"Football was played at Harvard long before there were any contests between he colleges. Intercollegiate games were gotten up merely as an added enjoyment, not to make the game itself enjoyable; and intercollegiate games were also usually enjoyed in the same spirit as were the scrub games, as I can testify from having played in a Harvard McGill game.
Unorganized Playing Difficult
"I am perfectly well aware of the technical difficulties in playing the modern game without being organized as a team, so highly developed have become the tactics and science of the game. Nevertheless, these difficulties could be gotten over if college students really enjoyed and really wanted to play the game. Where are the young graduates who so enjoyed the game and why don't they organize teams and play it as they used to play it shortly after leaving college? Such lack of playing by those not on college teams does not speak for enjoyment of the game. Still, if a decisive answer is desired, the question must be left open until a systematic inquiry has been made of a large number of players, preferably during the football season, by experts in such investigation.
George Owen has given adequate reasons as to why college students play the game if they do not enjoy it, and these need not be repeated. He points out that the undergraduate has "a feeling of duty" to his college; does not want to be a "quitter"; that if he has football ability, he is practically commandeered; the fascination of the eclat and glory of being on a college team; the excitement of being in the public eye; and the tremendous publicity and public interest in the game which induces excitement. In the Boston Herald of Saturday morning. November 7, I counted eighteen columns given to football; and this before a single game had been played on that day! It was propaganda to work up interest in the coming games of that afternoon. Of course every one, whether he likes the actual playing or not, enjoys the eclat, the glamor, and the glory; but to enjoy these is not the same thing as enjoying the actual playing of the game, which, includes all the preliminary drudgery, self-sacrifice, and hard work.
As to whether or not the players enjoy the game, I don't believe the undergraduates, nor the graduates, nor the general public care a brass button, any more than the Roman populace cared whether the gladiators enjoyed the game of slaying one another, so long as it was given a "Roman Holiday." Nor any more than the spectators care whether Jack Dempsey or Georges Carpentier enjoy being punched and mauled and knocked out. I find that this is the point of view of those I have asked, and I do not claim to be different from the rest. Nobody cares about the players having fun; it would be well for them to bear that in mind. What we want is that they play for our fun. Football is cock fighting on a grand scale. Whether the birds enjoy the sport they have not yet told us. For these reasons George Owen's point of view will not awaken a general interest beyond an academic one.
"But every one of us should face the facts. It is true that football is not enjoyed by the majority of players, then face the fact that it is not a sport for them but only for the professional coaches and the spectators. What the 50,000 spectators enjoy as a sport is the fight; they want to see their own particular college win. Probably not two per cent, of the spectators can recognize and appreciate what the plays are and how they are made (barring forward passes and punts).
"At the last Harvard-Dartmouth game, as an old 'Varsity' man I had a choice seat amongst younger Harvard graduates. I heard not a single expression of enjoyment of the beautiful plays of the Dartmouth team; only chagrin and disappointment, and abuse of our professional coach.
"When, as a matter of curiosity and to test my theory, I called attention to the fine playing of Dartmouth and suggested that that was enjoyable and well worth seeing, the silence and looks of astonishment on the faces of the Harvard 'grads' were most illuminating. What manner of man was I?, there looks seemed to ask.
"Let every one take up again his 'Tom Brown at Rugby' and reread the account of the game between 'School' and School-House' and then ask himself if he can possibly imagine that account, or anything like it, being written of the present American college game. That game was true sport.
"No; if it is true that the majority of players do not enjoy the game, it is mere idle chatter to speak of modern college football as a sport. It is sport for the spectators, and it is sport for the professional coach who plays his team against a rival coach. But of these I shall write in another communication. And I will try to answer the more important question which the Bulletin asked in its last number: What is the remedy? --if a remedy is really wanted.