(Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications.)

To the Editor of the Crimson:

The report of the Student Council Athletic Committee seems to me to employ the very methods calculated to frustrate its aims.

(1) One of its Principal aims in abolishing all minor sports and most Junior Varsity sports is economy. But the plan would actually increase the expenditures on athletics for more coaches would be necessary to coach nine inter-House teams (including two for the out-of-House group) than to coach one minor sports team. For example the Varsity tennis coach has all he can do now coaching one squad, so how can he be expected to coach nine? At least one additional coach will be necessary--at considerable extra expense. The situation presented by other minor sports is similar.

(2) Another bad feature of the plan is that some minor sports which are to be made inter-House sports will probably die out because of an insufficient number of players in each House to make up a team. For example lacrosse drew only 60 men at the beginning of the year, enough for a Varsity team, but not enough for eight House teams (there being 10 men to a team). The situation in soccer, fencing, wrestling, and rugby is very similar.

(3) The injection of minor sports men and Junior Varsity athletes into the inter-House leagues is bound to squeeze a good many House men off the House teams. Since the Associate Plan has been accepted for next year, the associate members will be added to the House teams and may even overcrowd them. At present there is an excellent division between the good minor sports athletes and the not-so-good House men who play sports for the fun of good exercise. Moreover the plan would make the House teams unbalanced, for there are usually more minor sports athletes in one House than another. For example, there are five out of the first six men on the Varsity tennis team in Eliot House.

(4) Abolishing minor sports would destroy half the initiative and incentive to improvement in athletics. Furthermore, half the fun of playing sports is the outside competition. If economy is necessary, the minor sports schedules could be made shorter and the money saved diverted to Hose athletics if expansion is required there.

For these reasons the plan seems to me to be rash and ill-considered. Langdon P. Marvin, Jr., '41