| OCR Text |
Show THE FUTURE OF FOOTBALL. (By David Starr Jordan, President of Leland Stanford Junior University.) Following the Interesting discussion that has appeared In these pages on commercialized athletics, I am asked to say a word about Intercollegiate football from the point of view of a college president, one who in his day and generation Ins been an athlete, and who still has faith in the value of all forms of collegiate and most forms of intercollegiate athletics. First, as to the good side of football. foot-ball. As Professor Hiram Corson once observed, "It Is not a lady-like game." It is a rough, virile, unsparing man-making man-making contest, with a distinct lesson In courage, patience, self-control, and co-operation. When played by gentlemen gentle-men it tends to strengthen the instincts in-stincts of a gentleman. When it falls among muckers, no doubt It shows all the features of muckerlsni. Such fate Is not peculiar to football. It overtakes over-takes literature, for example, the drama, and even religion. Those who have played straight football, in honest hon-est teams with honest opponents, all testify to Its value In teaching the many virtues Implied in successful team work. While men are sometimes killed at football, and sometimes maimed for life, such things do not often happen outside of the raw beglnn'ngs of the untrained secondary schools. For these schools, as matters are, football is not well adapted. What Is called the brutality of football Is greatly exaggerated ex-aggerated In current newspaper criticisms. criti-cisms. The number of serious acc'-dents acc'-dents Is scarcely greater proportionally proportion-ally than Is caused by horseback riding, rid-ing, rowing, yachting. swimming, hunting, and other forms of manly exercise, ex-ercise, from which danger can not be wholly excluded. Brutality Is by no means Inherent In football. For that matter, rough play wins no games. Yet we must confess that brutality is sometimes present brutality criminal crimi-nal and beastly. This Indicates the presence of the mucker, the typo or man the very opposite of that which It Is the business of the university to discover and develop. The word "mucker" was Invented at Harvard, and Is usually used to Indicate the kind of man a normal college man ought to despise. There Ins been much discussion ot the possibility of Improving tho game of football by making It more Interesting, Interest-ing, by making It less dangerous, nnd by excluding the possibility of muck-erism. muck-erism. As to tho first and second of these matters the writer has no final opinion. The distinguished athlete-professors, athlete-professors, in whose hands tho forming form-ing of the gamo still lies, seem to be-far be-far from any agreement among them selves. Beyond a doubt, tho elimination of mass plays and the encouragement of end runs, punting, and rush'ng through a scattered field would make tho gamo more Interesting to spectators. specta-tors. The same Interest would nlso b heightened by n distinctive color ot dress on tho two sides, with a big letter let-ter on tho back of each man to distinguish dis-tinguish guard, tackle, quarter-back, md the rest of tho nrmamcnt, ono from another. It is very doubtful whether a more open gamo would be less dangerous. Most serious accidents, occur in the tackling of a swift runner In tho midst of his Interference the very play which Is most Interesting to tho spectators. As matters are, tho gamo is too beefy. There is too great a reward placed on more muscular force and too much stress on tho ability to hammer ham-mer a weak place In tho lino, until at last the weak man gives way. To ram at a player until ho Is Insenslblo puts a premium on a surplus of brawn and a minimum of brains. The remedies for actual brutality or "dirty football" are mainly two: Tho direct penalty, and the elimination through scholarship and other academic aca-demic tests of tho dirty men who mako games "dirty." The direct remedy rem-edy is in the hands of tho umpire. This remedy Is never sure, for tho umpire um-pire does not see everything and sometimes does not try to do so. There are umpires who will think twice before ruling out a member of a powerful team, on whoso good-will futuro chances for umpiring may depend. de-pend. Moreover, thb penalty Is not severe enough. Dirty piny in football stands in the same category as cheating at cards. It shows the offender of-fender to bo a cad, a mucker, a thief, who has no rights in the presence of gentlemen. To bo convicted of dirty football should bar the person In question from all futuro Intercollegiate Intercollegi-ate games. That the innocent might not suffer from the umpire's bad judg-,ment judg-,ment on the moment, there should be some sort of a court of final appeal. In an admirable article, recently .published In "Tho Outlook," Dr. J. ;Wllllam White, of tho University of Pennsylvania said: , "As no other game brings about such close and violent personal contact, con-tact, no other gamo Is so likely to bo complicated and discredited by collisions col-lisions between Individuals whono ethical eth-ical Ideas are undeveloped, or who have not learned tho great football lessons that ought to bo printed and displayed in every team room, viz., that the better students they are the bettor football they will play; that, on the whole, a clean team and a clean gamo are good football policy ns well as good morals and good manners; man-ners; that time sijent In quarreling nnd disputing Is time wasted, and that every moment employed In slugging or calling names, or in unfair play of any sort, lessens tho effectiveness effective-ness of tho Individual player and weakens tho work of tho whole team." But tho proper antidote for mucker-Ism mucker-Ism must rest with tho university nnd Its relation to its own athletic sports. In a recent report the president of Yale University has stated in striking strik-ing phrase that tho great function of tho university is the fixing of standards. stand-ards. By tho. standards which tho university uni-versity sets, all its activities of whatever what-ever sort will In tho long run be affected af-fected nnd determined. An Institution may be caught unawares by an outbreak out-break of parasitic vulgarity. But tho prevalence and persistence of muckerlsni, muck-erlsni, in nthletlc sports or elsewhere. Indicates a mucker college. And in every such case the final responsibility responsibili-ty rests with the Indifference or tho vulgnrlty of the college faculty, with tho lowness of Its standards or Its failuro to fix them at all. It is a recognized fact that many members of our most successful football foot-ball teams, in fact most of the men chosen by our exports for an "All-American "All-American line-up, nro professional or 'semi-professional athletes. That Is, thoy are In the college not for education, educa-tion, but for what they can make out of tho game taking rofesslonal coaches, "rank outsiders," so far as university standards are concerned, through the patriotism of alumni and Interested cltlzonr (largely gamblers, saloon-keepers and promoters) n good many "inducements" can bo offered to the husky boys of tho high schools, and even to the still huskier fellows of no school at all. If tho professor In tho college assumes an attitude of indifference in-difference in these matters, tho "bleacher" set has Its waj; the more scrupulous of the student body are swept aside, although usually in tho majority, and tho team Is fixed for Victory. Vic-tory. An amateur is one who does a certain cer-tain thing because he likes it, his pro- : II fession or avocation lying in some other direction. Amateur sparts are. the play, of men who do not depend cn. sport for a living. A "professional" j is ono who derives his financial support sup-port wholly or in part from tho activity ac-tivity In question. In any lino of nctl- j vity a professional will naturally excel a an amateur. A college exists to do- 1 velop professional excellence in Intel- Jj fectual lines. A college man Is rarely i Intending to become a professional athlete. Tho professional lifo of an nth- leto is short and precarious, and a t college man can do hotter. Collogo sports aro therefore tho by-play of I scholars and of men In training for I creative action. Because thoy are tho t by-plny of men chosen for higher things, thoy havo their chief Interest to tho public. A baseball match of ft college seniors counts for fsr more 4: than a gamo among street gamins; though tho latter may put up tho bettor game. The college men represent repre-sent standards in life. Thoy nro men with a future, and this trait Is, or ought to bo, shown in their games as well as In their themes of Investigation. Investiga-tion. Moreover, tho lntorcol-legiato lntorcol-legiato games involve a comparison com-parison of ideals In institutions, institu-tions, each with its group of loyal partisans. Tho charm of football lies in Its clash of clans. But In tho fact that each clan dearly loves victory, tho parasite of muckerlsni finds Its place. In tho Joy of victory his performance per-formance passes with tho rest ns part of college loyalty. He may win be-causo be-causo ho is a professional, not an amateur; ama-teur; but tho gamo has its interest and importance to collogo folks solely from Its amateur character. Tho ovll is not in professionalism itself. There is no crime in being a j paid athlete; It lies In tho trickery by which professionals masquerade as amateurs, and by which vulgar cads and their vulgar ways aro mado objects ob-jects of worship 'to collogo students, and of tender consideration by college faculties. ' I Tho real remedy Is this: It Is tho duty of tho college to stand for intellectual intel-lectual work and Intellectual excellence; excel-lence; for tho manners and Instincts wo attributo to tho gentleman. If tho collogo has parasites from which it can not free Itself, If it maintains snap courses and departments unworthy un-worthy of Its best ideals, let It debar the students of theso departments from tho football teams. It may bo a useful charity to maintain a night law school, open to all comers. It is wrong to admit this class of students to university privileges, and especially especial-ly In athletics. To do so opens, tho doors to all abuses. Furthermore, the actual standards of tho college should exist In fact as well as In name. Tho man who is gaining nothing intellec- J tually and morally should bo "taken to the edgo of the campus and drop-ped drop-ped off" just ns soon as-that fact ap'-' pears. The professor who neglect's his duty to escape tho execrations of tho bleachers is an accessory In fact; In whatovor tho bleachers may demand. de-mand. Nino-tenths of tho nthletlc parasites remain through neglect on tho part of Individual professors or of scholarship committees to do their own duty In tho matter of upholding standards. As tho work test disposes of tho ordinary tramp, so doc3 the athletic tramp vanish before tho test of scholarship. Yet wtih all vlgllanco and all courage, cour-age, college authorities tiro some times imposed upon. To this end, tho 1 rule that a student going from one I college to another shall not play footj I ball for the first year is a good onol Tho rule that he shall not' play till 1 entrance deficiencies aro mado up is, I also good. Tho rulo that unbroken attendance on classes and attention to' work is tho first of training rules is, (Continued on page 11; THE FUTURE OF FOOTBALL. (Continued from page 8) still better. It is essential to honest football that the player should receive re-ceive no favors In class room markings. mark-ings. To this end, the number of games should be limited. Half a doz- ' en games each season, on Saturdays, not more than hair of these away 4 from home grounds, represents the mcst that a fair student can do and retain his standard In scholarship. A schedule much more strenuous than this Is prima facie evidence of academic acad-emic laxity, which means professionalism. profession-alism. The four-year limit to the career of an academic Is also a wholesome reminder that football Is not the chief end of life. Above all, It must bo Insisted that the final responsibility for university standards, for standards of behavior and standards of honesty, as well as standards of scholarship, must In America Am-erica rest with the university faculty. To deny this responsibility is not to escape from it. The student body is our own creation. The athletes are representative students. In view or this responsibility our attitude In matters mat-ters of athletics should be constructive, construc-tive, not negative. It serves little to "pile up restrictive legislation, to be Ignored In proportion to its severity or Its complexity. It counts little to "flunk out" an occasional illiterate ''football hero." To reject a man I now and then because he got a dollar In his boyhood for a baseball game helps make a liar of the next man. be sure that he is a professional in spirit before you bar him out. One alternative remains. Let the football team become frankly professional. profes-sional. Cast off all deception. Get the best professional coach. Pay him syell and let him have the best men the town and the alumni will pay for. Throw off all restrictions as to previous pre-vious experience and duration of engagement. en-gagement. Let the only regulations be the rules of the game itself. Let the paid team struggle with its rivals on the gridiron In perfectly honest warfare, each known for what it is, and with no masquerate .of amateurism amateur-ism or of academic ideals. Let the rooters root and the faculty cheer If they care to do so. There is no harm in this. It Is nothing more or less than takes place In baseball every ev-ery day, except the "giants" and the "bean-eaters" struggle under the banner ban-ner of individual cities, not of universities. univer-sities. That does not matter. The evil In current football rests not In the hired coaches and hired men, but In academic lying and in the falsification falsifi-cation of our own standards as associations asso-ciations or scholars and of men of honor. No real interest would suffer, because nobody would need act a Ho. Collier's. o |
