iversity
because they do not drain on the univer
sity’s educational money.' The Athletic
Department is (at least at Penn State) a
self-supporting operation; it makes
money.
And if we assume that the existence of
all other varsity teams at Penn State is
justifiable, then the football program
benefits the university by financing all
their operations.
However, the financially autogenous
structure of the Athletic Department is not
by itself .reasonable justification for its
continued operation. But as the
football team is winning big, the surplus
money generated by bowl windfalls and
television contracts is channeled into'
improving the intramural facilities for the
students, building new tennis courts, and
upgrading the available facilities in
general.' This is a distinct, measurable
benefit of the program.
Another measurable plus for big-time
football is the interest in the University it
keeps alive in the alumni. This means
money; for the Athletic Department (Levi
Lamb Fund); and, more importantly to
this examination, for the university’s
growth (Alumni Fund). Football keeps the
alumni active with their alma mater.
As one alumnus stated, “If I was a
geology graduate, why would I ever come
back except for football? To visit my fa
vorite rocks?”
As far as football’s assets to the average
student, the arguments divide-sharply.
Penn State students started the sport,
but every year the Athletic Department
recruits the high school graduates that it
wants to play it. So apart is the program
from the university that students who only
wish to watch practice are ordered to
leave.
At the'state.-funded Pennsylvania State
University last spring, 19 of 27 recruits
didn’t even' attend high school in Penn
sylvania. However, education at Penn
State, to be sure, is not offered exclu
sively to Pennsylvanians.
Even when the students are allowed to
watch the team, they receive the worst
seats in Beaver Stadium. Money may not
be all important in the football program,
but it does seem that Rec Hall caters
much better to spectators bearing $7.50
than to its most vocal supporters, the
students.
As mentioned above, the program does
fund athletic improvements exclusively
for the students. It also provides socially
important functions.
■ ;|h- 1 __ .
It used to belong to the students
• The first Penn State intercollegiate
football contest was Nov. 12, 1881. The
students first issued a challenge to
Bucknell, it was accepted, and on the
afternoon of Nov. 11 the team left State
College in two horse drawn rigs. The
carriages were left at a livery in Spring
Mills where the team caught the train
to Lewisburg. On the next afternoon, in
a drizzling rain, Penn State won 9-0.
Intercollegiate football at Penn State
has seen four major eras since
students of the Pennsylvania State
College organized the sport in the
1880’s. But it wash’t until 1887 that the
students had their athletic association
organized well enough to field a team
that owned a schedule.
At its beginning, students handled
every aspect of the football program,
even the coaching. Students comprised
the athletic association in its entirety.
They eiven made the schedules and
chose the starting teams.
In the years following the students
tried to improve and expand the
program, but, lacking funds, they
eventually turned to the alumni.
. The era of alumni control began in
1908 the students reorganized
their association and transferred the
authority for the business and
management affairs to the alumni.
Under the alumni the program
moved into the “Golden Era,” the
period immediately following the First
Among new aquaintances, over a few
beers in the evening, talk usually includes
football.
There can be no denying that students in the public mind is one of the important
genuinely love college football. They love expressions of the College’s activities, and
to read about it, talk about it and watch it. this is particularly true of football. Ex-
More than simply entertainment, the' cellence in competition is expected: by
team . adds an additional element to Alumni as an evidence of the good spirit
campus in the fall which makes that term and adequate physical training of ;the
seem best. It’s not school spirit it’s student body, in fact, as a reflection of one
impossible to love an institution like Penn of the accomplishments of the College.
State. Perhaps it’s a feeling of in- Teams need not win every time, but they
volvement and union with the entire must win a reasonable number of times in
student body and alumni. The heart of the a given period if the Alumni and public are
university is in Beaver Stadium on home to believe" in' the soundness of this
game afternoons. It’s a valuable feeling, partiqylar phase of College activity.”
Even though the football program But even if the Alumni committee in
touches only a very small number of 1935 failed to report them, there are strong
students, it must still answer one fun- arguments that correlate intellectual
damental question to justify its presence development and athletics,
in the university community: Does Dr. Paul Weiss, Sterling Professor of
contribute to the intellectual growth of its“ Philosophy at Yale University, writes in
participants? n , favor of sports:
Again the answers separate. . j “No one seems to have discovered a
As viewed by the alumni after establish- {better way for producing fine adults than
ment of the College of Physical Education, by making young men learn how to make
college football was to be a showpiece for creative use of rules which demand self
the university, with the actual benefits to discipline, thoughtfulness, and
the participants secondary considerations cooperation. Such rules govern athletic
at best. In 1935, the Special Alumni events...lt is sometimes contended that
Committee on Athletics reported the athletics not only builds bodies but
following need for college football: character.
The Daily Collegian Fall Sports Preview Friday, September 13, 1974
World War. During the period from
1921 to 1929, the team repeatedly
generated surplus revenue in access of
$25,000. These were also the years
Penn State made two trips to the West
Coast, beating Washington 21-7 in
Seattle in 1921, and losing to Southern
California 14-3 in the 1923 Rose Bowl.
But late in the decade, amid
mounting criticism from t ,the in
tellectual community, the rapid
growth of football at Penn State was
halted.
Specifically, there were two evils
singled out; subsidizing (awarding
scholarships); and proselyting
(recruiting). Penn State began its
curtailment of big-time athletics evefi
before the famous Carnegie Foun
dation report on college athletics was
published in 1929, which documented
abuses and-irregularities in college
athletic programs.
In 1926 the Alumni Athletic Board
sliced scholarships from 75 to 50. The
following year the board ended this
subsidizing program completely.
That started a period of de-emphasis
that lasted well into the 1930’5. During
this time, scouting was forbidden,
spring practice was voluntary, and
scholarships were not awarded. At this
time the alumni also recommended
that the Department of Physical
Education be separated from the
coaching of intercollegiate athletics.
“The School of Physical Education and
Athletics has a most potent influence on
Alumni attitude...lntercollegiate athletics
.JP&r.
Thus in January, 1930, the Board of
Trustees approved and established the
new college.
The “Alumni News” of Feb:, 1930,
recorded the fact with the following
note: i
“All members of the School ofi
Physical Education and the Athletics
staff, including present and future
coaches, are to be employed as regular
membelrs of thej academic staff of the
College, and are to be responsible to
the college administration in the same
manner as are faculty members of the
six other schools of the College.”
Slowly, the attitudes on football
relaxed, the de-emphasis of football
was itself de-emphasized, .and after
toiling through ithe ’3o’s, Penn State
experienced its 'East losing season in
1938. The new era, the winning, ,
streamlined, professionalized era, is y
the one-that somes up to the present.
The whole tiling started with an
unorganized group of students, who
probably learned a lot running such a
disorganized program with
problems (the Columbia game inM93
ended in dispute when spectators ran
onto the field and helped Columbia
push over the final touchdown.) Of
ficiating was very bad and eligibility
rules nonexistent.
But it all belonged to the students at
Penn State, back in the 1880’s and 90’s.
—Rick Starr
“Character, it has long been known, is
best forged by making men face crises in
the little; by being pushed up against
limits they define themselves. If they are
made to‘do this again and again in the
same areas, firm habits are established,
enabling the men to act without much
reflection and yet with surety and
precisian.
“Properly trained, the men gradually
learn how to act quickly and yet suc
cessfully; properly aimed, their actions
will be productive of what enriches while
it satisfies. -As a result of their athletic
activity the men will become more alert to
the insistence and rights of others, both
those with whom they play and those
against whom they play.
“If athletic training will lead to such
outcomes as these more expeditiously
than other means allow, it will provide a
strong justification for sport programs’.”
In the final analysis, any realistic
conclusion must support the continuance
of professionalized collegiate athletics, at
least temporarily. But this does not mean
all is well. ; ’
Although little has been said up to this
point about scholarship abuses, recruiting
abuses, 'the influence of athletic depaijt
(continued on page 10)