Wrong Signal

Aside from the actual proposals presented in the Student Council's report on athletics, the Athletic Committee's reasoning was poor, misleading, and harmful. The Committee made serious but vague charges about football coaching and administration, based on the simple statement that some athletes had complaints. Nowhere in the report is the degree of the investigation noted. Nowhere is the reader told how many men were interviewed before a decision was reached, and nowhere is he told what sort of sample was taken. He is not told how many people thought the coaching was "impersonal and inadequate." This is a serious charge to be made so lightly, particularly since the Harvard athletic plant has always been considered manned by one of the finest coaching staffs in the country.

These charges quickly spread a wrong impression of the athletic situation. Boston papers and the Associated Press grabbled the repot for stories on widespread dissatisfaction. These stories did much harm, for they pictured a chaotic athletic situation that would hardly be enticing for an athlete thinking of coming to Harvard. And, considering the vague basis for the charges of "dissatisfaction," the report cannot be used as the basis for practical policies.

The much-discussed football problem lies deeper than the surface dissatisfactions and recommendations mentioned in the Council report. It requires an affirmation of the amateur position of football in colleges, and a new policy of attracting and admitting generally excellent students to the College.