 | Board of Visitors minutes September 26, 1952 |  |
On call of The Rector, a special meeting of the Board of Visitors of The Rector and
Visitors of the University of Virginia was held on this date at 10:30 A.M., in the office of Mr.
Thomas B. Gay, Electric Building, Richmond, Virginia. The following were present: The Rector,
Barron F. Black; President Colgate W. Darden, Jr., of the University of Virginia, Visitors
Carrington, Gay, Howard, Mears, and Wheeler. Absent: Visitors Barksdale, Coxe, Emmett, Gravatt,
Mrs. Smith, Mr. Smith, Talbott, and Wailes.
MONSANTO FELLOWSHIP
The Board accepted the offer of the Monsanto Chemical Company to establish an annual
fellowship of $2500 at the University of Virginia. The fellowship carries a stipend of $1500 to
the recipient, and $1000 to the department for miscellaneous overhead expenses in connection with
administration of the fellowship.
ATHLETIC REPORT
The President presented the recommendations of the University Senate concerning the
control of athletics at the University. The report was referred to the Athletic Committee which
was asked to furnish copies of the report to the officers of the Alumni Association.
FRESHMAN PARTICIPATION IN VARSITY ATHLETICS
President Darden stated that he had requested Mr. Tebell, Director of Athletics, to
present to the University Senate the request of the Athletic Department to use freshmen in varsity
football for the session 1952-53 only. Upon completion of the presentation, the Senate
voted 12 to 3 not to lift the ban for the current session.
The President then asked Mr. Tebell to present the case to the Board.
Mr. Tebell stated that it is his belief that, as a general policy, it is not a healthy
thing to use freshmen on varsity teams. However, the football team is suffering from a man power
shortage and all of our competitors will use freshmen, and he feels it is unfair for our teams
if we do not let freshmen participate. To safeguard the team, a doctor carefully checks them
for injuries.
How many freshmen would be used?
Mr. Tebell:
About six.
Mr. Gay:
How many freshmen are on athletic scholarships?
Mr. Tebell:
Twelve full time and two part time.
Mr. Gay:
Mr. Tebell, please tell the Board about these individuals. I am disturbed at
the possibility that boys might be brought in just to play one year who could not meet our academic
requirements to stay in school.
Mr. Darden:
The recruitment of football players in the spring was on the assumption that
they would not play with varsity teams. Hence, there was no incentive for the coaches to recruit
men who would not stay beyond the first year.
Mr. Tebell.
It is a natural tendency for coaches to go overboard in seeking to obtain
good football players. However, I feel that the new Admissions Committee serves as an adequate
brake on the football coaches. I wish to state that no member of my coaching staff attempts to
bring any pressure on the Admissions Committee.
Mr. Black:
Is participation in freshmen football as rugged as participation in varsity?
Mr. Tebell:
No. Freshmen are simply in training. They have a schedule of only four
games as compared with ten for the varsity.
Mr. Gay:
What will be the effect on the success of the schedule if the University does
not play freshmen in varsity football?
Mr. Tebell:
If we do not have any injuries, we can get along okay. If we suffer many
injuries, we would be handicapped as we have few reserve players.
Mr. Black:
Has this question been brought before the 3-3-3 Council?
Mr. Tebell:
Yes, last spring. The 3-3-3 Council decided not to ask the Senate to relax
the rule.
Mr. Black:
Was not this decision reached after the Southern Conference had announced its
plan to use freshmen?
Mr. Tebell:
At about the same time in May.
Mr. Black:
I understand that you feel participation of freshmen in varsity football is
not advisable.
Mr. Tebell:
Yes, as a general policy.
Mr. Black:
Why?
Mr. Tebell:
Many of the boys who come out for freshman football are non-scholarship
holders. If we abolish freshman football, these boys would not try for the varsity as there would
be a slim chance of their participating. Fifty to sixty non-scholarship boys will come out for
freshman football, but the coaches would add only the scholarship boys to the varsity team if there
was no freshman team. One reason why the 1952-53 varsity team is so small is because we had no
freshman team last year. However, I believe we could transfer five or six freshmen to the varsity
team and continue the freshman team without disturbing its schedule or the participation of non-scholarship
boys.
Mr. Black:
Is the freshman schedule less gruelling?
Mr. Tebell:
That is my opinion.
Mr. Carrington:
Dr. Frankel is disturbed because the varsity squad is so small. He
believes there is less danger of injury if the boys do not have to play until they are exhausted.
Why should the freshman rule be relaxed this year?
Mr. Tebell:
There are three reasons. (1) A lack of man power on the varsity team. We
are about sixteen short of a desirable squad. (2) The possibility of greater injuries because
the boys have to play for longer periods. (3) There is a greater chance of winning if we can use
some of the freshmen.
Mr. Black:
What would be our standing in the NCAA and the American Council on Education
if we relaxed this rule?
Mr. Tebell:
All major conferences except the Southern and Southeastern bar freshmen.
The NCAA regulation is only advisory.
Mr. Carrington:
Do most of our competitors grant more scholarships than we do?
Mr. Tebell:
The Southeastern limits scholarships to 125, but there is no restriction
in the Southern Conference. The University of Virginia gets ten scholarship boys each year or
about 40 total.
Mr. Howard:
Would freshmen be of any value in the game tomorrow?
Mr. Tebell:
Not on offense. However, they could help out on defense.
Mr. Gay:
Do immature boys get hurt more frequently than older students?
Mr. Tebell:
There is no more hazard for freshmen than for older men.
Mr. Gay:
What would be the effect if we raised the ban now?
Mr. Tebell:
I believe it would stimulate freshman participation, particularly in
sports other than football where they have a better chance of making the varsity team.
The Rector thanked Mr. Tebell for appearing and he left the meeting.
Mr. Howard:
What position would it put Mr. Darden in if we reversed the action of the
Senate?
Mr. Darden:
I don't believe the rule ought to be relaxed. I regret that I have to
differ with Dick Carrington.
I have no confidence that the Southern or Southeastern Conference will go back to the
freshman rule at the end of this session. I think we are going to have to cross the bridge
sooner or later.
You will recall the Southern Conference Presidents voted overwhelmingly against the use
of freshman. There are four major reasons for my position.
(1) I believe abolishing the freshman rule would greatly limit the number of students
who participate in football. That is why we have such a small squad this year.
(2) I do not believe a boy can do satisfactory academic work in his first year under
the grind of varsity football.
(3) I think physically it is a mistake to put young boys in varsity competition.
(4) Abolishing the rule will impair the academic standing of the University.
The Secretary was asked to read a letter from Mr. Mears to Mr. Talbott in which Mr.
Mears stated that he felt we should use freshmen if our competitors plan to use them.
The Rector read a letter from Dr. Emmett supporting Mr. Mears' position.
Mr. Darden:
There are a great many temperate middle ground men on the Senate. It is
awfully important that there be close cooperation between the governing board and academic
groups of the University. I believe the reversal of the Senate would drive the faculty into the
hands of the extremists. Mr. Tebell feels he can develop a satisfactory athletic program under
the rules adopted by the Senate.
Mr. Gay:
What is in the best interest of the general athletic program of the University?
We are not trying just to win this year but to establish the best policy. We should not
do something in derogation of the best interest of student participation in football.
Mr. Black:
I believe that if the freshman rule is a good rule, we should adhere to the
principle and not vary from it this year.
Mr. Gay proposed the following resolution:
RESOLVED, that the rule prohibiting the playing of first year men in varsity athletic
competition be adhered to.
Mr. Howard:
If I thought the Southern Conference were going back to the freshman rule
I would be more inclined to waive the rule for this year. However, if we relax the rule at this
time it would be a bad thing. I believe freshmen will make better students if they do not participate.
In the long run, I believe the University will be respected for its stand.
Mr. Carrington:
Does this resolution apply to all sports?
Mr. Gay:
No, only to football.
Mr. Darden stated that he believes Mr. Carrington's question is important and he does
not feel that one sport should be discriminated against.
After discussion of the matter, it was decided not to change the resolution, and leave
the question of other sports to be decided upon at a later date if a petition were presented by
the athletic authorities of the University.
Upon vote, the resolution was passed. Mr. Carrington and Mr. Mears asked to be recorded
as voting No.
On motion the meeting was then adjourned.
Rector
Secretary
| Board of Visitors minutes September 26, 1952 | |