“We’ve Got To Go For It”

Retiring athletic director Dick Jaeger '59 assesses the state of recruiting and Dartmouth's place in the Ivy League.

AS A FRESHMAN IN THE FALL OF 1955, he was cut from the Dartmouth basketball team. As a sophomore, he was cut from the baseball team. After his junior year, he left the football team, in part because of a leg injury. Now, nearly 50 years later, Dick Jaeger '59 is retiring as Dartmouth's athletic director, and it's pretty clear why: He finally wants to end something related to Dartmouth sports on his own terms.

Yet for whatever staying power Jaeger lacked as an athlete, he has not wanted for endurance as an administrator. He started working for the College in 1964, first spending 25 years in admissions before serving as athletic director for the last 13 years.

Before Jaeger cut himself from Dartmouth in June, Dartmouth Alumni Magazine took the opportunity to talk with him about the state of Dartmouth sports:

What's the greatest challenge to recruiting top athletes to Dartmouth?

It's the admissions guidelines and the objective data our coaches have to deal with. The academic index [a rating system used by Ivy League schools that combines standardized test scores and class rank] makes it very, very tough. In terms of the overall student profile of the classes at Dartmouth, we are very much high up there in the company of Harvard, Yale and Princeton. And that means that when our coaches go out and recruit and have to think of the numbers they have to hit [to conform to the academic index], they're going head-to-head with the Big Three. In all my years at Dartmouth, in admissions and in athletics, when you go against the Big Three, you certainly don't even get half of the students who have also been admitted to the other schools.

What can Dartmouth do to position itself better against the Big Three?

We have to sell the Dartmouth Plan and our location and our way of doing things, our way of life, our style. But as long as we have so many things we're trying to accomplish in building a class—admitting athletes being just one of them—the numbers are going to be tight. We have fewer admissions slots for athletes in just about every sport than any other Ivy League school. That means our talent pool is stretched more thinly.

Should the admissions departmentgive athletes more of a break?

Selfishly, I would like to see that happen. I say that in my position as AD, but also in my position as an alum who wants us to be more successful in a greater range of sports. If we're going to offer 34 sports and we want to do well, if we're asking kids to make a total commitment to success, if we value passionately having a

first-rate athletic program—the way Princeton appears to—then we've got to go for it. We've got to go for the extra kid here and there.

Yet Ivy League athletic directors arecurrently studying the effect of recruiting fewer athletes, specificallygoing from 35 to 25 football recruitsper year. Would 25 be a mistake?

I think we're about as low as we can go right now. Maybe we can go down five per year. Maybe we can make it work, as long as there is a quid pro quo that each school has access to some of the athletes in the lower bands of the academic index. I'm not saying take someone who doesn't have a solid IQ. I'm saying some of those borderline candidates are the ones who have a track record through the years of being able to get it done. They're the ones who make the difference between being modestly good and being really good.

The authors of The Came of Life, abook that's stirred debate recently, argue that recruiting athletes from lower academic bands drags down theacademic profile of Ivy League schools.Is that a fair criticism?

Even having been in admissions for a long time I still have a problem with objective profiling. I still go back to: What kind of human beings are we dealing with? I've seen kids—and I can call them that because of my age—who got in here with modest credentials. But, boy, they were burners from the moment they hit campus. And now they're doing remarkably well in society and their professions, in their careers, in their communities. Hell, I get revved up about this stuff.

Dartmouth has its success stories nowwith a lot of the women's sports—soccer, hockey, lacrosse. Meanwhile, thetwo highest-profile men's sports, football and basketball, have struggled. Hasthe success of women's sports come atthe expense of men's sports?

The basic issue is really finding more resources across the board rather than robbing Peter to pay Paul. I'm not about to jump into that one and say, "Oh, we shortchange the men and gave a shot to the women." We just gave a shot to the women, which they had not had before. We knew we were legally mandated and morally obligated to start giving similar opportunities to our women's teams. And that's what we've done.

So what's the problem with football?

The main development I've observed is related to the academic index. We had our class indices go higher and higher, and it meant we could no longer fish in different pools from Harvard, Yale and Princeton. It meant we were right in there with them. And when you fight those battles whether it's for a squash player, a debater, a bassoonist or a football star—you're only going to win about 20 or 30 percent. That's always the way it's been and that's always the way it will be. Parents are comparison shoppers. They can look at things like resources and facilities and see a difference.

Let's talk facilities. If I could give yousome dynamite right now to blow upone field or building, where would youstick it?

Right here [in Alumni Gym]. Now, wait a minute, you said you'd give me the block of dynamite. What about the money to rebuild?

You're not hitting me up for a donation, are you?

I don't want to blow up what we have until we've got the dough to replace it. We've got some wonderful plans for a recreation center and the renovation of Alumni Gym. But it depends on the resources and on how those needs blend with all the other needs the College has. Right now we don't have those resources, and I'm still sitting here in a building that was built in 1911.

Nevertheless, U.S. News & World Report recently named Dartmouth to itsTop 20 list of best college athleticprograms. If Dartmouth wants to remain at that level, what's the most important quality your successor mustbring to this job?

Really it boils down to patience and perseverence. It would be nice to be a George Steinbrenner, who can wheel and deal and buy and sell, but you can't. This is a collegial situation with a lot of bureaucratic Checkpoint Charlies. That's the way institutions work. In order to get what you need you have to be diplomatic.

What if I made you Grand RulerSupreme of Dartmouth College, andyou got to change one thing, no questions asked. What would you do?

I'm tempted to say something about facilites or something about resources. But if I could just give our coaches one extra wildcard with admissions, that's what I'd like. We've shown over the years, being the country cousins of the league, that we can make do with less when it comes to facilities and resources. But when we are able to get the real quality student-athletes—an extra one here, an extra one there, a special talent—that's when we've mounted a charge, won a league, gone undefeated.

Okay, you've been at this 13 years.Let's run through some quick superlatives. Greatest success?

Being able to create a good, family-friendly, open-door atmosphere around here.

Greatest failure?

You have to say no a heck of a lot more than you say yes, and that's depressing.

Greatest change?

The growing complexity of getting things done because of all the other offices, individuals and departments that are involved in decision-making.

Greatest constant?

The commitment on the part of the student-athletes. They're amazing kids. They're very special people. I've had the pleasure of watching generations of Dartmouth students rise to prominence and productivity. I just marvel at what they've achieved both at Dartmouth and after Dartmouth. That's the greatest thrill.

Dick Jaeger

BRAD PARKS is a sportswriter for The Newark Star-Ledger in New Jersey.