all hope for the PCC. I'm disappointed—no, disgusted with the men who are
running this thing. They are all vindictive, hypocritical men too small to ever
be placed in the position of such authority over human lives. They have set a
far worse example by their actions than the athletic men whom they have judged
and chastised. Athletes don't ask fancy fees for their talents, only an
education. Don't try to make 'em pros. Just give 'em a free education. No
convertibles, no cash—just education. The boy can earn money in the summers for
cars, dates and clothes. The only fit solution is what many term ugly: the
athletic scholarship—board, room, tuition, books, fees, laundry but not one
dollar in cash."
Further north in
the PCC, football is still reeling from the scandal of the Roscoe (Torchy)
Torrance slush fund (SI, Feb. 20), which led to the University of Washington's
football misery. In the wake of this upheaval, feeling is also strong that all
money should now be channeled through universities' athletic departments. But
there was defiance just the same. As one alumnus—like most in this touchy area,
he preferred to remain anonymous—put it: "Under present conference
regulations, I think such a fund is necessary. Ours was mishandled by Torchy,
but it did a lot of good just the same."
contributes to Washington's legal grant-in-aid fund and was also a contributor
to the Torrance fund, sadly concurred:
football thing has become confused. Because of so much publicity, there seems
to be a sort of stigma attached to helping a kid through school. The feeling
seems to have got around that a man is a crook because he helps an athlete to
get an education.
ways," this alumnus concluded, "I think Red Sanders at UCLA was the
most honest guy of all. He saw to it that his football players got enough extra
over the conference allowance to live on. Of course, it was illegal as far as
the conference was concerned, and that's wrong. But he tried to see that
everybody was treated the same."
So much for the
PCC, that besieged citadel of grants-in-aid and the dollar honestly earned.
What is the situation elsewhere, where the football-frantic alumnus must work
through the universities if he wants to express his enthusiasm through
Here lies the
area of the athletic scholarship, the "free ride," which provides
tuition, room, board, books, fees and up to $15 per month for incidentals. It
is, to judge by the answers received to SPORTS ILLUSTRATED'S questionnaire, a
far more satisfactory arrangement—but still inadequate. Many of the alumni
clubs and booster organizations questioned stated their belief that more help,
usually in cash form by individual alumni, was needed—and forthcoming.
In the great
majority of cases the athletic scholarships are administered through the
university, usually the athletic department. The money for them is raised by
annual dues, and is presented either in the form of a direct donation, or used
to pay the bills sent by the university for the items covered by the
scholarship. The question arises: Who gets this aid—both scholarship and
cash—and on what basis?
The question can
be disposed of in short order. The president of a prominent southwestern
booster club, who asked that his name be withheld, succinctly expressed the
prevalent practice: "The athlete is judged on the basis of whether the
coach tells us he wants him or not."
for which this man spoke is dedicated "99%" to giving aid to football
players, both in scholarships and individual help by individual members. In
defending the practice, he added: