and ambitious coach you would want to play for. I was somewhat surprised that he described in great detail a recruiting loophole that he discovered and exploited before the NCAA moved quickly to close it. It's now called the P.J. Fleck rule.

Fleck himself was unapologetic, explicitly saying that his job is to find and exploit every loophole he can. He smiled and laughed as he described with glee how he had discovered this loophole which clearly was against the spirit of several existing NCAA rules.

The point is that there are ethical college coaches who want to win by the rules, but simultaneously believe that pushing every single rule right to the very edge is not only acceptable, but desired and practically mandatory to doing their job.

That's what Amaker and Scalise have done and are doing. Push every rule to the edge. That's not the philosophy I believe the Ivy League should stand for.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:34:57 08/25/17 Fri

All I can say is that I wish there wasn't all this hush, hush about the AI and the league rules. It's a real shame.

If you're interested in learning more about truly what's going on, I'm happy to provide as much context as I can/am allowed to provide from my fifteen years of experience covering the league.

If you're interested in just repeating your fan agenda over and over again, that's fine, but I don't see a lot of reason to continue to engage.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
Boston Lion
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:27:14 08/26/17 Sat

Perhaps there's no reason to engage.

Thanks to An Observer for your comments.

Harvard-in-decline deniers can launch all of the statistics-focused arguments that they want to. But, there also such a thing as common sense and experience-based judgment.

For example, using these skills and knowledge, a car guy can often (I stress often but not always) tell the difference between a good car and a bum car from twenty paces using many small clues. Looking at Harvard's recent race to the bottom from a few yards away, the overall downward tilt of Harvard's practices are obvious to some, but I apparently not to all. I guess that we'll just have to leave it there. Eventually, the end-results of all of this will become evident as time rolls on.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
Boston Lion
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:30:09 08/26/17 Sat

. . . meant to say "but apparently not to all."

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:57:48 09/11/17 Mon

mrjames, I think you're way off base accusing anybody else of pursuing a "fan agenda."

All that people (fans or not) can do is work with the facts that are in front of us. That's all any reasonable observer of any situation can do. This is not pursuing a "fan agenda." It's drawing a reasonable inductive conclusion from necessarily imperfect information.

And the facts that are in front of us are incriminating for Amaker.

We've discussed Amaker's transgressions before. You imply that you have exculpatory additional facts and yet you repeatedly refuse to disclose any of them.

Let me ask you this. Let's arbitrarily select the year 2000 as the beginning of the recent past. Since the year 2000, has any other Ivy coach been cited by the NCAA for recruiting violations? Has any other Ivy program been sanctioned by the NCAA with recruiting restrictions as punishment? Has any other Ivy coach done something questionable like the Zack Rosen "Shop Rite" recruiting incident? Are you aware of any other Ivy coach recruiting a high AI player off a high school junior varsity team and then immediately dismissing him? Are you aware of any other Ivy basketball player being recruited in eighth grade? Are you aware of any other Ivy basketball player who has publicly disclosed lower SAT scores than Wesley Saunders did? Which other Ivy programs have recruited a junior college transfer?

Are you aware of anything any other Ivy coach or other Ivy program has done which compares to what Amaker has done?

If you genuinely have this huge cache of exculpatory facts, you can disclose one or two or three has you suggest you can.

Enough of your opaque hints that Amaker is innocent or that everybody else cheats.

The facts that we have in front of us are incriminating for Amaker. Either provide new additional facts or concede that we "fans" are simply drawing reasonable conclusions from the imperfect information we have.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: How and Why Boston Lion Believes Harvard Leading A Race To The Bottom Academically


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:47:36 09/14/17 Thu

Answers:

Since the year 2000, has any other Ivy coach been cited by the NCAA for recruiting violations?

Not sure what you mean by "cited" but teams self-report secondary or inadvertent violations to the NCAA all the time. The Ivy League and its teams have a policy not to disclose these reported violations but took the unprecedented step to do so in the Harvard case due to the previous publicity it received. If you're looking for a published list of all the Ivy secondary violations, though, you're going to be disappointed. Do a quick search though, and you'll see that it's common for athletic departments to report double-digit numbers of these a year and normally nothing comes of them.

Has any other Ivy program been sanctioned by the NCAA with recruiting restrictions as punishment?

I don't believe any other secondaries have yielded penalties from the NCAA, but NCAA violations can happen anywhere. Right around the beginning of this decade, I think Princeton Women's Tennis was hit with a major (not secondary) violation for paying a player. But you wouldn't normally ever hear about a secondary violation.

Has any other Ivy coach done something questionable like the Zack Rosen "Shop Rite" recruiting incident?

The New York Times has not bothered to report about other similar incidents. Or you can ignore Chris Lincoln's book Playing The Game and assume that was the first time any Ivy coach has ever said more words than "Hello" when he or she was supposed to only say that.

Are you aware of any other Ivy coach recruiting a high AI player off a high school junior varsity team and then immediately dismissing him?

A little history here. Prior to the establishment of roster sizes that could count toward the AI average (early 2000s - traveling size times 1.4), you could literally count anyone that checked the box indicating interest in a sport on the application toward your AI average. It's only recently that AI boosters are highly scrutinized as actual recruits. And here's the issue: you want either an AI booster that can actually play (not all that common - though coaches around the league will jokingly refer to them as "AI All Stars")) or an AI booster that clearly couldn't play for any D1 school. If you pick someone in the middle, they're likely to be a cancer on your team for not getting playing time and to ultimately transfer or otherwise be a nuisance. I hate AI averaging (as do many administrators across the league), but if it must exist I'd rather see booster slots given to kids who know they won't ever play than ones given to kids who have fringe D1 skills but will be planted on the bench for four years.

Are you aware of any other Ivy basketball player being recruited in eighth grade?

If you think that the first exploration of a kid's ability and desire to attend your institution happens on a call on June 15th following their sophomore year, you've lost your mind.

Are you aware of any other Ivy basketball player who has publicly disclosed lower SAT scores than Wesley Saunders did?

Wes Saunders' publicly disclosed scores were over 1800 (or over 1200 on the two part). When Wes Saunders was coming into the league the floor was still 171. He'd be solidly clear of that. Even today with the floor at 183 now, he'd be darn close to okay, and Ivy coaches will continue to recruit and wait for re-tests on kids 100 points lower or more. I'm not going to malign any specific kids (that's exclusively for people to do to Harvard basketball recruits), but if you do your research, you'll find articles about kids in NE prep schools talking about raising their SAT scores to get into an Ivy.

Which other Ivy programs have recruited a junior college transfer?

Brown, Cornell, Penn just in the last couple years.

Ultimately, I don't blame people for coming to these conclusions. Between confirmation and availability bias, and the Ivy League's nature of not admitting anything unless external reporters break a story and force them to, I can understand how you've arrived at your conclusions. If I were covering the league as a reporter, I'd work really hard to get info on the record to share with others. But I really only cover the league for my own interest. To the extent it's totally fine to share something, I do (AI increases, the Ivy tourney, etc). There's always going to be a big gap between what I know and what media outlets bother to report about this league, though.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Boston Lion
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:42:10 08/08/17 Tue

Time will tell.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
Ivy BBall Fan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:43:15 09/12/17 Tue

Penn's Caleb Wood and Brown's Zach Hunsaker both are Juco transfer. Not that there is anything wrong with being a Juco transfer.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
John Harvard
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:55:58 09/12/17 Tue

Juco transfers could be very talented, and even very intelligent and academically accomplished. Is it, however, fair to say that is is unlikely that many JUCO students could have successfully applied to Ivy schools in the first place?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Harvard basketball players are smart.


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:11:09 09/13/17 Wed

JH, your question about juco transfers suggests another broader question. How, if at all, is a transfer student treated for AI purposes?

It seems that this might be a loophole. If Camden McRae can be included in the team average despite being on the team for only one day, does that mean players who join the team after the first year are essentially excluded from any AI calculations?

If so, transfer students are a potential gold mine of talent.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2016 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.