[BostonCard]

Harvard has 45 varsity sports. It is okay if some of our sports look more like Harvard than Ohio State.  Harvard is more of a peer school than Ohio State and we are competing with Harvard for top student athletes in many of these cut sports. Football needs a big budget. Fencing doesn't.

Harvard has also had to defend itself against a lawsuit alleging that it systematically discriminates against applicants of Asian descent, during which time it emerged that 43% of White admits to Harvard are legacies, athletes, on the "dean's interest list" or children of faculty and staff, 3/4 of whom probably would not have been admitted otherwise (https://tyleransom.github.io/research/legacyathlete.pdf).  The combination of increased awareness of these facts, the Varsity Blues scandal, increased pressure to diversify the student body (especially in light of the George Floyd killing and subsequent nationwide reckoning) and decreased tolerance for disadvantaging Asian applicants are all at least as important as the cost savings.  I know you think this squarely on Muir'sshoulders, but as you note, the numbers don't add up, the savings are trivial compared to the backlash, and independently raising the money has been turned down by the University, with the Provost responding to inquiries as to why raising the money wouldn't reverse the cuts with "I cannot give you the answers you want".  

I agree with my pediatric colleague that Stanford could raise $580 million if it wanted to, and has done so in the past.  They just don't want to do it to save these sports, which means they don't want the sports "saved".

BC

[BostonCard]

Harvard has 45 varsity sports. It is okay if some of our sports look more like Harvard than Ohio State.  Harvard is more of a peer school than Ohio State and we are competing with Harvard for top student athletes in many of these cut sports. Football needs a big budget. Fencing doesn't.

Harvard has also had to defend itself against a lawsuit alleging that it systematically discriminates against applicants of Asian descent, during which time it emerged that 43% of White admits to Harvard are legacies, athletes, on the "dean's interest list" or children of faculty and staff, 3/4 of whom probably would not have been admitted otherwise (https://tyleransom.github.io/research/legacyathlete.pdf).  The combination of increased awareness of these facts, the Varsity Blues scandal, increased pressure to diversify the student body (especially in light of the George Floyd killing and subsequent nationwide reckoning) and decreased tolerance for disadvantaging Asian applicants are all at least as important as the cost savings.  I know you think this squarely on Muir'sshoulders, but as you note, the numbers don't add up, the savings are trivial compared to the backlash, and independently raising the money has been turned down by the University, with the Provost responding to inquiries as to why raising the money wouldn't reverse the cuts with "I cannot give you the answers you want".  

I agree with my pediatric colleague that Stanford could raise $580 million if it wanted to, and has done so in the past.  They just don't want to do it to save these sports, which means they don't want the sports "saved".

BC