OPENING THE DOOR TO ABUSE.

That the best possible managers should be procured for athletic teams is a proposition which no one will deny. The question then arises, how can the best possible men be procured? And the answer is unquestionably by competition, as long as the positions are desirable enough to bring out a good field. Managerships at the University are attractive enough,--with the friendships they promote, the trips, the business training, and the granting of the "H,"--to justify and make practicable their being awarded by competition.

It is only possible to secure the best results when the competitions are on a thoroughly fair basis. The slightest suspicion of partiality throws a shadow over the competition which precludes anyone's going out for it who is not on the "inside." Harvard managerships have recently been run on as equitable a basis as is possible when human beings and not machines are the motivating factors. Undoubtedly, therefore, the best men have been attracted to the competitions and, in a GENERAL WAY, the aim of securing the best men as been realized.

"In a general way" because the point has been raised that several good men might compete for the same position, which only one could get, while another managership contest might be entirely devoid of capable material. For this reason the Student Council and the Athletic Committee have passed the following resolution:

"Voted: That the managers of the five major sport teams, together with the Graduate Treasurer of the Athletic Association, shall form a committee to pass upon the eligibility of experienced men entering a competition late."

The purpose of this is obvious, as indicated above, but the dangers attending such action far outweigh the benefits.

Suppose a man of recognized ability fails to win a managership because he is surpassed by someone of exceptional ability. By the terms of the resolution he may then, by vote of the managers, enter late a competition in another sport which has already started. Having been discussed by the managers, he is a marked man. He enters the new contest under advantageous conditions. This is the first step in introducing partiality. When two or more capable men meet defeat in the first competition, further complications arise. For then, jockeying and bartering will occur among the managers for their further allotment.

Suppose a man who has been injected into a later competition wins it. One such case might have no effect. A second is bound to. Eventually no one will start the later competition. The first competition whose defeated candidates are drafted into and win others will be the only managership to draw competitions. Instead of five major sport competitions, there will be but one. If it is desired to revolutionize the managership system, this might be done, but the advantages of five specialized competitions over one general competition need not be pointed out here. It is enough to show the abuses not only possible but probable in a hybrid of the two systems. Once partiality has crept into managership competition, confidence in them is destroyed and the best men will turn their abilities to cleaner fields.

What, then, can be done to eliminate this possible uncertainty which the recent enactment suggests? In the first place, the managers are not the men to pass upon the eligibility of late entrants. In a small body of six vitally interested men, the temptation to unfair manipulation is too great. The entire Student Council should pass upon the eligibility of late entrants. In so large and representative a body, the influence of personality and extraneous pernicious impulses will be impossible. A limit should also be placed upon the time of entering a competition after it has been started. This limit should be set at not over three weeks. Men entering at that time by the permission of the Student Council would not be seriously handicapped, nor would they be favored by the proselyting which may occur if the decision is left to the managers themselves.