The sun., 1908-11-08

come from anbther university. in theory
it is because they are 30 greatly attracted
by some feature Of the curriculum that
they consider it worth while to change.
Granted that this is the case, they are to
he left at liberty to indulge Themselves
in the studies that drew them away from
the other university, where their work
was tempereI by athletics. II it is an
other case, such as moving from some
citv near their old university to one
nearer Chicago, for instance, which i'm
pels the change, at least they are under
the same ruling. This Is a perfectly in
nocent step that brings with II all the con-
sequences OF one undertaken with a W orse
intent. The best that can be said, then,
Is that It is unfortunate.
By preventing the athlete entering
late from another college from ever
taking part in sports much Of the un-
pleasantness which now exists can he
done away with. There can be no talk
OF proselyting and no insinuation that
the big college gobbles up all the good
men OF the smaller. II man changes
colleges because he is after better things
in the line OF instruction in some par
ticular line there is no question that he
should feel hurt at being barred from
varsity sports. Primarily that should be.
al Chicago for Chicago men; at Wiscon-
sin. for Wisconsin men, and so on.
An example OF the wrong sort OF uni
versity tearp WAS at Columbia some years
ago when the football! eleven had men
from Williams, Wesleyan. Michigan and
what not on il. These men had no real
LOYALTY to Columbia. IL may be said with
out hurting their feelings, They we're in
Columbia TO pursue, in most cases. grad
uate work, and they were not Columbia
men any more than an American Rhodes
scholar is really an Oxford man.
II is not always the fault OF the college
either Many mon who come into athletic
prominence write TO coaches in bigger
universities asking whether they would
be welcomed il they made change.
Prot. Stagg has had occasion to deal
with some Of these men and has written
in return that he had no interest in their
movements. Latterly he has been stron gly
tempted to make sharp reply TO these
men whose very action Is enough to
bring Chicago into disrepute. He cannot
hello what they may be intending TO do
in the way Of selling their athletic ability,
but he argues that If it became impossible
for them 10 find a market an end would
be put to one form of athletic traffic.
be has no objection. nor has any other
men in charge Of college sport, to let
these men, hive every privilege OF exer-
cislng in the second university they may
choose TO adorn. But that is what few
OF then ere after II they haven't been
approached by some person interested
they ere eager for themselves TO share
in the glory that attaches to being star
man on big university oleyen or other
athletic team. They want that beo>use
they believe they are qualified 10 10 big
frogs in big puddles quite as they were
hjg frogs in small puddles. That Is where
the athlete very often is 10 blame. Often
in just such cases folks outside blame the
colleye for reaching out 10 grab up good
men from small colleges.
AGAIN, TOO MANY RULES
The conference, which may be said
TO lead in reforms, undoubtedly leads
also in the amount Of legislation enacted
on behalf Of sports. The code Of rules