As one looks over the Harvard football roster for next year, it becomes increasingly apparent that the new Crimson coach- whoever the lucky man may be- will have to be more of a diplomat than a strategist.

With a wealth of talent returning from this year's 7-2 team, the new head man should have little trouble producing a winner in his first season. He may have trouble, though, keeping his players happy.

It is rare that a football coach inherits a team as solid as next year's Crimson squad. Due partly to the fact that John Yovicsin is leaving because of his health and not because of his lack of success, and partly to the fact that Harvard had a great recruiting year in 1969, the incoming coach takes over a young and unusually deep team.

The problem facing the new head coach will not be mustering two strong starting units, but finding the strongest combination of personnel. It is a seemingly enviable task, but in reality it is one which can breed discontent.

Four very important defensive starters- Farneti, Fenton, Frisbie and Doyle- are graduating, but with five starters returning and a covey of more than adequate replacements awaiting the opportunity to move up, the new coach will find most of his troubles on offense.

There again, a lack of talent does not present itself. There were only four seniors- Varney, Freeman, Honick and Miller- Starting on offense at the end of the season. It is on offense, however, that diplomacy becomes essential.

Rather than being confronted with the task of filling the vacated positions, the new coach will instead have to pick among any number of players who think they should be starting- and probably would be on many Ivy League teams.

This problem is especially acute in the backfield, where the primary decision will have to be made at quarterback. Both Rod Foster and Eric Crone are back, and both carry impressive credentials from this year.

Foster nailed down the starting spot before he was injured in the Princeton game, and he still wound up as the team's total offense leader. His 830 yards was the fourth best in modern Harvard history.

While Foster was the team's second-leading rusher, Crone was the better passer, and both accounted for 11 touchdowns during the season.

Choosing between these two is not as pleasurable as it at first appears because someone has to end up on the bench- and chances are he won't like it there.

Before the Yale game. Foster seemed to be able to instill more confidence in the team, and he responded to pressure with more acumen. But since Crone very nearly turned that game into a rout, delineation between them is virtually impossible.

Some people have argued that since Foster is such a threat as a runner, he should move to halfback. This is a necessarily shallow view because it discounts the factors of leadership and performance under pressure.

Another consideration is that Foster has maintained from the outset that he will not play halfback, and he is deadly serious.

Nonetheless, either Crone or Foster is going to have to move or find a seat on the bench. Crone, like Foster, is a strong runner and would be a constant threat on the halfback option pass should he switch positions.