Well, at least the Ivy League is finally good at something. It only took 400 years.
It's a pretty decent year for Ivy hoops, too, though. In most seasons, Princeton's experienced team would probably be favored to win and be the Ivies' best team. A close win over an ACC opponent would be an upset for sure, but not completely unlikely. (They totally should have beaten NC State earlier in the season, too, but failed to play well enough to lock down a win over the undermanned WolfPack.) This year, however, Harvard has really raised the bar and has a team that can compete in any conference. Harvard beating FSU was a nice win for them, but that is probably a toss up game between to talented teams and not a shocking win (Harvard is rated higher in KenPom). Harvard over Boston College is no surprise at all, as you'd have to guess Harvard would be somewhere between 5-3 in the ACC this year.
Don't fault them for not being able to afford you.
Back to the topic: the New York Times has published a series of articles on the surging competitiveness of Ivy League athletics, and how the institutions have found ways to funnel money to create de facto athletic scholarships on a scale and breadth that (seemingly) had not been in place until recently.
I think it's terrific--and reasonable--that Ivy League basketball should be able to compete outside of itself. But I do not think it's terrific that its top teams should be able to compete with the ACC's mid-level programs. I'll have some cheese with that whine.