February 12, 1946. : Mr. Art Rason, Aseoointed Press, _ Kemenas City, Mo. Dear Art: ’ I have discontinued sending you the Jayhawk Rebounds for the reason that you are somewhat like Westbrook Pegler, only not as - geod in any line as he is. Your article: “Sample: Every month | er so, F. ©, *Phog’ Allen, “ansas basketball coach, composes his ‘Jayhawk Rebounds". They're like the great Phog himself, gabby, _ platitudinous =~ and chock “full of news." I wrote those letters for the boys and thought that although you were not human at times you could have been human enough to reflect the better things in the Sebounds. But I see you just haven't got it. | : Sincerely yours, 3 : Director of Physioal Education, FOALAH Yarsity Basketball Coach. Platitudinous - abounding in platitudes (platitudes - quality or state of being flat, dull, or insipid; triteness. A dull, stale, or insipid truism; a commonplace.) Gab - Prate; chatter. Gabble = To chatter; jabber. .Gabby - not in Webster. Year's pay wok th, Se asa gasoline saving Pay eee TOI aes é ~ -_ er 0 eee eer wee eet Gt “Ta Jl ed eo | ARE FULL Ob Dr. F. C. Allen Sends hawk Pebounds”’ to i < ft in Service caking of morale building _ isn’t these days?), not & yeen said nf one of th le legs in th: ~the college coach and radents oe. Th arly every coach and pu’ tor puts if considerabl ding f athletes 1 jervices how the old scho. schoolmates are getting « Bnet sovts of methods are . ; Some et prefer mimeographed 1_ws. ters. Others keep stenographers batting out personal notes. Sample: Every month or so, F. C. |“Phog” Allen, Kansas basketball coach, composes his “Jayhawk Re- bounds.” They’re like the great Phog himself, gabby, platitudinous -——and chock full of news. _ Allen doesn’t spare the type- writer—or consider the newsprint ‘| shortage. His last issue rambled 15 pages, single spaced. More than two of the pages were devoted to | expressions of regret from Jay- awkers, scattered the world over, who had just learned thru “Re- bounds” that T. P. Hunter, quiet, likeable Kansas center, had been killed in action on Guam. The names sprinkled thru the “Rebounds” recall many an excit- ing moment in Kansas, and Big Six, history. Such as\Don Ebling, Howard Engleman, Qtto Schnell- bacher, Armand Dixon, Bert Itoga |. and Cecil Smay, who did their Jay- hawking a decade or ae ago. es What Doctor Allen is doing at Kansas is being duplicated in one :| Way or another on almost every campus, ' See A line in a letter to Allen from Irven W. Hayden, in India for more than a year, probably sums up the feelings of all servicemen. Wrote Hayden of the “Rebounds”: “Just like a visit home.” (Dee ee rete ma -— -— TTY a 374 La, Meop HPO. 247 Ty A TH. we. Franrtvety, ao Sees baie as phon nip : ‘ Tee Amn ae i, : ; oe a ‘ey ee ee < 2 Ws ak nahi zai Ts a en ety iy Baad a ae eu Hose ee he: yg | Don. Abin esther © So | (hull Ruck Reva! Hohe, eA AOA. peg h we | aed TE te nth ds che 7 e Mde Avia # Cs < a : k 2 tony ha hou. oe oo as a » ie oe JQ Igo ath ene usb < — uae = i Dos, AA MAL Hos AS RS a ol sxe Jo fe Moat Sah > ws a ogonde Vow ON a a & Tend. ab yu ot Sakon Me — Z wpe Kl as pnonrrachy Ahead ste So See ae ne — 9 peat Aacmeiedl 1 Allon forme Merwnich dala : 20 mite , Ze Fits diate: Anat = ate onde Gai ak be sce MMhbbtine par neriafrafeeco. h Zo wuthe tee Tl < ii | oe 3 : 4 # ve et ie io ste Oe pte, 4 oad os ae 4 ree Se = ee Coa ie a 3. ee eae ah es a ; rae 2 1 if £4) ese ie rae ag sq a | cay a ee ae | ay ries S : peed <4 « a ee , 4 4 ee eLe j Len ae = ag a4 : 3 eS sites, Sat . Bo a Bo ee “ POPE as a Rae Be eats at UN SMT aS VERN ect ere ry tay ; Opes rd cata tate: hae dnl Javeses Geil . 2% SS ie be gn. eet bs AS SD gS ? Oe Lf Pt hen z es ric February 15, 1946. Lite Tay Re Event, O-SST7SR, 242nd AAP BU, . Grand Island, Nebraska. Dear Ray: Plea’e find enclosed a carbon copy of the letter — that I wrote Bob Iandren. It wae wonderful of you to be on the beam every second as expressed by the fact that you had a tear sheet of Beb in your letter and giving me additional information ~~ a | Gosh, Ray, you were swell that night. The boys ad- mired you from the bottom of their hearts. Your nodesty, your never forget their visit with you. Although they were broken- * hearted over the game, se ; badly needed. Me sartatnly wilt be tapyy to hear from you so tint we can put you on the next Rebounds list. With every good wish te you and yours, I am Very sincerely yours, Director of Physical Fducation, PCA:AH Varsity Basketball Coach. Ene. ae COLORADO SPRINGS LARGEST ANO FINEST HOSTEERY OREN ALL YEAR P ih? 2 FRANK J.HABERL MANAGER EUROPEAN PLAN RESTAURANT FAMED FIREPROOF Ee Seas een hey Euceate Cleese © DELIGHTFUL CLIMATE ANTLERS HOTEL COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO Din Dy, We - P Mareh 22, 1946. ‘ Mr. George R. Edwards, Basketball Coach, University ef Missouri, Golumbia, Mo. Dear George: _ I have never doubted for a second the sincerity in your desire to do a wholesome and complete job. Frankly, I did not expect you to take the time or the trouble that you have gone to with my comments. Frankly, I did not care about raising the ire of certdéin menbers on that committee. I did not want it to reflect on you or Pleyd Rowe or Heo Edmondson, - maybe I have missed someone else, - but as for the rest of them, it suite me fine. I dare say that the rules comlttee will pay no attention to any of mine and to the majority of other suggestions. Let the eomnittee aseept the responsibility for making the game a rougher one by inereas- ing the fouls from 4 to 5. They have played a good many years without the increase in number of fouls, and had they increased that from 4 to 5 in the begiming they would have just had five or six more rougher years. My guess is that the committee will refuse te reduce the number from 5 to 4 because to do so would mean that a number of coaches would be forced to do a little more coaching in regard to some of the finer points of the game and maybe take out some of the slam-bang tactics that they now, employ. ‘Outside of a few members on the committees, I have always thought things were done to keep somebedy good-natured -vather than because logie dictated the action. George, I wrete this Sammy Wolfe stuff that was from "Pime" of February 12, on the gambling expose, because he was a race horse tout and discussed very unsoientifically and wimowingly the game of basket- ball. Read it over again. _ Personally, George, I don't care whether the rules committee ever change a rule or make another one. I was much interested when you said that there had been mech work done on the 12 foot basket. John Bunn had a most exhaustive report on the 11 and 12 foot basket, and knowing Roy Munderff as I do, because I was down there at a coaching school and eeached the South Georgie. boys against his North Georgia beys, I would say that he didn't spend a lot of time on 12 foot basket research. I have had 12 foot baskets erected in Robinson Gymasiun for fifteen years and we use them constantly. I have tried them out from a great many page 26 / angles. I don't care whether they raise the baskets to 11 or 10% or lower them to 9 feet. I still feel, and will always reserve the right to say, that any group of rules members who will wangle all , the rules they have regarding the offensive and defensive men on a “10 foot goal are not meeting the question straightforwardly. Bd Hickox and I, when I was back at Springfield, put up a 12 ft. basket there, and without any of the players having shot at it be- fore, they hit a 12 ft. basket without any difficulty in a regularly played game. The point that I em mking is that I dare say there are not ten men in the United States that have ever tried any re- search with the 12 foot basket. That shows, to me, their closed miné, rather than an open mind. | And as I said, I hope the players get taller and taller, and I will have more fm as the height increases, and they still try te - make rules like the S-seoond rule, the defensive man being prohibited from touching the ball, and so ferth. But sincerely, I do want to dongratulate you on your honesty of endeavor. You certainly work at this job. I am leaving for Bnporia tonight and am to speak at Manhattan Friday night, but hope to see the games in Kansas City Saturday night. With all good wishes, I am Sincerely yours, POA: AH UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI! COLUMBIA March 16, 1945 INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS Dr. F. C. Allen, Director of Physical Education, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kan. Dear Phogs Your communication regarding the Basketball rules entitled "They | Are Confused" has just been received. I shall take it with me to the meeting next week and present it to the Committee for discussion. I have no doubt but that it will receive thorough and objective treatment in line with the policy the Committee. In order that the ideas you presented will be made clear to all, and that I will be in position to answer questions I have made a digest of your material. Please check it and notify me if I have misquoted or mis- interpreted. Here are the points as they will be presented unless you submit corrections. 1. The Basketball Rules are the underlying cause of confusion among players, officials and spectators. (no mention of coaches). 2. Modification of the center jump rule has resulted in: (a) Continuation of the value of the excessively tall player despite contentions that it would eliminate such players from the game. (b) Fire-wagon play with uncontrolled speed being rewarded and applauded more than orderly, skillful, and well planned maneuvers. (c) Danger to the hearts of players and spectators with consequent increase of heart trouble. , 3. Elimination of confusion and reduction of the disastrous effects of the center jump modification are assured by a regulation which will force an intermittent breathing spell. 4. The five foul rule is a confession of this need, but does not hit at the source of the trouble. 5. A necessary break in the continuity of play can be assured by application of the present Technical Foul regulations to Personal Fouls. 6. Adoption of No. 5, therefore, would: (a) Eliminate confusion caused by the rules. (b) Slow down play so that skill rather than uncontrolled speed would predominate. | (c) Reduce the danger of heart trouble. (d) Dispense with the policing now required at the free throw lane. (e) Lessen the value of skyscraper players by preventing tip-ins on missed free throws. (f) Dispense with the option of substituting an out-of-bounds play. (g) Make unnesessary and unwise a deliberate foul near the game's close. a ae 7. All jump ball situations should be held at the nearest restraining circle in the interest of uniformity and ease of administration. 8. A future progressive Committee will elevate the basket and thus nullify the present advantages enjoyed by the tall player. 9. The present goal tending rule is discriminatory in that it hinders the tall man on defense but offers no similar hindrance to him on offense. 10. Most of the research by coaches has been a search for sky- scraper players for use under horse-and-buggy ten-foot baskets. ~— ww eee ieee eee You can rest assured that these points will be presented to the Committee exactly as outlined or as corrected by you. I anticipate that I will be called upon to uphold your beliefs or to state specifically my reasons for objections. : It appears most fair to you, then, that I cover briefly my own personal reactions to your suggestions so that if my logic is poor you will have the opportunity to straighten me out, or at least you will know my reasons for supporting or rejecting your proposals. Each issue raised in . your article is referred to in my discussion according to the numbers assigned to the items in the outline above. 1. I will agree with your stand that the rules cause confusion. I must add, though, that I have never heard of any set of regulations which have not caused confusion. The question, then, as I see it concerns the degree of confusion caused by the present rules. On this point I believe that less confusion in regard to the meaning of the rules exists today than ever before. That is an opinion I cannot prove to your satisfaction anymore than you can convince me that confusion has been growing. 2 (a) With you I was present and participated in the discussions leading to the modification of the center jump. You state that its adherents promised elimination of the tall man from the game. I don't recall any such promise, but remember that it was thought the modification would "reduce the importance" of the tall player. If we think the present crop of giants already have too much advantage just imagine returning to them the certainty of tip recovery on the center jump after every score. The rule has lived up to its promise of reduction of value of the tall men. 2 (b) Fire wagon basketball with its speed that your term "dazzling and reckless" appears to me to be a matter of coaching more than rules. The McPherson Oilers employed the fire wagon play in the old days as did numerous other teams. The slow, deliberate, precise attack is still possible if a coach wants to teach it as Bruce Drake did for his second game with Iba's team this past season. Without radically altering the game I don't see how the ‘rules can be changed to dictate to coaches what methods are to be used. Cer- tainly I don't see how applying your proposal will have much effect. 2 (c) Such scientific research studies as I have seen do not bear out your assertion that basketball develops heart trouble in a previously sound heart. Time Magazine reported an opinion which has no basis in fact. ee te 3, 5, and 6. Your belief that a brief interval following a score would be helpful to the game finds support here. However, my reasons do not parallel yours. I believe it would be worthwhile solely because of its dramatic effect in that it will allow everyone a time to appreciate the making of a score just as a good comedian pauses long enough to let his joke register. Such a pause could be obtained by allowing possession in all cases as the present rules provide, but carry the ball to the center sideline for the pass-in instead from the end line under the basket. Your suggestion that all free throws follow the technical foul procedure, I am sure, will be met by vigorous objection because it adds a lot to the penalty for a foul by giving not only a chance for the point but def- inite ball possession to the offended team. The majority, I think, feel that the present punishment of a chance for the point plus the record against the offender is sufficient punishment for a foul. Perhaps your idea might be incorporated along this line, though. How about using the technical foul regulation when a personal foul has been punished by two free throws? Also, don't you think that the argument that your proposal is good because it prevents tip-ins following missed free throws would be countered by fact that most of the fouls are called on the guard of the tall man. I recall that Kurland, for instance, was fouled approximately 17 times by Oklahoma. To give the Aggies ball possession whether he made or missed the free throw cer- tainly would have been welcomed by the tall man. 4. The five personal fouls allowed this year was not a confession that the game has become confusing. The reason stressed concerned the additional playing time made possible by modification of the center jump. Under the old jump rules the ball was in play from 20 to 24 minutes. Four fouls thus had a relationship to the playing time of 1 to 5 or 6. Without the jump playing time was increased to about 30 minutes. Thus, five fouls establishes the same time relationship that prevailed previously. Recently there has been an unfavorable reaction against five fouls. The Questionnaire Committee has called for a statistical study and will probably revote on that rule. Returns from this area indicate a vast majority favoring the five fouls, and I feel obligated to support it. 7. The adoption of uniform jumping situations was tried in K.C. while I coached at Westport, and again in the Big Six. It met with favor in this area but other sections outvoted us. I have presented it every year, and last year obtained the agreement to have it on the questionnaire. I will urge its adoption. 9. Naturally you arouse the ire of all memberstwhen you infer that lack of “progressiveness" of the present group prevents elevation of the basket. Adherents of a higher basket have submitted only unproved and untried theories to substantiate their contentions. Opposed to them is one scientific “test made by Roy Mundorff that a 12 foot basket reduces scoring accuracy by approximately 30%, and practically eliminates the running lay-in close shot. ; Progress, as I understand it, is a movement or action leading to gmprovement. In common with the vast majority of coaches I don't feel that ae a reduction of scoring is an improvement. Those who wish a higher basket insist that it will equalize the height advantage enjoyed by the tall man; that it will relieve under-basket congestion by causing longer rebounds; that it will stop goal tending and dunking; that shooters will soon adjust to the change and will score readily enough to maintain proper balance between defensive and offensive play. They say, however, that this should apply only to mature players and that high school or college intramural players will definitely find the 12 foot basket a handicap to their play. Opponents counter with the definite proof that scoring will drop off 30%; that the distance of rebounds is more dependent upon the angle of deflection than on the height of the basket; that goal tending and dunking are now adequately controlled by the rules; that it is unsound to make a change which affects thousands in order to restrict possibly 100 players; that all courts must be prepared for both 12 foot and 10 foot baskets which, aside from the cost, would necessitate adjustable backstops which have been unsatisfactory in all past experience. Standing between these two groups is the Rules Committee which in an approved democratic procedure calls for votes. Those who believe the present height should not be changed outvote the others by hundreds to one. When and if a czar is given control of athletics, and when dictatorship rules this country we may have a "progressive" committee that will override the wishes of the majority, but in the meantime I will side with the group that holds on to= a basket elevation under which a comparatively new game has enjoyed phenominal growth in popularity. I will remain opposed to a higher basket, whether or not I am on the Rules Committee, until adherents of the change show statistical proofiin the form of thousands of shots taken from a large number of angles and dis- tances by players of a variety of degree of experience, and then amplify this by records taken in a number of games. When such accurately and objectively collected data indicates that a higher basket is an improvement I'll change my support. 9. The present goal tending rule perhaps is discriminatory as you stated. When the change was discusssed, though, the only problem presented concerned the defensive actions of the tall men. No objection was raised concerning scoring activities of the tall man since Rule 9, section 9 requires that the hand must be away from the ball when the ball reaches the imaginary cylinder above the basket. Dunking, therefore, when strictly defined is penalized by the rule. That the taller man should be required to throw the ball still further, at least on pivot turn shots, now appears to be demanded although it was not mentioned as a evil last year. The most prominent suggestion along this line appears to be Hobson's experiment with 12 foot lanes. 10. Your statement that coaches have quit reseach in favor of a search for tall men describes a situation which is not new in basketball. When Dr. Naismith invented a game with elevated goals he placed a premium @ height. Other things being equal every coach has attempted to find or to devlopethe skill of tall players. Two ways to nullify this advantage are (1) place’a Limit on team members similar to that done for the cancelled 1940 Olympics; or (2) lower the basket to about 5 feet so all can reach it. ~ 5 - This is one of many letters I have written to coaches who have made proposals, and is in line with my plan to act as a delegate and repres- entative of them in this area. I desire to be informed of the wishes of the majority on all points open for argument and these wishes dictate the vote I cast when the topic comes before the Committee. Press of other duties made it necessary to prepare this letter in installments. Strenuous efforts have been made to keep it organized ‘and to avoid sarcasism or any statements arousing animosity. If I have written anything in a way as to give you offense I wish to apologize. My sole objective has been to-analyze your ideas as well as I could, and to put my reactions to them down on paper. Hope to see you at the NCAA games in Kansas City next this week. Yours truly, Mes George R. Edwards.