The persistent and critical Harvard , John B. Tunis '21, is at it again. His article and ratings of football teams according to degree of professionalism in the recent "Mercury" can in part be compared to Larry Kelley's recent outburst against his Eli Alma Mater.

Both have profited financially on what can wait be called responsible mud slinging and flagrant inaccuracies. Both have and will be criticized for rating personal gain and fame over "verities."

Black Sheep

How the naming pen chanced into the bands of these two black sheep is worth recounting. Harvard's Tunis achieved considerable acclaim years back for a competent and much needed expose of the "tennis bum." Later efforts have been unfortunate. His annual football ratings have been grossly inaccurate, and his attacks on his own college both athletically and academically entirely unwarranted.

Yale's Kelley popped into the literary picture via two well-paying articles in the Saturday Evening Post two autumns ago. Neither inflicted discredit on any but the author, and this only indirectly. His last article in "Look" undoubtedly paid less, but caused considerably more comment . . . all adverse.

In his latest literary attempt, Tunis gives a general survey of football proselyting, and classifies colleges under the following headings: amateur, mostly amateur, mostly professional, admittedly "pro." Harvard falls into the second group with such eminent commercialized teams as Stanford, Nebraska, and Minnesota.

Brilliant Imagination

Evidently because of the Crimson's repued "holier than Thou" attitude, Tunis takes special delight and particular pains in lifting the cover from Harvard's gridiron cess-pool. His generalizations are basically true, his interpretations inexcusable. His single concrete example is a wonderful product of unbridled imagination.

He cites the case of Jack H. As far as anyone can tell, Tunis is referring to Jack Haley, who received financial aid from 29 alumni. What Tunis failed to mention was that Haley was declared ineligible at the start of his Senior year, and was forced to resign the captaincy.

Of course, individual players and alumni may violate successfully college regulations against professionalism. However the Haley case and other instances of college intervention are proof that the H.A.A. not only doesn't encourage infraction of the rules but is constantly investigating unethical financial aid.

Justified Aid

Director of Athletics Bill Bingham and the college administration have always and rightfully felt that a student should not be handicapped because of athletic talents. Needy athletes receive the same aid that their similarly situated classmates receive through office, dining hall and other jobs. Reduced rents in the Varsity Club and the boat-house are easily explained under the same principle.

Fortunately the mighty Larry refrained from professionalism charges against Yale and the Ivy League; for to many it has been a source of wonder as to just how Kelley managed to live so kingly an existence at New Haven. Kelley's gripe was aimed at another quarter, the coaches and their barbaric treatment of individual players.

The Great "I Am"

Too often football players are permanently hurt physically by participation; Larry apparently has escaped bodily injury, but his inflated ego is typical of the mental affliction of many college football heroes. In his article in "Look,"' the former Yale player attacks collectively the Ivy League coaches as giants of destruction who ruthlessly send crippled gridders to their doom.

Especially distasteful in his unwarranted aspersions on his college and on Ducky Pond. Both were responsible for Kelley's rise to fame, and their reward has come in the form of odorous publicity. Denials of Kelley's examples have already been heard from some of the supposed victims; other stories approached fantasy through exaggeration.

Modestly Larry disclaims credit for some of the "wisecracks" attributed to him, and in the same modest way recounts one crack he did get off.

Thought I'd die laughing.