DEPARTMENT OF ATHLETICS KANSAS STATE COLLEGE MANHATTAN, KANSAS September 24, 1940 Mr. Louis Menze Mr. George Edwards Mr. W. H. Browne Mr. Bruce Drake Dr. Forrest C. Allen Gentlemen: After extensive study and experimenting with the fan-shaped backboard I am convinced that its adoption with the present proposed dimensions would be a backward step in the game's progress. Anything that tends to reduce scoring hurts the game, and my findings have proved beyond a doubt that such would be the case should the new board be adopted. My decision is based on the following findings: 1. The new board is a poor target. When shooting from an angle the black ring is hard to see since the white background is eliminated. Medium-long and long angle shots become as difficult to convert as corner shots. 2. The new board does not have the necessary banking space for angle shots, and therefore, tends to discourage players from making such attempts. 3. The small board increases the number of out-of-bounds, therefore, there is more whistle blowing and too many unnecessary inter- ruptions which the spectators do not like. 4. The small backboard cuts down the number of rebound attempts which are thrilling to watch and an aid to scoring. 5. I have yet to find the player who likes the new board. To me the above points out-weigh the advantages the fan- shaped board would give to the spectators' visibility. Should the new board be adopted, resulting in decreased scoring, I doubt if we would need to worry much about filling the end seats. I am heartily in favor of removing the one-foot space below the basket and would be inaccord with thé modified board, but simply feel that our Rules Committee has done a little too much whittling for the good of the game. The new board's proponents have _ misrepresented it by claiming it to be a better target, thus promoting greater accuracy. Until a more suitable, modified board is presented this corner will cast a negative vote regarding its adoption. Sincerely 7 4 ack Gardner Head Coach of Basketball + JGsLR