Letters to the Editor

"GEM" Football

TO THE EDITOR:

I would like the following to serve as an open letter to the Presidents of the Ivy League members.

In a recent dispatch a coach was quoted as follows: "The Big Ten rule that limits our Rose Bowl team to 44 men is ridiculous. Our opponent is allowed to suit up 50 or 60 or as many players as they want." Isn't it also ridiculous, and so unnecessary, to permit even 44 players to suit up and possibly play? Even the NFL or the AFL does not permit this.

As a constructive cure and to add to the excellent and time-proved reforms already effected by the Ivy League in college football - abolishment of spring practice, banning of athletic scholarships, forbidding team or individual participation in bowl games, etc. - I recommend that the Ivy League also uniformly adopt Game Equalized Manpower (or "GEM") football.

"GEM" football would require no change in existing football rules. Without restricting the size of any squad it would necessitate, for each game, only a gentleman's agreement to play no more than 25 men. 22 players (to permit, if desired, the continuation of separate offensive and defensive teams) would be declared or made eligible before starting a game, and three unnamed players, or "wild cards," would be held in reserve for subsequent use as dictated by injuries, game strategy, or other reasons.

The resulting advantages of smaller squads, and consequent need for fewer players, could go a long way towards eliminating the hypocritical and corrupting proselyting that has plagued college football for so long - and which can't help but continue as long as the demand for good players continues to far exceed the supply. This restriction could also, perhaps, eliminate any further need for athletic scholarships, big gates, and participation in commercialized bowl games, and in so doing permit college football, which many colleges were forced to relinquish since World War II, to again become a "luxury" that everyone can afford.

Is it fair to continue to permit any school that can field, as an example, a squad of only 25 or less qualified players to play another school with 60 or more qualified and participating players? Is it necessary or desirable to play games which, for this reason alone, are all too often lost before they even start? And what exactly does winning such a game prove? Finally, should large football squads continue to be encouraged merely on the grounds that they permit many more to participate and play? No one appears to be too concerned or unhappy about college basketball — where squads of less than 15 men with only one coach, with sometimes no more than five men participating in a game, are quite common if not the rule.

The Ivy League has an excellent opportunity to continue to set a good example and lead the way. Or should college football be allowed to fade away, as some have already predicted? I believe that college football has always had, and continues to have, too much value and good to offer to any school to permit the latter.

Sunnyvale, Calif.

"Thoroughly Disgusted"

TO THE EDITOR:

I am distressed and shocked that the College, or whatever group played host, would permit the appearance last October of the so-called poet, Allen Ginsberg, and his socalled "wife," Peter Orlovsky, on its campus.

With their anti-Americanism voiced and with their personal filthy appearance, they are a shocking pair. Dartmouth should be ashamed that facilities, and perhaps expense money, were provided for their appearance.

A thoroughly disgusted member of the Class of 1922.

Bethlehem, Pa.

A Threat to the Campus

TO THE EDITOR:

The New York Times of January 14, 1967 carried a letter from William H. Timbers '37 titled "Highway Threat to Dartmouth." The author of this letter is Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut which should add some emphasis to his opinion as to the buckpassing that is taking place in this day of superhighway construction.

The point at issue is a proposed interchange in Norwich on Interstate Highway 91 just across the Connecticut River from Dartmouth College which, if constructed, "would pour heavy traffic of monstrous proportions across the Ledyard Bridge, along West Wheelock Street and through the heart of the Dartmouth Campus." The buckpassing results from the fact that the proposed location of the interchange is in Vermont, while Dartmouth is in New Hampshire. The editor of The New York Times, in a previous editorial, pointed out that "most Federal and state highway officials are alike in their basic indifference to community values, natural resources or esthetics."

Perhaps it is too late to raise one's voice. We hope not, but construction bids were due to go out in January. We trust the combined voices of the College administration and the alumni have been heard in protest to this threat to the character of the Dartmouth campus. The proposed interchange would be not only uneconomical, but unwanted and unnecessary. There are six other accesses to the interstate highway system within five miles of Hanover.

Can we save our campus, one of the most beautiful in our country, from this unnecessary encroachment?

West Hartford, Conn.

"Unwanted and Unnecessary"

TO THE EDITOR:

I expect the concern over the new interchange on Interstate Highway 91 is no longer a local matter. William H. Timbers' letter in The New York Times (13 January, 1967) reminded many of us away from Hanover of the "uneconomical, unwanted and unnecessary" danger of the whole business.

When Eleazar Wheelock went about his work, the words of another very pious man, Isaiah, were a good description of the College's situation. There are those who say it is not hard to read the words of a prophet in the College's motto even now. It now seems certain, however, that Isaiah's vision went far beyond just a vox clamantis indeserto. There are now voices in the land actually ready to make straight in the desert a highway fit for the Lord.

I think we can find evidence that the Lord has been able to find his way to Hanover in the past albeit following the most circuitous routes. Even for alumni who are accustomed to more impressive entrances, the interchange would be no special convenience since there are six other accesses to the Interstate Highway system within five miles of Hanover. The roads of Hanover will never be desolate, that is a happy certainty, but the irony is that they will be hardly worth visiting if the eager voices have their way.

New York, N. Y.

Tennis Heroes Slighted

TO THE EDITOR:

I came across the enclosed clipping* in the December issue of World Tennis. To my knowledge there was absolutely no mention of the tennis te.am in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE this autumn.

This is perhaps the finest achievement of the. Dartmouth tennis team in about thirty years, if not of all time. Here is a team that has the Eastern intercollegiate singles and doubles champions as well as being within two points of winning the team championship of the East. Shame on you for not bringing this to the attention of the alumni.

While I am on this subject, shame on the athletic department for not making room for at least one indoor tennis court in the new field house.

New Bern, N. C.

*In the EC AC Matches at West Point, October 9, Captain Charlie Hoeveler '67 defeated Maurio Obando of Penn State, the Costa Rican champion, to win the singles tournament for 1 and 2 players. He an a Bill Kirkpatrick '67 won the doubles tournament for No. 1 teams, and the Dartmouth team of Curt Anderson '67 and Roger Gutner '68 won the doubles in the second group. In the overall point scoring of the six singles and doubles tournaments, Harvard edged out Dartmouth, 33½ to 31½.