ivy league 2024

[MDlaxfan76]

Totally agree, those are all things that I can see players asking for. My question is what are they offering? Once they are, in essence and perhaps in practice, employees, these are essentially demands of their employers. In negotiations, they would ask for these and in return they would give….? What? I’m not sure how students are supposed to negotiate with the school in this setting. Do they threaten to strike? That would obviously be hollow. Sue the school? Not so sure about the parity issue. Those who aren’t getting as much would like that sure but the higher earners would now be better compensated employees who have earned a higher salary, not sure why they would be arguing for the right to make less. Certainly not so much of an issue in the Ivy League but a huge issue in other conferences where some football players are making millions a year and others nothing (which it would be hard to argue is unfair if they are employees earning different salaries based on different earning power for their employees based on their star power and worth to the team). An utter mess.

I think the logic unions have in pro sports is that not everyone gets the same but there are some minimums with some sort of structure for performance bonuses that are individual or team based. The top players are willing to give up a little to make sure their teammates are cool. What I meant by parity is more across the league so that a single billionaire doesn't 'buy' the Ivy championship. Again, people can make collective decisions that are better for their sport...no guarantee they will, but there's at least some chance.

As to what an Ivy player or team 'gives' is that they're willing to spend the time and energy at that school versus another, or dropping altogether. Obviously players are willing to do that now, but we're going to see base level of $10k and $25k and more...going to all players on opposing teams, on top of scholarships...we're still going to be drawing those who value the academic opportunity over immediate $, but I think what an Ivy union will do is better demand other things to match the quality of the rest of the experience than individual athletes can negotiate for themselves.

I'm less convinced that $ will be what the Ivy unions emphasize versus other aspects of student-athlete experience. Most Ivies go out of their way to Not support the athlete experience differentially from other students, despite those time demands; there's been real pressure that direction from the rest of the campus...it's more philosophical than actual $ when you close your cafeteria because practices go later than what the cafeteria union is willing to work; ok, then find an answer to make sure your athletes get the good nutrition they need, without having to run across campus to get to the one cafeteria left open for that last half hour of possible overlap, or change the practices times...or.....and there's a real issue with how to deal with actual problem coaches. If we're honest about it, we all know horror stories at our alma maters have gone on way too long...(not an Ivy specific thing, more a college sports thing). A union can push to solve these things while insulating the individual athletes from blowback...

[Unknown Participant]

I know this is a lacrosse board but the Dartmouth basketball union saga is quite something. (There's a link to the NLRB decision in this law firm blog post summary: https://ogletree.com/insights-resources ... oard-case/)

I think it's extremely tortured logic that the Dartmouth players receive "compensation" (sneakers and gear and on-campus housing during winter break are included) -- one argument turns on its head the principle that the players aren't compensated because they can quit the team and maintain full student status and financial aid benefits; somehow the NLRB accepted the interpretation that this means the athletes, who receive a bump in admission likelihood, are thus receiving guaranteed compensation since they keep their financial aid/student benefits even if off the team. To put it another way: if you lost your financial aid when you quit the team, that would show you were being compensated. If you keep your financial aid when you quit the team, per the NLRB interpretation that also shows you were being compensated, you just had a guaranteed contract.

Although this is currently only in the context of a right to bargain collectively, if athletes are found to be employees for union purposes one wonders if athletes would be found to be employees in other regulatory contexts such as minimum wage laws? I just can't really see the Ivy League agreeing to pay players but who knows.

This probably deserves its own thread, however in the meantime, I agree that the Ivies are going to struggle with the notion that athletes are employees.

The logic that providing housing and food and equipment and access to facilities and travel to athletes incrementally more than other students (because they need such in order to effectively participate in the activity of intercollegiate DI sports) is compensation is indeed 'tortured'. But there is the alternative of club sports in which the students are responsible for these sorts of costs...often with the support of alumni. And the schools are making the call to support DI teams.

They're really edge cases for the union movement as other leagues are far more clearly engaged in compensation, especially in major revenue sports. Those situations are obviously compensating, just limiting that compensation with no collective bargaining power for the athletes. Union negotiating makes a ton of sense from those perspectives, though, IMO what the most likely impact will be is a reduction in the # of sports supported across the board.

If this stands up in court, pretty much all schools which in any way cover such costs will be compelled to allow their athletes to join...it'll be interesting what would happen if the US military academy athletes make such a call...

I asked my son what he thinks as a more recent ex Ivy athlete....he's in favor and suggested that from an Ivy perspective it's likely to be mostly about negotiating the priorities many such Ivy athletes feel about things like making sure that practices don't conflict with easy access to food, access to majors in various subjects that may conflict with practice schedules, representation in the event of coach/trainer conflicts/abuse, etc. It's to shift just a bit the power dynamics between the school and coaches relative to the athletes, who individually are rather powerless within the system other than dropping the sport, transferring etc.

I'd note though that non-Ivies with which we compete in our non-revenue sport are actively enabling paying their lacrosse players. Minimums and bonuses. Through booster NIL. My hunch is that's already happening or will happen in some of the Ivies. The lack of transparency is another issue that unions could address.

Seems to me that it would be better to have consistency at the sport level and full transparency, as negotiated collectively, than not, given that the genie is out of the bottle.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/dea ... s-unionize

yes the Dartmouth team isn't very good and hasn't been pretty much for decades, if I recall. But that doesn't have anything to do with the reality that they have started the ball rolling...it's a rather extreme argument to call Ivy players employees, so if that stands up, pretty much everyone else playing NCAA sports will be as well.

And there's at least a valid argument that such would be appropriate; I worry about unintended consequences....

Not a fan of zero hedge, but that's beside the point.

I believe the band gets transportation paid for when they to go to away games. Are they next? I can see this argument if there were athletic scholarships. But any financial aid they get is on the basis of need and being a student. If they quit the team nothing would change.

I agree, it's a huge stretch...I do think that there would be some benefits, even for Ivy athletes, of having union representation, but the logic is definitely weakest for Ivies versus most other leagues.

That's because you are a wacky lib. (Is that enough to get a penalty?) Also, take this to the politics forum where all you guys can discourse and show off to each other with your 4-5 erudite paras about why an Ivy league athlete needs union representation and why Che Guevara was misunderstood, when in reality the players should just be trying to, or preparing to, win a game.

[bearlaxfan]

What's the story on Denver's stream? Because they're not full Big East they're not on flo?

[Gobigred]

What's the story on Denver's stream? Because they're not full Big East they're not on flo?

Pioneer All-Access...$10 for a month..have to cancel

[MDlaxfan76]

I know this is a lacrosse board but the Dartmouth basketball union saga is quite something. (There's a link to the NLRB decision in this law firm blog post summary: https://ogletree.com/insights-resources ... oard-case/)

I think it's extremely tortured logic that the Dartmouth players receive "compensation" (sneakers and gear and on-campus housing during winter break are included) -- one argument turns on its head the principle that the players aren't compensated because they can quit the team and maintain full student status and financial aid benefits; somehow the NLRB accepted the interpretation that this means the athletes, who receive a bump in admission likelihood, are thus receiving guaranteed compensation since they keep their financial aid/student benefits even if off the team. To put it another way: if you lost your financial aid when you quit the team, that would show you were being compensated. If you keep your financial aid when you quit the team, per the NLRB interpretation that also shows you were being compensated, you just had a guaranteed contract.

Although this is currently only in the context of a right to bargain collectively, if athletes are found to be employees for union purposes one wonders if athletes would be found to be employees in other regulatory contexts such as minimum wage laws? I just can't really see the Ivy League agreeing to pay players but who knows.

This probably deserves its own thread, however in the meantime, I agree that the Ivies are going to struggle with the notion that athletes are employees.

The logic that providing housing and food and equipment and access to facilities and travel to athletes incrementally more than other students (because they need such in order to effectively participate in the activity of intercollegiate DI sports) is compensation is indeed 'tortured'. But there is the alternative of club sports in which the students are responsible for these sorts of costs...often with the support of alumni. And the schools are making the call to support DI teams.

They're really edge cases for the union movement as other leagues are far more clearly engaged in compensation, especially in major revenue sports. Those situations are obviously compensating, just limiting that compensation with no collective bargaining power for the athletes. Union negotiating makes a ton of sense from those perspectives, though, IMO what the most likely impact will be is a reduction in the # of sports supported across the board.

If this stands up in court, pretty much all schools which in any way cover such costs will be compelled to allow their athletes to join...it'll be interesting what would happen if the US military academy athletes make such a call...

I asked my son what he thinks as a more recent ex Ivy athlete....he's in favor and suggested that from an Ivy perspective it's likely to be mostly about negotiating the priorities many such Ivy athletes feel about things like making sure that practices don't conflict with easy access to food, access to majors in various subjects that may conflict with practice schedules, representation in the event of coach/trainer conflicts/abuse, etc. It's to shift just a bit the power dynamics between the school and coaches relative to the athletes, who individually are rather powerless within the system other than dropping the sport, transferring etc.

I'd note though that non-Ivies with which we compete in our non-revenue sport are actively enabling paying their lacrosse players. Minimums and bonuses. Through booster NIL. My hunch is that's already happening or will happen in some of the Ivies. The lack of transparency is another issue that unions could address.

Seems to me that it would be better to have consistency at the sport level and full transparency, as negotiated collectively, than not, given that the genie is out of the bottle.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/dea ... s-unionize

yes the Dartmouth team isn't very good and hasn't been pretty much for decades, if I recall. But that doesn't have anything to do with the reality that they have started the ball rolling...it's a rather extreme argument to call Ivy players employees, so if that stands up, pretty much everyone else playing NCAA sports will be as well.

And there's at least a valid argument that such would be appropriate; I worry about unintended consequences....

Not a fan of zero hedge, but that's beside the point.

I believe the band gets transportation paid for when they to go to away games. Are they next? I can see this argument if there were athletic scholarships. But any financial aid they get is on the basis of need and being a student. If they quit the team nothing would change.

I agree, it's a huge stretch...I do think that there would be some benefits, even for Ivy athletes, of having union representation, but the logic is definitely weakest for Ivies versus most other leagues.

That's because you are a wacky lib. (Is that enough to get a penalty?) Also, take this to the politics forum where all you guys can discourse and show off to each other with your 4-5 erudite paras about why an Ivy league athlete needs union representation and why Che Guevara was misunderstood, when in reality the players should just be trying to, or preparing to, win a game.

First, I don't think this is political in the partisan sense, and probably shouldn't be political in any sense. So, no, IMO doesn't belong in Politics forum.

Second, I'm far from a "whacky lib" as if that would matter anyway.
As a moderate conservative, and ex Ivy student-athlete, my knee jerk reaction would have been...'not Ivies". But I've listened to my more recent ex Ivy student-athlete son and shared his perspective. Made sense to me.

You want to discuss what the athletes should be doing? go ahead.
On whatever thread you want. For as many "erudite paras" as you want.

As I originally said, I think this overall topic probably deserves its own thread, but, in the meantime, as it was an Ivy team that pulled this trigger, it's on its way, including whether it makes sense for the Ivies in specific. NIL is a related topic that is likely going to impact Ivy athletes as well.

Probably going to impact Tufts and NESCAC teams too at some point. Seems a little crazy though to have this happening first among such schools rather than where the money really is being made in sports. But issues do happen across the board and maybe some organized representation would be better at addressing...imagine if those gals being abused in gymnastics had had representation or the wrestling guys or...

[PizzaSnake]

Totally agree, those are all things that I can see players asking for. My question is what are they offering? Once they are, in essence and perhaps in practice, employees, these are essentially demands of their employers. In negotiations, they would ask for these and in return they would give….? What? I’m not sure how students are supposed to negotiate with the school in this setting. Do they threaten to strike? That would obviously be hollow. Sue the school? Not so sure about the parity issue. Those who aren’t getting as much would like that sure but the higher earners would now be better compensated employees who have earned a higher salary, not sure why they would be arguing for the right to make less. Certainly not so much of an issue in the Ivy League but a huge issue in other conferences where some football players are making millions a year and others nothing (which it would be hard to argue is unfair if they are employees earning different salaries based on different earning power for their employees based on their star power and worth to the team). An utter mess.

I think the logic unions have in pro sports is that not everyone gets the same but there are some minimums with some sort of structure for performance bonuses that are individual or team based. The top players are willing to give up a little to make sure their teammates are cool. What I meant by parity is more across the league so that a single billionaire doesn't 'buy' the Ivy championship. Again, people can make collective decisions that are better for their sport...no guarantee they will, but there's at least some chance.

As to what an Ivy player or team 'gives' is that they're willing to spend the time and energy at that school versus another, or dropping altogether. Obviously players are willing to do that now, but we're going to see base level of $10k and $25k and more...going to all players on opposing teams, on top of scholarships...we're still going to be drawing those who value the academic opportunity over immediate $, but I think what an Ivy union will do is better demand other things to match the quality of the rest of the experience than individual athletes can negotiate for themselves.

I'm less convinced that $ will be what the Ivy unions emphasize versus other aspects of student-athlete experience. Most Ivies go out of their way to Not support the athlete experience differentially from other students, despite those time demands; there's been real pressure that direction from the rest of the campus...it's more philosophical than actual $ when you close your cafeteria because practices go later than what the cafeteria union is willing to work; ok, then find an answer to make sure your athletes get the good nutrition they need, without having to run across campus to get to the one cafeteria left open for that last half hour of possible overlap, or change the practices times...or.....and there's a real issue with how to deal with actual problem coaches. If we're honest about it, we all know horror stories at our alma maters have gone on way too long...(not an Ivy specific thing, more a college sports thing). A union can push to solve these things while insulating the individual athletes from blowback...

I thought the draw of the Ivy League was the cachet and the perceived entrée into a certain group whose members enjoyed the benefits of association with past, accomplished, privileged members: the Boston Brahmins, "good old boys" network, WASP establishment, etc.

What is up to some debate is whether any of that perceived benefit remains in the 21st century.

Edit: This pithy and concise enough for you, Unknown? Did I make in under your "para" limit?

[The Orfling]

My fault for starting this particular hare! There continue to be a lot of changes coming in college athletics and the union movement popping up in the Ivy League was eye-catching to me but I agree a separate thread would probably work best. (With that said, a lot of thoughtful commentary on the union topic.)

To get back strictly on-field matters, Massey Ratings has four of this weekend's Ivy games pretty much in the "pick 'em" category (Cornell, Penn, Princeton, and Yale), one game with the Ivy as a more modest underdog (Harvard), and one Ivy as a big underdog (Brown):

• Penn State over Cornell by 1 (55% confidence rating);

• Penn over Villanova by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Denver over Yale by 1 (52% confidence rating);

• Rutgers over Princeton by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Michigan over Harvard by 4 (75% confidence rating);

• Maryland over Brown by 10.

I think the "pick 'em" games show the parity in college lacrosse -- as we saw last weekend, a team like Penn can beat Duke fairly handily, then get beaten by a weaker-on-paper UNC team. Of those predictions, I see Cornell as beating PSU in a close one; Penn beating Villanova by more like 3-4; Denver over Yale by more like 3-4 (but hope I'm wrong!). The Michigan predicted outcome/margin looks about right given that it's a road game for Harvard; as for Brown, they'll fight hard vs. Maryland like they did against Georgetown but it's hard to see where the goals will come from against that excellent Terp defense. And I just don't know with Princeton and Rutgers, I could see either team winning by a few.

[pcowlax]

Two surprising scores so far for the Ivy, one good, one bad

[PizzaSnake]

Two surprising scores so far for the Ivy, one good, one bad

Spring weather is often surprising.

[The Orfling]

Penn held serve against Villanova; Brown almost but not quite pulled off a monumental upset; Cornell had a terrible-no good-very-bad-day against Penn State. Now we wait for three tough match-ups on Sunday (Harvard-Michigan; Princeton-Rutgers; Yale-Denver) to see how the weekend plays out for the Ivies.

[Typical Lax Dad]

My fault for starting this particular hare! There continue to be a lot of changes coming in college athletics and the union movement popping up in the Ivy League was eye-catching to me but I agree a separate thread would probably work best. (With that said, a lot of thoughtful commentary on the union topic.)

To get back strictly on-field matters, Massey Ratings has four of this weekend's Ivy games pretty much in the "pick 'em" category (Cornell, Penn, Princeton, and Yale), one game with the Ivy as a more modest underdog (Harvard), and one Ivy as a big underdog (Brown):

• Penn State over Cornell by 1 (55% confidence rating);

• Penn over Villanova by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Denver over Yale by 1 (52% confidence rating);

• Rutgers over Princeton by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Michigan over Harvard by 4 (75% confidence rating);

• Maryland over Brown by 10.

I think the "pick 'em" games show the parity in college lacrosse -- as we saw last weekend, a team like Penn can beat Duke fairly handily, then get beaten by a weaker-on-paper UNC team. Of those predictions, I see Cornell as beating PSU in a close one; Penn beating Villanova by more like 3-4; Denver over Yale by more like 3-4 (but hope I'm wrong!). The Michigan predicted outcome/margin looks about right given that it's a road game for Harvard; as for Brown, they'll fight hard vs. Maryland like they did against Georgetown but it's hard to see where the goals will come from against that excellent Terp defense. And I just don't know with Princeton and Rutgers, I could see either team winning by a few.

You had a typo on the Maryland score. You had a 0 after the 1 by mistake!

[The Orfling]

My fault for starting this particular hare! There continue to be a lot of changes coming in college athletics and the union movement popping up in the Ivy League was eye-catching to me but I agree a separate thread would probably work best. (With that said, a lot of thoughtful commentary on the union topic.)

To get back strictly on-field matters, Massey Ratings has four of this weekend's Ivy games pretty much in the "pick 'em" category (Cornell, Penn, Princeton, and Yale), one game with the Ivy as a more modest underdog (Harvard), and one Ivy as a big underdog (Brown):

• Penn State over Cornell by 1 (55% confidence rating);

• Penn over Villanova by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Denver over Yale by 1 (52% confidence rating);

• Rutgers over Princeton by 1 (51% confidence rating);

• Michigan over Harvard by 4 (75% confidence rating);

• Maryland over Brown by 10.

I think the "pick 'em" games show the parity in college lacrosse -- as we saw last weekend, a team like Penn can beat Duke fairly handily, then get beaten by a weaker-on-paper UNC team. Of those predictions, I see Cornell as beating PSU in a close one; Penn beating Villanova by more like 3-4; Denver over Yale by more like 3-4 (but hope I'm wrong!). The Michigan predicted outcome/margin looks about right given that it's a road game for Harvard; as for Brown, they'll fight hard vs. Maryland like they did against Georgetown but it's hard to see where the goals will come from against that excellent Terp defense. And I just don't know with Princeton and Rutgers, I could see either team winning by a few.

You had a typo on the Maryland score. You had a 0 after the 1 by mistake!

Ha! Well played. Brown blowing up the Massey algorithm!

[faircornell]

Great Sunday for the Ivies. Some noteworthy performances during the week:

Offense:
Colin McGill, Dartmouth: (4,1) 5 points
Coulter Mackesy, Princeton: (3,2) 5 points
Matt Brandau, Yale: (2,3) 5 points
David Anderson, Yale: (3,1) 4 points
Sam King, Harvard: (2,2) 4 points
Peter Lapina, Dartmouth: (2,2) 4 points
Ben Smith, Penn: (2,2) 4 points
Michael Long, Cornell: (1,3) 4 points
Matteo Corsi, Brown: (3,0) 3 points
Cameron Brown, Dartmouth: (2,1) 3 points
Jackson Green, Harvard: (2,1) 3 points
Patrick Hackler, Yale: (2,1) 3 points
Jack Kelly, Brown: (2,1) 3 points
CJ Kirst, Cornell: (2,1) 3 points
Griffin Scane, Penn: (2,1) 3 points
Henry Bonnie, Dartmouth (1,2) 3 points

Face-off:
Machado Rodriguez, Yale: 14/21, 67%
Marc Phyllos, Cornell: 13/21, 62%
Dash Sachs, Brown: 17/30, 57%
Mitchell Meyers, Dartmouth: 14/28, 50%
Angelo Petrakis, Cornell: 6/12, 50%

Goalies:
Emmet Carroll: 16 saves, 67%
Michael Gianforcaro, Princeton: 14 saves, 67%

[bearlaxfan]

BIG day for the league today as there aren't many games left against top-tens once league comp begins. After today Cornell has 'Cuse & ND, Harvard has UVa. Need wins to maybe get more than 2 teams in the ncaa dance. Looking like a 2 bid league at best right now, assuming most all the top OOC foes the Ivies played/will play hold serve in the rest of their schedules.

[FannOLax]

BIG day for the league today as there aren't many games left against top-tens once league comp begins. After today Cornell has 'Cuse & ND, Harvard has UVa. Need wins to maybe get more than 2 teams in the ncaa dance. Looking like a 2 bid league at best right now, assuming most all the top OOC foes the Ivies played/will play hold serve in the rest of their schedules.

Yep, BIG day. Might even say "massive."

Penn's win over Duke must be the best Ivy win so far. Looking forward, Cornell will be playing Cuse at Schoellkopf, and against Notre Dame at a neutral site on Long Island. UVa will be coming to Cambridge to play Harvard. Cuse's win over Hop seems to portend that 4 ACC teams will make the dance, with implications for the importance of the Cornell - Cuse game.

Brown wildly exceeded my expectations yesterday. While OT losses can be so painful, Bruno could be a force in conference play.

[faircornell]

BIG day for the league today as there aren't many games left against top-tens once league comp begins. After today Cornell has 'Cuse & ND, Harvard has UVa. Need wins to maybe get more than 2 teams in the ncaa dance. Looking like a 2 bid league at best right now, assuming most all the top OOC foes the Ivies played/will play hold serve in the rest of their schedules.

Yep, BIG day. Might even say "massive."

Penn's win over Duke must be the best Ivy win so far. Looking forward, Cornell will be playing Cuse at Schoellkopf, and against Notre Dame at a neutral site on Long Island. UVa will be coming to Cambridge to play Harvard. Cuse's win over Hop seems to portend that 4 ACC teams will make the dance, with implications for the importance of the Cornell - Cuse game.

Brown wildly exceeded my expectations yesterday. While OT losses can be so painful, Bruno could be a force in conference play.

Agreed about Bruno. They are going to be tough competition in the Ivies. Congratulations on a tremendous effort.

[pcowlax]

So far so good today, Harvard looking great

[The Orfling]

So far so good today, Harvard looking great

Princeton gets it done, getting out to a 5 goal lead at the half and then holding strong for the eventual 14-8 victory. Harvard also rode a great first half (up 7-2) to the win although Michigan made it interesting and Harvard ended up with a 13-11 win.

Nice job, guys!

[MDlaxfan76]

So far so good today, Harvard looking great

nice effort at a comeback by Michigan winning second half 9-6, but that 7-2 first half lead was too much.
Way to go Crimson!

[FannOLax]

It looks like Harvard can win outside of New England. Congratulations to the Crimson.