Contention over Ivy football rules

Although every other Princeton sport competes in the postseason, football, a Division I-AA sport, must content itself with contesting only for an Ivy League championship.

In 1951, the emerging coalition of Ivy League athletic programs adopted an eight-point code of amateurism to govern its collegiate football teams. In addition to restricting recruiting methods and prohibiting spring practice, the Ivy presidents excluded postseason play.

Although most of these restrictions have become more palliative over time, one of the resolutions that the President's Council has most adamantly refused to ease is the one regarding postseason competition.

"I would not be in favor of postseason play," President Tilghman said. "I think football is a very good example of a sport where by virtue of the fact that we only compete within the Ivy League we can constrain the kind of outside influences that have affected college athletics, and in particular, football, in lots of other conferences."

The issue is still a bone of contention among league administrators and within Princeton.

"Clearly the devil is in the details," Princeton Director of Athletics Gary Walters '67 said. "Many of the current presidents continue to focus on concerns that in part have been addressed and may have less relevance today with the advent of Division I-AA. Significantly, the Patriot League, who embraces our educational and athletic philosophy and who provides the bulk of our non-league schedule, not only participates in the playoffs but also saw a team advance to the national championship game a year ago. They don't feel that the education mission is corrupted by such involvement."

The primary logistical concern for the presidents is the conflict between exam periods and the 16-team Division I-AA single-elimination championship bracket.

"While the possible conflict with exams is clearly a very legitimate consideration, it is one that we have been able to successfully negotiate with our academic authorities for other teams in postseason play," Walters said. "Consequently, you get into an issue related to equity."

Equity is the rallying cry for football coaches who want their teams to be eligible for the postseason.

"I just don't see how they can justify not having it when every other sport in the league can go," Princeton head football coach Roger Hughes said. "Certainly if they want football to be treated like all the other sports, they should treat it like all the other sports and have post season play. I just don't see a logical reason why not to have it."

There is disagreement on the subject elsewhere in the league.

"Those of us who are in the administrative committee — athletic directors — and policy committee — deans — who are sensitive to the educational mission of our respective institutions feel that this is one of those areas where reasonable people can disagree with regard to the status quo on postseason play for football, understanding that the presidents have ultimate responsibility for athletic policy," Walters said.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Ivy League administrators are still concerned that the added pressure of gaining postseason berths could potentially compromise scholastic performance. However, Harvard and Penn are currently No. 16 and No. 20, respectively, in Division I-AA rankings. They have achieved a level of on-field distinction while maintaining their educational principles. Either team might provide a compelling postseason story if they were not confined by Ivy League rules.

"If you have sports competing nationally, then you have to be competitive," Hughes said. "So maybe [the presidents] are afraid that if the playoffs are there, then the want of alums to excel in the playoffs would put some pressure on the administrations to do things differently. But clearly what we're doing now is working if we have two teams ranked in the top 20, and it would be great to see us get a chance to play."

Students in every activity at Princeton are encouraged to pursue them to the fullest of their interest and ability. Football players and coaches argue their sport should not be held to a different standard than other sports or other student activities and that an additional game or two in the playoffs would augment their college experience.

"It's been an ongoing struggle for the coaches to try to get representation in the NCAA tournament," Penn head coach Al Bagnoli said. "We're very disappointed because I think we would be very good representatives. Whoever wins the Ivy League is a pretty good football team and an excellent academic team and should be able to compete on the national level."

Division I-AA football is already constrained in comparison to Division I-A, and Ivy League football imposes even more restrictions. The Ivy League only permits its football teams to schedule 10 games per season while all other schools are allowed to participate in 11. Pending legislation before the NCAA may soon give other schools permission to compete in 12 games, putting the Ivies further behind the curve.

This summer, the Ivy football coaches lobbied the athletic directors to present the issue of postseason competition to the President's Council again, Walters said. The issue will be brought to the presidents in the spring. In the past, similar proposals have graced the council's agenda every four to five years, but each has been turned away.

"The presidents have been very firm in their position that the appropriate thing for football is to stay within the Ivy League," Tilghman said. "No one in the three years I've been going to these meetings has ever raised the possibility of postseason play."

In the end, the power to make a policy shift resides with the Ivy League presidents, but the impetus for any change must come from the league's administrators and alumni. If they are unable to convince the President's Council that postseason football will not open the doors to corruption, the status quo will remain.