Some wisdom from Bud Wilkinson
Oklahoma’s Bud Wilkinson, a former assistant at SU, began a series of articles imparting more of his wisdom on the problems on college football on September 8th. The first one was about financial support for athletes and the definition of amateurism. “Troubles besetting big-time college football stem from the following causes: 1) Intense public interest in football; 2) Different interpretations of the word “amateurism” and 3) the independence of the average American, who will not obey laws that he doesn’t believe in. Combine the high level of interest and place a boy in a framework in which he receives no financial support from the school. Then an outsider who wants to see his team play well, if he is financially able, is going to help the boy. When that happens the school has lost control. It is vitally important that college faculties have control over college athletics….(An athlete) should only receive what it costs to attend school I do not consider that to be paying him.“ Bud said that athletic scholarships enable players to pursue both academic and athletic goals, regardless of his economic background. He contrasted the plight of football players to tennis players who were paid expenses but remained “amateurs” and baseball players who were allowed to play for semi-pro teams in the summer and then came back in the fall to play for college teams. “There is a definite belief among some administrators that it professionalizes a boy if you give him any financial assistance. “ Bud cited examples of people bending the law when they didn’t belief in it. “Most people do not interpret the tax laws in the spirit in which they were intended but rather in the spirit of seeing what the government will let them get away with. The 18th amendment on prohibition is another example. To solve this problem, it will be necessary for academic administrators to recognize that, with the high level of public interest , they must pass legislation the public believes in and will support. If realistic legislation is enacted, then we will return to the days when the boy selects his college rather than the college selecting him.
Bud also had some things to say about bowl games:
“The evils inherent in bowl games were a direct result of opportunities for tremendous financial gain for the competing schools. A few years ago, if a team’s record was sufficiently good and it was chosen to participate in a bowl game, it would clear anywhere from $100,000 to $150,000. The opportunity caused a number of schools to embark on football programs which were predicated on the possibility of receiving a bowl bid once every two or three years. Salaries of the coaches, the grant-in-aid program the maintenance of practice fields, purchase of equipment and other expenses might exceed the regular season income. Bowl game receipts would meet and exceed these expenses.
If things did not go according to plan- if the team wasn’t invited to the bowl- each succeeding year created greater pressures. These pressures sometimes led to practices that were not in the best interests of football. Coaches take a dim view of bowl games for a very practical reason. The memory of a sports fan is short and all too often the success or failure of the season depended on the outcome of the bowl game, since that was the campaign’s wind=up. Forgotten in the bitterness and disappointment of the January 1 defeat were the victories and the conference championship of the previous autumn.”
But didn’t suggest a solution to this problem and we haven’t found one today, either.
In another article Bud discussed football formations, one of which was “Spread football which has one back deep behind an unbalanced line, both ends spread 10 yards from their tackles and the remaining three backs in the gap between the tackle and end of either side.” Nothing new under the sun? “The merits of various offensive formations are not nearly as vital as the execution of offensive fundamentals. These are the ability to run, block, fake and throw the ball while running. Teams executing these fundamentals well can operate from any formation and win.
In another column Bud explained how Oklahoma “checks” athletes- that is selects them as high school players they wish to recruit. “The foundation of a winning team is always the material.” Players in those days were often referred to as “the material” as if the coach was a seamstress knitting a garment. “In checking prospective athletes we analyze the situation in this manner. We check the boy’s grades. He must be able to do better than average college work. Another factor is scholastic ambition- the desires to pursue his course and a attain a degree. Then we check is character and finally his athletic ability. If he falls short in either the scholastic or moral standpoint, he is of little use to Oklahoma as an athlete.” Was it ever really like that?
Bud says it’s easier to evaluate talent in other sports. “In track you measure the distance of the throw or the jump. In basketball, you total his shots and note his defense. Football, essentially, is a game of desire and morale. Areal potential depends on these qualities. “ Oklahoma players just wanted it more than the other guys. Bud does warn against recruiting guys who have peaked too soon, siting the example of a player who was all-state two years in a row and came to Oklahoma expecting to be a star and never made the varsity and another who was ”more noted as a French horn artist” but an Oklahoma alumnus noted his “great desire” and the player stared at tackle for the Sooners for two years, despite being only 180 pounds. Even Oklahoma looked for the “under-the-radar” guys. He also felt the player should be happy at the school and that football should be fun. “A good way to see if you have a happy team is the attitude of the alumni.” That seemed a strange statement. I think he meant the attitude of players after they left school- if it’s still good, they had fun there. “Not only have we had boys of high caliber scholastically, morally and athletically but they enjoyed football and become our best salesmen.”
Tradition is important, too. “Tradition is something that evolves slowly. It is unfortunate if you don’t have it but it is the greatest asset in athletics when you do have it. A team imbued with a winning tradition plays to win and knows by extending its best effort it will usually win. Your opponents enter the game with a mental hazard to overcome. They realize they are not likely to win. Addition of those factors gives your team a tremendous advantage. “
On September 12, it was announced that Athletic Director Lew Andreas had negotiated with old friend Bud Wilkinson to have the Orange travel to Norman Oklahoma again to the play the Sooners in a regular season game in 1962. There was no return date involved, (altho9ugh we would be playing Oklahoma in the 1959 Orange Bowl). But still, it was a coup to get a game with what had become the nation’s most prominent program, on that had won two straight national championships and 40 games in arrow. Ben Schwartzwalder said “You know, nobody scares that Lou….at least that’s one game we don’t have to worry about this year. – and we’re glad of it.” Arnie Burdick joked that Andreas would be scheduling the Cleveland Browns next. He told Andreas, “You’ll be remembered as the fellow who (1) persuaded Schwartzie to come to and remain at Syracuse and brought off a successful game- that is to raise Syracuse’s schedule to that of national prominence.” But Arnie was concerned that Syracuse’ shortage of team speed would put them at too much of a disadvantage against the Sooners but he noted that they’d have until 1962 to close the gap. (Actually they had 15 months to do so.)
On September 19th, another announcement came: Syracuse was to get “a second chance at the Orange Bowl”. A game had been set up for the end of the 1960 in Miami to play the Hurricanes for the first time ever- and, of course, they played in the Orange Bowl, “scene of the 1953 disaster”. The Post Standard noted that this would be only the “fifth bona-fide southeastern foe” Syracuse had faced after (Alabama (1923 and 1953), Duke( 1938-39), Florida, (1931) and North Carolina Pre-Flight (1942)- it was a very regional game in those days. The Hurricanes, a small-college team until 1936, had begun to flex their muscles in the post war era, famously winning the 1946 Orange Bowl over Holy Cross on a last play 89 yard interception return, losing there to Clemson by a point in 1951 after finishing the regular season undefeated except for a tie, then beating the same Tigers in the Gator bowl a season alter. They’d been ranked 11th in 1954 and 6th in 1956, although, strangely they were not selected for bowl games in those years.. Lew Andreas: “I know we’ll do a lot better there this time than the last.” Little did he know that we’d be –playing in the Orange Bowl before then- and have something else to make up for.
You might enjoy this You-Tube clip of that famous 1946 Orange Bowl game. I did:
A 9/14 editorial in the Herald announced that the Big Ten had stated the era of professionalism in college sports by giving out athletic scholarships. The total amount allowed was $200,000 in the first year but it was to rise to $2 million by the fourth year. “The schools figure is cost $10,000 to get a “representative” player through college in the country’s most football happy section. The money, in about one fourth of the cases, covers room, board tuition, books and fees. In the main it pays for whatever the player or his family is unable to meet. “ the paper compared the new procedure to baseball’s reserve clause, noting that when a players signs a scholarship agreement with the school, if they ever transfer to another schools “they cannot engage in athletics there.” The value of the scholarship varied depending on the family financial means. “Parents of each boy accepted field out a questionnaire that makes the federal income tax statement look like public property. It includes not only such data as is required in the infamous form 1040 but information on wealthy friends or relatives and money saved for college from odd jobs including paper routes. The returns are fed into an electronic brain at Princeton University’s College Scholarship Service, (I though the Ivys had opted out of big-time football), and the financial answer is returned. Some coaches are shocked by the news that a father earing $5,000 to $6,000 a year must contribute from $540 to $720 to the education of a football son.” Doug Mills the AD at Illinois, reported that “most coaching staffs restricted themselves to 30-35 freshman football players and 15-20 athletes in all other sports. The schools, Mills said, do not need any more freshmen than that to replace varsity members “and besides it would cost too much.” It’s interesting that traveling squads were generally not much more than the 30-35 football scholarships they were planning to give out each year just to freshmen. “Gate receipts will carry most of the freight- just like professional football- and rich alumni are expected kick the rest into a general fund.” The editorial says that the schools were setting up the grant-in-aid program “to avoid excesses in recruiting player material which have long been associated with schools turning out perennial football powerhouses.” Athletic scholarships were considered to be “paying the players” when they were created and were supposed to the answer to the excesses of recruiting. Now of course we are talking about paying the players a salary beyond that to deal with the same, continuing problem.
