Seventy-First Year EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN hen Opinions Are PFre UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS Wuth WWl Prevall" STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG.,* ANN ARBOR, MICH. * Phone NO 2-3241 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. Faculty Controls Athletic Progra JJ )AY, FEBRUARY 26, 1961 NIGHT EDITOR: PAT GOLDEN 'he WCHA and Its Problems: AnotherIL WH STHE WESTERN Collegiate Hockey Associa- tionheading for a crackup? To the casual observer everything seems to fine., Denver has made a runaway of the ague championship race, but even that doesn't em so bad considering that two of the three ilowing teams will get another shot at them .'the WCHA and NCAA playoffs. But beneath the shiny outward appearance ere is dissention in the ranks. 1INNESOTA'S JOHN MARIUCCI is kicking up another storm about professionalism and ie use of Canadian "import" players; WCHA ches in general, particularly Michigan's Al enfrew and Michigan Tech's John McIlnnis, e disconcerted about Minnesota's refusal to ay Denver. Nobody seems to know what hap- med In the cases of Tech's Louis Angotti and enver's George Konik, both of whom should wye been barred from participation in league ames for at least 'one game; officials seem to e at a loss as to what rules to enforce and what y do about it when they do decid#. Ironically all of these incidents involve Mich- an. . Mariucci's blast at professionalism and Cana- ans was directed at the Michigan, Denver, dd Colorado College, all of whom are primar- y Canadian teams. The Wolverines have one merican and Denver doesn't have any. ' 1IS MAIN ARGUMENT states that he doesn't , want to bar all Canadians from the league, it limit them so that more Americans will ave a chance to play. But curiously enough he ted the fact that the Canadian hockey players 'en't amateurs in the American sense of the ord because the majority of them have at one bre or another played with a Canadian Junior iam and have accepted expense money to at- Ind. a National Hockey League tryout camp. This argument holds little if any water. Amer- an athletes do much the same thing-not so uch in hockey, but specifically in track. If he ants to bar Canadians from participation in e United States because of his "expense oney" beef, then shouldn't all the American hletes who accept money for expenses to allow iem to compete in "amateur" track meets be "o barred. The NCAA hasn't thought so in he past and it seems doubtful that they will aw, even though Marooh has succeeded in atting another investigation into the ubject. jROM HERE IT LOOKS like Mariucci's main objective is winning a NCAA hockey chain Lonship for Minnesota. With the Canadians qne he would have little if any trouble doing , as Minnesota has one of the few high school ockey programs in existence and thus Mariuc- 's Gophers, although he insists otherwise, ould have a monopoly on the players. Trouble number two also concerns Minnesota -this one is of an entirely different nature- ait with the 'same ultimate goal. Simply because Denver's powerhouse hockey 'am would beat the Gophers, Minnesota de- ded that it would be more profitable not to hedule them, and now while Michigan and [chgan Tech and the rest of the league hools have been taking their lumps from the oneers, the Gophers have been sitting back 0d getting fat on the lesser teams of the ague. Ordinarily such a refusal might not make ich a difference, but in the light of the cur- int battle for the number two position in the ague, it takes on tremendous significance. MOTH MICHIGAN and Michigan Tech, the other two teams involved, have been beaten y the Pioneers, but have played well enough gainst the rest of the league to stay in the Bining. Minnesota, on the other hand, by not Leting Denver has fattened its percentage msderably, and now all it needs to take cond, and home ice in the playoffs, is to win s last'three games, leaving Michigan, whohas eaten Minnesota three times in four games, i the dust. . It isn't fair. The third controversy has arisen as a result , the extra-curricular activities of Angotti id Konik while on the ice. Angotti, who drew a "match" misconduct for is forceful protests of a penalty given to him y Referee Marty Pavelich here in Ann Arbor, ipposedly was ineligible to play in the "next gularly scheduled league game." He played in spite of the ruling, and played ell, scoring three times as Tech beat Michi- an State, 8-1. N VIEW OF THIS Michigan State should be awarded the game by forfeit, but nothing as come of it. Either Michigan State didn't rotest, which they insist they did, or the ague front office has somehow let matters ide through. 711 -1 -na The league rule was enacted in an attempt to discouage such actions as those displayed by Angotti at the Coliseum, but it isn't any good unless it is enforced. Denver's George Konik, an All-American de- fenseman, was involved in something of the same kind, only his escapade was a little more serious. Konik actually belted an official during a fight that erupted while DU was playing Colorado College. Here again, according to league rules, Konik should have been thrown out, not for just one game,but for the season. He's still playing. THE FINAL CONTROVERSY involves the old trouble ,with officiating Reports from rinks around the league led us to believe that the game isn't the same every- where. Along the same line some players and coaches have accused some teams of slanting the officials. The most notorious case again involves Min- nesota, sad to say. In Michigan's visit to Wil- liams Arena, the Wolverines were handed 12 penalties over the course of the evening. They spent 15 of the 20 minutes in the second period short-handed. All of this still wouldn't raise too many eye- brows, as hockey players have reputations for getting a little wild at times, but when in the same evening, the other side is given only two penalties, then it becomes time to take a closer look. THE OFFICIALS CALLED Michigan "the dir- tiest team they had ever seen," but this observer feels that while Michigan probably deserved 75 per cent of those penalties, heads were turned too often when Mariucci's little angels committed a fpul. Apparently Michigan isn't the only team that doesn't care for the Gopher's officials as Michi- gan Tech, in their visit to Minneapolis, re- fused to play unless the officials were changed. All of this seems to stem from one point, the lack of a stroig front office to control the league. For all practical purposes the league presi- dent has no power. Each of the seven members of the league is entitled to one vote when any controversy arises. The only function of the president is to count the ballots. In a league with the problems the WCHA has it seems that the only way to control matters would be to set up a strong president instead of a weak one. INVOLVED IN THE ORGANIZATION are rep- resentatives of five different Conferences, and though most of the policy was ironed out when the WCHA evolved from the old WIHL three years ago, there are bound to be differ- ences that will crop up in the future. And only through a strong central office, instilled with the power to enforce his rulings, can the schools be brought into control. It can be argued that for only one sport it isn't practical to go through such an elaborate procedure of setting up the office, but it should also be brought to light that without one, there may not even be that one sport. The WIHL cracked-what is there outside a sup- posedly better understanding between schools to assure that the WCHA will not follow suit? After all, the schools are the same and the problems as well. TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM concerning the - refusal of certain teams to schedule cer- tain other teams for pure nonsense reasons, it seems that a return to the point system might be appropriate. That way a team couldn't be unjustly penal- ized in the league standings for scheduling games with a strong team, and would encour- age each school to schedule a full slate. The way it stands now, anyone can drop anyone else for any particular reason, including personal gain. And if the league is going to continue its present playoff plan in which the number one and number two teams get home ice for the playoffs, and there is no reason it shouldn't, then something should be done to assure the two top teams the spots they de- serve. The third part of the program might include some kind of a school for officials set up by the league before the season starts to assure at least some semblance of standardization to rules. To ask a team to adapt its style of play to every rink it visits throughout the season is ridiculous. Currently in one city players can get away with things that are snapped at in others, some of which are legal and some of which aren't. Even with such a school, nothing could be said which would force officials to leave per- sonal bias at home, but in the state the WCHA is in right now, anything would be an improve- ment. BUT THIS ISN'T THE POINT. The point is tha t if theWCHAr is nin tn call itelf a (EDITOR'S NOTE: Prof. Plant is a member of the Law School faculty and is Michigan's faculty repre- sentative to the Intercollegiate Conference (the Big Ten. The fo- lowing is a condensation of an ar- ticle that appeared in the January 1961 issue of THE JOURNAL OF HIGHER EDUCATION.) By MARCUS L. PLANT ONE OF THE conditions of membership in the Intercol- legiate Conference ("Big Ten") is that there be "faculty control" of athletics. The basic philosophy is that the intercollegiate athletic program has validity only if it is an integral part of the total educational program of the school. As such, it ought to be in the control of the group whose func- tion is to plan and carry out the educational program. The debat- able issues revolve around what constitutes faculty control and how it should be implemented. It is not likely that a plan can be developed that will have univer- sal validity. The most that can be done in a discussion such as this is to outline some of the elements that should be given weight in arriving at an acceptable modus operandi. f s INSTEAD OF PLUNGING into tables of organization, it may be more profitable to consider the nature of the task, with particular reference to the attitudes and characteristics that ought to be possessed by faculty men who are to engage in the control of inter- collegiate athletics. In taking this approach I consciously tip my hand to some extent, for the im- plication is that not all faculty men should have a part in such control. This is indeed my view. The mere fact that one is a mem- ber of an institution's faculty ought not entitle one automatically to take part in the control of athletics. Faculty control can only be enduring and effective if it is reasonable, responsible, and wise. If it is arbitrary, or capricious, or irresponsible, it will be discredited. I hold that any task can be carried out successfully, regardless of or- ganizational arrangements, if the right people for that job are put to work at it. Conversely, if the wrong people for that task are at- tempting to carry it out, the in- evitable result will be failure and discredit, no matter how well con- ceived the organizational arrange- ments may be. Thus the suitability of the mien who are going to be given the job is crucial. Intercollegiate athletics, which Professor Frank Gardner, Faculty Representative of Drake Univer- sity, has described as a tiger held by the tail, calls for certain quali- ties onthe part of those who are to hold the tail. Sterling charac- ter and ahigh order of mental ability are attributes that are abundant in a university faculty. But they are not enough. There are additional important consid- erations, of which the following list is suggestive, though not ex- haustive. The men who are to guide the program ought to have a lively but balanced interest in athletic acti- vities and to be reasonably sym- pathetictoward the program and its objectives. This is not to say that they should be zealots or wor- shippers of athletic heroes, for the zealot will bring swift and sure disaster upon the whole program. The point deserves mention be- cause a substantial number of faculty people have not the slight- est interest in this phase of col- lege life. Such people ought not to be asked to give thought to athlet- ic matters, and, more important, ought not to be required, or even permitted, to vote in the determ- ination of athletic policy. To place them in a position where they must do so is an injustice to them and to the athletic program. SYMPATHY with the program and its objectives is suggested on the theory that those who are op- posed to intercollegiate athletics (and there are a certain number on every campus) are not likely to make a constructive contribu- tion to the cause of faculty con- trol if they have a part in it. Their approach will be nihilistic. The result will be, not the demise of intercollegiate athletics, but the demise of faculty control. The faculty athletic controller ought to be a person with a judi- cious habit of mind. He should be one who does not reach his deci- sions hastily or on the basis of his visceral reactions; but who studies the facts and listens to the argu- ments before he formulates his judgment. It is sometimes assumed that this is an ever-present char- acteristic of the professorial mind. I respectfully question that as- sumption, at least when matters of athletics are involved. Frequently, I have encountered faculty men who were national authorities in their own fields' and who would not dream of stating an offhand conclusion in the area of their special competence, but who made the most dogmatic and sweeping assertions on athletic affairs with- out any substantial study or pre- vious thought on the subject. On this topic even careful scholars seem prone to assume an attitude comparable to that of the P.T.A. parent who suddenly becomes an expert on elementary education, and who thinks he can give all the answers in simple fashion right off the top of his head. For ex- ample, a renowned professor, whose name would probably e recognized by many of my read- ers, only recently said to me, "This whole business of financial aid to athletes is ridiculous. College ath- letics should be either entirely amateur, with the boys being paid no wages at all, or it should be entirely professional, with the boys being paid wages competitive with the salaries paid by the pro- fessional clubs. Make your choice and stop fooling around!" I am sure he would never make an as- sertion in his own field in this manner. Another professor re- cently stood before a general fac- ulty meeting at my University while we were discussing athletic problems and announced, "I do not come here to expose myself to persuasion; I come to see that my prejudices are enacted into law!" * * * I SUBMIT that men whose minds are likely to function in this fashion when they leave their areas of special study ought not to be permitted to have a voice in controlling intercollegiate athlet- ics. The major problems in the athletic field are extremely com- plicated. They involve basic edu- cational philosophy, economic fac- tors, sociological factors (includ- ing race relations), administra- tive problems, public relations ele- ments, and, in some places, heavy political overtones, They will nev- er be solved by off-the-cuff gen- Prof. Marcus Plant eralities or by enacting prejudices into law,, however laudatory they may be. They will be solved the way most other difficult problems are solved, which is by careful, dispassionate study and a great deal of trial and error. In connection with the las point, let me say that a faculty man ought not to be controlling intercollegiate athletics if he has the disposition of an evangelistic reformer. I have seen several such individuals burst upon the scene with the general attitude "Re- pent, ye sinners!" These people used to bother me, probably be- cause of their implied aspersion on the sincerity of their colleagues, and also because they found so simple the problems I found so dif- ficult. But these exhorters no long- er bother me, for I have found that their fervor does not last long. After a certain amount of braying, they fall flat on their faces, and most of them retreat to more tractable subject-matter. Others come to the realization that inspirational oratory is not the path out of the wilderness and get down to work. A faculty man who would con- trol athletics must not be afflicted with volatile emotions. If he has a low boiling point, particularly if he is sensitive to criticism, he will spend most of his time in a state of emotional turbulence. For he is sure to be criticized almost con- stantly for every real or imagined deficiency in the entire athletic program. The subjects of griev- ance will range from the academic standards of the university to the price of hot dogs at the stadium. Perhaps the most irritating aspect of his work will be the stream of, misinformation that pours from certain sections of the press. Much reporting of sports news, as such, in the daily newspapers is accur- ate and well done. Occasionally, a news writer who fancies himself a cut above the ordinary refuses to stick to his beat, develops a col- ,umnwith a by-line, and sets him- self up as an oracle on intercolle- giate athletics. Thereafter he is under compulsion to fill his col- umn, whether with fact or fan- tasy. The harm some of these people do in misleading the pub- lie is often irreparable. Even worse is the irresponsible conduct of some nationally known magazines that exploit the public's interest in athletics to build circulation. Such practices have an impact on the sincere faculty man who is do- ing his best. Since many of his colleagues tend to take published distortions at face value, he is forced to do a great deal of un- necessary repair work to correct the impressions they leave. One must be ready to be criticized un- justly, and have his efforts mis- interpreted, and not let it demor- alize him. THE FACULTY athletic con- troller must have the courage to withstand pressure that sometimes becomes very heavy froi powerful groups desiring to use the athletic program to accomplish collateral objectives in which they are inter- ested. Intercollegiate athletics at- ,tracts tremendous public atten- tion, and is a great vehicle for publicity. For these reasons many people seek to climb on its, band wagon for their own ends. Politi- cians areprobably the worst of- fenders in this respect. For ex- ample, scarcely a year goes by that does not witness some office-seek- er in an area of high television- set concentration proposing legis- lation or other official action look- ing toward unrestricted telecast- ing of college football games. He is not interested in the welfare of intercollegiate athletics; he wants publicity, and is currying favor with the voters. Finally, .one who takes part in controlling athletics must be pre- pared to devote a great deal of time and effort to the enterprise. It cannot be well done if it is :given only casual and occasional atten- tion. It takes steady and system- atic work, much of it burdensome and somewhat dull. The dilet- tante's contribution is of no more value here than it is in most uni- versity affairs. In the case of large universities with faculties numbering more than a thousand persons, it seems obvious% that control by the entire faculty would be out of the ques- tion. Meetings of such a group are held infrequently, and the deci- sions that must be made in ath- letic matters often require prompt action. Furthermore, meetings of such a body, regular or special, are often poorly attended. The danger would be that a small pro- portion of the faculty, the compo- sition of which was largely a mat- ter of chance, would be making the decisions. Some form of dele- gation of the power to decide and act is required, * * * IT WOULD seem advisable to delegate the function of control to a relatively small body whose sole responsibility was to handle the affairs of intercollegiate athletics. Its members ought to be selected for terms long enough to make it worth while for each to become fa- miliar with the current status and history of the crucial problems i the field; in other words, there should be reasonable continuity of tenure. But tenure on such a body should not be indefinite, for there is also a danger of the develop- ment of a "vested interest" com- plex, with an accompanying rigidi- ty of mind. Deliberate rotation of membership is desirable if it is not too rapid. New blood should be steadily introduced into the group. The question of whether the members of the controlling body should be appointed by the presi- dent or" elected by the faculty at, large I adebatable one. The dan- ger of having the president ap- point the membership is that he may choose only those who repre- sent his point of view. The dan- ger of having the members elected by the faculty at large is that the persons chosen will be se- lected on the basis of mere popu- larity rather than suitability for the task. Perhaps a compromise between the two alternatives is possible; the faculty might nomi- nate a panel of names from among whom the president would choose his appointees. Whatever the method of, selec- tion, once the body is chosen it should be given full responsibility, with power to decide and to act. It ought not to be required to clear its decisions with the general fac- ulty or any of the faculty's other operating organs. Nor should it be subject to a veto once a decision has been reached. Such devices merely disperse responsibility, im- pair morale and undercut the ef- fectiveness of faculty control. Ths is an area in which the principle should be followed of picking the right people for the job and then letting them go ahead and do it.\ Together with this power to de- cide and act, however, the con- trolling body should have the re- sponsibility an the duty to furn- ish full information to the faculty, and the members should be sub- ject to questions at any faculty meeting regarding actions taken or contemplated. All members of the faculty should be entitled to express their views. freely at fac- ulty meetings or elsewhere on any subject having to do with athletics. As to whether the alumni and the students should be represented on the controlling body, it is hard to generalize. In some collegiate "fanilies, both groups have a very active interest, and: it may be wise to have representation of their points of view. In any event, the membership should be so arranged that the ultimate con- trol rests with the faculty mem- bers, who, by joining together, can outvote any other combina- tion of interests. t A AT BIG TEN MEETINGS: Battle Looms Over Aid to Athletes Plan. By BRIAN MacCLOWRY Daily Sports Writer NEXT FRIDAY and Saturday the Big Ten faculty athletic rep- resentatives will gather in Cham- paign, Ill., as part of the Confer- ence's business meetings. And although this year's meet- ing will sound like a mere cap pistol alongside last year's fire- works display, the a g e n d a i s, blessed with one proposal that could bring the heavy artillery out of hiding again. Last year, it will be recalled, the faculty representatives in an unprecedented and electrifying maneuver, voted in favor of pro- hibiting all Conference institu- tions from engaging in post sea- son NCAA playoffs in any sport, including football bowl games. This bombshell, which was termed a maneuver by the pro-Rose Bowl forces to throw a scare into their' brother institutions, was later re- scinded at the Conference's May meeting. " * * THIS YEAR the number one is- sue scheduled to be brought up at the meeting concerns aid to ath- letes. The issue may be a hot one, for like the Rose Bowl, opinion is divided. Since 1957 the Big Ten has- placed aid to athletes on what might be termed a need basis. The "need" plan was the result of a four year study by four different committees, the last of which ac- tually formulated the program for a year, including tuition, room, board, books and fees. * ' * WHEN THE plan first went in- to effect, the boy who entered school on this part of the program was required to remain in the up- per quarter of the male class he entered with, in order to keep the tender. This, 'however, soon proved un- workable. Some. institutions were just not prepared to rank students on this basis, and a substitute had to be found. It came in the form of a grade point average. By act of the faculty representative the athletes under the program now have to maintain a 2.5 cumulative grade average to retain their tenders.. (2) The second half of the "need" program is the part that has alternately been under fire from various Big Ten institutions. It is also the broadest part of the program, the part under which most Big Ten athletes enter school. * * * UNDER THIS part of the pro- gram if the athlete has graduated in the upper two-thirds of his class he can qualify for a finan- cial aid grant, but only insofar as establishes he need. A college service board confi- dentially evaluates the ability of the parents to send the boy to col- lege, and the difference between the amount of family aid given and the cost of an education is supplied by the institution. A third part to this "need" pro- ___ it4 4 ~lc.. m- r o AT who could qualify only for tuition scholarships because of their rank in the high school graduating class. "Winding an eight-day clock is not exactly my idea of a legiti- mate job," remarks Plant. It was practices such as these that led to the formation of the committees that finilly came forth with the aid based on need program. There was but one alternative to the "need" program at this time. "If we hadn't adopted the need plan there would have been affirmative votes to ride the sled all theway to the NCAA," declares Plant. "Riding the , sled" is Prof. Plant's expression for saying that the conference would have more or less adopted an every school for itself program, within NCAA rules. THIS, IN effect, would have meant that all athletes would have been given the "full ride," mean- ing tuition, room, board, books, fees, and $15 a month, with no limit on the number of tenders. Enough faculty representatives, however, felt that the NCAA al- ternative would, not have curbed illegal recruiting and other fla- grant abuses which sorely needed regulation. Thus, the present plan was passed, with Michigan vot- ing the affirmative. Througout its four year exist- ence, Michigan has continued to favor the aid based on need pro- gram, but other schools in the Big Ten have brought the program program and should their research be complete by next weekend, it will be presented to the faculty' representatives and put to a vote. An affirmative majority would be needed for the new program to re- place the present program. * * * ALTHOUGH THE details have' not yet been worked out, the new proposal would have three main sections. (1) The need factor would be eliminated altogether. (2) No boy could get aid unless he placed in the upper one-half of. his graduating class, or had achieved a specified composite, score on the American College Test Program or a specified stand- ard score on the Scholastic Apti- tude Test of the College Entrance Examination Board. (3) Tenders would be reduced to 70 per year for each school. While Michigan stands com- mitted to the need factor, it is not uncompromisingly opposed to the tentative new proposal. "The Board in Control of Intercollegiate Athletics at Michigan is in favor of any step that will raise the academic standards,," explains Prof. Plant. "We would look with favor on passing entrance pxami- nations. But we also want to keep the need factor." * ' * - JUST WHERE each school stands .on the new proposal will not be known until the crucial vote is taken. The Associated Press has listed Indiana, Iowa, Michi- Va Rta n Ohi Mte .rthwest- BEFORE closing this portion of the discussion, it may be pointed out that there is one way in which the faculty of a college or uni- versitycan exercise powerful con- trol of the athletic program with- out moving out of its academic sphere.' There are three elements in this method of control. If the faculty (a) controls the stand- ards for admission of students to the institution, (b) sets the aca- demic standards of eligibility for competition in intercollegiate ath- letics, and (c) exercises complete autonomy in grading the students in their academic work, no stu- dent will ever participate in inter- collegiate ahletics without hav- ing the full assent of the faculty with respect to those 'aspects of his college life with which the faculty is most concerned and in which the faculty is 'most expert, He will never be admitted to the institution unless he meets the standards which the faculty has established, and ,thus he will :come to college, notdas an athlete, but as one who appears to have the mental and emotional capacity to absorb the benefits of a college education. After admission he will never participate in intercollegiate athletics unless he demonstrates the ability to meet the academic standards of eligibility created by the faculty. Thus the faculty's in- dependent judgment on each stu- dent, uninfluenced by the athletic coaches or the administration, Will determine who is to be on the ath- letic squads. This is probably the most potent control that can exist. A strong argument can be made that the faculty needs no addi- tional control. With this power in the faculty, it is hard to see how the administration or the athletic staff could take the athletic pro- arnm outsithe bounnsof the in-