While most of the newspapers of the country are deploring the trend towards professionalism in college athletics, the "Chicago Tribune" takes a very different stand. It maintains that the rule preventing a man from playing on a professional team during the summer and on his college team at other times is all wrong. There is no shying at professionalism in this assertion.

To back its claim the "Tribune" declares that there are many high school students who are denied access to a higher learning because they are not allowed the income from professional ball playing. And why not allow them such a privilege? Does not the Rhodes scholarship committees take a broad and sane outlook on this matter in demanding that applicants be of all round development. As for the possibility that a man would become an undergraduate only as an athlete and not as a scholar, a careful scrutiny of scholastic records would determine his sincerity. In short, the present rule is unnatural and unfair. Change it!

It is perfectly true that the distinction between a professional and an amateur athlete is often invisible to the naked eye. We have heard it said that one should be wary of carrying golf clubs for money; that sin makes one a professional golfer. The amateur rules may sound ridiculously strict, but they are not unfair, for the fact is that if there is to be any erring at all it must be on the side of strictness. Sport for sport's sake really does mean something! And this is particularly true of college athletics.

The real backbone to the "Tribune's" argument, however, is its plea for the high school athlete. Consider a star shortstop, who is not wealthy and honestly wants a college degree. Under the present system he can do one of two things: he can play professional ball during the summer, joining the scrubs at college where he will find his exercises and make his friends.

If he is a professional athlete in spirit he will adopt the 'first method, securing his education for which he is thirsting, at the same time avoiding amateur sport with which he has little in common. If he is an amateur he will follow the second plan--hundreds are doing just that--avoiding professional athletics with which he is not in sympathy for the sake of learning and the gain derived from clean sports.

Apparently the "Chicago Tribune" sees no harm in commercializing college athletics; or it has a small opinion of the true worth of an education--both of which ideas are of dubious merit.