Brown Incident Questions Ivy Recruiting Policies

In the wake of the recent NCAA violations at Brown, involving the football, men's basketball, men's soccer and women's volleyball teams, the recruiting policies of other Ivy League universities has come under close scrutiny. Despite strict regulations, some Ivy League schools bypass the system and maintain an edge over rival schools.

Although the Harvard athletic department declined to comment on the Brown incident specifically, it released the following statement concerning Harvard's recruiting policy:

"We carefully instruct our coaches on the recruiting rules of the NCAA, Ivy League, and Harvard, and they are required to pass an NCAA certification test each year before going out to recruit," the press release said.

"Within this framework, our coaches aim to identify the highest-level

student athletes. After identifying these prospective candidates, coaches share the information with the admissions office, which selects all students for admission."

Ivy League athletics are rarely touted as the pinnacle of collegiate sports. Though Princeton and Pennsylvania occasionally pose a serious threat to opponents in the world of men's basketball, the rest of the Ivies seem to accept their status in and understand the ever-elusive nature of the NCAA Tournament. At Harvard, March Madness more aptly describes the flood of papers and exams before spring break.

Recently, the Ivy League has been seriously underrepresented in the four major sports: football, basketball, baseball, and hockey. The lack of competitive ability remains somewhat concealed by the small conference of private schools, where even perennially mediocre teams have a chance to compete with the Ivy's elite.

This is not meant to undermine Harvard's success in smaller venues like squash, women's hockey, soccer and basketball, but these sports do not generate the revenue that the men's major sports do.

Just how could an institution, filled with over-achievers and motivated students, lag so far behind the large state universities in college athletics? Why is it a major accomplishment when the only Ivy participant in the NCAA basketball tournament actually reaches the second round, let alone the Sweet Sixteen?

The answer is simple. The playing field is definitely not level. In fact it is decidedly lopsided. The wide chasms in athletic prowess rival the persistent academic gaps between the Ivy League and everyone else. A major reason for this is the Ivy's more stringent recruiting guidelines.

Basically, the difference comes down to money. According to the Ivy Group Agreement of 1954, financial aid must be solely provided on the basis of need. Other schools, however, can offer financial aid for merit as well.

With the exorbitant costs to attend colleges, the lure of financial assistance becomes a potent weapon in the recruiting game. The Ivy schools, constrained by the group agreement, rely upon the name recognition of the university and unparalleled academics to attract athletes.

Despite the gaping difference in financial aid policy, the general recruitment period is similar for all colleges.

During a prospect's junior year in high school, the process begins with form letters. All interested schools send generalized and rather impersonal letters to the homes of potential recruits, ranging from simple letters to elaborate messages and colorful pamphlets.

By the time summer rolls around, the schools escalate their efforts with phone calls. Each program is permitted to make one phone call per week, and coaches tend to fill that quota each week during this portion of the recruiting period.

"Harvard and other schools were calling every single week," recalls freshman Elliot Prasse-Freeman who was recruited by the men's basketball team. "It was like this extravagant and long drawn-out dating game."

By July, the quiet period begins. At this point, all schools must cease contact with the athletic prospects. This is the point at which the coaches visit the summer league games and evaluate the players. For a brief period, the elaborate competition to lure students subsides, and the recruits are given a chance to prove themselves.

The short respite from the recruiting process ends abruptly when school begins again, and the schools once again intensify their efforts with home visits. In these ritualistic events, the coaches generally meet with the parents of the recruit and run down a laundry list of what their particular programs have to offer. If the prospects are still interested at this point, the university pays for trips to the college campus, which gives the students a feel for the university and helps them to make the difficult decision.

At this juncture, the two recruiting processes diverge. Large schools with impressive athletic programs emphasize the facilities, professional exposure, high-level competition, and, of course, the possibility of an athletic scholarship.

As for the Ivy League, the stress is put on the academic opportunities and name recognition of the school. The attraction of a name like Harvard or Yale can certainly not be underestimated despite the lack of financial compensation.

"There's definitely natural compensation in the fact that it is an Ivy League school," says sophomore Dan Farley, who was recruited by the football team as a receiver. "Plus, I had a great time on the recruiting trip and could not find a good reason not to come to Harvard."

Prasse-Freeman, who was also recruited as a point guard by nationally ranked basketball programs like Stanford, echoes these sentiments.

"Basically, Harvard offered the best mix of academics and athletics," Prasse-Freeman says. "Sure, there is definitely a trade-off to turning down money from another school, but coming to Harvard is a much longer-term investment."

Brown, in a highly publicized report issued by the university, recently alleged that several coaches, some students, and an outside sports booster foundation committed recruiting violations. The report implicated the football, women's volleyball, men's soccer and men's basketball teams.

"Violations include improper offers of financial assistance from non-University sources to athletes and recruits, and recruiting activities by several coaches that went against NCAA guidelines," the Brown Daily Herald reported on Tuesday.

Currently, the NCAA is still planning its course of action, though the report proposed several possible remedies.

The recruiting infractions may give Brown an unfair advantage in terms of access to quality athletes. Essentially, Brown's practices offered a powerful combination of a strong academic name recognition and financial aid for potential recruits. This, of course, makes it more difficult for Harvard and other Ivies to attract quality players.

Several Harvard athletes are understandably upset at the infringement, since Brown's behavior not only places Harvard at a competitive disadvantage but also tarnishes the image of other schools that play by the rules.

"It definitely gives Brown an unfair advantage," Farley says. "I mean, that's why the league sets the rules, so they shouldn't be broken."

Other athletes, however, place the blame on the tight regulations of the NCAA and believe the violations were an inevitable result of a corrupt establishment.

"The NCAA is such an exploitative organization, and honestly, I blame them more than anyone else," Prasse-Freeman says. "As for Brown, all I can say is that I'm glad they got caught."

Brown's violations, however are certainly the exception in the Ivy League, as most schools in the conference have a relatively clean recruiting record. Yet, not all Ivies are created equal. Pennsylvania, for instance, has generally stronger athletic programs than other Ivy schools, while Princeton manages to recruit a strong basketball team nearly every year.

There are different recruiting practices among the Ivies, ranging from different academic requirements to what some believe are seriously unethical practices.

One generally accepted practice among the Ivies concerns the different acceptance standards based on academics. All Ivy League schools must assess their athletes academically before accepting them, but certain schools are given more leeway in this respect to compensate for a less prominent name.

According to sophomore Sam Taylor, who was recruited as a receiver on the football team, Harvard, Princeton and Yale are only allowed to admit very few athletes in the lower tier of their academic standards. Cornell, Pennsylvania, Brown and the other Ivies are permitted to accept a larger proportion of athletes from the lower tiers in order to compensate for their less conspicuous names.

"Namesake pulls everyone to Harvard, Princeton and Yale, so these other schools have to have some form of compensation," Taylor says.

According to Prasse-Freeman, Pennsylvania and Princeton regularly engage in a highly unethical practice known as "over-recruiting." Essentially, more players are recruited than needed to fill spots, and only the best of the crop are encouraged to stay.

"Basically, they bring in a ton of guys, pick the ones they want, and drop the rest," Prasse-Freeman says. "These kids are just left out in the cold and have already forfeited opportunities to play elsewhere."

As the NCAA and Brown work out some sort of punishment for the violations, the rest of the Ivies will have to sit patiently and await any results that could impact the entire conference. There seems little hope of overturning the nearly half-century old Ivy Group Agreement, so recruiting practices will probably resume as before.

Hopefully, there will be parity among the Ivies once again, but in the meantime Harvard coaches are getting ready to begin the recruiting process for next year.