New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-02-25

miscalculated or overlooked the consequences
of some Of his recommendations. Ills desile ~
! end football brualities is not only eh'ilcy
right but in fair way 10 be grained WIZ
ont much delay His approval OF the 1"ie
UNDERGRADUATE rule we think that longer eA-
pcricncr will confirm. Ills opinion tlat coiese
sports ought 10 be restricted to college heiuS
we are inclined to share. assuming That ne eN-
, crpts boatracng which requires spcciai natural
conditions But other limitations which lie suS-
gcsts are rs ii seems TO us. III conceived.
In the first place. since this consideration
GOES 10 the root of the matter. 1t Is not 10 De
/ suppOsed that college sports can DE hehr'!
and uscfuy sustained on far lower pane ol
proficiency than that 10 which they nave Deeh
slowly but steadily attaining for n generation
II may be possible 10 regret the ola DAYS Oh
careless and happy enjoy OF inferiorl'E'
though the adagc that what Is worth DONG III
all is worth doing well is commonly hcld 10 dc
of universal application. But, however Unit
may be- the old days cannot he restored III
college students are subjected 10 conuiliohS
which prevent them from approaching the pro-
fcssonal standard of excellence in their sports
they will not obcdicntly cultivate medlocri'y
but stop connecting And therefore, since there
is general agreement with President Eilot
conviction that college athletics are of great
utility, ana since they require the stimulus OF
intercollegiate rivalry it is OF the hrst lmpor-
lance to avoid restrictions which would eX-
tirpatc instead of merely pruning them.
There are two of President Eliot's proposals
which would inevitably tend to abolition rather
than reform. one of them Is the prohibition or
intercollegiate freshman contests: but this Is the
less Objectionable Of the two. The other, ana
by far the more mcnacing. is that which Wonii
forbid Intercollegiate contests in any one sport
ofcncr than once in two years. 1t needs Ito
argument 10 show that such IA regulation would
completely disorganizc the system which con-
tnuouSly develops athletic ambition ana ca
pacty by Keeping constantly in view IN nj
tractive reward for effort and sacrifice. Apart
from its obvious discrimination against the
whole senior class in alternate years, it's prac-
teal effect would be- the general neglect and
deterioration Of each branch Of athletics in
every other year That would be it's earlier
effect Its final effect, think. would be. as
We have said the virtual extinction Of college
sports
Thus. though several of President Eliot's
recommendations are salutary, taken together
they form n scheme which seems to lis Illogical
athletics to a basis where they will be wholly
advantageous To individuals and to the general
body of students. one of the regulations by
which he would accomplish that object forbids
a student 10 be Il member of Il team In more
than one sport in a single year. When. there
fore. according 10 his scheme, all college sports
shall have been rendered harmless and univcr-
sally useful the members of the football team.
for example whose activities cease in Noycm-
Der will be- unable throughout the rest Of the col
lcgc year Ia employ their superior skill for their
own and the common advantage. The PROPOSE
ton that two hours Il day are enough for any
student 10 devote 10 athletics. which we think
is sound. implies that much tim" can be
prDftably used in that way. If this Is truc II
logically holds good for the whole college year
not merely for a fraction of IT,. At this point
We may add that. though We believe HAT college
sports now absorb altogether too much time and
thought. We cannot accept President Eliot's
unqualified assertion that " no student can keep
up his studies and also play his full part in any
one of these sports rs M present conducted"
Unless official college records are false and
worthless. a remarkably large number of stu
dents have disproycd that dlctum during the
last ten years.
President Eliors final conclusion Is thar IF
trial shall prove the n>ulIicicncy of all these
limitations intercollegiate sports ought 10 be
abolished 1t seems to us that conclusion
more deserving of general adoption would be
this: That college sports which, by common
consent, are well worth saving. ought not TO be
subjected to conditions that are far more likely
10 Kill than cure them.