What a tremendous coup for Edwin Shrake (A Champagne Party for Joe and Weeb, Dec. 9)! The NFL still had six teams in contention and the AFL had four when his article "describing" the Jets' Super Bowl upset over Baltimore appeared. Among other things, Shrake should qualify as the prognosticator who replaces Tex Maule for the preseason selections in SI next year.
Could it be 1975 already? That is when most of the experts estimated the two leagues would finally become equal. Although many of us thought the Mets would bring the next championship to New York, we might have looked a little closer at the AFL domination of the interleague exhibition games for a preview.
WADE N. PATTERSON
Grants Pass, Ore.
I don't believe it! I do not believe it! Not only the supergame, but the superstory! You had better get a pretty good hold on Edwin Shrake—New York City will stop at nothing to get him as a weather forecaster.
Please ask Edwin Shrake to write a letter to his friend Max describing how the New York Knicks managed to beat the 76ers, the Bullets and the Lakers in the NBA playoffs.
By the way, should you happen to see Tex Maule, please ask him for me how his foot tastes.
I feel it should be said here and now that the performance of the New York Jets in the Super Bowl has to go down as one of the greatest moments in sport. It is for this reason that I wish to nominate Joe Willie Namath for Sportsman of the Year 1969. It might be a little early, but I feel there is nothing more that can be done in the world of sport which can overshadow what Mr. Namath did on Jan. 12.
FORE- AND HINDSIGHT
As anyone who has read SI for a few years knows, sometime in January we can expect an issue similar to the Jan. 13 number (Surfers and Sybarites). You continually publish pictures of young women in skimpy, revealing swimsuits that leave little to the imagination. If this practice continues, I may be forced to take out another subscription.
It's nice to know that Giorgio Sant' Angelo's creation, covering just enough of beautiful Erin Gray in front, consists "mainly of thin straps" in back. If he had enough hindsight, your photographer must have taken a shot of those straps and, as an old straphanger, I would like to see it.
I am writing about the apparent decline in the visual impact and quality of your famous (or infamous) January "swimsuit" issues (1963 et seq.). I believe SI is mistaken in departing from the criteria set forth by Jule Campbell in the Jan. 16, 1967 issue: "The girl has to look healthy, has to be the kind men turn around to stare at, has to have visible spirit and should be athletic." With this latest issue SI seems to have abandoned this formula in favor of a style and format more suited to Vogue, and I believe I am not alone in asking you to return to the "fundamentalism" that made the first issues so appealing.
CARTER B. STACK
Count us among the subscribers who are severely disappointed to see SI apparently betraying its professional standing by joining in the race for pinups.
LeROY J. HOLBERT, M.D.