The students have blamed the college authorities for not realizing how impossible it is for our nine to compete with nines of other colleges without good instruction, but we have done the same thing ourselves with regard to foot-ball. We must all of us, faculty and students, understand, once for all, that it is just as impossible for the average man to excel in athletics without instruction, as it would be for him to excel in his studies without instruction; and that it is just as absurd to expect an uncoached crew, nine, foot-ball, lacrosse or cricket team from Harvard to beat a well coached team of another college, as it would be to expect a set of Harvard men who had received no instruction whatever in Greek prose or Calculus to surpass in an examination in these studies a set of carefully taught men from some other college, Our victories in rowing, thanks to Col. Bancroft's better coaching, proves the principle; our defeat in foot-ball, thanks partly to Mr. Camp's better coaching, proves the principle also. Moreover, coaching by a competent person does not mean merely better work of the same kind. It means a different kind of work, attention to details, a gradual improvement in the game, elimination of objectionable features. A score of instances could be mentioned in which superior head work, thoughtful training, such as a student cannot be expected to give has helped the Yale team. We all know how much weaker individually, and yet how much stronger collectively, Yale's nine was than ours last year. But there is no use multiplying instances. We have better foot-ball, base-ball, and other material than any college in the country,-and how little we accomplished with it ! Of course there are several influences to blame besides lack of coaching; such as proximity to a large city, high social standing not dependent on athletic attainments, and other influences that generate what is commonly lumped as "Harvard Indifference." But give us as good coaching in other branches of athletics as we now have in rowing, and in those branches too, we shall soon be supreme.
The subject of our choosing new editors from '87 has already been broached in our columns, and we take the opportunity now to repeat what we then said, that we shall shortly take on our board some men from the freshman class. But we cannot do this unless more men try for the position. The contributions received thus far have not been numerous, in fact have been decidedly few. Only a small number of men have written, and these not often. Such a state of affairs is all wrong. A college paper is as representative a part of a college as any of its athletic teams, and deserves just as much support. It is as much the duty of those men who can write to come forward and do their share, as it is the duty of an athlete to strive to give the college a leading place in athletics. '87 is not doing her part in a literary way, and we believe it to be not from inability, but from some unwillingness to do the work. Any contributions will be gladly received; no one need feel any anxiety on that score. There is no reason then why '87 should not do fully as much as the other classes, and it will be to its discredit if it fails. The editors will be chosen solely from the merits of the articles handed in, and we hope to revive more contributions so that those men who are chosen may be fit representatives of the freshman class.