Tradition as 87 eloquently stated is much different for alumni and students. The logic applies just as aptly to the PL. I fondly remember the late 90s thru mid 2000s and view our current situation through that lens. Students and recent alums do not. They have only seen a rather parochial conference with a occasionally interesting title race with no national relevance whatsoever. Are we then really any different now in football than the NEC? No. Our question is whether PL will take the steps necessary to regain a national presence as something better than a 1st round cupcake. Obviously, the first steps must be by individual schools to provide admin support, adequate funding and competent coaching. Those alone will not elevate our conference. PL must also act to modify its self imposed rules to at least in part even the playing field for football nationally. Our academic requirements are what they are and not an issue we should compromise. That said. The AI floor likely will always be with us. I dont see banding as a necessary complement at least in football. PL redshirting rules need to be modified to at least permit a limited number of NCAA redshirts. The PL rule is ,in part, a sop to our Ivy past and a cost saving tool for certain schools. We are no longer the Ivy Lite League and should stop dragging that history with us inasmuch as it serves only to diminish our competitiveness without serving any actual purpose.