Ohio State tried its first dose of Ivy League "altruism" last week, and didn't like it. The Faculty Council of the nation's leading football (and basketball) power voted 28 to 25 not to allow its magnificent eleven to accept a bid to the Rose Bowl, after which, as any fool could have predicted, all hell broke loose in Columbus.

According to a source at Ohio State, the primary reason for the Council's decision was that a bowl trip would cause a certain amount of disruption among the student body. But lurking in the background was the sentiment of many professors that the university's image was suffering from the success of its athletic teams; to some, it was a matter for acute embarrassment that Ohio State annually tops the country in football attendance.

Students Riot

The students, being students, rioted. Coach Woody Hayes, preparing to address an alumni group in Cleveland, practically disintegrated when he heard the news of the decision. Later, Hayes voiced his extreme disappointment, although he said that the Faculty Council had a right to its opinions. Hayes suspected his long-standing personal enemy, alumni secretary Jack Fuller, of dirty work, and he was upset that his seniors would not be rewarded for their efforts.

No one, however, was as infuriated as the players. The decision was exceptionally unpleasant for them, since they had won the right to play in the Rose Bowl and had been invited, only to have their own school turn them down. The team added greatly to the school's prestige, and engendered quite a bit of alumni interest that undoubtedly would not have existed otherwise; the Council's misguided altruism seemed like an unfeeling insult. What are the players supposed to do now? Study?

Ivy League Approach

In short, the Faculty Council's move was uncalled-for and unnecessary; in its own, exaggerated way, it was a fairly accurate parody of the Ivy League's approach to intercollegiate athletics.

Ohio State had, this year as always, honestly and openly recruited a tremendously able football team. No one at the school will deny that a concerted effort is made to find good football players, and to interest them in Ohio State. This method--recruiting athletes as athletes--may not agree with some people's sensibilities, but at least it's honest.

Once the players take the field, it becomes insignificant who they are or how they got there. Then only the game is important. And this fall's Ohio State eleven was beautiful to watch. Compiling a 9-0-1 record, the team was a masterpiece, painstakingly put together by the best recruiters in the business; it was a team all Ohio could take pride in.

How stupid it seems, after all that work, for the Faculty Council to refuse to send the team to the Rose Bowl. The team was created with the avowed purpose of being the best in the nation; what sense does it make to pull up short? And this decision almost certainly will never be repeated. By Bowl time next year, the Big Ten will probably have signed a pact agreeing to send its champion to Pasadena, and Ohio State will definitely yield to the omniscience of the Big Ten as a whole.

Thus the Council's move was simply a feeble effort to put a respectable face on things. The parallel with the Ivy League is this: it is just as hypocritical for Ohio State to refuse to go to the Rose Bowl as it is for Harvard and the Ivies to say they don't recruit (in the "evil" sense of the word).

Harvard Recruitment

Mr. Barnaby in his letter says that his tennis and squash teams are not recruited, and that therefore Harvard does not recruit. But the College does go after football players, and it is quite easy to cite "chapter and verse."

*Walter W. Birge, Jr. '35, president of the Harvard Club of central and southeast Ohio, is the man football captain Pete Hart was talking about when he said in his inauguration speech, "I'd like to thank the guy who recruited me."

Birge revealed last spring, to the consternation of the Admissions Office, that he ripped out the fly-leaves on Harvard Book Awards--generally given for scholarship and character--and presented the volumes in recognition of "other types of ability." "This year I gave them to two scholar-athletes... but it's Harvard's book, and it states exactly what it's given for," Birge said. "There's nothing particularly wrong with it." Or is there?

*The sprawling Harvard Club of Minnesota is widely recognized as one of the most efficient alumni groups in the country. D. Donald Peddie '41, the guiding light of the Club, said, "I like to think I'm doing for Minnesota what Bob Blackman of Dartmouth is doing for the whole country.... He hears of guys, tracks them down, and holds on." Blackman, of course, is one of the most forward athletic recruiters in the business.

Mall Order Campaign

Peddie conducts a mail-order campaign, concentrating to a great extent on athletes: "We use an annual report on Minnesota boys at Harvard to get a foot in the door.... We send it to the boys we have tips on, and then sit back and wait for a nibble," he said last spring. If a boy responds with so much as a thank-you, Peddie said, "We tell the school that so-and-so has expressed an interest in us, which is literally true, even if exaggerated."

There are many other similar examples, far too many to enumerate. When you have alumni doing the admissions work, you're going to have recruiting of athletes. Ohio State and Harvard alumni are pretty hard to tell apart, once they've graduated.

It is totally unrealistic to maintain that Harvard does not recruit, that its alumni do not in fact value athletic ability over other talents. In the past week, two high Administration officials have privately admitted that the College is not true-blue in this respect. And yet, if there should be shame attached to these facts, it should not arise from the premise that recruiting is evil--although perhaps it is. The guilt is that Harvard continues to proclaim its innocence publicly, as in Mr. Barnaby's letter.

This is not to say Harvard should or should not recruit. Rather, it is to suggest that honesty be adopted as a policy for running an athletic program. It is to request that Harvard stop excusing below-par performances by its teams by saying it can't recruit. Of course, admission to Harvard requires intelligence; but there is no immediately evident proof that smart athletes are worse than dumb ones.