Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

It definitely strains credibility that Harvard's roster composition has anything to do with recruiting budgets. I'm quite sure there are plenty of other Ivy League and ECAC/Hockey East schools with far lower budgets than Harvard. Admissions standards similarly are not higher at Harvard than most other Ivys with the possible exception of Cornell, so that's not an explanation either.

You couldn't be more wrong. The AI at Harvard is higher than every other Ivy except for Yale. Princeton is a close third. It's a constant battle for the coaches to recruit against not only other Ivies but non-conference foes as well.

Why is it a strain to say that our roster doesn't have anything to do with recruiting budgets? You think that Katey Stone can just jump on a plane to Minneapolis any time she feels like it? To say that Harvard's budget is higher than those of HE is laughable. You really think BC and BU spend less than Harvard? What are you smoking? And I do know for a fact as I related in my post that the men's hoop team has crumbs for a budget. I was told this by a b-ball alum who related in detail what Amaker has to deal with in terms of scouting and recruiting top talent. It is really sad that the University does not commit more resources.

 

[driventoit]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Fascinating thought......yes, now that Frazer is out of her boot and played regular minutes down the stretch, you count noses and get at least six regular D sans Pucci. Add a new first line consisting of Pucci and two other returning-from-elsewhere lettermen, keep this year's first line intact as a second line, count noses with Parker, Crugnale and other returnees and add the incoming first-years, and what have you got? The phrase that dare not speak its name.....no, not SB....FL. It begins with F, continues with O, U, R, L, I....NO! I can't bring myself to say it! It's downright un-Harvardian.

It's positively mid-westernian.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

You couldn't be more wrong. The AI at Harvard is higher than every other Ivy except for Yale. Princeton is a close third. It's a constant battle for the coaches to recruit against not only other Ivies but non-conference foes as well.

I just responded to this, but Princeton certainly has tougher admissions standards within the sport women's hockey than Harvard does, since it's not as much of a priority for Princeton, as far as I can tell.

Why is it a strain to say that our roster doesn't have anything to do with recruiting budgets? You think that Katey Stone can just jump on a plane to Minneapolis any time she feels like it? To say that Harvard's budget is higher than those of HE is laughable. You really think BC and BU spend less than Harvard? What are you smoking? And I do know for a fact as I related in my post that the men's hoop team has crumbs for a budget. I was told this by a b-ball alum who related in detail what Amaker has to deal with in terms of scouting and recruiting top talent. It is really sad that the University does not commit more resources.

Sure, but everyone would like more money and would say their budget is crumbs. And the ability to raise money for this kind of thing is probably a relative advantage for Harvard. Here it probably helps some for fundraising that the women's hockey program has been around longer, and Katey has been around longer to build support.

 

[Call It]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

As for Harvard recruiting, it's not very far from Cambridge to Concord. I would think there is more gas money in the recruiting budget to allow for Coach Stone to broaden her circle.

Watching the Wisco game, I was unimpressed with the players who had previously played on the USA U18 team. Daniels (her stats for the year are...) was a non-factor and the D struggled to make a good first pass.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

You couldn't be more wrong. The AI at Harvard is higher than every other Ivy except for Yale. Princeton is a close third. It's a constant battle for the coaches to recruit against not only other Ivies but non-conference foes as well.

I am most definitely not wrong. It has been a well known fact within recruiting circles for years that Harvard has been able get many women's hockey players in with scores lower than the other Ivies. Feel free to ask any other D1 coach. I personally know of several players admitted with low scores, and not just for the Vaillancourts or even U18 national-type players--some of these have received limited ice. As was mentioned previously, Harvard apparently committed to a player this year with a 19 ACT. It is certainly possible that several NE prep kids with stratospheric scores may also be admitted alongside them to meet overall AI targets, as Harvard allows balancing.

I also know that the AI at each Ivy is not always calculated identically. In one case, a player told her AI from Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and Yale, was given 4 different scores, with a 10 point gap between high and low. Harvard was the highest.

Secondly, unlike many D1 coaches, Stone does not hit the recruiting trail personally. But I can assure you that a Harvard coach flies faithfully to all the same events across the continent that most other ECAC and HE schools frequent ( with the notable exception of Boston College) looking for prospects.

Think about it logically. If Harvard's budget constraints were such that it was limiting their recruiting capability, why would they be then spending money somewhat frivolously to send a band to the game in Wisconsin?

 

[frozenfeet]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

I am most definitely not wrong. It has been a well known fact within recruiting circles for years that Harvard has been able get many women's hockey players in with scores as low or lower than any other Ivies. Feel free to ask any other D1 coach. I personally know of several players admitted with low scores, and not just for the Vaillancourts or even U18 national-type players--some of these ultimately received limited ice. As was mentioned in a previous thread, Harvard apparently committed to a player this year with a 19 ACT. It is certainly possible that several NE prep kids with stratospheric scores may also be admitted alongside them to meet overall AI targets, as Harvard allows balancing.

Secondly, unlike many D1 coaches, Stone does not hit the recruiting trail personally. But I can assure you that a Harvard coach flies faithfully to all the same events that other ECAC and HE schools frequent (except Boston College) looking for prospects.

How does it work with these Ivy schools that offer only academic scholarships and no athletic ones? Are they bound by the same NCAA restrictions limiting the number of full scholarships available to use?

 

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

How does it work with these Ivy schools that offer only academic scholarships and no athletic ones? Are they bound by the same NCAA restrictions limiting the number of full scholarships available to use?

Ivy schools do not offer academic scholarships either. Only financial aid.

 

[frozenfeet]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Ivy schools do not offer academic scholarships either. Only financial aid.

Okay potato patoto…the question is are they restricted in any way.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Ivy schools do not offer academic scholarships either. Only financial aid.

That is not 100% true. Our daughter got a substantial academic award during her time at her school. This was over and above her FA package. She applied for and won it as part of her achievements at said school.

Having said that, in general all Ivy league school students, varsity or otherwise are all treated the same way. Once admitted they are all evaluated on an equal basis for financial aid. If a coach is supporting a recruit for admission, he/she can and will guide a recruit through an early financial aid read as part of the decision process, so that a recruit does not go into it blindly before formerly applying to the school.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

That is not 100% true. Our daughter got a substantial academic award during her time at her school. This was over and above her FA package. She applied for and won it as part of her achievements at said school.

Having said that, in general all Ivy league school students, varsity or otherwise are all treated the same way. Once admitted they are all evaluated on an equal basis for financial aid. If a coach is supporting a recruit for admission, he/she can and will guide a recruit through an early financial aid read as part of the decision process, so that a recruit does not go into it blindly before formerly applying to the school.

Can't speak to your daughter's specific situation or school, but generally if an Ivy League (or NESCAC) kid gets an academic achievement award or scholarship, it shows up in income or some other manner in the financial aid process the next year and the next year need-based award is then decreased - so net-net you end up paying the same. The only exception to this is generally in the senior year when you can hide the award to some extent....

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

I also know that the AI at each Ivy is not always calculated identically. In one case, a player told her AI from Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and Yale, was given 4 different scores, with a 10 point gap between high and low. Harvard was the highest.

The Academic Index at each Ivy is calculated with the same formula, but is not teh same for each school. The AI at a specific school is calculated in relation to the school's overall general population's Academic Index (the overall average AI across all recruited athletes has to be at 90% or higher (I think that is the threshold - that is a little fuzzy in my memory) of the general population's AI). So if the population AI is 220 at Harvard (just making that up so don't quote it), the recruited athlete AI average across all athletes has to be at 198. The athletic department then parcels that 198 average out by team based on how they see fit - for example, the football team has to be at 190, squash team has to be at 225, women's hockey at 195, etc. So variations in the AI target for each Ivy League school's women's hockey team come from two sources: the overall average academic index of the student population (higher at Harvard, Yale and Princeton) and the parceling of the athlete's AI average between sports teams.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

The Academic Index at each Ivy is calculated with the same formula, but is not teh same for each school. The AI at a specific school is calculated in relation to the school's overall general population's Academic Index (the overall average AI across all recruited athletes has to be at 90% or higher (I think that is the threshold - that is a little fuzzy in my memory) of the general population's AI). So if the population AI is 220 at Harvard (just making that up so don't quote it), the recruited athlete AI average across all athletes has to be at 198. The athletic department then parcels that 198 average out by team based on how they see fit - for example, the football team has to be at 190, squash team has to be at 225, women's hockey at 195, etc. So variations in the AI target for each Ivy League school's women's hockey team come from two sources: the overall average academic index of the student population (higher at Harvard, Yale and Princeton) and the parceling of the athlete's AI average between sports teams.

This is correct. Thanks for the great explanation. Because women's hockey is a priority sport at Harvard because of its history, and not at the other schools, it further contributes to it being easier to gain entrance among players despite a high overall AI--though it is generally true everywhere that female hockey players get a better admissions break than other female sports because of the relatively small overall talent pool.

However, this still does not explain why the AI quoted for the same athlete was different for each school. Though the general formula is constant, I was told it has something to do with how each Ivy used the data. For example, some may include only 2 SAT IIs others 3, and when queried I was told that in some cases, Canadian grades were translated differently and given even more of a boost, particularly at Harvard.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Generally if an Ivy League (or NESCAC) kid gets an academic achievement award or scholarship award or scholarship, it shows up in income or some other manner in the financial aid process the next year and the next year need-based award is then decreased - so net-net you end up paying the same. .

Not in all cases. For example if you are full pay, you will still be full pay, and the student has the award money in her pocket on top.

The real value in many of these awards is the doors it opens for future opportunities.

 

[frozenfeet]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Okay…while that is all really interesting and…yawn…not what I was looking for. So I will take the more direct route.

Does this process of giving aid (as an alternative to athletic scholarships) present the possibility to where as these intuitions… with their virtually unlimited endowments… could conceivably present a scenario that could provide for all players to be fully awarded full rides in contrast to the limits set by the NCAA…thus giving them an unfair advantage? Potentially that is? Maybe?

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

okay…while that is all really interesting and…yawn…not what i was looking for. So i will take the more direct route.

Does this process of giving aid (as an alternative to athletic scholarships) present the possibility to where as these intuitions… with their virtually unlimited endowments… could conceivably present a scenario that could provide for all players to be fully awarded full rides in contrast to the limits set by the ncaa…thus giving them an unfair advantage? Potentially that is? Maybe?

No!

 

[robertearle]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Okay…while that is all really interesting and…yawn…not what I was looking for. So I will take the more direct route.

Does this process of giving aid (as an alternative to athletic scholarships) present the possibility to where as these intuitions… with their virtually unlimited endowments… could conceivably present a scenario that could provide for all players to be fully awarded full rides in contrast to the limits set by the NCAA…thus giving them an unfair advantage? Potentially that is? Maybe?

Interesting question, the answer to which I have no idea.

But it brings to mind the 'non-Ivy League' related question. Can a half-scholarship athlete apply for and get financial aid for the 'other' half? And if so, doesn't that start to amount to effectively the same thing as what your question suggests? Again, no idea at all what the answers are.

(And I asked this question yesterday: why do Ivy League schools not offer plain old scholarships in the first place?)

 

[D2D]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Okay…while that is all really interesting and…yawn…not what I was looking for. So I will take the more direct route.

Does this process of giving aid (as an alternative to athletic scholarships) present the possibility to where as these intuitions… with their virtually unlimited endowments… could conceivably present a scenario that could provide for all players to be fully awarded full rides in contrast to the limits set by the NCAA…thus giving them an unfair advantage? Potentially that is? Maybe?

Harvard has increased its financial aid packages in recent years as this article explains: http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2013/03/financial-aid-budget-increases-by-10m/

However, note that athletes are not treated any differently than other applicants/students who do not play any sports. To give all athletes (including women's hockey players) 100% financial aid would mean they would need to give ALL students 100% financial aid. Obviously if they did that (which they never would) their substantial endowment would gradually go to zero and after a number of years the school would be no more.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

We need more skill up front. Sam Reber had a disappointing season as far as I was concerned. She could have and should have done more.

I agree with charlieconway and dave1381 that you are being quite unfairly harsh wrt Reber. By any objective measure she had an excellent season. It should be hard to complain about any player in the Top 15 in the ECAC in points, especially one who does not have the obvious natural gifts of a Babstock, Saulnier, Rattray et al.

Comparing her 13-14 production more directly to other Harvard forward predecessors, she's also done remarkably well. She posted more points than Buesser and Wilson did in their senior years, and more than Ryabkina ever achieved in any season. Buesser and Wilson only ever topped her output once. Otherwise, since 2006, only Vaillancourt and Brine (all 4 years), Dempsey (twice), and Fry (twice) ever achieved more points-wise than Reber until Crowe and D'Oench outpaced her this season--and I don't think too many would argue that she has comparable natural scoring gifts to those players. She also has not had the luxury of playing alongside an Olympian or Kaz nominee.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

However, note that athletes are not treated any differently than other applicants/students who do not play any sports. To give all athletes (including women's hockey players) 100% financial aid would mean they would need to give ALL students 100% financial aid. Obviously if they did that (which they never would) their substantial endowment would gradually go to zero and after a number of years the school would be no more.

That's certainly true of all other universities. However, Harvard's endowment is so large (over $32 billion) that they probably could stop charging tuition and pay full room and board for all of its students (and definitely could for all undergraduates) if it wanted to.

 

[D2D]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

That's certainly true of all other universities. However, Harvard's endowment is so large (over $32 billion) that they probably could stop charging tuition and pay full room and board for all of its students (and definitely could for all undergraduates) if it wanted to.

Harvard's endowment would certainly last longer than any other school's but you would need to do the math and make some assumptions on investment returns before concluding that it would never run out. In fact with no incoming tuition revenue I doubt it could last indefinitely, assuming Harvard would continue to invest in its future in order to maintain its status as one of the more elite universities in the world (and I think that goes without saying). And the size of endowments doesn't always go up - didn't Harvard's shrink by something like $10 billion in the last financial crises, even with all that tuition revenue coming in?