In a letter to the Princeton Alumni Weekly a graduate of that institution advocates giving the game of football back to the students. The present predicament at Princeton with the retirement of Roper as coach is seen as an opportunity to try out this theory, Harvard will be the first to join with Princeton in this venture, according to the writer, and the influence of these colleges will rescue intercollegiate football from the oblivion towards which over-mechanization and the autocratic control of coaches is rushing it.
Obviously the coaching situation at Princeton is in a position where such alterations could hardly make it worse, but it is doubtful whether the granting of more authority to the captain or the relegation of the coach to the press box would make the game any better. This system has been tried out in college baseball with no very conclusive results, but it is fairly certain that the players themselves do not want the coach to relinquish his control. A coach is necessary to make substitutions in football and direct the team insofar as he is allowed under the present rules. These are functions which can not be carried out efficiently by the captain, whose worries are great enough now to affect his playing ability. Certainly no one wants a coach who moves his men about like pawns on a chess board even if the rules allowed such manipulations. His position is on the sidelines during a game and his presence there can hardly be said to have an unwholesome influence on the game.