Ivy Group Ratifies Recruit Reductions

The history of collegiate football lies in the Ivy League, where the forward pass was invented and the first 43 national champions crowned.

The future of the sport, though, lies elsewhere.

In June, the Council of Ivy Group Presidents agreed to a reduction in football recruits from 140 players over a four-year period to 120, or 30 per season. It was a sour ending to a sweet year for a Harvard football program that posted a 9-0 record in 2001.

“Since 1994, the Ivy League has cut the collegiate football programs almost in half, in terms of number of football recruits,” said Harvard Coach Tim Murphy. “As I have mentioned to our President and Director of Athletics, this is certainly a concern to all of us in athletics in general, and Ivy League football in particular.”

Two other rule changes were decided on at the annual spring meeting: the reduction of football coaches from six full-time and six part-time to seven full-time and three part-time; and the establishment of a seven-week span free from all athletic activity in every sport.

The reduction to 30 represented a compromise by the athletic directors. The original directive by the Ivy League presidents had asked the athletic directors to consider a reduction all the way to 25.

“While we strongly advocated for 35, we feel that 30 is a far better outcome than 25,” said Director of Athletics Bob Scalise. “I’m not sure whether the intent of the presidents was to de-emphasize athletics, or to see if there was an opportuity for more efficiency.”

Even with the reduction, the Ivy League’s number of football admits remains high relative to other conferences.

But the Ivy League also has a much higher attrition rate among its athletes than most leagues. Since no Ivy institution awards athletic scholarships, the incentive for recruited athletes to continue playing football once they begin attending classes is lower than at other schools.

Scalise acknowldges this.

“While efficiency sounds good, the mechanisms which enable many schools to recruit in small numbers, such as athletic scholarships and redshirting, are things which go against the principles of both Harvard and the Ivy League,” Scalise said.

Murphy and his staff will be forced to recruit differently now.

“It’s certainly changed the way we recruit,” Murphy said. “From the standpoint of emphasizing retention, we absolutely must get serious football players. We just can’t afford to lose a kid once they matriculate to Harvard.”

Murphy may also have to target players capable of contributing immediately.

Since there is no redshirting in the Ivy League, the reduction will most likely lead to increased playing time for freshmen—who, as late as 1991, were not allowed to participate in varsity football at all.

“In my opinion, very few if any freshmen are ready for the transition to college and playing collegiate football at the same time,” Murphy said.

Last season, the majority of the freshmen players saw their only meaningful game action during junior varsity contests, a less-stressful transition to intercollegiate athletics. According to Scalise, a proponent of JV programs, the admission cuts were agreed upon with the survival of JV football in mind.

“Given our principle of broad participation and developmental nature of football, I am very concerned about anything that would jeopardize our JV program,” Scalise said. “In speaking with Tim Murphy, our football coach, 30 seemed like the bare minimum to be able to continue to field a JV team.”

Murphy, though, is not sure.

“In the long run, I believe that it will be very difficult to field JV teams in the future,” Murphy said.

This, according to Murphy, may diminish enthusiasm for the sport in his younger players.

“The ability to play in a game (as opposed to just practice) for a freshman or sophomore not only helps their development as an athlete, but is also a positive emotional factor,” Murphy said. “Football, although arguably the greatest game to play on Saturday, can be a very tough, mundane sport to practice.”