Bingham Defends High Cost of Athletics in Annual Report To President Lowell--Traces Growth of Sport in Houses

Replying at length to the critics of the large expenses connected with the conduct of college athletics, W. J. Bingham '16, Director of Athletics, undertakes a strong defense of the financial policies of the Harvard Athletic Association, in his annual report to President Lowell, made public yesterday.

"To conduct intercollegiate and intramural athletics on such a scale (as that at Harvard)", Mr. Bingham writes, "costs money and a great deal of money." He goes on to point out the enormous expansion of the "Athletics for All" program, declaring that "the whole scheme of athletics has changed," and that the new expenses "have added many hundred percent to our requirements." He takes special pains to reject the charge that coaches' salaries are too high.

Mr. Bingham examines the question of charges for the use of athletic facilities and arrives at the conclusion that it may be advisable, in lieu of the present charges for use, to set a fixed fee required of all students, regardless of whether they make use of the facilities or not. After pointing out that only five percent of the income of the Athletic Association is derived from the present charges on students, he says that "if our modest fees keep boys away from the buildings, then we have failed to accomplish our purpose."

In addition to the question of finances, Mr. Bingham discusses the working out of the program of House sports, the problem of non-House residents in athletics, and the scholastic records of intercollegiate athletics.

The important sections of his report follow:

During this year the development of the intramural athletic program has been extremely interesting and highly progressive. Just as Mr. Lowell has never doubted that the "House Plan" would be a scholastic success, because the central idea of the House is the Tutor, so the Athletic Association is equally certain that the success of an intramural program depends on its tutors--who in athletic parlance are called coaches.

Useful as the House buildings are, with easy access to libraries, and with dining halls and common rooms to foster a wholesome social influence, the nerve center of the House always will be the Tutors and the coordinating direction of the Masters. In the matter of intramural athletics it has been the aim of our department not merely to provide gymnasia, playing fields, rowing facilities, squash and tennis courts, and to attract as many students as possible, but to interest them in exercising regularly. It is here we too are satisfied that the answer is the coach. The coach of an intercollegiate team is almost always an expert in the sport he is teaching. The coach of less formal teams is usually a man trained in several sports, but who has not been outstanding in any one. If this man is a real leader, and these are the men we try to find, he stimulates an interest in the sport. The problem in the past was to understand why many boys reported for our intramural teams only to remain a few days and then drop out. We are now more than ever convinced that the spirit, guidance and teaching through properly se- lected coaches point to the right road of success for all intramural athletics.

Many educators are of the opinion that the ideal in athletics is intramural, and can see no benefits from intercollegiate competition, whereas it should be obvious that both have a very proper place in the College. With the experience I have had in athletic administration I am convinced that the essential difference between the two is only one of attitude. We have no purely intramural teams at Harvard, because our intramural teams enjoy numerous informal contests with other institutions. It is equally true that many of our intercollegiate teams look forward to games with teams within the college. But the attitude of each group is quite different. The intercollegiate group is composed of what we might call our "A" athletic students. Performing well is what thrills them most, and they, therefore, derive real pleasure from practice sessions. On the other hand, the intramural athlete does not want to practice. It matters little that he makes errors; his fun comes from playing, and on the days of a practice session he seldom appears. To interest the intramural athlete, then, you must schedule almost twice as many games for his teams as you arrange for the intercollegiate group, a practice commonly referred to as "overemphasis" in intercollegiate sport.

Athletic Autonomy of the Houses

Two years ago a committee of the Student Council presented a report on inter-House athletics. In general the conduct of inter-House athletics during the past year has followed the procedure recommended in that report. Even as the Houses were to be permitted to develop other extra-curricula activities in their own way, we in the Athletic Department were anxious to see as much autonomy as possible in the evolution of an inter-House athletic program. The changes in and the additions to the program, made necessary by experience, were affected not by the Harvard Athletic Association, but by the Inter-House Athletic Committee.

This committee, composed of one student representative from each of the seven Houses, formulated the policies used in the conduct of House athletics. During the fall this committee of seven supervised all sports, but the problems which arose were so numerous and so varied that it was agreed to organize Inter-House Sport Committees to attend to the details of the different sports.

The Role of the H.A.A.

To assure close cooperation between the House teams and the Harvard Athletic Association in such matters as equipment, playing area and coaches, and in accordance with the suggestion of the Student Council, I appointed the Director of Intra-mural Athletics, Adolph W. Samborski '25, to be Secretary of the House Athletic Committee. In the administration of House athletics Mr. Samborski has no instructions from us, other than to offer his experience to help the House Committee. On the other hand, he does not knowingly allow a House to default in athletics because of the improper selection of an unqualified representative of a particular House. When such a condition exists he calls it to the attention of the House Master or Head Tutor, and usually another man is named to the Committee. The important thing in that we have tried to have the Houses run their athletic programs as they want to run them.

Upperclassmen who are not residing in the Houses have found it difficult to adjust themselves to the inter-House athletic program. This group is represented in the various sports. Aptly named the "Ramblers" because of no definite House allegiance, the very question that at once arises is, should they be represented in the House leagues? The Houses which would exclude them point out that they are a different unit, and would disrupt the homogeneity of the House leagues. On the other hand, they are classmates of the men living in the Houses. Their numbers are not large enough to form an independent league, and often through no fault of their own they are deprived of House residence. After the Yale "College Plan" is under way perhaps we may find a mutual solution to obtain competition for the "Ramblers."

Competition With Yale

For several years our winning class teams have played the winning class teams at Yale. With the advent of the House it seemed wise to discontinue class athletics, and this past year the winning House teams have competed against the winning Class teams at Yale. Within the next few years Yale will abolish class athletics, after which time we hope to have our winning House teams compete against the winning College teams at Yale.

In permitting boys to compete in some of our more energetic team sports there is a serious question as to how far we should expand our inter-House program. Intercollegiate sport teams demand real supervision, because to make the team a boy must subject himself to the rigors and discipline of training. We require, of course, a physical and medical examination for all who take part in inter-House athletics, but the training requirements are not compulsory, with the result that these boys are not in as good physical condition as are intercollegiate athletes. Often in House football we have been worried about the physical condition of a boy who apparently seemed all right when the game started but who had to be removed from the game after ten minutes of play because of physical fatigue. It is, therefore, not as simple as it sounds "to give the game back to the boys to conduct as they wish," for too often their wishes are not equal to their physical strength.

The Cost of Athletics

House athletics is only one phase of our intramural program. Other intramural activities include Freshman dormitory competition, as well as competition for teams from the fraternities, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the Law School, and from the Business School. All of these graduate departments are adjacent to our facilities. In intramural athletics of all kinds the total number of men engaged during the year, with no duplication between sports was 2194.

In a year of depression it is a popular pastime to criticize the amount of money expended by a college on athletics. Obviously to conduct intercollegiate and intramural athletics on such a scale as I have outlined costs money, and a great deal of money. Total figures loom large, and those not familiar with the number competing may well wonder if the $900,000 on the expense side of our ledger can be wisely expended on athletics. Although money paid out by the Athletic Association reaches this large total of $900,000, several major items in this sum cannot be regarded as expenses. Many items of outgo are offset by much larger items on the side of income, and without such expenses there would be either no income or less profit. For guarantees to visiting teams we pay $284,008.98, but teams would not travel from New Haven or any other place to play for nothing, and without such games there would not be the several hundred thousand dollars of income which appears on our books. It cost our teams $40,099.95 to travel last year, but in return we received $52,964.94 from guarantees. The H.A.A. News cost $42,472.95, but from advertising and circulation we received $53,673.88. The training table cost $19,490.55, and the boys eating at the training table paid $17,716.90. It is obvious that there is a wide distinction between money paid out and actual expenses.

Salaries of Coaches

One item invariably attacked is the amount which we spend on coaching. Last year we had 92 coaches, or, allowing for duplication, 02 different individuals. These coaches earned $110,255.53, or an average per coach of $1,778.31. Only four of these coaches received more than $5000, and, contrary to the opinion that a coach is paid as much as the highest salaried professor, not one received more than the lowest salaried professor.

A graduate interested in athletics recently presented a series of ten tables comparing our present day costs with the expenditures on athletics here in 1912. His final conclusion was that if the cost of living had increased 150 per cent since 1912, the cost of conducting athletics in 1932 should not exceed 150 per cent of the 1912 costs.

A Defense of the Cost

If the burdens placed upon the Athletic Association had not increased, and the student enrollment had not grown in large numbers, any ratio measured by rising costs or by any other index might be a very simple formula to follow. Since 1912 the whole scheme of athletics has changed. "Athletics for all" at that time was a mere phrase, and no one dreamed that it would ever reach the reality it had today, not only at Harvard, but at all other colleges. To be compelled to take care of 2194 undergraduates and graduates in the matter of athletic facilities was then unbelievable. Even the number of fields in use, and which must be kept in shape, have added not 150 per cent by many hundred per cent to our requirements. Compulsory training for Freshmen was unheard of. The Harvard Athletic Association was operated mostly by part-time men. The Graduate Treasurer, at the head derived most of his income from the practice of law, and apparently his greatest job was to handle the football tickets in the fall to the satisfaction of the Harvard graduates.

In 1912 the Athletic Association spent no effort as it does today in cooperating with the College in the matter of studies.

Even today the undergraduates resent the modest charge for the use of some of our athletic equipment which is made necessary by these very increased responsibilities which we have assumed. Undergraduates, like other individuals, do not want to pay for anything which they think they should get for nothing. At the present time our income is derived first from gate receipts (mostly football), and second, from charges to the students for the use of certain buildings, the tennis and squash courts, and single scull rowing. From the latter source we receive $44,494.60, which is about 5 per cent of our revenue.

Charging a Fixed Fee

I do not think it is unreasonable to ask students to pay for a part of the cost of operating our buildings and our grounds. The amounts now charged are small in comparison to the expense involved in keeping these buildings open. Many institutions charge their students an athletic assessment whether or not they use the facilities offered. Should we therefore request that a fee be added to the term bill of undergraduates, or should we continue to charge only those who use our buildings? Our aim is not only to point out to Freshmen the value of regular exercise, but to reuire it and to provide the facilities, with the hope that they will want to continue to exercise after their Freshman year. If our modest fees keep boys away from the buildings, then we have failed to accomplish our purpose. It seems to me that we might quite properly charge a fixed fee to all undergraduates, and require graduate students to pay only if they use our facilities.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE REPORT

1. Both intercollegiate and intramural athletics have a proper place under the House Plan.

2. Upperclassmen non-resident in the Houses do not fit into the inter-House athletic program.

3. Despite depression critics, the cost of conducting an athletic program like Harvard's is of necessity large. The "Athletics for All" program and the cost of maintaining all buildings and equipment, formerly borne by the University, have enormously added to the expenses of the Athletic Association.

4. Not a single coach received a salary higher than that of the lowest paid professor.

5. It may be advisable to substitute a blanket compulsory charge for the use of athletic facilities in place of the present fees-for-use system.