The Daily Pennsylvanian is a student-run nonprofit.

Please support us by disabling your ad blocker on our site.

1102007_stevebilsky_0002_1
Athletic Director, Steve Bilsky, is interviewed. Credit: Julia Ahn , Julia Ahn

A s one of eight Ivy League institutions, Penn is perpetually compared to its peers.

For example, just a few days ago, College Factual ranked Penn as the No. 1 college in the nation. But the U.S News and World Report’s ranking had Penn at No. 8 behind four of its fellow Ivy schools.

On the athletic field, however, there seems to be no need for a comparison or ranking: The Ivy League schools play each other for Ivy titles, and the stats clearly say who is the best — after all, the Ivy League is primarily an athletic conference.

So after the announcement that Columbia Athletic Director M. Dianne Murphy will step down after the 2014-15 academic year, it is easy to look at how Penn has performed in relation to its Empire State rivals.

And when you look at overall titles, Penn seeks out a 31-26 edge since Murphy took over in 2004-05. Look at the decade before Murphy took over (the first 10 years of Steve Bilsky’s tenure as Penn’s AD) and you see that the Red and Blue hold a much more significant 42-13 advantage.

Many questions easily arise from those numbers: Why did Penn win fewer titles? How did Columbia have so much success, at least, numerically compared to prior years? Does any of this actually matter? And how much will the Ivy League miss Murphy?

When looking at Murphy’s tenure, you can see some significant renovations and additions to athletic facilities, including the Campbell Sports Center within the Baker Field complex that houses many of Columbia’s sports.

But compared to Penn, Columbia falls short in terms of athletic facilities.

During his time working in Weightman Hall, Bilsky put together an even more impressive resume of renovations and new fields. Renovations to the Palestra and Franklin Field were complemented by new facilities like Penn Park, Rhodes Field and Meiklejohn Stadium.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention Columbia’s lack of land with which to create new fields, yet Penn still went above and beyond when working on new fields.

Looking at on-the-field success, Columbia caught up to Penn in non-marquee sports while Penn kept its edge in men’s basketball and football titles, something Bilsky used as a metric for success.

The stats say it all. Columbia has won most of its titles in a handful of sports: archery (which Penn doesn’t have), fencing, men’s golf, men’s tennis and baseball. Meanwhile, Penn has won titles in 13 sports that both schools have compared to in 10 sports by Columbia.

And in those marquee sports of football and men’s basketball, Penn has six titles while the Lions haven’t been very close to a title in either sport for the last two decades.

So despite Columbia’s improvements, the Lions don’t quite measure up to Penn over the last decade. That’s not surprising since Penn has historically won more titles. But the gap has gotten smaller.

Could Columbia overtake Penn in Ivy titles in the next decade? All of that truly depends on who takes over its athletic department.

While Grace Calhoun is firmly in place as Penn’s Athletic Director, we probably won’t know Columbia’s next AD until 2015. And Murphy’s legacy in Morningside Heights extends far past wins and losses or the actions of the athletic department.

Regardless of how you think she handled certain issues at Columbia (the Spectator summarized their opinion pretty well), her impact in advancing the Ivy League as one of the eight ADs during the last decade is crucial to remember.

Her successor will have to build upon her success in Ivy championships, improve marquee sports programs and be a steady voice within in the Ancient Eight.

What a comparison.

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.