A FRONT ROW VIEW: Old Ivy rule ends Penn playoff hope

They're 10-0, but there'll be no show. Thanks to a hypocritical Ivy League policy that should be changed. Such is the plight of the 1993 Ivy League gridiron champion Quakers, who finished their perfect regular season ranked 10th in the nation. If it were not for hypocritical Ivy League policies, this ranking would have guaranteed Penn a berth in the 16-team division I-AA playoffs. Yes, football fans, your beloved Quakers may have been gearing up to play in the national semifinals this Saturday if it weren't for Section I-14/I-B Paragraph D of the Ivy Group Agreement, signed by the Ancient Eight presidents in 1954 to prohibit postseason play. Since then, exceptions to this rule have been proposed and accepted by the Ivy presidents for every single sport except football. A formal proposal has never even been made to the Ivy Group to correct this injustice. But, there is no reason to hold the league's football programs – and only the football programs – to a standard that is inconsistent with today's realities. At its inception, and even today, the principle of keeping the world of academia a clear priority in the university world is a noble one. "The initial rationale was to differentiate ourselves as a league," Executive Director of the Ivy Group Jeff Orleans said. However, current and past Ivy administrations have abandoned this principle in other sports in favor of increased endowments, national exposure and the delight of students and alumni everywhere. All that's left is a double standard. The 1993 Quakers are a group of student-athletes who practiced three hours a day from summer's sweltering heat into late fall's frigid and blustery winds, who represented this institution as well as any group of students or alumni ever has, and who gave this entire university community a special sense of pride, unity, and joy on those 10 Saturday afternoons this fall. For this administration and every other administration in the Ivy League to deny this group and others like it the satisfaction of postseason play is unfair. The 1993 Quakers have yet to lose. In fact, they will never lose. Although it will be very enjoyable many years down the road to tell their grandchildren about their perfect campaign, an incomplete feeling will also accompany this season. This team will never know how good they actually were. This team will never know how high they could have raised their abilities or what further challenges they could have risen to meet. Together, they have met every single one so far. Until a team gets beaten, it does not know its limitations. The 1993 Quakers will never know theirs. "I think we would have wanted to see if that No. 10 ranking was a legitimate ranking – to see if we could finish 10th or higher," Penn junior tailback Terrance Stokes said. "It would have been a good test for the Ivy League to see if we're up to par with the rest of the country. I think we would have had a chance." Beyond that, win or lose, the thrill and intensity provided by playoff games is what athletes live for. It would be an ample reward for all the blood and sweat that our student-athletes have contributed over the course of their careers. "I think it's really a shame," sophomore wideout Miles Macik said. "We obviously had a really talented team and it kind of hurts not to be able to see what this team could do." There are several possible reasons for withholding this opportunity from the Ivy League's football champions. The primary reason according to most Ivy administrators is that the championship game this season would be played on Saturday, December 18, (isn't the men's basketball team's home opener that night?) Had an Ivy team advanced that far it could excessively interfere with academics. Football would be the only sport whose season would cover the entire length of a term. All other sports either start late, finish early, or cross over between terms, so as to give the student-athletes a chance to catch up in their classes. But, if team members felt that the time constraints imposed by extending their season would be unbearable, they could always elect not to go. That choice should be made by the athletes and only the athletes. Further, by allowing teams to play in the Division I-AA playoffs, it has been argued that the focus would transfer from winning the Ivy title to gaining the national votes and recognition to be invited to postseason play. Undue emphasis might be given to nonconference schedules. However, if postseason play were allowed, the Ivy champion would probably be extended an automatic bid, thus intensifying the quest for the league championship. Also, the intense rivalries that have developed within this league would more than preserve intense competition throughout the season. I don't think ACC basketball games last season were tarnished by the fact that six teams in that conference were legitimate contenders for the national title. Finally, the fear has been raised that Penn would not be able to compete against the upper echelon scholarship schools that dominate the playoffs. First of all, if sports were decided on paper, the 1979 Quakers would not have travelled all the way down the road to the Final Four, and this season's Phillies would have spent October on the golf course. Second, a possible matchup with the Tar Heels doesn't keep the men's hoops team home during March Madness. Why should the football players stay home in December? Third, it would strengthen Penn's program tremendously to give its athletes the experience of high-level playoff competition. It is difficult to improve without competing against superior competition. The national exposure would also help our coaches' efforts to recruit quality student-athletes for the future. The final reason, and the one that I believe has thus far prevented an Ivy League president from proposing to give football the same rights as every other sport, is that football has become the highest profile, revenue producing and often corrupt sport throughout most of the country. As a result of that status, football programs became the measure of a university's athletic department. Since the Ivy League does not want to be seen in the same light as Division I schools whose identities are wrapped in their sports programs, it has done an injustice to its football programs. The Ivy League has already stepped into the national spotlight in other sports. By not letting football programs go to the playoffs, the Ivy League thinks it can maintain that veil of validity – that it can continue to preach that the world of academia is the only priority in its university world. It can't. The Ivy League has compromised itself in every other sport and in football in eliminating freshman teams and permitting spring practice. The only piece of the veil remaining is postseason play for the Ivy League's football teams. Until one of the league's presidents can accept the reality and understand that the rest of the nation sees through our tattered veil, the individuals being hurt are our student athletes. They are paying a huge price, especially after giving so much. They should be rewarded. Jed Walentas is a College sophomore from New York, N.Y. and a sports writer for the Daily Pennsylvanian.