To the Editor:
In response to the May 2 article in The Dartmouth "Ivy League Reconsiders Role of Athletics in Admissions," it is often forgotten, in the ongoing debate on Ivy League campuses about athletics in admissions, that athletics are the only pursuits in which the Ivy League schools are flat-out mediocre. For instance, Ivy League colleges boast, as a whole, some of the best undergraduate students in every field, as well as some of the very best undergraduate newspapers, orchestras, debate teams, etc.
But, in most sports -- and almost all high profile sports such as basketball, baseball, and football -- the Ivy League pales with respect to other colleges. Athletics is the only pursuit on Ivy League campuses where this can happen. The Ivies have two options for eliminating this last bastion of mediocrity from their campuses. One option would be to become like Stanford -- where by disregarding academic concerns in admitting athletes, the admissions office has made the level of athletic talent commensurate with the rest of the student body's academic and extra-curricular talent. The other option would be to eliminate athletic recruiting altogether and have teams composed of walk-ons; under this system, most teams would compete at the Division III level.
Both of these courses of action would entail a radical but necessary shift in a well-established system. The Ivy League's undergraduate mathematicians, poets, journalists, musicians, etc., are among the very best in the nation. There is no good reason why there should be a large group of Ivy League students who are less than excellent, as, sadly, many Ivy League athletes currently are. There is a place for well-rounded students on Ivy League campuses -- but not when well-rounded means mediocre at a variety of activities.
