Sometime in the next week or two, Penn's Undergraduate Assembly will likely vote on a proposal calling for University President Amy Gutmann to vote to overturn the Ivy League's ban on postseason play for football.
If the proposal passes, Penn's UA will be in the same company as Princeton and Harvard -- both schools' undergraduate governing bodies have passed similar legislation in recent weeks.
It's no coincidence that these schools are all acting on the most unfair rule in college sports at the same exact time.
The effort was organized by the Ivy Council, a group that brings together student governments from all Ivy League institutions bar Harvard. The point of the Ivy Council is to make it possible for the seven schools' student leaders to voice their opinions as one on issues that are of particular importance on every campus.
It's a noble effort by the group, considering that football is the only sport in the Ancient Eight which is prohibited from participating in an NCAA Tournament.
When asked why this rule is still in place, Ivy presidents -- who make all decisions regarding league-wide athletic policy -- offer responses that range from the absurd ("It's a longstanding rule. Why should we change it now?") to flat-out lies ("The Ivy football playoffs conflict with final exams").
But despite the best efforts of everyone on the UA and other Ivy student governments, these are just not the right people to be leading the charge against the league's unfair policy.
In 2002, the conference passed another unfair athletic policy known as the "seven-week rule." Intended to give athletes more time for academics, the Ivy presidents mandated that all sports teams have seven weeks worth of time off from sports during the school year.
This wasn't a problem for most sports teams, which play for a few months and then take several months off before preparing for a new season. But the rule was a major problem for rowers because the crew season starts in the early fall and doesn't end until June.
So what did Ivy League rowers do?
They protested by wearing black shirts with a crossed-out number seven at every regata. Within a year, the presidents altered the rule.
This is what happens when student-athletes directly affected by an unfair policy speak out against the Ivy presidents.
But in the case of the postseason ban on football, there are no football players involved in fighting this unjust rule.
Instead, this is a case of a bunch of fans trying to bring about change. Unfortunately, it just isn't as convincing.
The Ivy Council should realize that football players are by far the best spokesmen for overturning the rule. All seven student governments should try to find one or two football players who can be point men on this topic.
But the football players are even more to blame here. They all want the ban to go away, and when asked about the proposals passed at Harvard and Princeton, members of the Crimson and the Tigers say they are pleased with the efforts of their student governments.
Yet, for a group of over 100 guys that is used to making stands on the goal line on a regular basis, why don't Penn's football players stand up against this rule?
If the league is arguing that this ban on postseason play is a way of protecting players, it is those players who must argue otherwise.
If the presidents say that the ban is a way of protecting the importance of competition between Ivy League schools, it is the players who must disagree.
What's more powerful?A piece of paper handed to Gutmann, or an entire football team wearing patches against the rule and displaying signs in every stadium reading "Let us play" or even, as some have suggested, boycotting a game?
Again, the UA and the rest of the Ivy Council should be commended for fighting this uphill battle. Coaches, athletic directors and members of the media have tried for years to get the eight Ivy presidents to think logically on this issue.
Ivy football players are smart enough and articulate enough to fight this rule on their own and win. But until they organize against this ban, they don't deserve to play in the postseason.
David Burrick is a senior urban studies major from Short Hills, N.J., and former Senior Sports Editor and Executive Editor of The Daily Pennsylvanian. His e-mail address is dburrick@sas.upenn.edu
