The attitude of the University in this whole matter is remarkable. Harvard's top officials are perfectly aware that, whether they like it or not, football has come to be the public identification tag on American universities. Harvard put football on a big-time basis--with the first high-pressure coach, the first big stadium, the first "big game"--and now tht other schools have developed this technique far beyond us, Harvard cannot escape at least some of the consequences.

The admissions office and the scholarship office and the Provost's office knew that a good Harvard showing in the Stanford game would boost our stock immeasurably on the Coast. They added their blessing to the expedition. But they now feel that the loss in that game has cost us years of quiet propagandizing.

Football-Harvard

Football can certainly do a lot for public relations--in fact, the football team in the fall and Valpey in the winter are Harvard's two biggest ambassadors. But football cannot do much for public relations unless we either win or make an excellent losing showing.

The Administration also likes football for its money value. This one sport supports virtually all the others, varsity and intramurals alike, and keeps Harvard's fine "athletics for all" program alive. Without gate receipts at the Stadium, there would be no money to pay for wherries and shells or for squash and tennis courts. Therefore, the people who have to sign checks for upkeep and replacements on Harvard's colossal athletic plant want big names in the Stadium, for big names mean big crowds. There is one flaw in this line of reasoning, however: big name opponents will not draw big crowds as long as Harvard teams lose by large scores. This season's attendance records prove that decisively.

Still, big name opponents that beat us badly draw more people than little schools which we can beat. So the people who sign the checks continue to want big name opponents.

Something for Nothing

If the football team is to fulfill these two functions it means that the players must put in a lot of time and effort which directly benefits Harvard University. But the University is not reciprocating. It is leaning over backwards not to reciprocate, on the apparent premise that any help at all would be subsidization.

This is ridiculous. One non-scholarship student, a member of the Varsity first-string lineup for two years, puts it thus: "Why doesn't Harvard give athletes an even break?" Not athletic scholarships, mind you, nor lowered entrance requirements, nor easy courses: just an even break. The H.A.A. and the Student Employment Office will not guarantee a job--a real job, where you work for the money you get; and the Housing Office will not guarantee a room in the same price bracket throughout a man's college career. Neither of these steps can be called "subsidizing."

Yale, which cannot be accused of "subsidizing" any more than Harvard, does both these things. A member of the Minneapolis Harvard Club told one of the authors this fall that the Yale Club of the same city could offer a prospective Yale student both a steady job and a room at one price during his four years in New Haven. This relatively small guarantee means a lot to a boy who is not sure just how far his finances will go towards paying for college, and who does not know how much college will cost him in toto in the first place. Neither of these aids include any provisions that force a man to play football.

All-Around Loss

We feel that the present football policy at Harvard is unsound, for both financial and prestige reasons. If the administration continues its present policies, we will merely continue to pile up $100,000 deficits and losses to powerhouse teams around the country.

There seem to be two solutions to the present football confusion. The first is to abandon all pretexts that we are a major college football team and play purely New England schools and one or two traditional rivals. The second is to take a positive attitude toward the game which supports all other athletics at Harvard, and do enough promotion work to at least produce a team which is halfway up the Ivy League scale.

If the Administration decides to continue its hyper-hands-off football policy, then certain things must be done. First, we should play only the three traditional Ivy rivals, Yale, Princeton, and Dartmouth, and pad the rest of the schedule with Amherst, Connecticut, and N.Y.U. Under this system we could easily achieve a season record which could always be better than .500. Unfortunately, since Dartmouth, Princeton, and Yale are already out beating the bushes for young football players, we suspect that our traditional rivals will win about 75% of those games.

What the Traffic Will Bear?