Norwich bulletin., 1918-03-27

 ception of fife, are open to censure. As it is a known fact that athletics l are beneficial the criticism is pertin | ent that all of our students do not | benefit equally from college athletics. l The slogan of those attacking college i sport at this time is Sport for all"
 The sport for all agitators and ideal- 1 ist-for their conception of sport is ideal-have always been misunder stood. The athlete and those who l have backed our athletics have looked looked upon those of its men who wore wrist watches-up to the time we got in this war. They were not altogether there as men; something was lacking. No one ever did just define what this something was. In this case the something, although not defined, was caused by the idealist- the man who was far-sighted enough to realize what sport for all meant to the nation-making the mistake, of trying to kill our development of sport first before explaining his conception of it. He was at heart an iconoclast We did not like to be told that our pet hobbies in sport were all wrong. Tn fact, we discovered there was much more good in our sport, especially our intercollegiate sport, than had even been planned for.
 The ideahst never got anywhere al- though his ideas were splendid, simply because he devoted more time to att tacking that which existed than to proving his case He sought to throw out the scheme of athletics the col leges had developed rather than to use them and their very good qualities as an aid to his own just cause. There flo ie 1,ic trouble at the present time as lie uses the word crisis with all it's topsy- l turvy effect on college athletics to set them aside for his own pet theories. He has been, most unfortunately, a most impractical man.
 What the result of all the wartime argument and action in regard to re- l forming intercollegiate and college sport is going to be is a difficult pre- | diction to make. One thing is becom- 1 ing more and more a certainty. That l is that intercollegiate sport. whatever l it's faults, will not die The informal scheme of things tried at several col | leges met with sudden death and at an institution such as the U. s. Mill tary Academy 1t is fact admitted 1 that even football cannot continue un- l less the all-important Navy game be | played
 1 But admitting that intercollegiate | sport will not die it would be a pity if the sport for all idea met with an unlike fate. While it is ideal that in | itself is no reason for passing it by. | We have already seen what splendid response the intercollegiate athlete has made to the call of his country, hence the thought arises: why not more and more of such 8 thing until gradually all students get such a training? That is the big question and that is the | question the practical athletic men launched sport for all have dismally failed. It would be too bad if all this agitation in the matter of college | athletics should fail to bring about re- | suits or if peace should come and find us without an improved college ath- letic system.
 The mere matter of whether we have professional coaches or not? of whether we have training tables or not? and of whether other agitated economies are put into effect or not? are ques- tions of little importance, aside from the object. The question is: whether we have nearly everybody in strenuous sport? or whether but small per centage, as in the past, is to represent the college? If our war time sport agitation results in sport for all the argument will have been well taken If it does not then give us this result l then all the agitation about reforming sport is mere piff1e.
 Copyright. 1918. by Sol Metzger.)