THE BIG TEN DICTUM

In straightening out its own tainted athletic affairs at Chicago Saturday the Big Ten officials also passed a rule that no Western Conference team can play against an opponent that has not the three year eligibility rule in effect. The Big Ten has had this rule on the statute books for its own teams for quite some time but now it is insisting that every one of its opponents also come up to the same eligibility standards.

That the rule is aimed at the Army especially is obvious because West Point is the only major institution in the country that does not have the above rule in effect at the present time. Army has the three year rule applying to its own institution but does not bar players who have already played three years at some college from being members of the West Point team. Following as it does on the Cagle incident, in which the Army star played right into the hands of the Navy, the institution which is advocating that the Army adopt the three year rule, the decision of the Big Ten is convincing in proving that West Point will, soon have to regulate its standards along with its collegiate rivals or be out of the football picture altogether.

Some colleges, of which Harvard is probably the leading one, do not require their opponents to have the same eligibility rules but only ask strict adherence to any rules that their rival may have. With these colleges Army can keep on playing under its present eligibility system but with the others, among whom all the Big Ten universities are now notable additions, Army can not hope to remain on friendly terms.

Both the facts of the Cagle case and the present dictum from the Middle West are indicative of the fact that the West Point athletic authorities will have to alter their standards in the near future. It is only fair to Army's opponents to do so. Such a change will not only remove an unethical principle from football and keep the Army on good terms with all the universities, but it would also remove the bone of contention from the Army-Navy quarrel and make the resumption of relations between the two service institutions the natural outcome.