WILL THEY?

Coach Sanford, of Rutgers, made a rather startling statement at the meeting of football coaches held recently in New York. He advocated a modification of the rules that would permit the coaches to be on the field, in an advantageous position, so as to direct the play of their respective teams. "I am strongly for it," he said, "because it would tell just how much the coaches knew. No longer would they be able to put the blame on the quarterbacks when things went wrong."

We hold no brief against Coach Sanford, but we do feel that his statement is evidence that the various accusations against modern football are not totally unfounded. When football reaches the stage where it is simply a demonstration of how much the rival coaches know, it ceases to be a sport; it is a trade. In a game where two opponents merely direct their respective machines the frequently used term "Gridiron Battle" assumes a grim reality of meaning. Individual initiative on the part of the players is no longer desirable, but on the contrary positively dangerous: it might interfere with the coach's plan.

Of course this suggestion is not to be taken seriously. Football is conducted, or should be by and for the undergraduates of a college. It is their game. Coaches and graduates have a share in it just so far as the college body desires; beyond that point they may go, but they open themselves to justifiable criticism if they trespass. This is the fundamental principle upon which college coaching bodies are builded. Although this may not be particularly apparent from a superficial survey of existing systems, yet in any game overstepping of the limits would bring quick enough reprimand. The general feeling now prevalent among coaches, that the game has a slight tendency towards professionalism et. al., is ground for believing that there will be no trespassing.