D

LELAND D. CASE e C) | N
) ! < / \ ; / \ TELEPHONE
EDITOR STATE 4016

; PAUL TEETOR
ASSISTANT EDITOR

 

 

OFEISIAL: MAGA ZANE. OF TRROTLAR YING ERNAT TONAL 35 EAST WACKER DRIVE
HARVEY C. KENDALL
BUSINESS AND © CH ICAG O, ELE.
ADVERTISING MANAGER U.S.A.
August Ninth

Dear Dr. Allen:

In order to facilitate matters in the preparation of your
side of the debate on the question "Should College Athletes Be
Subsidized?" I am listing herewith some of the points covered in
Major Griffith's outline:

He grants that some college and university athletes are
at present subsidized even in violation of existing rules, but insists
that there have been no laws but have not been broken at some time.
We must have rules and regulations even in a "perfect" society. Even
though subsidies are granted, there would still be the necessity for
regulations inasmuch as the larger institutions would be able to hire
the_ best athletes if there were no "salary" limit.

Good students, he maintains, are entitled to scholarships
and the benefit of loan funds and employment agencies for students,
regardless of whether they are athletes or not. He states further
that in the Big Ten athletes are not receiving mow favor in this
phase of student help than are non-athletes. The athletes should not
be discriminated against. However, to make a cash award because a
men has definite athletic abilities would be to divide students into
classes.

As a whole, schools go into the red in the expense of their
athletic departments, so there would be only the larger schools which
make a net profit on football that could afford to pay athletes, and
even for those schools that can afford this, the payment for stars
would handicap intramural sports which may have to depend to some
extent on the income from football. If the larger institutions could
afford to pay salaries, probably 80% of the other colleges and univer-
sities could not afford to pay their players. In other words, sub-
sidizing would interfere with a well-rounded program of physical
education.

With paid players, the students and alumni would lose in-~
terest. Furthermore, there would be danger that athletes themselves
would lose sight of the purpose of college athletics and would look
more to their reward in dollars and cents rather than the honor they
have in representing their respective institutions and in their personal
development, morally and physically.

I am submitting these few points chiefly to expedite matters
in the preparation of your manuscript. In planning our debates it has
not been our policy to show manuscripts to the author writing the
opposing side of the question, for our spatial limitations will not
permit a rebuttal. In stating the above points, I must ask that you not