Truth. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1901-1908, 1906-01-06
THE FUTURE OF FOOTBALL.
(By David Starr Jordan, President OF
Leland Stanford Junior University

commercialized athletics, | am asked
| to say a word about intercollegiate
| football from the point of view of a
college president, one who in his day
and generation has been an athlete,
and who still has faith in the value
| of all forms of collegiate and most
| forms of intercollegiate athletics.
| First, as to the good side of foot
ball. AS Professor Hiram Corson once
observed, at is not lady-like game"
| 1t is a rough, virile, unsparing man.
making contest, with distinct lesson
| in courage, patience, selfcontrol, and
cooperation. When played by gentle
men it tends to strengthen the in
stincts of a gentleman. When 1t falls
among muckers, no doubt it shows all
the features of muckerism. Such fate
is not peculiar to football. 1t over
takes literature, for example, the
drama, and even religion. Those who
have played straight football, in hon
est teams with honest opponents, all
testify to it's value in teaching the
many virtues implied in successful
team work.
While men are sometimes killed at
football, and sometimes manned for
life. such things do not often happen
outside of the raw beginnings of the
unframed secondary schools. For
these schools, as matters are, football
is not we'll adapted. What is called
the brutality of football is greatly eX-
aggerated in current newspaper crltl-
cisms. The number of serious acc
dents is scarcely greater proportion
ally than is caused by horseback rid
ing, rowing, yachting, swimming,
hunting, and other forms of manly eX-
ercise, from which danger can not be
wholly excluded. Brutality is by no
means inherent in football. For that
matter, rough play wins no games.
Yet we must confess that brutality is
sometimes present-brutality crimi-
nal and beastly. This indicates the
presence of the mucker, the type OF
man the very opposite of that which
it is the business of the university
to discover and develop. The word
"mucker" was invented at Harvard,
and is usually used to indicate the
kind of man a normal college man
ought to despise.
There has been much discussion OF
the possibility of improving the game
| Oh lOOlDdll NY Dluhiht7 II bhci iAANSa~
ing, by making it less dangerous, and
by excluding the possibility of muck
erism. AS to the first and second of
these matters the writer has no final
opinion. The distinguished athlete
professors, in whose hands the form
ing of the game still lies. seem to be
far from any agreement among them
selves.
Beyond a doubt, the elimination OF
mass plays and the encouragement OF
end runs, punting, and rushing
J through a scattered field would make
the game more interesting to specta
! tors. The same interest would also BE-
heightened by a distinctive color of
dress on the two sides, with big let
ter on the back of each man to dis
tinguish guard, tackle, quarterback,
and the rest of the armament, one
from another.
1t is very doubtful whether a more
open game would be less dangerous.
Most serious accidents occur in the
tackling of a swift runner in the
! midst of his interference-the very
play which is most interesting to the
, spectators.
AS matters are, the game is too
beefy. There is too great reward
. | MI pniIcpn1ar fnrpn and