2004 Harvard–Yale prank
American football prank
At the annual Harvard–Yale football game on November 20, 2004, Yale students, costumed as a Harvard "pep squad", distributed placards to Harvard fans for a card stunt. When the fans raised the placards together, they read "We Suck".
The practical joke was conceived of and coordinated by Michael Kai and David Aulicino, two Yale students in the class of 2005, and was executed with the help of 20 classmates. The perpetrators handed crimson-and-white placards to fans in the central area of the Harvard side of the stadium—mostly Harvard alumni, with a few faculty, students, and others. The group told the crowd that, by lifting the placards, they would spell "Go Harvard".
Most Harvard students were sitting in a section off to the side of the alumni area where the prank was executed, and they left the stands unaware of the prank; however, players on the field did see the placards.
Response
Initially, many at Harvard denied that the prank had happened. In response, Yale students registered the domain name "harvardsucks.org" (as well as "yalesucks.org" in a preemptive move) and posted a video detailing their efforts. Chuck Sullivan, Harvard's director of athletic communications, said, "[It was] all in good fun." In an interview with The Harvard Crimson, the prank's organizers claimed that members of the Harvard Band were complicit with the Yale pranksters.
Media and internet coverage
The prank was covered by newspapers, radio programs, Jimmy Kimmel Live!, MSNBC, and several other TV shows.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “2004 Harvard–Yale prank” as american football prank. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as american football prank. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 20, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4602841. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2004 and 2005.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “2004 Harvard–Yale prank”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow 2004 Harvard–Yale prank primary sources, 2004 Harvard–Yale prank archive and Harvard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “2004 Harvard–Yale prank”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “2004 Harvard–Yale prank” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.