If it seems vaguely discomforting to think that until Harvard's last-minute rally last Saturday, the Crimson was losing by three touchdowns to a squad that had won only one Ivy game in three years, it is even more disturbing to realize that Columbia may have been the easiest opponent Harvard will face for the rest of the season.

If all of this seems fairly strange, it is because this may be the strangest season in Ivy League history. It is the best balanced race of any in the League's 14 years-for the first time there is no acknowledged doormat. Yet there is a strong possibility that the championship will be settled by Halloween, when Yale and Dartmouth meet in New Haven. And this means trouble for the Crimson. A well balanced league is the last thing Harvard needs in a rebuilding year. If everyone is as good as Columbia, and several are better, chances could be slim of improving appreciably last year's dismal 3-6 record.

Things may not be quite that disheartening, however. Although for most of the second half last Saturday it seemed that what was happening to Harvard was a replay of last year's Cornell game, this is not precisely the case. Last fall, the Crimson went to Ithaca with a 2-1 record, a solid defense, and high hopes of retaining the Ivy crown. It came back with its offense permanently stalled, a defense that had been shredded by a one-man attack, and its confidence badly shaken. Needless to say, the season wasn't extremely successful.

It was a slightly different situation last Saturday. Although Harvard entered the game unbeaten, with a defense that ranked second nationally, and an offense that had rolled up 67 points in two games, it was far from a powerhouse. Northeastern and Rutgers were the poorest pair of nonleague teams Harvard has faced in at least a decade. Moreover, Columbia was drastically improved from the squad Harvard destroyed by 50 points last year, and had indicated as much with close game against Princeton two weeks ago. Harvard had no reason to be overconfident. It wasn't. But it may have been unprepared.

The Crimson seemed confused by the Lion sprint-draw style offense. Its secondary had problems with the Jackson-Parks combination through the air, and let one play that should have been stopped at line of scrimmage break for a 32-yard touchdown.

In addition, the Crimson attack wasn't quite ready for a solid defense. Northeastern's line had fallen apart after 30 minutes. Rutgers' wasn't stable even that long. But Columbia played impressively, stalling every Harvard drive until the final minutes of the last quarter. The Lions were much more decisive victors than the 28-21 score indicated.

But despite the unsettling novelty of losing to Columbia, it is unlikely that the Crimson returned to Cambridge in the same state of emotional disarray that marked the aftermath of last year's Cornell game. At that time, when the glories of the 1968 season were still fresh in the squad's mind, every loss came as a shock. That is not the case now. Harvard went to New York knowing that Columbia had a respectable team, and was aware that it lose. And it is apparent that the Crimson realizes that it could lose all of its remaining six games.

So now a victory over unbeaten Cornell this Saturday has become an absolute necessity if Harvard entertains any hopes at all of improving upon its 1969 season. Dartmouth and Yale may be untouchable by anyone, much less the Crimson. Princeton, despite its collapse at Hanover, is still a dangerous squad. Brown is no worse than the team that dumped Harvard at Providence last year. And Penn pushed Cornell all over the field at Ithaca until Ed Marinaro intervened in time to push the Big Red to a slender triumph. Ironically, although the 1970 Harvard team is a little better than its predecessor, it may be hard pressed to do any better.