The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-07-11
Am / Right !?
IN last Tuesdays journal Professor
I Conway Macmillan Of the state uni

YIN last tuesdays u a PROFESSOR
Conway Macmillan of the state uni
versity presents a few more argu-
ments against the prevailing code of anna
teur rules for college athletes. This has
Briefly stated, his contention is that the
present code is faulty in theory and prac-
tice; that the fact that man has once
been a professional should not bar him
from participation in college athletics, but
that a code of rules should be adopted
which would allow any bona sfde student
regardless Of previous record to repre-
sent his institution in intercollegiate
sports 81. S55t.g & 3 80.
In this position T h e. ou,r;n a L sup
ports Professor Macmillan. There have
been too many. instances where western
colleges have successfully evaded the eli
gibility laws Of the Big Nine conference
Men whose athletic skill was expected to
bring victory have been induced to enter
certain institutions by promise from some
alumnus or friend Of the ca1lege In ques-
ton Of an easy position at fat salary.
dents. They do simply enough work to
escape suspension. They are profession
ais in the worst sense of the word be-
cause they are actuated almost entirely by
hope Of gain. This is not mere SUPPOSE
ton; ] know Of actual cases where posi-
tions were offered athletes *of promise.
On the other hand, the present confer
ence code has barred for trivial offenses
many men who were bona fide students,
and who competed for the athletic teams
OF their institutions either from love of
the sport or from patriotic motives Pro-
fessor Macmillan is er1unciating a SOUND
principle when he says that a man who
earns his way thru college by pla ying
professional baseball Sin the; summer
should not be barred from the athletic
teams for that reason alone. But the con-
ference rules go farther. They, bar any
man who has ever received compensati or
| for engaging in any kind of sport. Nov
! consider some cases in which these rules
have worked the most fragrant injustice
by barring students who were technically
! professionals, but amateurs in, spirit.
| Gordon Clarke, the great halfback of the
Chicago university team IN 1898, was
barred because, several years before sent
ence was passed upon him. he had received
| small amount of money for coaching {
| football team. When he entered Chicago
Clarke, understanding the code, tried t,
return the money, but was unable to do SO
because the athletic association from
which he received the sum had disbanded
4 George Mueller, guard of the Mime
sofa team, was barred in 1901, because h
received IS for winning "a race at picnic
Earl Schneider Of Wisconsin was barre
at the same time because he played j
a baseball game in which a purse of 81
was. offered the winner No charge wa
ever made that either. of these men wa
z receiving nloneyfor hts Services upon hi
un1versity's eleven, nor was it eve
limited that either was not a bona fid
student These are only q few of tn
, cases which might be cited did one tax
: the time to look up the records. Ac
{ cord1ng to the present code, a studer
may be barred if he has. received so nanc
as fifty cents as a prize for an athlett
contest; he may be barred if the offens
was committed ten years ago. II
l. h-HF nresenf cnHo nf r,,1ee 4. ,