/I I1 _ - -:: __= I_ _. -: * -- II_ 00 libi i~iniiiiE~i~~i _i II I I I I II I FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY to The University of Michigan John Richard Behee Director of Physical Education Tri-State College, Angola, Indiana DISTRIBUTED BY Uhlrich's Books Inc. 549 E. University Ave. Ann Arbor, Mich. 48104 Copyright 1971 by John R. Behee ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 77-173360 Printed in the United States of America by Lithocrafters Inc. 7101 Jackson Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Preparing this acknowledgment bears a strong resemblance to organizing an athletic banquet. There are many who must be publicly thanked even at the risk of overlooking a few deserving boosters. My wife, Judy, tops the list. She was in all ways splendidly irreplaceable with her encouragement, listening, proof reading, and understanding. This work received the strong support and guidance of Drs. Paul Hunsicker and Guy Reiff of the University of Michigan. Most of the research was completed in the Michigan Historical Collections Library whose Director, Dr. Robert Warner, and staff were continuously helpful. Of that staff I would like especially to thank Tom Powers, J. Fraser Cocks, III and Miss Mary Jo Pugh. Generous with their time in interviews were H. O. Crisler, E. D. Mitchell, Ben Oosterbaan, Marcus Plant, Ira Smith and Mrs. Fielding Yost. The first three were also asked to read the first copy of this writing. They willing did so and offered their reactions. To those deserving boosters whom I undoubtedly overlooked, my profound thanks. FOREWORD Exciting, competitive, and vivid with color and pagaentry-that's college football. When crowned with a rich tradition of excellence, that's Michigan football. The name most associated with carving out this tradition is Fielding H. Yost. In fact, when you ask who pioneered football in the Midwest the men most frequently mentioned are Amos Stagg, my coach at Chicago, and Fielding Yost. Because of his significance both to Michigan and the Midwest an account of Yost's work is vastly worth recording. It should be especially interesting to those greying Michigan supporters who cherish first hand acquaintances with Yost and many of his teams, but it deserves a much wider reading. Anyone who has sat in the magnificent Michigan Stadium and felt a natural curiosity about how it became a reality, will enjoy this book. Beyond these groups, any lover of sports will be fascinated with this in-depth study of a legendary sports figure. This is a very meticulous study, but its real strength lies in the candor with which Yost's achievements and human frailties are equally portrayed. Its length, writing style, and sound scholarship should serve as a challenge to others writing sports history. H. O. "Fritz" Crisler June 26, 1971 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I THE PERSPECTIVE.......................... 1 II FIELDING H. YOST: A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. 17 III THE YEARS AS UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN FOOTBALL COACH.......................... 48 IV THE YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS.... 95 V MICHIGAN BUILDS A 'SHOWCASE' OF ATHLETIC FACILITIES................... 137 VI YOST AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION...........183 VII SUMMING UP...............................199 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES................. 207 Chapter I THE PERSPECTIVE While thumbing through Fielding Harris Yost's scrapbooks one becomes convinced that he was a man of broad vision who dreamed of building a Women's Athletic Building, an Intramural Sports Building and outstanding varsity facilities at the University of Michigan so that his dream of "Athletics-for-All" might became a reality. Indeed, sportswriters claimed, his interests ran deeper than intercollegiate athletics as shown by his intimate involvement in the University's four-year course which trained coaches and teachers of health and physical education. Because of the great sentiment that became synonymous with Yost's name to so many, it is hard to separate actual contributions from idealization. Few coaches received greater publicity in the sports world than did Yost in his era. Millions came to know him through the sports page, radio, his writings and public speaking engagements. Just as the sportswriters probably created too glowing an image of Yost, I suspected that opponents of intercollegiate athletics, or of Yost personally, would not have appraised his efforts honestly either. His flair for publicity and unabashed boasting were sure to engender professional jealousies. There were Michigan faculty engaged in educational research, writing or teaching that academicians considered far more important than athletics. Yet, their salaries and public recognition did not approach Yost's. It was my dubious privilege to investigate the legacy of Yost to the University of Michigan, and its basis in historical fact. Privilege, because of the esteem in which Yost was held by so many. Dubious, because the collection of his correspondence, scrapbooks, official reports, speeches, writings and other materials took one full year to wade through.' Fielding Yost was introduced to football in 1895, began coaching in 1897 and came to the University of Michigan in 1901. A look at the beginnings of college atheletics will help set the scene for his arrival in Ann Arbor. 1. It is housed in the Michigan Historical Collections Library on the University of Michigan campus under the title University of Michigan-Athletic Papers. Further references to it are abbreviated UMAP. 1 2 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Athletics were developed spontaneously by the students in the early days of the American colleges. The years 1853 to 1885 were characterized by a comparatively slow growth up to about 1870, and by a more rapid growth thereafter. Those students who were the most proficient and/or the most interested in sports assumed the leadership. They soon followed the impulse to test their mettle against other college or club teams. Intercollegiate rowing appeared in 1852, baseball in 1858, and football in 1869. Track sports developed more slowly. The Intercollegiate Association of Amateur Athletics of America was founded in 1875, and in the following year its first intercollegiate track and field meeting was held at Saratoga.2 College students began tennis clubs in the 1880's.3 By 1879, both the college students and the athletic clubs of the cities had established associations for the administration and control of athletics.4 Football dominated student interests in the fall; baseball, track and field and tennis were popular in the spring. Ultimately, it was college football that came to attract the largest crowds, became complex enough to require a full-time business manager and received the sharpest criticism from college authorities.5 Its practices seemed to be straining unwritten concepts of amateurism and the belief that athletics provided a wholesome outlet for student energies. The Carnegie Study reported that up to 1880 neither training nor coaching in American athletics had become specialized. Training tables were unknown; uniforms were the simplest. What coaching existed was done by faculty members, graduates or an apparently well-qualified undergraduate. After 1880, paid coaches came increasingly to be the rule rather than the exception, although they were only seasonally employed.6 While 1880 may be a very accurate date for coaching in Eastern college football, the year 1890 seems more appropriate for the Midwest. It was charged by some that the Carnegie Study had a strong "Eastern bias," and it may be true in this instance. Midwestern football teams were perhaps five to ten years behind the four Eastern powers, namely, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Pennsylvania. While the Princeton-Rutgers football game of 1869 is generally regarded as the first intercollegiate 2. Howard J. Savage, American College Athletics, New York: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1929, pp. 18-20, hereafter referred to as the Carnegie Study. 3. Deobold Van Dalen, Elmer D. Mitchell and Bruce Bennett, A World History of Physical Education, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.; Prentice Hall, Inc., 1953, p. 411. 4. Arnold Flath, "A History of the Relation Between The National Collegiate Athletic Association and the Amateur Athletic Union of the U.S., 1905-63," Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Michigan, 1963, p. 27. 5. Arthur Weston, The Making of American Physical Education, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1962, p. 42. 6. Carnegie Study, pp. 21-22. THE PERSPECTIVE 3 Michigan's first football team (1879) proudly displays new uniforms. Notice the influence of baseball on their design. 4 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY football contest in the nation, the Michigan-Racine contest in 1879 is thought to be the first played west of the Alleghenies. Football in the University of Michigan did not become highly organized until the 1890's, and Michigan was regarded as one of its pioneers in the Midwest. The University of Illinois did not appoint its first coach, Robert O. Lackey, until 1891.7 We get some idea of the infancy of Michigan football in 1879 from Irving K. Pond and in 1881 from Walter S. Horton. It was Pond who scored Michigan's first touchdown in its first intercollegiate football contest. He recalled that the game was played against Racine College at White Stocking Park in Chicago, May 30, 1879. "Michigan was challenged by Racine in the fall of 1878 and accepted the challenge for the spring so that in the meantime Michigan could procure a book from which to learn the rules of the game." Racine College was described as a "very peppy school in those days and given to sports or they would not have challenged us." Their enrollment was about 400 compared to Michigan's 1100. Pond saved the description of the game as reported in the May 31st issue of the Chronicle, the weekly student publication. It declared that: The long expected and much heralded foot-ball game with Racine has taken place... On Wednesday evening the eleven appeared on campus for the first time in their new suits. They presented quite a neat appearance. The uniform is of white canvas, close fitting, with blue stockings and belt. A large number of spectators came out to see the boys practice. They were opposed by a picked eleven. The team left Thursday on the day express. A few of the students, among them our managing editor, accompanied them as spectators. The team was brought by bus from the Clifton House to the grounds where about 500 students of Racine and citizens of Chicago gathered for the game. Michigan students had arranged to have telegrams sent from Chicago to report the game while it was in progress. A blackboard was placed under the trees near the medical building, and a boy was hired to bring the dispatches on a velocipede from the telegraph office. In all, seven telegrams were received. To say the least, they left a few questions unanswered. The first said the game would start at 3:30 p.m. and that the team would be given a banquet by the University alumni at the Palmer House following the game. The second said simply, "opening kick by Johnston, Racine." This was hardly any help as Michigan kicked off, and it was Michigan's Johnston who did the kicking. 7. Big Ten News Release, September 1939 folder, Carton 11, UMAP. THE PERSPECTIVE 5 The third announced that Michigan was playing finely but no goals had been scored at 4:45. The fourth said: "One touch down by Pond, Michigan, at 5 P.M., fine play." The fifth signaled the start of the second inning (half) saying, "ball down in the middle of the field,-a little to our advantage." The sixth: "Splendid playing Chase, Pond and Edwards, near goal." The seventh: "Game finished, won by Michigan,-one goal-kicked by DeTarr." When the last dispatch was posted the Chronicle reported, "Those who were present manifested their feelings in the usual student manner." In addition to describing this early attempt at "closed circuit telegraphy" the Chronicle carried a much more detailed article summarizing the game. It doesn't sound much like the football we are accustomed to seeing today: Soon by good playing the ball was carried within about ten feet of the Racine goal, and there it was kept for at least twenty minutes, by drops and pick-ups, by our men... The ball is finally got back by Racine, but Edwards brings it up to the Racine goal and another fight for it occurs. Again the ball was thrown out, Pond carried it across the grounds, and Hannan got it in touch and threw it to De Puy, and he touched it down behind the goal. A foul was claimed and allowed. The ball thrown in again and the fight renewed... Pond's touchdown counted no points. The scoring system employed between 1877-1883 was simply that games were decided by a majority of touchdowns, and a goal kicked from the field equalled four touchdowns. Captain De Tarr kicked a field goal in the second half, so, while technically Michigan won 114 to 0, no one ever counted fractional points. The final was Michigan 1, Racine 0. Neither does the following journalistic disagreement with an official's decision sound much like today's news reporting. When Michigan attempted to kick a goal following Pond's touchdown it was ruled no good by the referee. The Chronicle took issue with the decision saying: but our umpire and the whole team and the spectators declared the goal was safely made; however, we did not wish to dispute with the referee, yet, we must suggest, he is as liable to be mistaken as anyone else.8 Walter S. Horton, a Princeton graduate, entered the Michigan Law School in the fall of 1880 and joined the varsity football team. Only 8. See letters, Irving K. Pond to Phillip Pack, Michigan's Sports Publicity Director, July 9th and 25th, 1930, Carton 15, UMAP, and The Chronicle, May 31, 1879, p. 248 and 252. 6 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY one game was played that season, Michigan beating Toronto College 13-6. The following year the Wolverines played three games and Horton described them in a letter, almost 60 years later, to Fielding Yost: In the fall of 1881 we undertook the difficult task of playing the teams of Harvard, Yale and Princeton, all in one week... Those teams were the recognized leaders in football at the time. Of course we did not succeed, though the results were not discouraging. Horton recalled that all the members had not played together as a team until they tackled Harvard. Their training was "just what you may see at any time on any vacant lot in a city in the fall of the year." Harvard won over Michigan 4-0. The report of the Harvard-Michigan score So frightened the Yale Captain that when we arrived there he called upon me (the acting Captain of our team) and said the referee of our game must be a Yale man; that the game at Harvard indicated that they could take no chances. An impasse was avoided by the appearance of the captain of the Princeton team, who had come to New Haven to watch the game, and who agreed to referee. Yale won this game 11-0, and two days later Princeton was a 13-4 winner over Michigan.9 Those three games, played between October 31 and November 4, constituted the entire football season of 1881. The following year, no regular varsity football team was assembled and no outside games were played. Even as late as 1887, the University of Notre Dame did not even know the rules and procedures for the game of football. They were using approximately 100 men to a side in intramural play, with the object being to get the ball over the opponent's fence in any way possible. Two of their men, George W. DeHaven and William Harless left Notre Dame to enter the University of Michigan in the fall of 1887. Having become interested in football and making the Michigan varsity, these two men traveled with the squad to Chicago for a contest. A stop was made in South Bend where the team was requested by Brother Paul, the Irish Athletic Director, to teach his players the rules. The teams were mixed the first half, so the Notre Dame boys could learn the game. Then, they played as units in the second half with Michigan winning. Although the scores are not carried in the Michigan football record, DeHaven reports that the Michigan team then beat Notre Dame twice, on successive days, that spring. The expenses were paid, as usual, by Ann Arbor merchants. Notre Dame scored in one of these games, and because no opponent had scored on Michigan in 1885, 1886 or 9. Letter, Walter S. Horton to Yost, October 25, 1939, Carton 11, UMAP. Although Horton reports the Harvard-Michigan final score as 2-0, UM records have it 4-0. THE PERSPECTIVE 7 1887 (a total of eight games) DeHaven reports that the team was properly razzed when they returned to the Ann Arbor depot.10 University of Michigan athletic facilities of the time were as modest as the program, consisting of a small lot on the campus grounds and a few tennis courts. Baseball games were played at the fair grounds (what is known today as Burns Park). Student agitation for a gymnasium led to the reorganization of the Football Association, on October 26, 1878, as the "Athletic Association of the University." A few months later the new society became incorporated, and by one of its articles a trust fund, to be known as the "Gymnasium Fund" was established. President Angell, Judge Cooley, Professor Tyler, and two others were named trustees."T Donations were made to the fund from various student enterprises over the years. Interest would diminish periodically, only to be revived by later student groups. When Waterman Gymnasium was eventually completed in 1894, largely through the generosity of Joshua Waterman, this fund of $6,095.03 was used in equipping the new structure.'2 A fight for the presidency of the Athletic Association in 1881 hampered its effectiveness, and three years later it collapsed, "the victim of the football and baseball teams which it sought to control."l3 In 1890, all the athletic interests of the University were reunited under the University of Michigan Athletic Association. A new and carefullydrawn constitution was formulated, and an Advisory Board of three non-resident alumni and four resident professors were elected by the students.14 In another notable departure from previous policy, Michigan launched a nine-game varsity football schedule in 1891. The first football coach was appointed that year.'5 It thus appears that the year 1890 is a better dividing line between the informal and the highly 10. Letter, George W. DeHaven to Yost, October 21, 1939, Carton 11, UMAP. 11. Edwin Humphrey, The Michigan Book, Ann Arbor: The Inland Press, 1898, p. 174. 12. University of Michigan, The President's Report, 1894, Ann Arbor, Michigan: The U of M Press, p. 12. This source will hereafter be abbreviated President's Report with the particular year so designated. 13. Humphrey, p. 174. 14. Marcus Plant, "The Board in Control of Intercollegiate Athletics," The University of Michigan, An Encyclopedic Survey, Walter A. Donnelly (ed.), Vol. IV, Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 1958, p. 1959. This encyclopedia is hereafter abbreviated Encyc. 15. Frank Crawford, Yale 1891 either stood alone as the coach or was assisting Mike Murphy. Mr. Les Etter, the sports publicity director in the University for approximately 25 years until his retirement in 1968, calls Mike Murphy the first Michigan football mentor and says he was assisted by Frank Crawford. See: "Intercollegiate Athletics," Encyc. Edwin Humphrey, writing in 1898, called Frank Crawford the football team's coach and does not mention Mike Murphy. See: Humphrey, The Michigan Book, Ann Arbor, 1898, p. 166. The 1892 Palladium lists Mike Murphy as coach of the 1891-1892 football team. This was the student yearbook that preceded the Michiganensian. 8 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY organized football programs in the Midwest, and certainly this is true for the University of Michigan. The necessity of financing their own programs led students at many universities to solicit public interest in their games. The early success of a few in this respect is indicated by the approximately 2,000 spectators who witnessed the Harvard-Yale football game at Hamilton Park in New Haven, November 13, 1875. Admission price was increased from 25 cents to 50 cents for this game and uniforms were used for the first time by a college team.6l The dependence of most teams on gate receipts from their big game(s) or on donations made the cities popular sites for the intercollegiate athletic contests. Many of the 20 million immigrants entering the United States between 1870-1900 settled in the cities, contributing to what was for some a phenomenal growth.17 Fifteen thousand people watched Harvard defeat Yale 12-6 in their 1890 clash staged in Springfield, Massachusetts. Organized coaching was introduced at Harvard for the first time during this season, and the best eleven in Crimson history to that time was the result. It defeated all eleven opponents, the victory over Yale being the first since their initial meeting in 1875.18 This football excitement was apparent on a smaller scale in the University of Michigan's return game with Cornell in 1894. On November 3, in Ithaca, the Wolverines had been issued the only defeat they were to suffer in 11 games that season. The return game was to be played in Detroit, November 24. The Michigan Alumnus reported it as "the game of the year, and great preparations were made for it. Football songs were composed and rehearsed, yell masters were appointed, and over fifteen hundred students went to Detroit to cheer the boys." A crowd of 4,000 saw Michigan win 12-4.19 The football rivalry begun with the University of Chicago in 1893 was the major source of income for the University of Michigan Athletic Association from that date to 1900. The first game drew approximately 2,000 and 5,000 turned out the following year. The games were to be 16. Allison Danzig, The History of American Football, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1956, p. 10. It has been suggested that the agreement of 1878 between 12 colleges for contests in public speaking, essay writing, and exercise in Greek, Latin, mathematics, and mental science marked an attempt on the part of their faculties to abate some of the enthusiasm that athletics aroused. See: Carnegie Study, p. 21. 17. Chicago provides a septacular example of this growth, increasing from 500,000 inhabitants in 1880 to 1,700,000 by 1900. Richard Hofstadter, William Miller and Daniel Aaron, The United States, The History of a Republic, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., p. 570. 18. Danzig, p. 130. 19. "Three Football Victories," The Michigan Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 3. December 1894, pp. 46-47. Hereafter this source will be abreviated, Alumnus. THE PERSPECTIVE 9 played annually in Chicago on Thanksgiving Day, and were at first sponsored by the University of Michigan Alumni Association in Chicago.20 The 1897 meeting drew approximately 10,000 spectators and was played indoors, in the Coliseum. The Athletic Association managed this game and, not having to share its income with the Chicago Alumni Association, received a profit of $3,813.39.21 Many Midwesterners saw the Michigan-Chicago game as bearing the kind of wide interest and excitement in their region as the Harvard-Yale clashes generated in the East. Student and alumni emotions were often pitched high for these rivalries, and the 1898 Michigan-Chicago meeting provided the inspiration for one of the country's most famous college songs, "The Victors." A crowd of 10,000, mostly partisan to Chicago, was stunned by the touchdown run of Charles Widman in the final minute of play giving Michigan a 12-11 victory over their Maroons. Michigan boosters were electrified by this dramatic climax to an undefeated eleven-game season. With it came Michigan's first Western Conference title, and young Louis Elbel, a student in the University, was stirred to write the fight song that has since become synomymous with Michigan and college football, "The Victors." The crowds, the rivalries, the songs and the starring football players were very closely linked with the new phenomenon-the American newspaper sports section. Sporting news had, to be sure, been carried in the newspapers before 1895, but nothing quite matched the coverage given this topic by William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal after that date. Referred to as the founder of the modern newspaper sports section, Hearst bought the Journal in 1895 and immediately expanded sports coverage two to four times over his rivals. Banner headlines, cartoons, pictures, and ghost-written articles by prominent athletes helped create a rapidly increasing public interest in intercollegiate athletics.22 The "big business" profile of college football in this period was epitomized by the dedication, on November 14, 1903, of the Harvard Stadium. With a seating capacity of 23,000 it was the largest reinforcedsteel structure in the world, and it was also America's first football stadium.23 With the games largely under student sponsorship and gate receipts so intimately linked with winning teams, the desire to field an exciting 20. "Chicago Alumni Association of The University of Michigan," Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 4, January 1895, pp. 57-59. 21. "The Thanksgiving Day Game," Alumnus, Vol. IV, No. 2, December 1897, pp. 81-82. 22. Van Dalen, p. 339. 23. John Durant and Otto Bettman, Pictorial History of American Sports, N.Y.: A. S. Barnes & Co., 1952, p. 116. 10 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY and profitable football eleven often led to recruiting and subsidizing of athletes, the employment and payment of coaches, and charges of professionalism.24 In 1892, E. L. Godkin, editor of the Nation, decried the professional spirit and gambling mania connected with the game. A year later he condemed the practice of seeking out students to come to college for athletics.25 Another problem was that of the tramp athletes, who were not bonafide students. From 1890 to 1905 they were to be found on most college football teams. The ease with which an undergraduate at one institution might transfer to another was furthered by the fact that registration of special students in a single subject was common practice.26 Perhaps an even more serious criticism of college football was the brutality and poor sportsmanship that marred the games. Incidents of slugging and fighting were not uncommon.27 The rules favored massed formations and the collision of fast-moving, poorly-protected players often resulted in injuries. Not all aspects of the athlete's health were overlooked, however. The pre-season training camps were designed to condition the men for the rigors of competition, and the training tables attempted to insure a balanced diet. The foregoing problems and practices became widespread among the nation's colleges in the 1890's. As previously noted, the University of Michigan appointed its first football coach in 1891. It was not clear what remuneration was received for this part-time work the first few seasons, but The Michigan Alumnus carried the Athletic Association's financial report for the year 1895. Two items of interest are the $440 expenditure for the training table and $560 for the football coach.28 The money for the coaching expenses came from the Chicago Alumni Association of the University of Michigan who were realizing a nice profit by sponsoring the Michigan-Chicago football game. The Alumnus reported that, "Out of the money received from these games, the Association has agreed to pay the expenses of the 'coach' for the Michigan team and for this year has done so already."29 The gentleman receiving this remuneration was William L. McCauley, a tackle on the Princeton 1893 championship football team and a medical student at the University of Michigan. He was secured by the then Manager of football Charles Baird to coach for three seasons, 1894-1896.30 24. Carnegie Study, p. 25. 25. Van Dalen, p. 410. 26. Carnegie Study, p. 28. 27. Van Dalen, p. 410. 28. "Athletics," Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 7, April 1895, p. 105. 29. "Chicago Alumni Association of the University of Michigan," Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 4, January 1895, pp. 57-59. 30. This research did not disclose whether Baird was paid for his services before January 1, 1900. First mention of his official appointment was in the THE PERSPECTIVE 11 An attempt was made in 1897 to install alumni coaching at the University as Gustave H. "Dutch" Ferbert, Michigan 1897, was employed to coach the Wolverine teams 1897-1899. Although Ferbert was salaried, this move was designed to eliminate the quest for a "big name" athlete to mold a winning team. In an effort to help Coach Ferbert and the team, an Alumni vs. Varsity game was initiated, and the practice of taking the team to Whitmore Lake, just north of Ann Arbor, was introduced (the team was given two weeks of early season training there). At an enthusiastic mass meeting that fall over $1,500 was subscribed to retire the debt of $1,400 which was owed by the Athletic Association. The Alumnus also reported that the training table was again set at Prettyman's serving 24 football players, and that training quarters where Manager Hughes, the coaches, and part of the team lived during the football season had been established at a private house on Volland Street.31 That season, the Wolverines won six games, lost two (one of these to the Alumni), and tied the Fielding Yost-coached Ohio Wesleyan University. The brilliant 1898 season of 11-0-0 was followed by an 8-2-1 record in 1899. Of the latter, the Alumnus reports that when big games were lost to Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, "the cry for victory howled down a worthy effort toward reform."32 With the hiring of Langdon "Biff" Lea in 1900, the University of Michigan abandoned its practice of having former students coach the football team. Various malpractices led to a growing concern for regulating intercollegiate athletics, especially at those universities where football and baseball seemed to be getting out of hand. A three-man faculty athletic committee was appointed at Harvard University in 1882 because of the faculty complaint that the baseball team had played many games away from home and had missed numerous classes. This committee was instrumental in calling the meeting of the Intercollegiate Athletic Conference in December, 1883, at New York. It marked the first joint attempt by college faculty representatives to impose some regulations on athletics. Nine colleges were represented, including three college presidents.33 Eight rules were drawn up and sent to the faculties of 21 colleges. They would become binding if adopted by five of them. Neither students nor the athletic associations had been brought into the disNovember 1899 meeting of the Board of Regents. As Director of Outdoor Athletics, Charles Baird was to receive $2000 for a one-year appointment effective January 1, 1900. Of this salary, $800 was to come from gate receipts. See: Proceedings of the Board of Regents, November 1896-October 1901, University of Michigan Press, p. 458. 31. "Athletics," Alumnus, Vol. IV, No. 28, November 1897, pp. 40-42. 32. "The Professional Coach," Alumnus, Vol. XIV, No. 3, December, 1907, p. 87. 33. Van Dalen, p. 400. 12 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY cussion of these regulations. This may have been an important reason why only Harvard, Princeton and Cornell approved the rules.34 In the Eastern colleges, during the period 1889-1916, there was a tendency to attack the problems accompanying their intercollegiate programs on an individual basis.35 Attempts on the part of the faculty to regulate intercollegiate athletics did not meet with a great deal of success either. Students and alumni had become too deeply involved in the programs to be ignored. Football was banned by the Harvard faculty, in 1885, upon the recommendation of their three-man Athletic Committee led by Dr. Dudley A. Sargent. Shortly afterwards, Sargent was refused a promotion to faculty rank.30 This meant he could not sit on the Athletic Committee. Since approval of his appointment had seemed merely a matter of formality, the Board of Overseers may have been sensitive to student and alumni unrest over the banning of football.37 When it was revived two years later, a "central committee plan" of control was inaugurated, whereby alumni, undergraduates and faculty united in one body for the regulation of athletics.3<8 Faculty participation on committees Governing student athletics gained a wider acceptance nationally after 1890, but apparently was not successful in curbing the distressing practices of proselyting and subsidizing. Dr. Edward M. Hartwell was moved to write in his Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for 1897-98: The powerlessness of our educational leaders to originate, and their failure to adopt, effectual measures for evolving order out of the athletic and gymnastic chaos over which they nominally preside, constitutes one of the marvels of our time.39 President James B. Angell was becoming quite concerned with the whole problem of keeping intercollegiate athletics at Michigan within a wholesome educational perspective. "The experience of other colleges and universities, and to some degree our own experience," he wrote in 1891, "show that there is some danger that the passion for athletic sport may interfere with the intellectual work of the students, and incidentally lead to certain moral perils." He revealed the infancy of such programs at Michigan by stating, "The question of how far intercollegiate games 34. Bruce Bennett, "The Life of Dudley Allen Sargent, M.D., and His Contributions to Physical Education," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1947, pp. 57-58. 35. Carnegie Study, p. 39. 36. Bennett, p. 67. 37. It will be recalled that although football was banned from 1885-1887, 15,000 spectators attended the Harvard-Yale game in 1890, so there must have been wide interest in football and some ill-feeling over banning the game in 1885. 38. Carnegie Study, p. 24. 39. Ibid., p. 23. THE PERSPECTIVE 13 shall be encouraged or even permitted, especially in a University situated so far away as this from any considerable number of large colleges, is one on which there may well be two opinions."40 It is interesting to note that fifteen years later, in his report for the year ending June 30, 1906, intercollegiate football had reached such a stage of popularity that the President was prompted to say, "Certain it is that football will continue to be played, and will attract many spectators and will probably excite more interest among students than any other athletic game."'41 In his 1891 report, President Angell resolved that (1) the University would seek to make its gymnastic accommodations "conduce to the normal physical development and sound health of the many rather than to the abnormal development of a few athletes," and (2) "we should so conduct and regulate athletic games that they are kept free from demoralizing accessories." To implement his first resolution, Dr. Angell announced the purchase of ten acres of land one-half mile south of the campus for outdoor sports,42 and Mr. Joshua Waterman's donation of $20,000 for the construction of a gymnasium.43 Work on the latter began in 1892 and two years later Waterman Gymnasium was opened. Dr. James Fitzgerald was appointed its Director and all freshmen were required to take physical examinations.44 Their attendance at lectures and the developmental programs recommended for each of them were made optional. No University credit was given for the work,45 and classes in this first year of the new program were large, numbering as high as 200 each.46 Irregular attendance made the instruction extremely difficult. President Angell announced in 1899 that "attendance on the instruction in gymnastics was made compulsory on the first year's students of the Literary and Engineering Departments." He explained that although new gymnasiums had been made available for both sexes and good instructors secured, 'a considerable number of the new students took no opportunity offered 40. President's Report, 1891, pp. 13-14. 41. President's Report, 1906, p. 14. 42. This came to be called Regent's Field. 43. President's Report, 1891, pp. 13-14. 44. While Michigan was not the first of the Midwestern state universities to install a Physical Education Department. it was not far behind. Emmett Rice, et al., on p. 241, shows the dates for the actual establishments of these departments as follows: 1888 California 1893 Utah 1894 Washington 1890 Wisconsin 1893 Illinois 1896 Minnesota 1890 Texas 1894 Michigan 1897 Ohio State 1891 Indiana 1894 Kansas 1898 Iowa 1891 Nebraska Emmet Rice, John Hutchinson and Mabel Lee, A Brief History of Physical Education, New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1958. 45. President's Report, 1895, p. 20. 46. "Athletics," Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 3, December 1894, pp. 52-53. 14 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY for physical training. Many of these were persons who most needed to profit by them." The President concluded, The absorbing interest in athletic contests on the ball ground by no means leads the great mass of students to secure the exercise which is essential to the preservation of health and to the best success in study.47 There can be no doubting President Angell's sincere and continuous effort to insure that athletic games would be conducted and regulated to keep them free from demoralizing accessories. From 1891 to his retirement in 1909 intercollegiate football provided the greatest challenge to the president's quest of this elusive goal. A twelve-game schedule in 1892 saw the Wolverines play nine opponents outside of Ann Arbor. The extent of this team's travel is most remarkable. Journeys were made to Madison, Wisconsin; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Indianapolis and Lafayette, Indiana; Chicago, Illinois; Ithaca, New York; Toledo, Ohio and Detroit. Perhaps the matter of travel was discussed in the President's office, because the rest of the football teams of that decade show a considerably reduced road schedule. In 1893 faculty control of all intercollegiate athletics was established. The incident prompting this action was the discovery that two members of the varsity teams were sub-freshmen. A Board in Control was formed composed of five professors or instructors selected by the University Senate, and four undergraduates chosen by the Athletic Association. An Advisory Board, made up of professors and graduates, was also selected.48 Their interest in playing other Midwestern universities led University of Michigan athletes to join with Northwestern, Wisconsin and Minnesota in 1893 in the formation of the Northwestern Intercollegiate Athletic Association. This league lasted for one year. Then another temporary organization, the Western Intercollegiate Athletic Association, was established in the fall of 1894. It conducted a track meet in the following spring.49 Perhaps it was these abortive student attempts to unite, or the mushrooming growth of intercollegiate competition, that sparked Purdue University's President James Smart to call seven presidents to meet in Chicago.50 The most important outcome of that gather47. President's Report, 1899, pp. 6-7. 48. Humphrey, p. 175. 49. Elmer D. Mitchell, "The Growth of Physical Education and Allied Movements in The State of Michigan: A Study of Institutional Acceptance and Integration," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1938, p. 84. 50. The seven universities present were Chicago, Illinois, Lake Forest, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue and Wisconsin. See: Pack. p. 6. THE PERSPECTIVE 15 ing on January 11, 1895 was the formation of the Western Conference (the future "Big Ten"). President Angell, "although expressly invited by President Smart to participate,"5' did not represent Michigan at this conference. The Alumnus for that month reported: Through a misunderstanding as to time, he (President Angell) did not attend the meeting of college presidents at Chicago recently. He is, however, entirely in accord with the resolutions adopted by that body.52 In his report for the year ending September 30, 1895, President Angell made the following comments regarding varsity athletics: While intercollegiate games have been permitted, the number allowed is limited by rule. No professional players, and no persons who have 'conditions' in their studies standing against them are allowed to play in match games. It is believed that most of the objectionable features of athletic games have been avoided and most of the advantages to be derived from them have been gained during the past year. A great desideratum has long been to awaken in the great body of students the same interest in their own physical training that they feel in the training and success of the athletic teams. Our new gymnasium has done much to accomplish this end. But not a few students who most need its aid neglect the opportunities it affords.53 The following year an unusually severe test in administering the rules governing intercollegiate competition was furnished the Advisory Board on Athletics. President Angell reported that on the eve of a baseball game, "which was to decide the championship of the West, it was found that three of our most skillful players had hired themselves out for a 'professional' game." The Advisory Board immediately dropped them from the team. The team lost the decisive game, "but the University won a much greater victory than could have been gained by any superiority in playing." President Angell expressed his belief that the students generally approved the action of the Board, and advised that, "The sooner all students can understand that what helps the University is not so much victory in the contest as clean and honorable conduct on the part of the players, the better it will be for all concerned."54 At the 1896 meeting of the men who were constructing the "Big Ten" Conference, Michigan was represented by Professors C. B. G. deNan51. Plant, Encyc., p. 1960. 52. "Athletics," Alumnus, Vol. 1, No. 4, January 1895, p. 66. 53. President's Report, 1895, p. 21. 54. President's Report, 1896, p. 19. 16 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY crede and Albert H. Pattengill.55 Rules were adopted requiring players to be bonafide students; a six-months' residence was necessary for transfer students; loss of eligibility followed for students delinquent in their studies; and graduate students' eligibility was limited to the minimum number of years necessary to obtain their degrees.56 While they must have seemed revolutionary at the time, these rules were soon to be outmoded by the events of the next five to ten years. When Fielding H. Yost came to the University of Michigan in 1901, the football program had undergone a decade of swift and far-reaching change. The big games with Chicago had been attended by as many as 10,000 spectators; alumni associations were actively interested in football; Charles Baird had been hired to administer all'varsity athletics; during the past four seasons the football teams had lived and trained for two weeks at Whitmore Lake early in the fall; a training table and training quarters had been established for the team; and the system of student coaching or even alumni coaching had been forsaken in favor of seasoned professionals. 55. The seven universities present for this meeting included all those attending the January 11, 1895 gathering except Lake Forest which was replaced by Michigan. See: Phil Pack, 100 Years of Athletics, The University of Michigan, 1837-1937, Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Library, 1940, p. 6. 56. Van Dalen, p. 401. Chapter II FIELDING H. YOST: A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH By Fielding H. Yost's estimates, his family had been living in and around Fairview, West Virginia since about 1825 when his great, great grandfather, David Yost, settled there and took up a grant of over 2,000 acres.' When Yost was born, April 30, 1871, his parents owned a farm in this rural community located in Marion County, in the foothills of the Allegheny Mountains. His early life was not unlike that of many rural youngsters of that day; helping with the chores, spending a great deal of time in the out-of-doors, and, even, on occasion, being confronted with the hostile challenge of a poisonous snake.2 There were few books in the Yost home. He recalled that at age 13: I had not had an opportunity of seeing or reading many books except the regular school books. This was in the country and no books were available. The Bible was the principal book read in our home. Pilgrim's Progress, Swift's Family Robinson, a History of the Civil War, and a small encyclopedia were about all the books I read or had an opportunity to read before I was fifteen or more years of age.3 Mrs. Elzena Jane Yost, had been a member of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Fairview since early girlhood and took a leading part in church work.4 It was she who urged her son, Fielding, to enroll in the Normal School in nearby Fairmont, West Virginia.5 Although still in his teens, Yost had been working as a deputy marshal in Fairview.6 The first mention of schooling in the Yost letters is his attendance at the Normal School in Fairmont. This must have been a very short 1. Letter, Fielding H. Yost to Miss Medora Mason, September 7, 1938, Carton 18, UMAP. Hereafter, only the name "Yost" will be used in these footnotes of his correspondence. 2. Mrs. Fielding H. Yost, interview, February 22, 1966. 3. Letter, Yost to George Fenster, November 9, 1933, Carton 9, UMAP. 4. Obituary of Mrs. Elzena Jane Yost, July 28, 1943; Unidentified newspaper clipping; Carton 18, UMAP, folder labeled "Undated Material." 5. Letter, Yost to Mrs. Elzena Yost, December 14, 1936, Carton 18, UMAP. 6. Mrs. Fielding H. Yost, interview, February 22, 1966. 17 18 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY course, because he began it in the fall of 18897 and taught the remainder of the school year at Patterson Creek, West Virginia. This first teaching job paid $30 per month.8 The following fall found him enrolled at Ohio Normal,9 a Methodist university located in Ada, Ohio. Here, Yost played first base on the baseball team for two years and engaged in a rudimentary form of football. Football had not been introduced into Normal, but Yost remembered that, "we did have an old association football and this we used to kick around." The games were impromptu and often engaged as many as 100 players to a side. "There was a hedge fence on each end of the field on which we played," he reminiced, "and the idea was to kick the ball over our opponent's hedge."10 Teaching did not really appeal to Yost,1l and his finances were running low.12 The oil industry was just beginning to tap the resources of West Virginia, and Fairview bristled with activity.13 The paltry wages paid for teaching and the grandiose dreams of oil speculators may have turned his interests away from school work. Leaving Ada, he returned home to help his father, who had apparently opened a general merchandise store14 when the "big oil excitement," as Yost described it, hit West Virginia.l' What was happening in Fairview was part of the late American industrial revolution. Steam was harnessed for power, and seemingly inexhaustible natural resources were being tapped.16 Coal, gas, oil and water supplied the motive power for factories, which increased from 140,000 in 1860 to 500,000 in 1900.17 The opportunities available to a young lawyer knowledgeable in questions of property leases and mineral rights might well have prompted Yost to save enough money to enroll in the West Virginia University Law Schol at nearby Morgantown in the fall of 1895. This professional preparation was to be 7. "'Hurry Up' Gets Huge Welcome In Home Town," Fairmont Times, April 11, 1941. 8. Heinie Martin, "Sport Chatter," May 2, 1941. Unidentified news-clipping, Yost Scrapbook, University of Michigan Historical Collections Library. 9. Letter, Yost to George Fenster, November 9, 1933, Carton 9, UMAP. 10. Fielding H. Yost, "My 30 Years In Football," Detroit Times, December 4, 1925. 11. Ibid., November 30, 1925. 12. "'Hurry Up' Started It-Michigan Wins No. 500," Anderson Independent, Anderson, South Carolina, November 7, 1967. 13. Letter, Yost to "To Whom It May Concern," September 15, 1943, Carton 18, UMAP. 14. Letter, E. H. White to Yost, November 4, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 15. Letter, Yost to Mr. Kirk Alexander, February 6, 1920, Carton 17, UMAP. 16. Van Dalen, p. 384. 17. C. W. Hackensmith, History of Physical Education, New York, Harper & Row Publishers, 1966, p. 348. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 19 utilized extensively by Yost both in private business endeavors and in administering the athletic program at the University of Michigan. Another decision bearing important consequences on Yost's life was that of trying out for the football team at West Virginia. What began as a sports outlet for this vigorous young man ultimately became the focal point of his life. As described in his "My 30 Years in Football," Yost reported to the team as soon as he reached Morgantown.'1 He recalled that there was very little equipment. The athletic association was "glad it had a football," and the players had to purchase their own equipment. No paid coach was employed to handle the team. "A fellow by the name of Howard, who lived in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, did whatever he could to put some football sense into us," Yost related. "A fellow by the name of McCory who had played with the University of Pennsylvania and lived in Morgantown... helped out..." The playing field was of clay composition, and had a lot of gravel scattered over it. "In dry weather," Yost explained, "it was about the hardest field I ever saw, and all the protection we had against bruises was a little quilting or padding... Each played had his own bottle of witchhazel," to be used in rubbing his aches and bruises. After purchasing a rule book, Yost learned the rules "almost verbatim." Because of the many comments and compliments this knowledge prompted, he admitted, "since then, I have always been a bug on the rules." Later, as a football coach, Yost's teams were tested thoroughly on the rules and several victories were attributed to this alertness.19 Playing guard in his first game, this six-foot, 195-pounder was moved to left tackle where he was to remain during the two seasons with West Virginia University. The 1895 team was victorious in all its games except with its arch-rival, Washington and Jefferson. In spite of the fact that the team won only three games while losing seven and tying two in Yost's second season, he described this experience in glowing terms. Manager Curtright had lined up a good schedule for the 1896 team, and then arranged for them to do early training at Mountain Lake, Maryland, not far from Morgantown. "This was the way Yale, Harvard, and Princeton did things," explained Yost, and "it filled us with pride and great expectation."20 "Doggie" Trenchard, Princeton's 1893 All-American end, was hired to coach and play on 18. Fielding H. Yost, "My 30 Years In Football," Detroit Times, December 4, 1925. The following quotations are from this article. 19. Ben Oosterbaan, interview, February 17, 1966. 20. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 8, 1925. It may also be worth noting here that the University of Michigan began taking their football team to Whitmore Lake, just north of Ann Arbor for two weeks early season training in 1897. 20 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY, - I. i II% i-_ Sporting a handsome handlebar general store (1895). mustache Yost poses in front of his father's West Virginia University football team 1895. Top: Caldwell, Cole, Bruner,Capt., Cutright, Mgr., Neely, Ford. Middle: White, Nethken, Standiford, Krebs, Yost. Front: Robb, Keeley, Leps, South, Rane. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 21 the team receiving $1,200 for the season.21 Yost portrayed Trenchard as an excellent mentor who won the admiration of the squad.22 In addition to the regularly scheduled games, Yost was invited to play two games with the "Three A" team, representing the Allegheny Athletic Association. This was an athletic club located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which had been revived for the 1896 football season. A Mr. O. D. Thompson organized the team, and it included many outstanding athletes, both graduates and undergraduates from Princeton, Pennsylvania, Purdue and Chicago. Among them were "Doggie" Trenchard, Yost's coach, and "Biffy" Lea, the Princeton tackle who preceded Yost as Michigan's football coach. These two games were played during the season, between the regularly scheduled games.23 There were no rules that would have prohibited Yost from participating in them. It will be recalled that the Western Conference, with its first few resrictions on competition, was just being formed in 1895; it was a pace-setter in this regard. Another feature of this 1896 football season was the scheduling of three games between West Virginia and Lafayette in three days, Lafayette winning all three. In the first game, Yost got hit over the eye and had seven stitches taken to close the laceration. He stated that. "The next day I played with a piece of beef-steak over it." The doctor would not permit him to play the third game. His skill and mettle apparently impressed Parke "Dink" Davis, the young Lafayette coach, because he then persuaded Yost to "transfer" to the Easton, Pennsylvania campus and enroll in engineering.24 As it happened, Yost was there just in time to be in Lafayette's line-up against the mighty University of Pennsylvania. Football historian, Allison Danzig, described the collision of these unbeaten elevens as follows: Lafayette was the big surprise of 1896 and of college football to date among the smaller schools. Its victory over Pennsylvania, which had been invincible for three years through thirty-six (36) games with its guards back formation,2 was a tremendous feat.26 21. George R. Reiss, "No Turkey Day Game Beats Famous Victory of 1896," The Youngstown Daily Vindicator, November 25, 1927. 22. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 8, 1925. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid., December 10, 1925. 25. Pennsylvania lined up two heavy guards, both fast men, about 31/2 yards behind the line and they preceded the runner. This left five men on the line of scrimmage. The tackles and ends would then move closer to the center to fill the area vacated by the guards. Princeton found it impossible to stop this play and it was copied far and wide during the six year period (1894-1900) it reigned supreme. Then, Harvard contrived a defense to stop it. (This explanation comes from Danzig, p. 25.) 26. Danzig, p. 11. 22 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Yost opined that to say, "I played on the Lafayette team that beat Penn" could be expected to evoke both admiration and respect.27 Very shortly after this game Yost "transferred" back to West Virginia University. Eligibility rules were still ten years away. The ease with which these transfers were executed in the early years of football has already been pointed out. Yost refused, years later, to endorse for publication an article claiming Washington, Pennsylvania as the "Football Center of America." He reasoned that most of the records of teams in that area were made while they were playing freshmen, transfers, in fact, anybody they could get to their campus. "I have seen teams," he explained, "that were practically made up of athletes that were so called 'tramp athletes.' "28 Although it was common practice, the players must have felt that it was unethical. For this or perhaps other reasons, Yost chose to conjure up the following story: I thought I should like to take up engineering instead of law, so I left West Virginia and went to Lafayette. But before the transfer could be effected I enjoyed the unique experience of playing four hard games in one week for West Virginia... We learn by experience and I found that the engineering school at Lafayette was not quite as interesting or pleasant as the law school at West Virginia. For this reason I decided to return to West Virginia and finish my law course... Engineering was not interesting to me; it required too much messing around with figures.29 It was nearly 50 years later that a close friend wrote Yost: I look back to the happy days-playing football at West Virginia University (1896) when I used to loaf in your room at the 'Beanery.' I can see Ellis sitting at the window, reading the Bible, while you were 'telling the boys' all about how to 'play the game'... Well, do I remember when we played Lafayette those three games.. I recall they took you up to play tackle for them against Pennsylvania. It was a championship game. You returned on crutches, head in a bandage-looked like 'a Veteran returning from the Western Front'-but you beat them... I never 'told' about this little deviation, on your part, it would make a good story-and you would be safe now as the penalty is barred by the 'Statute of Limitations.'30 Spurred on by success as a player, Yost was eager to try his hand at coaching for a few years following receipt of the law degree in 1897. 27. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 10, 1925. 28. Letter, Yost to Joseph Hamilton, December 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 29. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 10, 1925. 30. Letter, George Beltzhoover, Jr. to Yost, April 29, 1945, Carton 18, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 23 That fall, he coached Ohio Wesleyan University, a sister institution to Ohio Normal, to a 7-1-1 season. The only blemish during this, his first coaching assignment, was a 14-5 loss to Oberlin. A tie with the University of Michigan and a victory over Ohio State prompted much favorable newspaper publicity for Yost and his team. On the basis of the Ohio State victory they were the self-proclaimed "Champions of Ohio. "31 Yost fully expected to coach only two or three years and use this as a means "to see as much of the country as I possibly could, so the next year I moved west and took charge of the team at Nebraska University."32 An excellent letter of recommendation from Charles P. Morgan, manager of the Ohio Wesleyan team, preceded him to Nebraska. The 1898 Cornhusker team won seven games while losing three. The victory over its top rival, Kansas University, was the highlight of their Missouri Valley Championship. A. A. Bischof, the Manager of Athletics at Nebraska University, praised the work of Yost in the following terms: Several evenings in the week he has a class for instruction in the rules and signal practice... He teaches only straightforward, legitimate football... He is a perfect gentleman at all times, both on and off the field... He is the most enthusiastic football man I have ever known... The reason why he was not engaged by Nebraska for the season of 1899 was that the financial side of football has never been a success with us."3 The financial statement for the 1898 Nebraska season reveals that Yost's salary was to have been $500, but that only $160 was paid him.34 Upon seeing the financial statement some 40 years later Yost replied, "I knew finances were low, but I didn't realize they were as low as this statement shows." In this same letter he could not remember having received the remaining $340."> Those two years of coaching had been enjoyable. Yost was getting to travel and see more of the country, a major reason for the decision to coach. He had even gotten the Michigan captain's permission to play in their 1897 tie game with Ohio Wesleyan. Yost had been able to bring 31. Letter, Robert M. Strimer, Director of Athletics (Ohio Wesleyan), to John R. Behee, April 29, 1969. 32. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 15, 1925. 33. Letter, A. A. Bischof, Athletic Manager, University of Nebraska, to Mr. J. Burt Gildersleeve, Athletic Manager, Stanford University, February 6, 1900, Carton 1, UMAP. 34. C. L. Parsons, "Jabs," The Post Phone, Denver, Colorado, undated newsclipping attached to letter, J. G. Donaldson to Yost, May 26, 1939, Carton 11, UMAP. 35. Letter, Yost to C. L. Parsons, May 26, 1939, Carton 11, UMAP. 24 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY only ten men to represent Wesleyan, and thus was allowed to serve as the eleventh member of his team. The time spent coaching, however, was beginning to interfere with interests in the oil business which he had accumulated after dropping out of Ohio Normal University. It was time to make a decision. "I wrote to the Sigma Chi boys to ask if a place was open at California or Stanford and received an answer in the negative," he explained. "I was on the verge of cutting my coaching career short right there, but Kansas... made me an offer."36 The Kansas University football team of 1899 rode through a tengame season undefeated, scoring victories over Nebraska and Missouri. Phillip S. Elliott, Manager of Athletics at Kansas, summarized the coach and season of 1899 in a letter recommending Yost to Stanford University, part of which is quoted here: Mr. Yost is preimmently (sic) the best football coach in the great middle west. First, he is a gentleman and a scholar and develops the same class of players. He insists on clean football. He came to us last year when our school was divided in its support of the team, and the town was largly against us, owing to some difficulty we had over our former coach Dr. (Wyle) Woodruff of Pennsylvania. One faction was for him and were offended when we turned him down. Mr. Yost went to work and developed our team so that we were not only champions of the western league but were ever victorious. We would sign him up for next year if he would do so. He however told me confidentially that he would prefer to coach one season in the west and that is why he has applied to you.37 Not having seen as much of the country as he had wanted, Yost accepted the coaching assignment at Stanford University for the 1900 season. "I approached this job with a teriffic desire to succeed," he recalled, "because a year or so before Stanford had not taken advantage of an opportunity to get me."'3 The Indians finished with a 7-2-1 record in 1900, one of the two losses coming against the Alumni. The major game of that season was the California encounter, won by Stanford 5-0. The previous season California had beaten Stanford 30-0. Reminiscing over those four seasons of his coaching career, Yost beamed that: Ohio Wesleyan... beat Ohio State for the first time while I was there. Nebraska, under me, beat Kansas, and when I changed 36. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 17, 1925. 37. Letter, Philip S. Elliott, to J. Burt Gildersleeve, Manager of Football, Stanford University, February 2, 1900, Carton 1, UMAP. 38. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 17, 1925. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 25 places Kansas turned around and beat Nebraska. At Stanford I met with the same good fortune. California had defeated Stanford in 1899, but the next year when I went there Stanford reversed the result.39 The ubiquitous Yost appears to have been associated with several teams in California that fall. Stanford fielded a freshman team and played a six game schedule. They swept all six games, including a victory over the California yearlings. Mr. C. C. Young, Principal of Lowell High School of San Francisco (later he served as Governor of California) employed Yost to coach the high school's varsity squad in the mornings. A few evenings a week he helped the San Jose College team.40 All four of these teams, Stanford varsity and frosh, Lowell High School and San Jose, won their championships. He spoke of having also "coached the Ukiah High School while I was up there deer hunting."'4' It is not clear why this latter team is not generally mentioned by the sportswriters. Perhaps it was not a champion and thus, not as good a story; perhaps he only spent a token amount of time with them. Internal pressures were mounting at Stanford to eliminate the hiring of other than alumni to coach the athletic teams. Yost would not be able to coach there again in 1901. He wrote George Huff, the Manager of Athletics at the University of Illinois, asking if a new football coach would be needed for the 1901 season. They had met following the 1899 season when, as Yost described it, "I stopped off at the University of Illinois in answer to a request of some fraternity brothers who had written me and said they wanted me to come to Illinois to coach."42 Manager Huff had already secured the coaches for the 1900 football team and there were no vacancies in 1901 either. Knowing that Michigan was in search of a coach, Yost's letter was given to Charles Baird, Manager of Athletics for The University of Michigan. This reply came to Yost in Palo Alto: Mr. George Huff handed me your letter to him of December 27th and requested me to answer for him. Illinois has secured coaches for 1901 but Michigan has not yet selected hers, although we shall do so very soon. We won the Western Football Championship for several years, namely 1893, 1894, and 1895. Since then, however, we have won the championship but once, namely in 1898... 39. Ibid., December 18, 1925. 40. Letter, Yost to Braven Dyer, February 28, 1940, Carton 11, UMAP. 41. Letter, Yost to Sheridan Baker, November 28, 1941, Carton 18, UMAP. 42. Yost, "My 30 Years," December 30, 1925. 43. The 1892 and 1893 teams were coached by Francis Barbour; the 1894-1896 elevens were under the direction of William L. McCauley. From 1897-1899 Gustave H. "Dutch" Ferbert coached the Michigan elevens. Langdon "Biff" Lea coached one season, 1900. 26 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Our people are greatly roused up over the defeats of the past two years, and a great effort will be made... Would you care to coach in Ann Arbor? What terms?44 A scrapbook containing Yost's football achievements, allegedly weighing nearly 50 pounds, was soon to arrive in Ann Arbor via Railway Express.45 Also, a lengthy recommendation from Mr. Gildersleeve, the Stanford Manager of Athletics, to Baird, said in part: Yost has superior knowledge of every known system, unusual keen perception of men, and enthusiasm far excelling any other man I could find last year. He was the first man selected from outside of the so-called 'Big Four," Yale and Penn had before furnished our coaches. This departure from precedent raised a storm at the University... From the chaos that had been ours for three years, Mr. Yost succeeded... in bringing our perfect harmony... As you know we are about to take up with our own graduates... So Mr. Yost cannot be with us another year, much as we would like to have him, for the graduate movement has been on foot for over a year now and will be tried out at last.4" Upon receiving the letter from Charles Baird, Yost boarded a train for his home in West Virginia, stopping in Ann Arbor to close an agreement to coach the 1901 Michigan football team.47 He was to receive a salary of $2,300, plus a sum sufficient to cover his living expenses in Ann Arbor during the coaching season. This was interpreted to mean board at the training table and a reasonable amount for room rent. He was to be ready to report September 1, if so requested, and continue until the last game was played.48 This was quite a pleasant increase over his rather tenuous $500 agreement with the University of Nebraska in 1898. In fact, faculty salaries in 1900 were averaging approximately $1,000 for instructors, $1,600 for assistant professors and $2,500 for full professors for the entire school year.49 Thus, Yost would receive at least twice the salary of a full professor. With reason to be very pleased, he returned to California remaining there until training began for the 1901 football season."~ 44. Letter, Charles Baird to Yost, January 5, 1901, Carton 1, UMAP. 45. Charles Baird, address given at the Michigan Union on June 15, 1935, upon presentation of two oil paintings to the Union-one depicting Fielding H. Yost, the other Keene Fitzpatrick. Located in June, 1935 folder, Carton 9, UMAP. 46. Letter, J. Burt Gildersleeve to Charles Baird, January 12, 1901, Carton 1, UMAP. 47. Telegram, Charles Baird to Yost, January 21, 1901, Carton 1, UMAP. 48. Contract, 1901 football season, October folder, Carton 1, UMAP. 49. Michigan University Board of Regents Proceedings, 1901-1906, pp. 48-49 and pp. 348-349. 50. Letter, Yost to "Bones" Hamilton, April 12, 1940, Carton 11, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 27 For 25 of the next 26 years (1901-1923 and 1925-26) Yost served the University of Michigan as head football coach.51 The record of his teams and leadership through those many seasons are detailed in Chapter Three. From 1901-1920 Yost was considered a part-time employee of the University and spent only the approximately ten weeks covered by the football season each fall in Ann Arbor. The remainder of the year was devoted to a career in business. The potential profits of an oil strike captured the interests of young Fielding Yost in the early 1890's. Work in his father's store and legal training offered some preparation for a vocation in the general area of prospecting for minerals. He would probably have engaged in this speculative quest on a full-time basis immediately after completing his LL.B. degree had it not been for a lingering fascination with football. Satisfying experiences as a coach further delayed his business career. After 1901, however, Yost became associated with West Virginia Investment and Development Co., Inc., in Clarksburg, West Virginia, doing what he so thoroughly enjoyed-traveling through the backwoods areas of the state in search of lands bearing potentially profitable natural resources.52 He thus accumulated a knowledge of various minerals and the mining thereof, as well as the legal entanglements of property right-of-way, mineral rights and other aspects of the investment business. The combination of these business experiences, national publicity as a football coach, and the chance finding of a wallet enabled Yost to take advantage of a very unique and profitable enterprise in 1908. The wallet in question had been found in Detroit by Dan McGugin,53 a member of Yost's 1902 and 1903 football teams. McGugin was serving as football coach of the Vanderbilt University team, a job procured for him by Yost. Further, Yost had attended a Sigma Chi party in Nashville in 1904 with McGugin. It was here that he met Miss Eunice Fite, and two years later, on March 12, 1906, they were married. Shortly before this, Dan McGugin had married Eunice Fite's sister. Thus, Yost and McGugin were brothers-in-law, and were to remain intimate, life-long friends. The owner of the wallet was a Mr. Newcomb, who had recently invested approximately $50,000 in a hydroelectric project on the Caney Fork River in central Tennessee. Recent medical problems prevented his continuing to administer the work. When McGugin returned the Newcomb wallet, their conversation led to the suggestion that Fielding H. Yost was the likely man who could head the unfinished project and push it through to a successful completion. That is, on the condition 51. In 1924 Mr. George Little was head coach of the Michigan football team. 52. Letters, Yost to Baird, January 1902, May 5 and March 14, 1902, Carton 1, UMAP. 53. Mrs. Fielding H. Yost, interview, February 22, 1966. 28 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY that he would be free during the three months of Michigan's football season.54 Several years later Yost described this undertaking: The largest work I ever did was when I had full charge of the Great Falls Power Company, which was later sold to H. M. Byllesby & Co. of Chicago and combined with other power properties here in the State of Tennessee... I was in charge of this business from 1908 to 1914. This work involved... proper rights of way for 110 miles of high power transmission lines, proper franchises in various counties and towns of the State, and securing and passing of the proper legislation necessary for the carrying out of this project, including the right of eminent domain, dealing with County Courts to flood and close the various fords and highways crossing the streams that would be flooded by the back water above the dam. This deal finally involved several millions of dollars.55 The profitability of such ventures was enhanced by the rapidly growing application of electricity to American living. This was the era of trolley cars in the fast-growing cities and increasing use of Edison's incadescent lamp. The construction of giant hydroelectric plants fostered the rise of great electrical firms such as General Electric and Westinghouse. For Fielding Yost it fostered a wide experience in several industries. For example, he had become Director of the Dixie Portland Cement Company in Chattanooga and held this position from 1908 -1914. In what must have been his single most profitable investment, Yost purchased Dixie Portland stock for $3,600 when he became director. He sold it in 1926 for $19,965.29.56 Other valuable experience was gained serving as a director of the Cumberland Valley National Bank (1912-1914), owning stock in the Central Bank & Trust Company, and both directing and owning stock in the Bonner Furniture Manufacturing Company.57 These latter three businesses were located in Nashville, Tennessee. Yost also purchased some property in Walling, Tennessee, built a home on it, and employed a full-time caretaker. This became his vacation retreat and an opportunity to exploit his gardening hobby. The caretaker did nearly all the planting of shrubbery and fruit trees, but Yost knew what kind he wanted, where and when they should be cultivated.58 This expertise was later to be a great asset in landscaping the University Golf Course. 54. Ibid. 55. Letter, Yost to Mr. Kirk Alexander, February 6, 1920, Carton 17, UMAP. 56. Fielding H. Yost, Federal Income Tax Return, 1926, Carton 17, UMAP. 57. Letter, Yost to Mr. Kirk Alexander, February 6, 1920, Carton 17, UMAP. 58. There are perhaps 100 or more letters, Mr. Yost to Mr. James Sparkman, in the Yost files for the 1920's. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 29 Upon completion of the hydroelectric project in 1914, Yost returned to speculative enterprising for various minerals. Several years later he recalled that, "In the past I was deeply interested in nearly every type of mineral produced in the country. In fact I actually had a fling at oil, gas, coal, gold, flurospar, silver, bauxite, graphite, asbestos and copper."'9 His interest in developing oil and gas leases had extended over many years, and he bought and sold them through Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas.60 The outstanding success that marked Yost's early coaching career was apparently matched by very profitable business endeavors. Success seemed to beget success. Ironically, just as the low point of his coaching career was reached in 1919, he was also experiencing the business failure that almost prompted his resignation from coaching. In January, 1917, he formed the Kentucky Producers Oil Company with a capital stock of $1,000. This was increased to $25,000 one year later, largely as the result of an advance of $20,000 from Yost. The company was to seek profitable oil lease investments, and Yost's brother, Ellis, was employed to assist in procurring several thousand acres of such leases. The expected profits were not being returned, and three years later Ellis wrote to Yost: I certainly am most 'crazy' to make some money and believe we are going to do this yet in Elliott county, but it must come soon or I am willing to get out and go to Louisiana or elsewhere and stay with the game until we do win out... The Kentucky Producers account is getting low and it will take just about the last dollar to pay for the one-half interest in the Jesse Mason (lease). You know that Albert Gillum made a big dent in this account. It seems impossible to interest any one in our wildcat leases in Elliott at this time. I am hard up myself and wrote Lenna (his wife) I did not see how I could afford to come to Washington for Christmas and have told her not to expect this... I" The Kentucky Producers Oil Company soon became inactive, and was later dissolved. In late January or early February, 1918, Yost met Messrs. Rawn and Meacham, two successful fluorspar operators, in Dan McGugin's Nashville law office. Dan had been associated with them in fluorspar mining property near Critten, Kentucky. As a result of this meeting, Yost, McGugin and several others began, through the Ken-See Mining Co., their quest for fluorspar.62 This mineral was used in the fluxing of steel and seemed to be in great demand during World War I. 59. Letter, Yost to U. S. Representative Robert Clancy, February 5, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 60. Letter, Yost to Mr. Kirk Alexander, February 6, 1920, Carton 17, UMAP. 61. Letter, Ellis Yost to Fielding Yost, December 17, 1919, Carton 17, UMAP. 62. "Interrogatories and Cross Interrogatories," May folder 1920, UMAP. 30 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY So confident was McGugin of the potential profits that he gave up his coaching at Vanderbilt for the 1918 season63 to devote full time to the Ken-See Mining Company's work. As early as January, 1919, his confidence had been largely spent and frank concern is reflected in this plea that Yost devote more time to the enterprise: I have been greatly worried the last few months with the burden of Kensee Mining Co. If this should turn out to be a total loss I would probably leave Nashville, try and get a teaching and coaching job in some good university and town and gradually branch out again in practice of law. If you know of anything along this line make a note of it... I was a little amused at your letter... in which you were rather complaining at what Kensee had cost you. It has cost you seriously but as the nigger said, 'It has mighty near ruint me.' I have substantially lost my law practice; I gave up $2,400 coaching money. Now as to Kensee I think it is up to you and me to both turn loose bolts for the next four months and try to bring it out.64 Apparently, the worst did not happen. McGugin was more calm in his letter to Yost six months later, but there is no evidence of financial profit either. Looking back over the flourspar endeavor, McGugin noted that the Armistice cut short the company's plans. He believed the properties purchased for mining had been valued too high in the desire to protect the stockholders.65 Suit was brought by several of the stockholders in the Ken-See Mining Co., but the case lay dormant for several years. The Yost files do not yield clear information as to the final settlement. McGugin returned to his Nashville law practice, and resumed coaching the Vanderbilt football team. In December, 1920, Yost received word that another enterprise was not doing well. J. L. Lane, Secretary-Treasurer of the Ken-Ark Oil and Gas Company wrote saying: Attached is statement of Ken-Ark Oil & Gas Company's business to January 1, 1921. Up to the present time we have not recevied your check... I cannot pay the rentals that are due in January unless I have the money to pay them 66 One year later, L. M. Moore, Vice President of the Ken-Ark Oil & Gas Company, wrote Yost concerning the advisability of surrendering 63. This was the only year he did not coach the Vanderbilt team in the 1904 -1917, 1919-1934 period. His teams compiled a record of 196 wins, 55 losses and 18 ties during these 30 seasons. 64. Letter, McGugin to Yost, January 9, 1919, Carton 17, UMAP. 65. Letter, McGugin to Yost, June 23, 1919, Carton 17, UMAP. 66. Letter, J. L. Lane to Yost, December 31, 1920, Carton 17, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 31 their charter, "as it seems that our wild-cat venture is now defunct."67 He reported that the company now had a $1,000 debt and asked Yost to help bear this expense. During the years 1921-1925, Fielding Yost received an average of $6,500 income from rents, bonds, interest on bonds, and stocks.68 This certainly suggests that in the period 1901-1921 he was a financially successful business man. The tone of his correspondence and his vigorous campaign to become head of the University of Michigan's proposed new Department of Physical Education in 1921 indicated that, contrary to the opinion Yost sought to create, he was not deeply disappointed in withdrawing from these speculative business enterprises. The growing national concern for better physical education programs led the University of Michigan to establish a new Department of Physical Education in 1921. The growing national desire to eliminate all parttime coaches was important in leading Fielding Yost to seek the position of Director of this new Department. In December, 1917, the Provost Marshal had released the medical examiners report, which indicated that of a total of three million men called to military duty under the Selective Service Draft, over one-third were physically unfit for service.69 Another one-third had serious pathological deficiencies.70 Over half the physical defects noted were possible of correction.7' Americans were dismayed at this portrayal of national unfitness. The National Education Association (NEA) met the following year to establish its Seven Cardinal Principles of Education. The first, "health and safety," and the sixth, "worthy use of leisure time," were of direct concern to physical education. The concern for health was reflected also in the rise of state legislation. Prior to 1900, only four states had passed a physical education law, and 14 years later only three others had done so. In the post-war period of 1919-1921, however, 17 states enacted legislation and others revised earlier laws.72 By 1930, the total reached 39.73 The widely-publicized draft statistics appear to be the single most important factor in this rush of state legislation. Even Federal legislation designed to assist financially in promoting health and physical education was attempted with the Fess-Capper Bill in 1919.74 Although both the 67. Letter, L. M. Moore to Yost, December 6, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 68. Income Tax Returns of Fielding H. Yost, 1921-1925, December folders, Carton 17, UMAP. 69. Hackensmith, p. 412. 70. Van Dalen, p. 447. 71. Ibid., p. 445. 72. Ibid., pp. 428-432. 73. Weston, p. 74. 74. Article by Hon. Arthur Capper, U. S. Senator from Kansas entitled, "Universal Physical Education Is Essential,"' The Nation's Health, Vol. III, No. 5, May, 1921. 32 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Democratic and Republican parties made health and physical education legislation a plank in their 1920 party platforms, the Fess-Capper bill died in committee, largely on the belief that education should remain under state control.75 This new physical education emphasis created a demand for those teachers far out of proportion to the supply. Such was the case in the State of Michigan, and it seemed inevitable that the University would establish a Department of Physical Education to prepare physical educators. Several Midwestern universities were already doing so.76 At the December 13, 1919 meeting of the Board in Control of Athletics, Professor Ralph Aigler presented his draft of a plan for a Department of Physical Education. At the special March 1920 meeting of the University of Michigan Regents, President Hutchins presented a communication from the State Department of Public Instruction requesting the University's cooperation in meeting the teacher shortage in physical education. With President Hutchins desiring to retire, no action was taken on this matter until after his successor, Dr. Marion L. Burton was installed, July 1, 1920. In the concluding paragraph of the Board in Control's annual report for the year ending June 30, 1918, it was stated that, "It has been the aim of this Board for some time to have the coaching done by men who shall be at the University the entire year. Such progress has been made in this direction that after this year all the varsity coaches with the exception of one will be here the whole year." The belief was espoused that coaches should be more intimately a part of the University and recognized as part of its regular staff. "Indeed," the report stated, it may be that physical education should be under the direction of a university departmental organization, such as have been provided for at many of the middle western universities."77 The one coach not on a full-time appointment was Fielding Yost, and the report was quick to point out that it was very desirous of retaining Yost. They regretted, however, that his interests were such that he was available only during the football season. 75. Hackensmith, p. 412. 76. Among those state universities offering a major in physical education by 1921 were: 1897 California 1911 Wisconsin 1919 Indiana 1897 Nebraska 1914 Utah 1919 Minnesota 1905 Illinois 1914 Missouri 1920 Kansas 1906 Washington 1918 Iowa 1921 Michigan 1907 Oregon From: Emmett Rice, John Hutchinson and Mabel Lee, A Brief History of Physical Education, New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1958, p. 308. 77. February meeting, 1919, University of Michigan Regents Proceedings, 1917 -1920, pp. 504-505. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 33 This was certainly in keeping with a general mood expressed by the NCAA in a letter sent to a number of university presidents, in April, 1919. This letter, received by Michigan President Harry B. Hutchins, contained two recommendations: (1) that all coaching be done by men who have permanent connection with the institution, and (2) that money for coaching and athletic training be made part of the budget of each institution.78 With creation of a new physical education department virtually a certainty and pressure against part-time coaching rapidly increasing, Fielding H. Yost began to contemplate the possibilities open to such a department head. Business endeavors had not met with much recent success. Another factor of significance was the resignation of Phil Bartelme in the Fall, 1920, as Manager of Athletics in the University.79 He had taken such action following a controversy with a member of the coaching staff, Bill Edmunds, but it was agreed that he would remain until the changeover to the new department of physical educaion was completed (June 30, 1921). Yost now became very interested not only in replacing Bartelme but in heading the new department as well. From his Nashville home Yost began requesting information from several universities with physical education programs in an effort to familiarize himself with their organization and curricula. Great care was taken to keep members of the Board of Regents, influential alumni, and the Board in Control of Athletics aware of this new knowledge as it came to him. Another strategy was to attend the meeting of the NCAA in Chicago, December, 1920. Two factors suggested that this was his first attendance at NCAA meetings: (1) A letter from Bartelme (January 4, 1918) was written bringing Yost up to date on the proceedings of the recently completed NCAA meeting and said, in part: I want to say that I believe that it would be extremely advisable for you to attend the meetings of this organization in the future if at all possible. The coaches of practically all eastern teams are in attendance as alternate delegates, and in addition there are, of course, coaches of the big western colleges, as for instance, Messrs. Stagg, Williams, Wilce, Richards, Stewart and others.8~ (2) Many references can be found in Yost's correspondence describing his attendance at NCAA meetings begining with December, 1920. On January 16, 1921, Bartelme wrote Yost that Regent James O. 78. Letter, Special Committee of NCAA to President Harry B. Hutchins, University of Michigan, April 11, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 79. It will be recalled that Mr. Bartelme had succeeded Charles Baird in 1909. 80. Letter, Bartelme to Yost, January 4, 1918, Carton 2, UMAP. 34 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Murfin81 was favoring a former Yost footballer, Jimmy Craig, for the new position. The following day Yost wrote to his friend, Regent Murfin, describing his attendance at the NCAA meeting and his having engaged in discussion with people interested in various universities in the United States. He alluded to a particularly searching inquiry he had made into the forms of departmental organization prevalent, especially in the Big Ten universities. With his customary air of certainty, he concluded that: There is no doubt that there is more advanced movement in the Middle West along these lines than in effect at the Eastern universities. I spent much time with Col. Koehler of West Point, who has had charge of this work for the Army for the past 34 years.82 One week later Yost sent Murfin a description of the course at the University of Oregon, which had a School of Physical Education embracing physical education for men and women, intercollegiate athletics, and university health service and hygiene. "This covers a wide field of work and certainly," thought Yost, "to much for a university as large as Michigan. It might be well that physical education for men, intercollegiate and intramural athletics and university health service should be embraced in one department"83 Futher thought on the matter prompted Yost to write Phil Bartelme three days later that the new department at Michigan should just include all physical education and athletics for men. The women's physical education and student health should be in separate departments.84 About a week later Yost met with Regent Murfin in Cincinnati conveying his revised thinking on what the department should include. He also assured Murfin that he would like to be placed at the head of the department.85 At their February 11, 1921 meeting the Regents adopted a resolution creating a Department of Physical Education. President Burton then presented the resolution to the Deans. Fielding Yost was mentioned for this position, but Dr. Burton doubted that his experience was broad enough. Dean Vaughn of the Medical School thought a medical man should be in charge and this was heartily agreed to by Dean Effinger of the Literature, Science and the Arts College (LS&A).86 81. James O. Murfin served as Regent of the University of Michigan from Januray 1, 1918-December 31, 1938 except for a two and one half month period in 1934. 82. Letter, Yost to Regent Murfin, January 19, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 83. Letter, Yost to Regent Murfin, January 26, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 84. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, January 29, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 85. Letters, Yost to Rickey, February 11, 1921 and Yost to Walter Eckersall, August 16, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 86. F. H. Yost, three type-written pages summarizing meeting with President Burton and the Deans, undated, Carton 2, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 35 The Board in Control of Athletics began reviewing potential candidates for Barteleme's position. As Secretary of the Board, Bartelme was able to keep Yost well advised concerning its proceedings, and assured him, "I will work for you first, last and all the time in seeking the job."87 After briefly reviewing the nine men whose names had been presented to the Board in Control, he confided: You ask where Aigler stands. I told him in confidence in a very short talk I had with him, that you would consider the position on a permanent basis and asked him how he felt now with reference to you. He said he was for you under those circumstances but added that he expected opposition. I asked him from what source and he said that there were faculty men who believed that the man selected should be one who has been prominent in the field of Physical Education... Of course, Dr. Burton with his very ambitious scheme thinks that a man with a 'medical education should be secured if he has all the other qualifications. Jim Duffy says he will have to be a $50,000 man.s8 In this same letter, Bartelme also advised Yost regarding the varying attitudes of the Board members toward placing the girls and the health department under the same department. Two weeks later Bartelme further reported that: So far, I have not discovered any member of the Board other than favorable to you... The old jealous policy on the part of a certain class of faculty men is croping [sic] out here and there. The fact that you have for years received more money as football coach than they have as members of the faculty sticks in their craw. I wish to say right now that I do not intend at any time to mention names. Nothing would be gained by that, but some of them still seem to think that you are a rather rough and ready fellow who would win a football contest by any available means.89 The key to Yost's success with the Regents lay in James O. Murfin, the former state senator, alumni member of the Board in Control of Athletics, and later Regent of the University. To ensure Murfin's support, Yost began soliciting the aid of some of the many alumni who had lionized him through the past 20 years of Michigan football. Their response is indicated in this letter from Murfin to Carl Green, an active Detroit alumnus, who sent a copy to Yost: I don't know why the coach is having all you boys write me on this subject. I had a long and satisfactory talk with him and he ought to know that this propaganda is useless. Confidentially, I expect he 87. Letter, Bartelme to Yost, February 3, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 88. Ibid. 89. Letter, Bartelme to Yost, February 19, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 36 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY will be appointed. I agree with you that his appointment would be splendid. I have been rather annoyed, however, at the fact that he has started this propaganda. I think I have had now certainly forty letter which I know he has inspired90 President Burton was desirous of having Dr. John Sundwall head the new department. The latter had joined the University of Minnesota faculty at the urging of Burton. In an address delivered at the dedication of the University of Minnesota's Health Service Building in 1939 Sundwall recalled: Marion LeRoy Burton became president of the University of Minnesota July 1, 1917... I met President Burton for the first time on a July afternoon in 1918, twenty-one years ago, at Fort Sheridan, Illinois. In his study of problems relative to the establishment of a Health Service at the University of Minnesota he had run across some publications of mine on the aims, organization, and operation of health services in colleges and universities. Apparently he was interested in what I had said, and wanted to meet me face to face... World War was on, and I was in the army stationed at Fort Sheridan. Burton came to speak with me. I recall vividly that sultry afternoon when we two, President Burton and I, sprawled out on the grass on the Fort Sheridan shore of Lake Michigan, discussed health service problems. At the end of our two- or three-hour talk, he asked me if I would be interested in coming to the University of Minnesota as professor of hygiene and public health and in establishing and directing a health service there. At the time of that interview I told him I wanted to have war service abroad and was looking forward to returning to my position at the University of Kansas after the war. The next day I was called to the office of the commanding officer who gave me the following order: "You are to report at once to the University of Minnesota for further conference with President Burton." Before long I was making provisions for a health-medical service at Minnesota for the nearly 6,000 members of the Student Army Training Corps on campus.91 Sundwall established and directed the Health Service, served as Professor of Hygiene and was Chairman of the Senate Committee in charge of intramural sports at Minnesota. Previous to this he had completed his B.S. and Ph.D. at the University of Chicago and his M.D. at Johns Hopkins University. Experience included work with the United States Public Health Service, Dean of the University of Utah's Medical School and Professor of Anatomy and Director of the Health Service 90. Letter, Murfin to Carl Green, February 23, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 91. Sundwall Papers, Carton 1, Michigan Historical Collections Library. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 37 at the University of Kansas for six years. In addition he had published several articles on physical education and public health.92 In the fall of 1918 a Sundwall article appeared in School and Society93 outlining an ideal structure for a Department of Student Health and Physical Education. It was this plan that was ultimately adopted for The University of Michigan in 1921, with the modifications made necessary by Fielding Yost's appointment. For this reason, it is briefly described here. A single Director would coordinate the programs of (1) the Director of Military Science and Tactics, (2) the Director of Physical Exercise for Men (including intercollegiate athletics), (3) the Director of Physical Exercise for Women, and, (4) the University Physicians (one for each 1,000 students) working closely with the Dean of Men and the Dean of Women's offices. The physicians would, of course, be assigned to the University Health Service, and the Director of this entire Department of Student Health and Physical Education would also head the Health Service. President Burton apparently liked the plan and intended to bring Dr. Sundwall to Michigan to inaugurate it. Sundwall said later, "He knew my views on a comprehensive student health program. We had discussed them many times while associated at the University of Minnesota... When here in May 1921, President Burton asked me to present these views to the Deans. Mr. Yost, also, was present and presented his views."94 Word came to Yost that Dean Effinger was opposed to his selection. Professor H. C. Anderson, of the University Mechanical Engineering Department, assured Yost that, "I have heard little or no objection to you as Athletic Director. Don't worry about Effinger."95 Regent Murfin was frankly concerned, however, as he wrote to Yost: Candor compels the statement that while Dr. Burton and myself have not changed our feelings in the slightest, there is most decided faculty opposition to your selection; so much so, in fact, that I think they will make it very uncomfortable for you. I want to have a long chat with you on the general subject as soon as you are in this neighborhood.9, 92. "Dr. Sundwall-Head of New Department of Hygiene and Public Health," Alumnus, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1, October 13, 1921, p. 17. 93. John Sundwall, "University Physical Education and Efficiency," School and Society, Vol. VIII, No. 202 November 9, 1918, pp. 549-557. 94. Dr. John Sundwall, "Remarks and Recommendations Relative To Day Report," located in February 1926 folder, Carton 4, UMAP. 95. Letter, H.C. Anderson to Yost, April 7, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 96. Letter, Murfin to Yost, April 11, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 38 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Replying immediately from Nashville, Yost related his understanding that Dean Effinger had been opposed to his appointment as the new director. "No doubt he is using his influence against me with anyone he can on Campus. Those who oppose you are usually active; your friends do not realize any necessity for them to become active." Yost could not remember ever having heard of Dean Effinger saying an encouraging word for any athlete in the Literary College. Declaring that Illinois, Ohio State and Wisconsin had the strongest and best departments of physical education in the Conference, Yost noted that all were headed by men of the practical type-George Huff at Illinois, Lynn St. John at Ohio State and Tom Jones at Wisconsin. He cautioned Murfin that, "If you will remember, Wisconsin tried out a theoretical man in Ehler and soon made a change."97 Aware that his academic preparation would meet with the most severe test, Yost sought to keep Regent Murfin abreast with his recent learnings. In the three months or so that he had been surveying the work of other universities, he had altered his opinion somewhat concerning who was doing the best work, but not his air of certainty: I have given the proposed Department of Physical Education much study. Columbia University of New York has done more along the line of preparing teachers of physical education than any other institution in the country. The work at Columbia embraces proper instruction in physical exercise, games and all forms of play best suited for the proper development and health of the boys and girls of the country.98 In this same letter, Yost pointed out that, "I have recently read some ten or more books dealing with these subjects." A scheduled conference between Yost and President Burton in April had to be postponed when the President contracted pneumonia. Thus, it appeared that Yost would face a stern challenge against the Deans without knowing just how much support he would receive from the President. He quickly learned from Regent Murfin that Dr. Burton wanted to divide the position putting Yost in charge of intercollegiate athletics only. The rest of the responsibilities would go to a medical man. Murfin urged him to accept the President's plan. "This would not leave us with a very good program," Yost replied, "I think it would indeed be a great mistake to separate the department and would think it best that this should not be done even if I am to be eliminated for further consideration. Personally, I am not to be considered so much as the interest of Michigan must be above all."99 The Detroit alumni club volunteered support for Yost and formed 97. Letter, Yost to Murfin, April 15, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 98. Ibid. 99. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 10, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 39 a committee to rally other alumni. Carl M. Green, 1899, Frank Murphy, 1912, Roscoe B. Huston, 1902, and Tom Hammond, 1905 made up the committee. The latter had been a member of Yost's "point-a-minute" teams. Murphy had roomed with Yost in the Sigma Chi house during a few football seasons, and had come to admire him. The astute Murphy was later to serve as Mayor of Detroit, Governor of Michigan, Governor-General of the Philippines, Attorney General of the United States and Justice of the United States Supreme Court. He easily emerged as the most articulate and influential member of this committee, and kept up a running correspondence with Yost throughout May and June. Yost sent him advice on alumni throughout the country who could be relied upon for assistance and cautioned him of those to avoid.100 Murphy assured him, "I have an arrangement with Natalie Murphy, the President's private secretary, and a very dear friend of mine, whereby all resolutions, letters, editorials, etc., on this matter will be called especially to the President's attention."'10 Newspaper support was solicited. State Senator, George W. Millen acknowledged to Yost that he had just had a meeting with Frank Murphy, Regent Beal102 and others, and that, "the papers this week in the State will have something to say."'03 Writing to one of his former football standouts, Stanfield Wells, Yost expressed his disappointment that, "The Deans, or some of them, while professing a great admiration for me think that the head of this department should be a man who has had regular training as a teacher of physical education and research, whatever that means." The Regents had recently postponed their decision until the next meeting when those desiring this type of man were to present a candidate for consideration. Yost confided to Wells, "I felt very much like withdrawing my consent to accept this position but many of the alumni in Detroit and Chicago insist that I shall stick.104 Just as he kept Regent Murfin up to date on his recent discoveries in physical education, Yost sought to assure Regent Beal that his academic preparation had included work in this field. "As a student I had two years military training, played basketball, football, baseball and was on the track team," he explained. "I had about two years of gymnasium work while in college."105 100. Letter, Yost to Murphy, May 14, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 101. Letter, Murphy to Yost, May 20, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 102. It will be seen that Junius Beal had addressed the mass meeting of University of Michigan students rallying for Yost, January 25, 1906, while then a State Representative. He was later to serve many years as Regent of the University. 103. Letter, George W. Millen to Yost, May 18, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 104. Letter, Yost to Stanfield Wells, May 12, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 105. Letter, Yost to Regent Beal, May 25, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 40 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Regent Beal quickly replied, "I have had a good talk with Frank Murphy of Detroit on the situation, and trust we can bring it about. I feel it is of the utmost importance that you have this big work."'106 Yost was of the opinion that Regents Hanchett of Grand Rapids and Gore of Benton Harbor were inclined to support the view of the Deans in opposition to his selection. To his loyal friend in Holland, Michigan, Jim DePree, Yost wrote, "However, of this I am not sure but feel most certain it is true... What should be done is anything that can be done to see that these men look at if from the right viewpoint. If you will get in touch with Tom Hammond... he can tell you what plans, they have, if any, for your district.107 - Hammond reported to Yost in May, "I have just returned from a trip to Detroit. Carl Green and I had luncheon with Judge Murfin and I want to say that he is for you 100 per cent.'"108 Reassurances came from other alumni. Frank Murphy's brother, George, wrote that, "From what Frank tells me, the Alumni all over the nation are being organized in support of you. And I understand that Secretary of Navy Denby, 1897, is sending a letter to the President urging him to insist upon your acceptance of the position."'109 From Carl Green came this confident analysis: I want you to be sure to get this strongly in your mind-that Michigan men everywhere are for you, and the alumni are for you to a man; the real people on the campus are, the President is, and Judge Murfin is. Another fact, all the regents, 'way down deep are for you, and it is only a little academic thought of the Deans' which spoils the situation at all."10 Frank Murphy reviewed the situation, as best he could determine it, with regard to the Deans: At the very first meeting of the Deans with the President during which this new department was discussed Dean Vaughn took the position that a medical man, one who has done some scientific research work and more or less academic in the laws of health, should be the type of man to head the Department. All the Deans, which of course included Bates and Cooley, voted affirmatively on that resolution."' At this point Murphy speculated that the Deans probably did not 106. Letter, Regent Beal to Yost, May 31, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 107. Letter, Yost to Jim DePree, May 12, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 108. Letter, Tom Hammond to Yost, May 23, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 109. Letter, George Murphy to Yost, undated, in May folder, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 110. Letter, Carl Green to Yost, May 20, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 111. Letter, Murphy to Yost, May 18, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 41 realize that their scientific man would be in charge of athletics and probably flop at this. He continued, Later it seems that Vaughn, Effinger and Lloyd signed some sort of a memorial or letter to the President opposing your appointment, and in favor of the type passed on by the Deans. Bates did not join in this, and I don't believe Cooley did either. Bates is an intimate and dear friend of mine... I will personally call on Effinger, who has always been very friendly, and we have had very intimate relations during the past few years.112 George Murphy commented that, "Frank had a long talk with Dean Bates and the Dean promised to see the President this morning. I guess that the Dean is all right, but it seems that it took him a long time to see the light.113 Yost kept Frank Murphy supplied with the catalogues describing the four-year courses at Illinois, Wisconsin and Columbia, and offered comments on them. "If I am appointed," he advised, "I expect to make a personal visit up East and study carefully the work being done among the Eastern Colleges, as I have already done at Illinois."'14 The Board of Regents met with President Burton on May 27 and Regent Murfin reported to Yost that, by unanimous action, the matter had been left to President Burton and himself to determine the new Physical Education head. "I believe we have in mind a plan whereby this division would be best for all. One man in charge of matters which you and the Alumni are so interested in, and some other man with knowledge of the scientific matters such as hygiene, corrective measures, health service, etc."11"5 Early in June, Yost had an opportunity to discuss matters with President Burton and attended a Deans' meeting with him. He later typed a three-page chronology of these two meetings, excerpts of which are used here to follow the sequence of events. President Burton, meeting with Yost on June 6, outlined a plan whereby two departments would be created. Dr. John Sundwall would be Director of Physical Welfare or Director of University Physical Education. He would have full charge and supervision of the University Health Service, intramural sports, the men's gymnasium and the women's gymnasium. He would also assist in training of teachers of 112. Ibid. 113. Letter, George Murphy to Yost, undated, in May 1921 folder, Carton 17, UMAP. 114. Letter, Yost to Murphy, May 23, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 115. Letter, Murfin to Yost, May 28, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 42 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY physical education in the School of Education and possibly might become Professor of Hygiene and Public Health in the Medical School. Yost would be Director of Intercollegiate Athletics having charge of basketball, baseball, etc.-everything of an intercollegiate athletics nature. Also, in connection with the School of Education, he would be actively related to the training of coaches. Yost explained that he thought all the games, at least of student life, should be under one head. Whereupon President Burton replied, "If I gave Dr. Sundwall all the work originally planned for the department the alumni would tear him up and if I gave this work to you the campus would blow up."116 This would indicate that President Burton had been planning to implement the broad plan outlined by Dr. Sundwall in which he would be given general supervision over all aspects of student health and physical education, including intercollegiate athletics, but Burton was now compromising. On June 8, Yost was present at the Deans' meeting at the request of President Burton. Dr. Burton explained that a divided plan had been agreed upon by all parties interested and that he had invited Dr. Sundwall to take charge of the health service, both gymnasiums and all intramural athletics. Yost was to have charge of intercollegiate athletics and the school for coaches. Yost reported having made a statement in reference to students in the summer school for coaches and the four-year course saying that they would be good salesmen for Michigan. He recalled that the following conversation ensued: Dr. Cabot asked me what they were selling and I told him the Michigan idea the same as he sold the Harvard idea. Whereupon Dean Effinger said; 'Mr. Yost, you never talk to any prospective students for Michigan except athletes, do you?' Dean Ward asked me if I didn't think a doctor should have charge of the physical examinations. I suppose he meant to infer that certainly I did not expect to do such work. At any rate, I told him a doctor had been making all physical exams since I had been there for 20 years and that I did not suppose that Dr. Sundwall expected to make any personal physical examinations. Dr. Cabot asked me during the meeting if I didn't think a thorough physical exam should be had of the men before I took charge of them. Evidently the doctor is not very familiar with the work being done at Michigan in regard to physical exams, for men who are not athletes, as well as for men who are athletes. Very careful and 116. F. H. Yost. Three typewritten pages summarizing meetings with President Burton and the Deans; undated; Carton 2, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 43 thorough physical examinations of all candidates for athletic teams have been made at Michigan ever since I went there, 20 years ago. Some other questions of similar kind and bearing were asked showing the Deans asking the questions were not familiar with the work now being done at Michigan by the Health Department and Dr. May in his work in connection with the gymnasium.117 Since the above notes were written by Yost and were undated, it is not clear whether he was as familiar with the work of Dr. May in the Waterman Gymnasium as he indicates. The day after his meeting with the Deans he requested and quickly received from Dr. May a full account of practices regarding examinations, 1901-1921.1 " Yost may not have been familiar with the work being done by the Health Department and Dr. May either. He could have added embellishments to these notes after having received Dr. May's report. What does seem to be clear from the notes is that his meeting with the Deans was not a very cordial one, at least from Yost's viewpoint. Unhappy with the limited responsibility being suggested for him, Yost wrote to Jimmy Baird, a former Michigan football player and good friend living in Washington, D.C. He explained the President's proposal and the reasons why it was unacceptable. "The situation now is that I declined to accept the limited work."119 Yost concluded the letter by asking Jimmy if he could see Secretary of War Edwin Denby, who had played football at Michigan with Jimmy, and have him drop a short line to President Burton on Yost's behalf. In a letter to President Burton, Yost projected that the School of Physical Education would be a special department and about one-half the work would be given by the faculty of the School of Education and the rest by coaches and others in the men's and women's gymnasium staffs. The summer school would be similar to those at Illinois, Columbia and Harvard. It would train and place men in various schools throughout the country where, after having imbibed some of the Michigan spirit they would be salesmen for Michigan to promising athletes as well as other good student material. '20 The President promptly cautioned, "I am sure you understand that in our situation, as in other universities, the training of teachers of all subjects will be a function of the School of Education." Dr. Burton clarified Yost's role in planning the program, "The course for the training of coaches, therefore, would be organized precisely in the same way that we organize courses for the training of teachers of any other subject. You do not expect me, of course, to outline the exact content of a 117. Ibid. 118. Letter, Dr. George May to Yost. June 13, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 119. Letter, Yost to James Baird, June 11, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 120. Letter, Yost to Burton, June 10, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 44 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY course for the training of coaches. This would be your duty in conjunction with Acting Dean Whitney."121 Yost was most upset at not having charge of intramural sports. He reasoned to Regent Beal, Dr. Sundwall has never played or taken part in any athletic game which would be given in the Intra-mural Department, never had active charge of any athletic work of any kind nor gymnasium work. If I am to have charge of the athletic side of the school for coaches I certainly would want to be charge of Intramural Athletics. Why give charge of this work to someone who has had no experience whatever in the athletic games.122 It is not clear that Yost had any evidence upon which to base such a statement. In fact, considering Dr. Sundwall's experience with intramurals at the University of Minnesota, it would appear that Yost was simply groping for an argument. Frank Murphy's final advice to Yost was to refuse the appointment: We do not want to be out-distanced by Illinois or Wisconsin or others in physical education work... It will be most unfortunate for Michigan if we create a Department less than what it ought to be for the reason that it is a convenient thing to do in the light of certain opposition... I cannot help but tell you as a friend that I think you ought to refuse any appointment to head a Department of Physical Education that will exclude the supervision of gymnasium work, and the more important work of Intramural Athletics.123 One week later Yost changed his mind and accepted the position as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics in spite of the above advice and his own statement one month earlier that, "it would indeed be a great mistake to separate the department and... this should not be done even if I am to be eliminated from further consideration. Personally," he had said, "I am not to be considered so much as the interest of Michigan must be above all."'24 President Burton instructed Regent Murfin to bring Yost to agreement. It must have been very clear when Murfin met Yost in Cincinnati, June 17, that there would be no budging the President on the matter of intramural athletics. Reporting to Frank Murphy on this meeting, Yost explained that Judge Murfin agreed with his viewpoint, but said that in order to put this across at all, nothing could be changed from the President's pro121. Letter, Burton to Yost, June 13, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 122. Letter, Yost to Beal, June 13, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 123. Letter, Frank Murphy to Yost, June 15, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 124. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 10, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 45 posal. He argued that Yost should accept the position as offered, and that later the other would be worked out entirely to his satisfaction if things do not work out for the best interests of Michigan. Dr. Burton stated that Dr. Sundwall would not accept the work unless he had charge of the intramural and gymnasium programs in question.125 Burton also pointed out to Murfin the great difficulty in getting Sundwall away from Minnesota.12' Thus, Yost accepted the position grudgingly, with the hope that things might be worked out later to his complete satisfaction. The Regental Resolution, passed on June 22, assigned to Dr. Sundwall full charge and supervision of the University Health Service, of all gymnasiums and of all intramural activities. He was to assist in the training of teachers of physical education in the School of Education and would hold the rank of Professor of Hygiene and Public Health in the Medical School. To Yost went the direction of Intercollegiate Athletics under the supervision and guidance of the Board in Control of Outdoor Athletics. Further, acting through the Dean of the School of Education, he was also to have the duty of establishing, conducting or supervising educational courses in the training of coaches, playground instructors and similar matters.127 President Burton telegraphed Yost June 23 that the Regents had unanimously elected him Director of Intercollegiate Athletics at a salary of $7,500 effective July 1, 1921.12s Yost's telegram that same date acknowledged acceptance of the appointment.129' One month later another telegram from President Burton carried the pleasant message that, because it had become necessary to establish Dr. Sundwall's salary at $8,500 annually, Yost's salary would also be $8,500.1"0 Dean Whitney recieved a $1,500 increase when appointed Dean of the new School of Education, bringing his salary to $7,000. The regents provided that Yost's salary would come from the "athletic tax." In view of long standing antagonisms over coaching salaries, perhaps the thought here was to regulate all salaries of coaches by controlling that of the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics. This was basically in keeping with the NCAA recommendation that money paid for coaching and athletic training be made a part of the budget of each institution. 125. Letter, Yost to Murphy, June 17, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 126. Letter, Burton to Murfin, July 30, 1921, Box 2, Murfin Papers, Michigan Historical Collections Library. 127. University of Michigan Regents Proceedings, 1920-1923, June meeting, 1921, pp. 203-205. 128. Telegram, Burton to Yost, June 23, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 129. Telegram, Yost to Burton, June 23, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 130. Telegram, Burton to Yost, July 30, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 46 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Writing to his good friend Walter Eckersall of the Chicago Tribune late that summer, Yost spoke of a recent ten-day trip he had taken to visit West Point, Columbia and Yale. Reviewing the sequence of events leading to his acceptance of the Michigan position, he spoke with pride in the alumni support and of his reluctance to leave business interests in Nashville. In closing, he assured Mr. Eckersall, "I did advocate one department as at Ohio State or Illinois, but there is plenty of work to keep Sundwall and I (sic) busy."'13 Yost served the University as Director of Athletics for the next 20 years, retiring July 1, 1941 at age 70. He held the title, Professor Emeritus of the Theory and Practice of Athletics,132 from that date until his death, August 20, 1946. Perhaps the essence of Yost is captured in the following journalistic "cameo." Edwin Pope, a journalist whose writings reflect a deep respect and admiration for Yost, characterized him as an unashamed ham, a natural-born exhibitionist-that rare person who can boast and be liked for it... When newspapers praised him (they seldom did anything else), he showed the printed applause to everyone within reach, beaming, 'Look 'ere, look 'ere what they say about me.'133 It was said that the surest way to find a camera was to put your hand on Yost's shoulder, close your eyes, and follow him. Pope described Yost as liking jokes only when he was telling them. His nature forced him to be a leader, always the giver, never the recipient. Other speakers on the program irritated him, "How long is this feller goin' to be?" he would growl. When Michigan beat Wisconsin 6-3 in 1923, referee Walter Eckersall forgot to blow the whistle on a violation, and Tod Rockwell scored for the Wolverines. In response to the protests of the Badger partisans Yost is reported to have drawled, "Ten Years from naow, what will the record book show? That Eckersall made a mistake? Naw. I reckon it'll show Meeshegan six, Wisconsin three!" In his personal life, Yost maintained a strict piety that was not hypocritical. Pope contended that, He not only preached against swearing, dirty story-telling, smoking, and drinking but sturdily refused to indulge in any of it himself. 'Some people can drink,' he lectured, 'and it doesn't hurt them. But it doesn't do them any good. And ye want to be good, don't ye?' Yost would go to almost any lengths to publicize the University of Michigan or to enrich her athletic traditions. Pope's account of Yost's 131. Letter, Yost to Eckersall, August 16, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 132. Letter, Herbert Watkins to Yost, May 26, 1941, Carton 12, UMAP. 133. Edwin Pope, "It's All For Meeshegan, Y'Know," Alumnus, Vol. LXII, No. 3, October 20, 1956, pp. 27-29. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 47 quest for a live wolverine to serve as mascot for the Michigan team illustrates this feature of his personality: Yost in 1923 became captivated by the Wisconsin team's practice of carrying about a live badger as mascot. He resolved to get a live wolverine for Michigan. Failure to find one only stimulated his search. He sent questionnaires to sixty-eight trappers. When that produced neither wolverines nor information, he wrote every Michigan letter man in the state. Still no success. He dug into books, corresponded with animal authorities, even consulted politicians. He heard that a senator had a stuffed wolverine and made a special trip to the legislator's farm only to find that the beast was a coyote. Desperate, Yost lengthened the trail of the wolverine into Canada. A year after his search began, he ran across a chap in Alberta who thought Hudson's Bay might be able to help him. Hudson's Bay sent a twenty-six-pound stuffed wolverine, but Wisconsin's live badger continued to torment Yost. In 1927 he rounded up ten live wolverines from Alaska. They grew so vicious that even Yost had to give up on them and ship all but one to out-of-town zoos. "Biff" was kept in the Campus zoo, a monument to Yost's perserverance. In personal life Yost was a devout Methodist, a Republican (he even campaigned for Alf Landon) and a Sigma Chi. He was admantly opposed to the repeal of Prohibition. All military history fascinated Yost and he became somewhat expert on the Civil War and Custer's Last Stand against the Sioux.'34 134. Ibid., p. 29. Chapter III The Years As University of Michigan Football Coach Yost coached the University football team from 1901-1923 and 1925 -1926. George Little was head coach in 1924. The 1901, 1902, 1903, 1904, 1922, 1923, 1925 and 1926 teams were Conference champions. The 1901, 1902, 1903, 1904, 1910, 1918, 1922 and 1923 teams were undefeated. Overall, these Wolverine teams won 165 games, while losing only 29 and being tied 11 times. His career at Michigan began sensationally with the famous "point-a-minute" teams. No other coach and no other series of football teams ever so dominated their era as Fielding H. Yost and the Michigan teams of 1901 -1905. He became a national figure, as did many of his star players.1 In this five-year stretch, the Wolverines won 55 games, lost one and tied one. The 1901 team beat ten opponents, 550 points to 0.2 Similar totals were amassed by the 1902-1905 elevens, and sportswriters came to refer to them as the "point-a-minute" teams.3 Crowds streamed into Ann Arbor to watch the games. A record 17,000 saw Michigan's final football game on old Regents' Field in 1905.4 The single tie came in the 1903 game with Minnesota before 20,000 spectators at old Northrop Field in Minneapolis. This 6-6 contest began the Little Brown Jug tradition, football's first nationally known trophy.5 The lone defeat came on November 30, 1905 at Marshall Field in Chicago. Michigan had its 55 game winning streak on the line and a crowd of 25,791 paid admissions, the largest that had ever attended a football game in the West, saw Alonzo Stagg's unbeaten University of Chicago Maroons win 2-0.6 1. Danzig, p. 159. 2. While this was a fantastic feat, a few teams had previously recorded similar seasons. The Yale University team of 1888, for example, outscored its opposition 694-0. See "Yale Winningest," The Toledo Blade, Sunday, July 21, 1968. 3. Etter, "Intercollegiate Athletics," Encyc., pp. 1970-71. 4. Pack, Encyc., p. 1580. 5. Danzig, p. 165. Michigan left its water jug in Minnesota following this 1903 game. The Gophers would not return it until Michigan again won over Minnesota in football. The jug remained at Minnesota until 1909. See: Pack, p. 64. 6. Danzig, p. 171. 48 15,500 await the opening kickoff at Regents Field, Ann Arbor for the 1905 Wisconsin game. Michigan won 12-0 notching its 54th consecutive victory. 50 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY To Michigan football, Yost added the dimension of spectacular, widemargin victories. On four different occasions his "point-a-minute" teams scored over 100 points while blanking their opponents. The 128-0 victory over Buffalo in 1901 was most impressive in light of other scores that year. Buffalo beat Columbia 5-0; Yale beat Columbia 10-5; Columbia scored victories over Navy 6-5 and Penn 11-0 that same season. Buffalo did not play Yale.7 Was Michigan really that good or Buffalo simply horribly inept that day? Perhaps it was a combination of each, but a letter from the Stanford University head football coach, C. M. Fickert, to Yost, dated October 29, 1901, would indicate that Michigan's 1901 team was really fantastic: I see by the papers that you defeated the University of Buffalo by 128 to 0. I at present doubt the score, as it also stated that the halves played were 25 minutes. Let me know if this score is correct, as I never thought it possible of one team to so defeat another, especially when Buffalo was considered to be so strong. In assessing the impetus or direction given by Fielding Yost to the University of Michigan intercollegiate football program, it would not be entirely accurate to say he alone initiated a winning tradition. Charles Baird had said that the Wolverine teams were Western Football Champions in 1893, 1894, 1895 and 1898, or, in other words, four of the eight years prior to Yost's arrival. Those eight teams won 65 games, lost 12, and were tied four times (84 per cent average). Baird said of the 1899 and 1900 seasons that produced 15 wins, four losses, and two ties (79 per cent average), "Our people were greatly roused up over the defeats of the past two years..." He had to be referring to the losses to Pennsylvannia, Wisconsin, Chicago and Iowa, all of which must have been considered "big" games. Thus, while the over-all percentage looked very good, against the so-called "big" teams Michigan's record must have been considered unsatisfactory by those people who were "greatly roused up." Thus, to Michigan football Yost added the impression of invincibility, even in the "big" games, and the expectation that Michigan would be second to none. He is credited with having a tremendous influence on the growth of Michigan spirit and tradition,8 and, with Alonzo Stagg, was often mentioned as one of the pioneers who popularized football in the Midwest. To Michigan football Yost brought financial stability in this early period. On of his greatest players, Willie Heston, wrote that: 7. Letter, Yost to Grantland Rice, October 29, 1935, Carton 9, UMAP. 8. Etter, Encyc., p. 1971. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 51 When I reported to the team in the fall of 1901... the athletic treasury was empty and the business men on Main Street were requested by our graduate director to contribute a few dollars to help out the good cause. As soon as Michigan started to win their games under the tutelage of Coach Yost, the public became interested, and crowds started to swarm to Ann Arbor on Saturday afternoons.9 The total receipts from football in 1898 were $7,245.72, or a profit of $131.57 over expenses.10 Football receipts in 1903 totaled $22,550.72 as against $6,758.47 expenses."1 The 1903 receipts were typical for the 1901-1909 period.12 These efforts were not without personal financial reward, as Yost received a $450 salary increase in 1902. His three-year contract called for $2,750 a year, plus his customary living expenses during the season in Ann Arbor. The figure jumped to $3,500 in 1905, and a new fiveyear contract was signed. Yost would receive $3,750 in 1906 and 1907, and $4,000 in 1908 and 1909. National attention was directed toward the University when the 1901 team traveled to Pasadena, California defeating Stanford 49-0 in the inaugural Rose Bowl Game. The game was no "spur-of-the-moment" decision. The entire series of letters setting it up and the Los Angeles Herald's game summary are in the Yost files,"3 and make it possible to reconstruct that historic January 1, 1902 encounter. As early as August 8, 1901 Michigan received an inquiry from Washington University. They had read newspaper reports that Michigan might play Stanford in San Francisco during the Christmas Holidays, and wanted to share travel expenses if Michigan would consent to a second game in Seattle. Several club teams from Oregon and California wrote hoping to engage Michigan should a western trip materialize. Talk of a game very likely originated with Yost. Having just spent a very active year coaching there, he was eager to show off this great Michigan team. On October 24, 1901 came the first letter from James R. H. Wagner, newly-elected president of the Tournament of Roses Association to Charles Baird, Michigan's Manager of Athletics: 9. Letter, Heston to W. G. Cowell, February 22, 1937, Carton 10, UMAP. 10. "Athletic Association Finances," Alumnus, Vol. V. No. 4, January 1899, p. 153. 11. "Athletic Association Election," Alumnus, Vol. IX. No. 5, February 1903, p. 12. 12. Receipts and disbursements for all sports 1903-1911 can be found in Murfin Papers, Box 9, folder labeled "Board in Control of Athletics, 1901-1918," MHCL. 13. See August file, Carton 1, UMAP. These priceless letters are still in excellent condition. 52 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The Pasadena Tournament of Roses Association will hold their annual festival January 1st, 1902. It is rumored that you intend sending a team to the Pacific Coast during the Christmas holidays; if such is the case, we are exceedingly anxious to make arrangements, if possible, whereby we can plan for a football game on this date with one of the Pacific Coast universities. The festival was described as the grandest social function of Southern California bringing together "the entire better element of the surrounding country." Having Michigan play in Pasadena on New Years Day would, Wagner conjectured, "not only assure us of the attendance of that element, but will bring us the entire sport-loving element of the city." A grand floral parade was scheduled for New Years morning, with all the private carriages decorated with fresh flowers. Positively no artificial flowers were permitted. Wagner was especially eager to set up the football game in conjunction with the parade. He had only recently moved to California having lived in Michigan the previous twenty years. "I am a new comer into this territory," he told Baird, and the people of this town have chosen me President of this Tournament... It is up to me to give them a carnival far superior to anything they have ever seen. The plan that I have made out simply staggers them, and if I can make good on this football game, I will be a high boy. I personally feel that if we can possibly make this date, that it will be a trip long to be remembered by those who are fortunate in being on the team. At this point in time it is hard to imagine a more accurate prophesy. For Michigan to have gotten permission to make such a long trip is really surprising. Intersectional games were not at all common in 1901. Someone must have argued the case well, perhaps Professor Albert Pattengill, chairman of the Board in Control of Athletics, and Charles Baird. The team would not miss any classes. Absoulutely no expenses would be incurred. Everything would be closely supervised. Only one game would be played. The opposition would be a regular college squad. The men would be properly conditioned. Excellent publicity would come to Michigan, and the men would benefit educationally from the travel. It is clear from Baird's letters and the Rose Bowl contract that many of these arguments were advanced. Baird admitted, I have had a great deal of difficulty to secure permission from our faculty to make this trip... Our faculty has appointed a committee, which has charge of the matter of our making this trip, and they will not permit us to leave town unless they are assured of two things,-First, that the trip shall be made without costing the YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 53 Athletic Association any expenses whatever; second, that arrangements shall be made so that the team may make the trip in a manner which will permit it to be kept in condition for the game. It was Michigan's desire to face the winner of the Stanford vs California (Berkeley) Thanksgiving Day encounter, thus pitting them against what would generally be regarded as the strongest team on the Pacific Coast. Stanford, by winning 12-0 over California, accepted Wagner's invitation to meet Michigan. On the afternoon of the beginning of Christmas vacation fifteen players accompanied by Yost, Baird, Keene Fitzpatrick (trainer), and a student manager, boarded the Michigan Central bound for Chicago. The Northwestern, Union Pacific and Southern Pacific lines carried them through Salt Lake City and on to San Francisco where they arrived Tuesday, December 24th. Following a limbering up practice the team enjoyed a good bath at the Olympic Club. It is likely that Yost's many friends and Michigan alumni took care to see that the players enjoyed the sights of San Francisco. On Thursday morning the squad left for Los Angeles over the Coast route. They stayed at the Raymond Hotel and practiced on a hillside a short distance south of the Hotel. It was about a twenty-five minute trip on in to Pasadena where the men were quartered in the Green Hotel. Wagner called it "the best in the State." The players of both teams rode in the Tournament of Roses Parade on New Years morning. The line of march was gaily festooned with banners and bunting of the blue and gold, a very close representation of Michigan's maize and blue! The boys from Palo Alto surreptitiously tore down all such annoying reminders of the enemy that they could lay hands on. Peace was restored when authorities informed the irate Stanfords that blue and gold happened to be the official colors of the Tounrament of Roses and that no slight had been intended. While the teams were riding to the scene of the conflict in their stylish tally-hos the crowd was storming the gates of Fiesta Park. By noon there were about 3000 ticketholders outside the fence and two policemen within, afraid to open the lone gate for fear of starting a stampede. Milling around in the 85~ sun the fans became impatient and began scaling the board fences surrounding the Park. While the two officers were busy keeping order at the one gate that was open, about 2000 fans climbed the fence. Final estimates of attendance ranged from 6000 to 8000, and the game sponsors realized a tidy $6000 profit. The Los Angeles Herald reported that, "Never before in the history of sport in Southern California have so many people gathered to see a contest on the gridiron." The applause that greeted the two teams as they came on 54 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The 1901 team prior to a practice session in Pasadena's Tournament Park as they prepared to meet Stanford in the first Rose Bowl game. A4' /, A,41 3 jw, Mwrx ) 0VV46^ Michigan drives for a touchdown in the 49-0 Rose Bowl romp. Notice the sound charge of the line, the hand fakes and drive of the backs. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 55 to the field showed the majority favored Stanford, but a surprisingly large number of Michigan rooters were apparent. In the pre-game warm-up activities Sweeley of Michigan astounded the capacity crowd with an exhibition of long, booming spiral punts. His kicking during the game was equally awesome. Michigan won the toss and chose the south goal with the sun at their backs and the light wind with them. As was customary, Stanford then kicked off, hoping to hold the Wolverines and gain excellent field position. Through the first twelve minutes of play both teams appeared equally formidable. Then, Michigan began a drive that made it perfectly clear why Fielding Yost was earning his nickname, "Hurry-Up". Taking over the ball on their own fifteen-yard line Michigan ran the plays as quickly as possible. Signals were given while the players were still disentangling themselves from the heap. Neil Snow climaxed the whirlwind, eighty-five yard drive by bursting five yards up the middle for a touchdown. The extra point was good and Michigan led 6-0. The tide was turning. Michigan took the ball to Stanford's eight and settled for a field goal to make it 11-0. With approximately two minutes left in the first half, Stanford fumbled a punt and Curtis Redden, Michigan's right end, picked it up and raced twenty yards for a touchdown. The extra point made it 17-0, Michigan, at the half. Yost apparently realized the weakness of Stanford's right guard and tackle and instructed his team to attack that area. The Los Angeles Herald reported that "nearly all the gains through the line for the remainder of the game were made through those two positions." With just four minutes gone in the second half Neil Snow scored a touchdown from six yards out. The kick failed and Michigan led 22-0. When Stanford again fumbled a punt, Redden scooped it up and ran twelve yards for another opportunistic touchdown. The extra point made it 28-0. Having established firm control of the game, Michigan began to use more and more of what were called "trick plays"-fake kicks, double passes and wing plays. Snow scored his fourth and fifth touchdowns and Herrnstein closed out the 49-0 romp with a twenty-two yard scamper. By consent of the captains the game was terminated several minutes (estimates range from three to ten minutes) before scheduled. The Los Angeles Herald's account attests to Yost's coaching brilliance. Fundamentally his team was sound. "The Ann Arbor men crouched low in the Line. Every man in the team leaned forward with his hands on the ground, as if starting in a footrace. It marked contrast to this style of playing the Stanford men played high and were with seeming ease thrown back toward their goal line... Michigan was al 56 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Michigan "luck" was born on the practice field. Here Yost teaches tackling, and proudly displays his Lafayette letter. The stances and alignment of the 1902 team look good even today. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 57 most always lucky in getting the ball on a fumble or her men had been trained to keep their eyes on the ball... The Michigan men had evidently been well drilled in the fundamentals of football such as correct tackling, falling on the ball, and catching it on kicks." Emphasizing speed and quickness, Yost's team relentlessly attacked the weakest portion of Stanford's defense. Once the game was firmly in their control, the "trick plays" came out of the bag. Michigan's kicking game was superb. They must have been in excellent physical condition because not a Michigan man was substituted for throughout the game. Back at the Green Hotel the four unused subs doused each other with a garden hose and rolled in the dirt so they would not bring clean uniforms back to Ann Arbor. The victorious Wolverine eleven left Pasadena January 2nd on the Southern Pacific route bound for New Orleans. The Illinois Central brought them to Chicago for the final "lap" back to. Ann Arbor. It was indeed an historic excursion. Great teams and a flair for publicity brought Yost and Michigan an inordinate share of news coverage from 1901-1905. Capitalizing on this popularity, he wrote a book entitled, Football For Player and Spectator, which appeared in 1905. Amos Alonzo Stagg and Dr. Harry Williams had published their Treatise on Football in 1893 and Yost later recalled that it was, "the first book on football I ever read. This book was published about the time I began to be interested in football and so far as I know, is the only source of information of this kind available anywhere."14 The Stagg-Williams writing might have served as a format for the Yost book. Years later, Yost wrote John Heisman saying that he didn't believe more than two or three books on football had preceded his own. His only claim to originality, however, was the manner of presenting the rules. "Previously, you had to look in the back of the rules to find the penalty and who had jurisdiction. In my book, they are presented together."15 Complimentary copies were sent to many newspapers.16 The reviews provided excellent advertisement, and Yost was often heralded as one of the top coaches in the country. The Boston Traveler said, "There is only one Yost as there is only one Bill Reid or one Walter Camp. These three men are the most prominent figures in the football world today."'7 The New York Evening Mail said, "Coach Yost is recognized as the 14. Letter, Yost to A. A. Stagg, April 26, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 15. Letter, Yost to John Heisman, February 11, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 16. Approximately 40 news-clippings from various papers may be found in Yost Scrapbook, MHCL. 17. Myron W. Townsend, "Sportographs," The Boston Traveler, Undated news clipping in Yost Scrapbook, MHCL. 58 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Sled work enabled the Michigan team to move as a unit on the snap of the ball. Yost did not hesitate to demonstrate defensive techniques. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 59 greatest coach in the West and some even give him the palm for all America."18 The rise in national popularity of this young (34 years old), parttime football coach had been meteoric. Many Americans were devouring the writings of Horatio Alger whose youthful heroes invariably rose from humble beginnings to wealth and happiness19 The Huntington Herald (West Virginia)viewed Yost in this light when it commented: West Virginians take special interest in Yost because he is a West Virginian. Ten years ago he was just a plain country boy and then he went to the West Virginia University. The next time we saw him was during the game with Lafayette at the fair grounds. He had a cut above his eye and blood streaked all over his face, but he stayed right in the game, and we admired his pluck and predicted a great future for him.20 Like the game of football itself, Yost had the appeal of "rugged individualism," in an era when the United States President, Theodore Roosevelt, was making this a most desirable quality. Bursting with enthusiasm Yost told an interviewer: The prospects for football this year are immense! The best ever! I have letters from the presidents of 15 universities, prep and high schools, asking me to recommend a competent coach. The tenor of each letter is that football has reached fever heat in their respective localities and it is necessary for them to keep up with the times. Most of them ask for Yost graduates... and I can't supply them, because every Michigan man who wants to coach has been snapped up.21 This portrayal of college football in 1905 contained as much wishful thinking as historical accuracy. The increase in serious injuries attributed to football reached shocking proportions in that year and gave rise to urgently needed reforms. From 1893 to 1902, a total of 654 known serious injuries occurred among those playing college football in the United States.22 Hackensmith lists 68 deaths and 804 incapacitating injuries recorded between 1901-1904.23 The climax apparently came in 1905 when Harold Moore, a sophomore back playing for Union College, 18. "'Hurry Up' Yost Edits Fine Football Book," New York Evening Mail, Undated news-clipping, Yost Scrapbook, MHCL. 19. Dexter Perkins and Glyndon Van Deusen, The United States of America, Vol. II, New York: The Macmillan Co., 1926, p. 161. 20. "Yost," The Huntington Herald, Undated news-clipping, Yost Scrapbook, MHCL. 21. "'Hurry Up' Yost Talks About His Book," Undated, unidentified newsclipping, Yost Scrapbook, MHCL. 22. John S. Brubacher and Willis Rudy, Higher Education in Transition, New York: Harper & Row, 1958, p. 131. 23. Hackensmith, pp. 398-399. 60 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Yost arrives at Whitmore Lake to conduct pre-season training in 1905. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 61 was killed in a game with New York University. The Sunday, New York Times gave the incident front-page billing, and news services spread the grim story across the nation.24 The serious injury of Hurley of Harvard and Carter of Columbia added to the uproar.25 At the end of this same football season, The Chicago Tribune reported that 18 high school and college football players had been killed and 159 were seriously injured that season.26 At Columbia University the faculty pre-emptively abolished the game, and Columbia did not play again until 1915.27 Northwestern and Union suspended the sport for one year. Stanford and California abandoned it in favor of Rugby, a change that lasted ten years.28 Severe restrictions were also levied at other prominent institutions. In some cases, shorter schedules were adopted. Special committees were set up, usually representing faculty, students, and alumni, to superintend and control the whole field of intercollegiate athletics. A few schools, such as the University of Missouri and the University of Chicago, raised " physical culture" to the dignity of a full-fledged department of instruction, centralizing all authority over both sports and physical training in one professor.29 Chancellor Henry M. McCracken of New York University invited President Eliot of Harvard to step into the breach. Dr. Eliot declined for lack of jurisdiction in the matter stating, "Death and injuries are not the strongest argument against football.. That cheating and brutality are profitable is the main evil."30 President Theodore Roosevelt believed that football was a moral force capable of preparing young men for civic responsibility. An advocate of self-reliant, vigorous manhood, he had popularized the motto, "Don't flinch and don't foul, but hit the line hard!"31 On October 9, 1905, he called several prominent college football men to a presidential luncheon in Washington, D.C. They included, Dr. D. H. Nichols and W. T. Reid of Harvard, Arthur T. Hildebrand and John B. Fite of Princeton, and Walter Camp and John Owsley of Yale. The President expressed his feelings on the need for rules changes and urged his guests to undertake a movement that would reform the game.32 This and other examples of his public support did much to promote football in schools and colleges. Chancellor McCracken soon called a meeting of the nation's colleges 24. Ibid. 25. The New York Times, November 28, 1905. 26. Weston, p. 59. 27. Danzig, p. 29. 28. Van Dalen, p. 437. 29. Brubacher, p. 129. 30. Danzig, p. 29. 31. Mitchell dissertation, p. 152. 32. The New York Times, October 10, 1905, p. 1. 62 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY to determine whether (1) college football was worth keeping, and (2) if so, what could be done to improve it. Thirteen Eastern schools were represented at the meeting December 9, 1905, and they decided on certain reforms. At a second meeting, December 28, 68 schools participated.33 A Football Rules Committee was appointed and the Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States was organized to serve the colleges as an educational body. General Palmer E. Pierce of West Point was elected its president. Its name was changed in 1910 to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The NCAA began immediately to work for improvements in five general areas with a large measure of success.34 (1) Faculty control. The NCAA undoubtedly was a key factor in promoting the change from student and alumni supervision in many institutions. (2) Encouraging the growth of conferences. Between 1906-1915, 29 conferences were formed, particularly in the Midwest, Far West and South. (3) Elimination of seasonal coaches. In 1910 the NCAA passed a resolution favoring employment of coaches on a full-time basis as regular members of the teaching staff. (4) The creation of rules committees and the promotion of national tournaments. (5) Working to control subsidization and recruitment. Moving swiftly into action were the newly appointed rules committee and the older group that had preceded it. At their January 12, 1906 meeting in New York, the forward pass was legalized, although at first hemmed in with restrictions; the length of the game was reduced; the neutral zone was established; a third official was added; and several other changes were directed toward ruling out mass plays.3 Fielding H. Yost is conspicuously absent from the list of 12 leading football figures who authorized these changes.36 Some of the men were 33. Palmer E. Pierce, Presidential address to NCAA convention in 1926. The University of Michigan was not represented at either of these meetings. See: Guy Reiff, "The Establishment of the National Intercollegiate Football Rules Committee," The Physical Educator, Vol. 19, No. 35, December 1962. 34. Van Dalen, p. 438. 35. Danzig, p. 31. 36. An article, "The New Football Rules," Alumnus, May 1906, p. 356, lists the following as members of this rules committee: Prof. L.M. Dennis, Chairman Cornell James T. Lees* Nebraska W.T. Reid, Jr., Secretary Harvard James Babbitt* Haverford Walter Camp Yale Paul Dashiell Annapolis F.H. Curtiss* Texas E.K. Hall* Dartmouth John C. Bell Pennsylvania Dr. H.L. Williams: Minnesota C.W. Savage* Oberlin A.A. Stagg Chicago * Brigadier General Palmer Pierce, in his 1926 Presidential address to the NCAA lists each of these men as being appointed by the NCAA to merge with the older rules committee in enacting the new rules. The only discrepancy between his list and that carried in the Alumnus was that he had Lt. Charles D. Daly of the U. S. Military Academy on his committee also. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 63 already members of the old rules committee. The Eastern schools were heavily represented not only on this new committee but in the entire leadership of the reform movement. Two of those who represented Midwestern universities, namely Dr. Williams of Minnesota and Alonzo Stagg of Chicago, were both Yale graduates. It is not clear whether Yost, as a businessman during this period, ever considered, or was considered for, a position on this committee. While Yost described several college presidents as anxious to keep up with the fever heat of football, one president who appeared to be very interested in reducing the fever somewhat was James B. Angell of the University of Michigan. The English idea of mass participation without an enormous publicity for winning teams was the direction he preferred to see college athletics take. He had expressed this hope with the completion of Waterman and Barbour Gymnasiums and Regents' Field. Again, ten years later, he took the approach that limited facilities were preventing widespread student participation. In his annual report for 1902, the President announced the donation of some 17 acres by D. M. Ferry to be added to the approximately 13-acre Regent's Field: This furnishes a spacious field, in which not only the ball teams can have their practice, but in which the great body of students can simultaneously have outdoor exercise... Previously the advantages of the field were for the most part limited to the comparatively small number of students who composed the teams. Our well-equipped gymnasiums and the large field, embracing nearly thirty acres, now affords every facility for physical training.37 Upon reciept of a $150 a year gift to honor the debaters who represent the University of Michigan in the Central Debating League, the President said, "In these days when athletic contests between universities attract so much attention, and as many think, undue attention, it is pleasant to have such recognition as this of interest in purely intellectual contests."38 As the national clamor for reform or abolition of football reverberrated across the country in 1905, President Angell sought to answer those critics who charged the universities with a lack of concern, and the students with over-zealousness: When we read of thirty or forty thousand persons rushing to intercollegiate football games at Cambridge or New Haven, Princeton or New York, and most of these persons of respectability and intelligence and maturity, when we see that journals of the highest character devote at least a whole page to the report of a game and publish the portraits and biographies of the players as heroes of 37. President's Report, 1902, p. 11. 38. President's Report, 1904, p. 14. 64 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY whom readers most desire to hear, may we not truthfully say that the public are as crazy about football as the students, and that the passion of the latter is only a part of the national passion which has taken possession of the country... Let the public who criticize accept their just portion of the blame, in so far as blame is pronounced. Answering the charge of indifference, the President said that no subject of college administration had been given more conscientious attention by colleges and universities in recent years than the regulation and control of athletics. "They greatly desire the cultivation of healthful outdoor exercise by all the students rather than the star acting of a few on a public occasion." Calling attention to the expanded facilities as evidence of this desire, he also reviewed the rules governing academic standards and unsportsmanlike conduct as enforced by the Board in Control. "One of the most difficult abuses to prevent," he admitted, "is the offering of inducements to promising athletes in preparatory schools to come to this or that college, because these inducements may be and often are offered by students or graduates without the knowledge of the authorities." Referring to recent articles in Scribner's Magazine giving detailed descriptions of such activities in some Eastern colleges, President Angell did not doubt the possibility of similar conditions existing in the West. He concluded that: Indisputably then something remains to be done to rid college athletics of certain objectionable practices, and college faculties who have already done so much to abolish abuses are not likely to neglect their duty in the future.39 Chancelor McCracken's meetings, held in New York on December 9 and 28, 1905, were attended largely by Eastern schools. President James Angell then called the faculty representatives of the "Big Ten" Conference to meet in Chicago, January 19-20, 1906. The widespread demands for reform and control of college football focused on two main issues: (1) reform the rules of play so as to make football less brutal and thus reduce injuries, and (2) eliminate the mal-practices rampant in eligibility, recruitment, lengthy schedules, subsidization, etc., by reforming the administration of intercollegiate athletics. With the NCAA Rules Committee already reporting rules revisions the Conference deferred action in this area to them and concentrated on the second issue. Michigan was represented in Chicago by Professor Albert H. Patengill (chairman of the Board in Control of Athletics) who opened the meeting by reading a letter from President Angell.Y In the discussions 39. President's Report, 1905, pp. 9-1 1. 40. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, Vol. XII, No. III, February 1906, p. 197. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 65 that followed, Wisconsin's representative, Professor Frederick Jackson Turner, demanded that the game be abolished or at least suspended for two years,41 Northwestern moved to suspend play. The mood of the conference was for change rather than abolition, however, and in the final hour of the second day some agreements began to emerge from the apparent chaos.42 Recommendations were adopted by the conference and submitted to the faculties of each institution. Each faculty was to report its reactions to President Angell. It was decided to await the action of the national rules committee (revising football rules), and if their work was deemed inadequate the conference would delegate a committee of its own to draw up rules. The conference recommendations called for barring freshmen from intercollegiate competition; reducing the number of football games from seven to five; requiring athletes to be bonafide students in residence for one year; barring graduate students from varsity competition; fixing the admission charge to games so that all students could afford to attend; limiting varsity eligibility to three years, and this was to be retroactive; abolishing training tables or training quarters; and "hereafter there shall be no coaching except by regular members of the instructional staff appointed by the trustees on the recommendation of the Faculty, and that the salary attaching to the position shall be no more than that paid to other members of the Faculty of same rank."43 Rumors had been rampant prior to the conference. Michigan had been criticized in the public press. An article by Edward Jordan in Colliers had been particularly offensive in its allegations of professionalism and proselyting.44 The February Alumnus also stated that the tension was amplified when a similar writing by a student in the University, Richard Clare O'Brien, appeared in the Inlander (a student publication). O'Brien recommended a complete de-emphasis on athletics that would dismiss the coaches and go back to student managers. According to the Alumnus, he also indulged in personalities, with the result that student sentiment was outraged against him.45 The Student Council summarily dismissed him from the Inlander staff and forced its editor to withdraw from the coming Student Council elections. When news of the conference action reached the Michigan campus, 41. Professor Turner gained considerable distinction in the field of American history with his famous "frontier theory." For comments on his activities at this Conference meeting see, "The Action of Conference Committee," Alumnus, Vol. XII, No. III, February 1906, pp. 197-198. 42. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, p. 199. 43. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, p. 200. 44. Edward Jordan, "Buying Athletic Victories," Colliers Weekly, November 25, 1905. 45. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, p. 200. 66 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY the student reaction was immediate and hostile. They saw it as an effort to bar Fielding H. Yost from coaching. Further, it was alleged that Chicago had introduced the coaches' resolution. The ring of the recent, momentous 2-0 football defeat at the hands of Chicago was still in the air. One of Michigan's players was ruled off the field that day for unnecessary roughness against the Chicago star, Walter Eckersall. The Michigan Daily, in its early reports on the conference action, referred to Alonzo Stagg as "The Spotless One" and his players as "lily whites."46 A mass student meeting was held the night of January 25, 1906. The Daily reported that the three principal speakers, Regent Henry Dean, Judge H. Wirt Newkirk and State Representative Junius Beal, would be saying what the students wanted to hear. Chief opposition centered on three proposals: (1) the elimination of the training table, (2) the limitation to five football games, and, far and away the most unpopular, (3) the coaching rule that would bar Yost. The Daily polled some of the regents and printed the following quotes from them. Frank Fletcher stated, "Yost is a manly fellow and a great coach." Levi Barbour thought that Yost should be retained if the other universities were able to keep their coaches. Henry Dean expressed his contempt for Chicago and declared, "I'm not going to favor any plan that is going to put that school on a plane above us." Regent Arthur Hill would save Yost by placing him on the faculty. Hill was enough a booster of football that he reportedly had once proposed giving University credit for participation in football.47 It was felt that some of the coaches at other Conference schools would be saved only because they were technically on the faculty.48 In spite of this sentiment, it does not seem likely that Yost would have considered a faculty appointment. He was already earning a salary double that of University professors, and this was for just ten weeks work. He would have taken a tremendous cut in salary to join the University faculty. The Michigan Alumnus reacted more philosophically. "The Conference has sought to bring us to a right-about and Michigan has been more than ready... to accept the recommendations, but she hopes withal, to save the game." Favoring reform rather than abolition, the Alumnus reported that: The English conception of college was confessedly the ideal of the representatives of the conference. It is a question whether, given the American sprit of which we are as tenacious and proud as any Englishman, we can ever equal the sang froid (cold blood) 46. The Michigan Daily, January 24, 1906. 47. Ibid. 48. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, p. 202. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 67 in sport of our blood brothers across the water. It is certain, however, that we can come many degrees nearer to this ideal and this about-face has started us a long way on the back track toward a healthier view.49 Subsequently the student body was shocked to learn that many of the reforms were suggested originally by President Angell and that it was he who signaled the representatives to meet. On February 5 the University Senate ratified the recommendations of the conference, except for the "coach" clause, explaining that the contract with Yost still had four years remaining. It was reported also, that the sentiment of the Senate was against the "retroactive" clause in the rule limiting participation to three years of competition.50 Professor Pattengill hoped that the rules would "work a revolution in the game. It is time," he stated, "that this disproportionate interest in football is checked. We have aimed to make rules that will put athletics within the reach of every student instead of a few special ones. We want a football game, be we do not want the present game with its surroundings. "31 The coaches and managers of athletics in the Western Conference were summoned by Coach Williams of Minnesota to discuss reform measures. These men met in Chicago, January 26th, but Michigan was not represented. A second "Angell Conference" was called for March 9 and 10, 1906. Michigan students and the regents were hoping their objections would meet with favor. The representatives amended the "coach" clause to read that no coach would be appointed except by University governing bodies on the recommendation of the Faculty or President in the regular way and at a modest salary. The other Michigan objections, including the despised "retroactive" clause in the three-year competition rule, remained unchanged. One week later, on March 16, 1906, Albert H. Pattengill died. There is, of course, no way of accurately determining the full impact of his absence on the direction taken by Michigan athletics. It is interesting, however, to speculate here on his loss to the University. Professor Pattengill seemed to have the unique charismatic appeal that made him the spokesman for both students and faculty. His early interest in student athletics, his important role in prompting Dexter Ferry to donate those 17 acres used for athletics,52 and his tireless efforts as chairman 49. Ibid. 50. Ibid. 51. Ibid. 52. Walter Miller, "Albert Henderson Pattengill," Alumnus, Vol. XLVIII, No. 10, December 6, 1941, pp. 45-53. See also, Minutes of Board in Control of Athletics. 68 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY of the Board in Control of Athletics had endeared him to students and faculty alike. With emotion and deep suspicion ready to replace reason, this was a time when charismatic personalities were in great need. No leader of similar stature emerged. In an effort to assure alumni of his friendliness toward the game of football, President Angell addressed the annual banquet of the Chicago alumni. It was, he said, the first time he had taken up the question of football in public. "I will tell you now-in my only football speechthat I am an admirer of the game... In starting the reform for football we believed that if the game was to be saved at all some modifications of the contests was necessary and highly desirable."53 Reacting to student sentiment, the Board in Control, at its March 29 meeting, approved the general idea of an Eastern football game.54 It was felt that some of the new Conference regulations bore with special weight upon Michigan with no corresponding advantages. Two weeks later, the Board in Control had not approved these new rules. Acting President Judson of the University of Chicago sent a communication from the Chicago Senate requesting that Michigan release them from their contract for the return football game, Thanksgiving Day, 1906. However innocuous this might have seemed to Chicago, it only deepened Michigan's feeling that Chicago had adopted a "holier than thou" position. The Board in Control voted to release Chicago from its contract. Later, they confirmed that a home-and-home football agreement had been reached with the University of Pennsylvania for 1906 and 1907. Fielding Yost was interviewed in Lexington, Kentucky on his reactions to the new football rules changes and the removal of Chicago from the schedule. He called football "the greatest athletic game ever invented," and said that, "under the new rules (it) will be strictly an open contest with a great variety of plays." He thought that the "on side kick, the forward pass and the ten yard rule were the best of the innovations." Regarding Chicago, he was disappointed at not getting an opportunity to avenge the 2-0 loss, but was glad to have the University of Pennsylvania so that Michigan could, by beating them, "win the championship of the world."55 Only one Conference member, Illinois, was on the 1906 Michigan football schedule. Victorious in their first four games, the Wolverines were held to a 0-0 tie by the Alumni in their warm-up for the big season 53. Alumnus, Vol. XII, No. 7, April 1906, p. 295. 54. Minutes of the Board in Control, 1900-1910, located in Athletic Office, University of Michigan. Note that the term "Eastern" simply refers to those larger schools East of the Mississippi having outstanding football teams. 55. "Yost Sorry For Losing Chance At Maroons," The Michigan Daily, May 8, 1906. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 69 finale in Philadelphia. There, the University of Pennsylvania defeated Michigan 17-0. Following a conference meeting in Chicago, December 1, 1906, it was reported that several changes were agreed upon that would reduce the recent restrictions. The playing schedule was to be extended from five games to seven. The retroactive features of the three-year rule were to be eliminated.56 A final decision was to be voted upon at a midJanuary meeting. The Daily welcomed the news, but reported that Wisconsin was working hard to repeal these "liberal reforms." The "retroactive" clause in the three-year rule had been eased permitting the seniors to play in 1906, even if it were their fourth season. Sophomores and juniors would not be permitted to do so, however. This was the "retroactive" clause that Michigan was fighting, and had ignored during the 1906 season. Now, as the Daily reported, she was threatened with losing the services of her track captain, Garrels, and the football captain, Magoffin, the baseball captain of the past season, Wendell, and several other good football players.57 It was suggested that if the Conference did not approve these "liberal refroms," Michigan should rightfully withdraw.58 At the January meeting, on the question of increasing the schedule from five to seven games, only Michigan, Chicago and Iowa voted "Aye." The other six members voted "No." On repeal of the "retroactive" three-year rule, Michigan, Chicago, Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin voted "Aye." Purdue, Northwestern, Minnesota and Indiana voted "No." As a two-thirds vote was necessary for repeal, it was lost by one vote.59 Northwetern was included among those that defeated the repeal, and Michigan students protested that this was "unfair domination by smaller colleges" who had practically eliminated their football programs.60 Before the Board in Control could meet to consider these results, the students took the matter personally to the Regents.61 Judge Victor Lane, Michigan's representative to the Conference and the chairman of the Board in Control, was summoned before the Regents and in56. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, February 1907, Vol. XIII, No. 5, p. 184. 57. The Michigan Daily, January 11, 1907. 58. It should be noted that some of the earlier suspicions regarding Chicago were diminished when a tentative "Big Four Agreement" was reached between Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnsota scheduling football games for the next four years. 59. The Michigan Daily, January 13, 1907. 60. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, February 1907, Vol. XIII, No. 5, p. 184. 61. "What is the Matter with Michigan Athletics?" Alumnus, Vol. XIII, No. 5, February 1907, p. 202. 70 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY formed that it was their unanimous opinion that Michigan ought to withdraw from the Conference. They wished the Board in Control to "withdraw our membership."62 At the January 25 meeting, the Board in Control members concluded that, in their opinion, they were primarily responsible to the Senate and not the Regents. A committee was appointed to so inform the Regents and a letter was written to the Senate explaining the pressures being applied by the Regents. The latter had warned Judge Lane that if the Board in Control didn't act, "the Regents would settle the matter at their next meeting."63 The University Senate met February 19 requesting the Regents to leave matters to the Board in Control. At their meeting three days later, the Regents were unable to come to a decisive vote. Regents Henry Dean, Henry Carey, Frank Fletcher and Arthur Hill voted for withdrawl from the Conference. Regents Loyal Knappen, Levi Barbour, Walter Sawyer and Peter White voted against such action.64 The Daily had quoted Regent Hill as saying that if the Conference rules prevent Michigan's preparing properly for competition with the big universities, we should withdraw. "We must be ready to meet Pennsylvania," he declared. Regent Sawyer believed that the matter was outside the province of the Regents.65 The question of whose prerogative it was to withdraw Michigan from the Conference, rather than sentiment for remaining in it, seems to have been the chief reason for the four votes against withdrawl. Faced with a student petition purported to have been signed by 2,000 to 3,000 students favoring withdrawl from the conference, the four student members of the Board in Control voted that sentiment. The five faculty men dissented. It was agreed to request a special conference meeting asking for another vote on the question of a sevengame schedule and the "retroactive" three-year clause. Further, Michigan would play a seven-game schedule in 1907 and would ignore the retroactive clause.66 The University of Chicago then announced it would break off all relations with Michigan if she did not abide by all the Conference regulations.67 Although the six-game football schedule for 1907 contained no conference opponents, Michigan announced that 62. "Event and Comment," Alumnus, February 1907, p. 202. 63. Minutes of Board in Control, January 25, 1907, located in Athletic Office, University of Michigan. 64. "Board of Control Has Final Jurisdiction," The Michigan Daily, February 23, 1907. 65. The Michigan Daily, January 19, 1907. 66. Minutes of Board in Control, 1900-1910; located in the Athletic Office, University of Michigan. 67. The Michigan Daily, April 11, 1907. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 71 she would abide by the no training table rule, "in view of the recent discussions in the public press.""" The Regents took a bold step in November, 1907. They determined that the Board in Control had never been properly constituted. They then passed a resolution re-creating the Board in Control. Instead of a five to four faculty over student ratio, the new Board had four faculty men, the director of Waterman Gym, one alumnus, and only two under-graduate students. The four faculty appointments would be made by the Deans and the President. Technically, the Board had five faculty men out of eight members. In truth, Keen Fitzpatrick, the director of Waterman Gymnasium and trainer of the foobtall team, was outspokenly in sympathy with the mood of the students and Regents. Perhaps even more important, if the Regents could destroy the old Board, what was to prevent them from re-constructing this new one at a later date if its actions displeased them? The question of faculty vs. regental control over athletics was now seriously debated.9 The 1907 football season centered around one game, the return contest with Pennsylvania. Michigan went into the game with victories over its other five opponents. A crowd of 19,500 saw Pennsylvania again defeat Michigan at Ferry Field, 6-0. In an interview in the Daily, Fielding Yost explained the poor showing of Western teams against Eastern teams over the past two years. They were a direct result of the "destructive Conference rulings." In 1905 Western teams had barred their freshmen from playing varsity football. Promising athletes then went elsewhere. In 1906, the threeyear rule, the five games restriction, the training table rule, and the limitations on fall practice all made Western teams even less attractive to Western athletes. "The full force of all these restrictions was experienced during the season of 1907," he said. Not only had the Pennsylvania elevens played in ten games to Michigan's five, but they had played more games in 1905 and 1906. Thus, they had a decided edge.70 Discussing the reasons why Michigan should withdraw from the Conference, the Daily said, "The best coach in the world supported by the best athletes cannot counteract the disadvantage of lack of experience. This, Coach Yost admits, is the main cause of Michigan's inferiority to Pennsylvania."71 68. Minutes of Board in Control, 1900-1910; October 11, 1907 meeting. 69. "Control By Faculty Or Control By Regents," Alumnus, Vol. XIV, No. 2, November 1907, p. 40. 70. "Yost Discusses Football Trouble," The Michigan Daily, December 17, 1907. 71. "Michigan's Place Not In The Conference," The Michigan Daily, January 10, 1908. 72 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The Board in Control voted that Michigan's delegates to the next Big Ten meeting (January, 1908) be instructed to work for passage of: (1) the seven-game schedule, (2) the training table, (3) repeal of the retroactive three-year rule, and (4) permit inter-departmental graduates to play three years.72 When none of these was approved, Michigan's alternate delegate and Board Chairman, Professor George W. Patterson, declared that while the faculty should guide the students in scholarship and honesty in conducting athletics, the choice of competing East or West, and thus the issue of Conference membership, should be left to the decision of the undergraduates.73 The Board in Control of Athletics met on January 13, 1908, at which time, by a 5-3 vote, it withdrew Michigan's membership in the "Big Ten" Conference. Voting for withdrawl were the two students, football captain Paul Magoffin, and, baseball manager Dudley Kennedy. Three new faculty men, who had been appointed after the November re-organization, voted with the students. They were the track coach and football trainer, Keene Fitzpatrick, George W. Patterson, and Dr. C. B. G. de Nancrede. The three dissenting votes were cast by the only two hold-overs from the previous Board, A. H. Lloyd and H. M. Bates, and alumni appointee Henry Bodman.74 The faculty was generally in favor of retaining membership, but the dominant opinion among students and alumni, at least on the part of those in the general neighborhood of Ann Arbor, was distinctly to the contrary.75 With the exception of two football games with Minnesota in 1909 and 1910, Michigan had no further contact with Conference teams until the close of the year 1917. Three monumental issues commanded the attention of all those interested in Michigan football in the period 1905-1908: (1) saving the game of football by revising its rules, (2) bringing order into the administration of athletics, and (3) sacrificing self-interests in favor of the mutual interests of the entire Western Conference. Fielding H. Yost did not take part at all in the first issue, and adopted a very provincial attitude in the other two. In the decisive 5-3 vote for withdrawl, the football captain and the football trainer were among those voting to terminate Michigan's membership in the Western Conference. It is possible that these two acted contrary to the wishes of Fielding Yost, just as a lot of unlikely events are possible. The preponderance of facts illustrating Yost's strong command over 72. Plant, Encyc., p. 1963. 73. "Professor Patterson Says 'Let Students Decide,'" The Michigan Daily, January 10, 1908. 74. Minutes of Board in Control, January 13, 1908. 75. Plant, Encyc., p. 1963. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 73 Capt. Allerdice of Michigan punts from his own goal line in 12-6 victory over Penn. at Franklin Field, 1909. Michigan tackler at far left brings down Case ball carrier in 34-0 Wolverine win, 1912. Helmets were still optional. 74 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY all those associated with Michigan football renders it highly improbable that these men voted contrary to his wishes. It does not seem inappropriate to conjecture that only one man, Fielding Yost, was capable of diverting the University away from the selfish policy of withdrawl from the Conference and toward a unity behind its reform measures. There can be no doubting his tremendous popularity with the students. His picture abounds in the Daily throughout these years. In 1903, the student yearbook, the Michiganensian, was dedicated to him, an honor which, incidentally, was repeated in 1913, 1925 and 1928. It is not clear whether Professor Pattengill, had he lived, would have been able to stem the tide of student and regental opposition to the Conference regulations and their determination that Michigan withdraw from it. Perhaps only Fielding Yost could have done that. He did not do so. In 1909 the Board in Control lost the services of Charles Baird, who took a banking position in Kansas City. Phil Bartelme replaced him and served as Manager of Athletics from 1909-1921. Michigan began looking eastward for its athletic competition, proud of her achievements and not at all happy to have smaller schools deciding her athletic future. Few in the Midwest would have tackled the Eastern teams. Michigan did so with supreme confidence. The attempt was made to establish popular rivalries with Penn, Syracuse and Cornell. While Michigan was able to trade football victories with these three fine universities during the 1909-1917 period, this was a considerable change from the glories of 1901-1905. Further, these games did not generate the kind of excitement that a Chicago, Wisconsin or Minnesota rivalry had. Almost immediately complaints that Michigan was out of her natural element could be heard. Some dissatisfaction was allayed when a home-and-home agreement was reached with Minnesota for the 1909 and 1910 football seasons. The Gophers fielded excellent teams, especially the 1909 eleven, but Michigan won both games and enjoyed staking a claim to the Conference crown "in abstentia." The only blemish suffered by the 1909 team was an 11-3 loss to Notre Dame. When Syracuse was bulldozed 44-0 and the Wolverines took Penn 12-6, the stage was set for the final curtain, Minnesota at Minneapolis. The odds-makers favored the Gophers who had just wrapped up the Western Conference title. Michigan did all the things Minnesota was supposed to have done well. Blocking aggressively, tackling viciously and playing tenacious defense, Michigan won with straight, power football, 15-6. The triumph brought pandemonium to the streets of Ann Arbor. The saloons closed voluntarily at 7 P.M., but the students didn't need them. They were intoxicated by this great victory. I 1 l, I. Michigan Spirit led supporters to engulf the train bringing Captain Dave Allerdice and the 1909 team back from their 12-6 victory over Penn. The kickoff, Michigan vs. Penn. at Ferry Field, November 18,1911. Michigan 11 - Penn. 9 YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 77 "Everything that can make a noise is being pressed into service," reported the Ann Arbor News. Groups of about 100, each with enough ammunition to rout an army, marched through the streets. Other groups with tin instruments of noise, and other squads which hurridly formed themselves into brass bands, composed mostly of tubas and drums, paraded through the city, headed by several hundred collegians bearing torches showing red and green lights. There was a monster bonfire across from the campus on North University Avenue in a vacant lot. Several speeches were delivered and everyone listened just long enough to find out which of Michigan's eleven was the particular hero of that speech and then yelled their nine 'rahs for that man, and managed to rest up and catch their breath just in time to hear the next name mentioned and yell again. The enterprising merchants donated a huge stock of fireworks and the sky resembled the heavens on a Fourth of July night. Michigan had plenty of reason to claim supremacy in the Midwest. The possibility of continuing to play its top teams without observing all the Conference regulations was closed very quickly to Michigan. A rule (popularly called the "non-intercourse" rule) was passed prohibiting athletic contests between members of the Western Conference and former members who had since withdrawn. They may as well have declared blatantly to the world, "NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO PLAY MICHIGAN!" That is exactly what it meant. Football could still have survived this boycott, but Michigan's other sports could not. Discontent began to arise within the student body as early as 1910 and by 1913 debate on returning to the Conference had left the campus divided and the regents thoroughly frustrated. Comments in several issues of the Daily led Phil Bartelme to express doubt that they represented student sentiment accurately in calling for renewal of Conference ties. His February 1, 1910 letter estimated the faculty to be about evenly divided on unconditional return, the Board in Control against it 7-1 and the Michigan coaches to a man against it. Yost was described as anxious to have friendly relations established with Chicago but not at the expense of unconditional return. 7 Faculty control of athletics dissipated further when the Regents, in November, 1910, reconstituted the Board in Control giving it eleven members-three alumni, three students, the director of Outdoor Athletics and four faculty members appointed by the Deans. The engineering students presented the Board in Control with a resolution, in December, 1910 expressing sentiment favoring Michigan's return to the Conference. A motion by Professor Evans Hol 76 Letter, Bartelme to Hiram Cody, February 1, 1910, Carton 1, UMAP 78 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Jim Spirited Ann Arbor rally sent the Michigan football team on to Harvard in 1914. Harvard receive results of the October 31, 1914 Harvard receive results of the October 31, 1914 Alumni of both Michigan and game won by the Crimsons 7-0. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 79 brook, proposing a committee to investigate the possibilities of re-entry failed for lack of a second.77 His most adamant opposition came from alumni members James Duffy and James Murfin. Their argument was that too much bad jublicity for Michigan had appeared in the press of late, and it should be allowed to die down first. They were apparently referring to the "non-intercourse" rule. The contention that the Conference could not long endure without such a policy did not dissuade those who saw this as just another blow struck at Michigan pride. In April, 1912, a petition was presented the Board in Control by the captains of the football, baseball and track teams. It complained of decreasing interest in athletics at the University, and asked that whatever rules changes necessary be made to permit resumption of competition in the Conference. Instead, the Board passed a resolution saying Michigan had no intention or returning to. the Conference, but would welcome competition with its members and stated that the principle Conference regulation not then enforced at Michigan was the training table.78 Surprisingly, representatives of Michigan and the other Conference universities did meet in Chicago in November, 1912 to discuss differences in rules. It was agreed that members of a team could come together for meals, but they must pay for the meals themselves. On the issue of faculty control, no specific solution was recommended for Michigan. She was to establish this control in her own way. Adjustments in the schedules and the number of games were also discussed. The entire question provoked spirited debate on campus. At a Michigan Union dinner senior law student Frank Murphy presented the student viewpoint. His call for certain concessions before Michigan should agree to resuming membership drew generous applause. Law Professor Ralph Aigler was then introduced to present the faculty sentiments. He created a small sensation by alleging that the regents had simply manipulated the Board in Control into withdrawing Michigan's Conference membership. When the Board at first refused to withdraw, pressure was brought to bear upon the regents to abolish that form of the Board and create a new one, which finally took Michigan out of the Conference Aigler was vehement in calling for restoration of faculty control of athletics. He maintained that the only successful athletics had been under such control. The athletic board was characterized as running athletics like a private corporation. Michigan's athletic relations in the east were attacked both from the standpoint of prestige and finances. 77. Minutes of Board In Control, December 20, 1910. 78. "Statement of the Conference Question," The Michigan Alumnus, Vol. XX, No. 188, November 1913, p. 72. 80 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Officials at Chicago were reported to have offered to publicly invite Michigan's return if she were so inclined. His speech concluded with an appeal for immediate, unconditional return to the Conference.79 Jim Murfin was very upset by this speech particularly with two quotes. One had Aigler saying the present Board voted to take Michigan out of the Conference, when, in fact, it hadn't been formed until 1910. The other insinuated that only under faculty guidance could athletics be free of fraud or subsidy. Murfin was very unhappy with the aspersions this cast upon the Board in Control and wrote Aigler demanding clarification. Aigler answered promptly and politely that while the newspaper account had misquoted him on both these statements, his several criticisms were entirely impersonal, and were to "matters of general policy, upon which I conceive that men may well differ." He added that when agitation over the Conference rules erupted in 1906, he was a student at Michigan and very much in favor of withdrawing from the Conference, "as I then understood the case. However... my opinion has changed in the light of things which I then did not know."80 Early in 1913 a committee of the Board in Control, consisting of its Chairman A. S. Whitney, Duffy and Murfin was named to carry on negotiations with the Conference. Professor Evans Holbrook, who had proposed this idea two years previously, was invited by Whitney to accompany them to Chicago for the meeting. He declined, saying: Since you and Professor Patterson inform me that Judge Murfin refuses to join in any further negotiations with representatives of the Conference unless I am excluded from such negotiations, I do not wish to jeopardize the success of these negotiations and thus will not attend.81 Out of these discussions Michigan's return to the fold was made contingent upon reorganizing the Board in Control so that it was controlled by the faculty. Murfin and Duffy were not about to concede this. They permitted the Board to express its willingness to make such a recommendation to the regents only if the Conference would simultaneously repeal their boycott rule. Thus, it was back to stalemate. The student vote favoring re-entry was offset by alumni opposition; the faculty vote was split, and the director of Waterman Gymnasium was against it. Whitney thought membership was essential, not so much for money, football or baseball. "We do need it for developing track and all minor 79. "Pleads For Immediate Entrance," The Detroit Free Press, December 6, 1912. 80. Letter, Aigler to Murfin, December 12, 1912, Box 1, Murfin Papers. 81. Letter, Holbrook to Whitney, January 31, 1913, Carton 1, UMAP. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 81 sports," he wrote an Iowa University professor. "We must develop these minor sports if we are to ever move toward the English ideal of sports which is the only safe and sane ideal."82 The University Senate adopted two resolutions, and asked the President to convey them to the regents. They thought it an opportune time to assign the regulations of athletics where it belongs-to the Senate or its delegate (director or board). They favored Michigan's return to the Conference with no prior conditions. The student body passed a resolution as did the directors of the students' Athletic Association requesting regental action to get Michigan into the Conference. The Daily conducted a survey showing that, while there was strong sentiment for returning to the Conference, most students, faculty and alumni polled did not favor unconditional re-enry. Apparently they wanted some gesture that would enable Michigan to save face. Regent Hubbard announced on May 31, 1913 that Michigan would meet the Conference half-way, "but not on our knees. We must consider Michigan's dignity." By November 1913 debate had not moved Michigan any closer to resolving these problems. Instead, it had divided the campus, frustrated the regents, and prompted them to declare that it was "not expedient under present condtiions to return to the Conference." Further, they felt strongly that it would be best for all concerned if the entire matter were completely forgotten.83 The issue lay dormant for two years. The man whose name was so intimately associated with effecting Michigan's eventual return to the Big Ten was Professor of Law Ralph W. Aigler. His appointment to the Board in Control was prompted largely by the well-publicized rebuttal to Frank Murphy at the Michigan Union dinner.84 Serving on the Board from May 1913 to May 1955, Aigler was the chairman of this body all but the first two years. For 42 years this legal scholar and athletic buff provided the kind of charismatic leadership that had been missing since the death of Professor Albert H. Pattengill. In May 1915 the Regents ruled that the four faculty members of the Board were to be elected by the University Senate rather than appointed by the Deans. This Senate prerogative had been taken away in 82. Letter, Whitney to Professor Smith, June 2, 1913, Carton 1, UMAP. 83. "Statement of the Conference Question," The Michigan Alumnus, Vol. XX, No. 188, November 1913, pp. 69-72. 84. Marcus Plant, Interview July 24, 1969. Also, see the December 6, 1912 Detroit Free Press. It should be noted that Frank Murphy was a student at this time, and shared a room with Fielding Yost in the Sigma Chi house during the football seasons. He was mentioned earlier for his involvement in Yost's campaign to become head of the Department of Physical Education and Athletics in 1921. 82 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Ralph Aigler led Michigan's return to the Big Ten and served on the Board in Control of Athletics 1913-1955. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 83 1908, resulting in faculty appointments that swung the vote for leaving the Conference. Restoration of the Senate's power brought new appointments to the Board in Control in December 1915. Only Aigler was returned. The three new members, Reuben Peterson, W. T. Fishleigh and Lou M. Gram all favored resuming Conference ties. At their December 9, 1916 Board meeting Chairman Aigler offered that renewed discussion on campus, in the newpapers and among alumni suggested the timeliness of requesting readmittance to the Conference. Northwestern and a number of the smaller colleges which had opposed Michgian would now likely welcome the prospect of a fifth big institution to help their schedules. With only Duffy dissenting, the Board authorized Aigler to investigate attitudes at other universities, at his discretion, to determine the prospects of their welcoming Michigan back. Finding the representatives of several Conference colleges favorable, Aigler and Lou Graham were then authorized to confer with a Conference committee, in Chicago. They met February 17 in the University Club, and, to their delightful surprise, every Conference school was represented except Indiana. They learned that Michigan would be welcome if faculty control could be re-established.85 It was suggested that veto power by the University Senate over Board in Control actions would suffice. When this report was brought back to the Board, Murfin argued that a letter from President Hutchens saying, on all important matters the faculty did have control, was all that was necessary. Professor Aigler believed not only that the President would not write such a letter, but that even if he did it would not be acceptable to the Conference. A resolution giving the Senate the veto power in question was passed by the Board in Control. Only Duffy dissented, but Murfin wanted it recorded that he voted for the resolution because the University of Michigan Club of Detroit preferred it. He personally disagreed.8' The Regents unanimously adopted a recommendation favoring reentry and Aigler reported that at the Conference meeting in Chicago, 85. Minutes of Board In Control, 1910-1927; Letter, Aigler to Board in Control, February 20, 1917, Box 1, Murfin Papers. 86. Minutes of Board In Control, 1910-1927, February 22, 1917. Later this same year Murfin became a regent of the University. The issue of faculty control, which had caused him great frustration, prompted this light-hearted comment four years later. As the appointment of Yost to direct athletics in 1921 appeared eminent, Murfin admonished his colleague Regent Beal: "Bear in mind if I hear of any rumors that we are taking a step away from Faculty Control I shall strongly suspect you of chuckling out loud. I do not intend to chuckle for at least six months-then I think we will be sufficiently established to permit it." (Letter, Murfin to Beal, February 15, 1921, Box 2, Murfin Papers. 84 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY June 9, 1917, the decision was made to extend an invitation to the University to resume membership.87 On November 20, 1917, Michigan returned to the "Big Ten." At this late "hour" even Yost favored Michigan's return.88 There had been a seemingly interminable restlessness for Michigan to revive competition with her Midwestern foes, and, more than that, to regain a position of eminence in football. Yost felt these pressures. A look at the record shows that Yost-coached elevens from 1906 -1915 fared commendably well, winning 49, losing 15 and tying 8 (77 per cent winning average). The record in the big games, where Michigan more or less traded victories, was also commendable. Any thoughts of world championships coming out of competition with Eastern teams had long since dissipated. To Wolverine audiences, nurtured on "pointa-minute" football teams, commendable seasons were hardly fulfilling. The fall of 1915 was particularly disappointing. After winning four games from the smaller schools, Michigan lost to Michigan State, Syracuse and Cornell. A tie with Pennsylvania concluded the 4-3-1 season. Spirits were lifted when an invitation came from the Tournament of Roses Association to play the University of California in Pasadena on New Year's Day. This would have been only the second Rose Bowl game in history. An urgent invitation, seconded by scores of western alumni, was accepted by the Athletic Association contingent upon faculty approval. The University Senate Council refused permission on the grounds that such a game, not under collegiate auspices and held primarily for exhibition purposes, would not be for the best interests of athletics at the University.89 Ultimately, the Rose Bowl committee engaged Washington State and Brown for the game. Professor Aigler attended a dinner with several members of the University of Michigan Club of Detroit. The outcome of their meeting was an expression of loyalty and confidence in Yost, but some reservations were voiced. Aigler believed that the essence of the meeting was captured in an anonymous letter he had recently received. It said Yost sometimes lacked the human touch, forgetting that his players were only boys and new at the game as compared with himself. It was felt that he kept some men in too long and didn't use his substitutes enough. Sometimes in the heat of the fray he used words too strongly. He often praised a man's work to other people, but seldom to the man himself. Due to a few trouble-makers there was a lack of team harmony. There was a lack of student interest, alumni interest and a lack of faculty cooperation. This letter, and the Detroit meeting, apparently 87. Minutes of Board In Control, 1910-1927, June 16, 1917. 88. Letter, Murfin to Aigler, February 28, 1917, Box 1, Murfin Papers. 89. The Michigan Alumnus, Vol. XXII, No. 3, December 1915, p 174 YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 85 concluded by saying the Conference question was the fundamental trouble.90 It is not at all surprising that Yost received some criticism following this poor season. Many of the complaints were petty, the type that often plague a coach when his team does not win. Of interest here is that no one suggested that Yost be fired. Indeed, his name had become synonymous with Michigan, and they wanted to be constructively critical. They hoped also, that the Conference question could somehow be settled. This was the kind of pressure that eventually brought Yost to favor Michigan's return. With the question finally resolved, the Wolverines won all five football games on the 1918 slate. Particularly satisfying were triumphs over Ohio State and Chicago. Some of the nostalgia of being a national football power was returning, but only briefly. The 1919 team won but three games, losing four and tying none. During his 25 seasons as head football coach at Michigan, Fielding Yost suffered just this one losing season. It was a very low ebb in his coaching career. He entertained thoughts of quitting to devote full time to business endeavors where, incidentally, he was also suffering some setbacks.91 Instead, he determined to employ all interested alumni, students and others in the quest to restore Michigan football to a position of eminence. The following account will illustrate Yost's leadership in this campaign. "I suppose there will be much talk and criticism about the season's swork," Yost commented to Phil Bartelme in December, 1919. "'Michigan loyalty should be expressed in service' is a motto I gave the Daily to use as a heading for statements of the kind of service that students and Alumni should do..."992 Yost was not waiting for a ground-swell of opposition to form before taking action. He knew it would come and he wanted to show he was at work to solve the problems. He also wanted to transform criticism into action that would re-build Michigan football. Mr. J. P. Hart, sports editor of The Michigan Daily, carried through Yost's request and received the following compliment: I just received the Daily of December 11th with the editorial, 'Keep Michigan With You,' and 'Your Part In The Solution Of The Athletic Problem.' I want to thank you and your associates for the work you have been doing... 90. Anonymous letter to Ralph Aigler, attached to the Murfin-Bartelme letter, Carton 1, UMAP. 91. F. H. Yost, "Notes on Address of Fielding H. Yost, Annual Meeting of the Ninth District University of Michigan Clubs, June 11, 1929, Pontiac, Michigan," Carton 6, UMAP. 92. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 1, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 86 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY In this same letter, Yost advised Hart that he might run a summary statement saying that Michigan had the finest college athletic field in the country; the finest baseball diamond and stands; the finest football field in the West; the largest seating capacity of any university west of Philadelphia.93 Next, Yost solicited the assistance of Intramural Director, Elmer D. Mitchell. A committee was selected for each fraternity and other organizations on the campus to: (1) get all the talent on campus out for the team, and, (2) help recruit more good athletes.94 Several other changes seemed to be in order. Yost suggested that the football schedule was tougher than it should be and asked Bartelme to take steps to reduce the number of strong teams Michigan was expected to face.95 Dr. May, the director of Waterman Gymnasium, had been serving as team trainer. Yost believed that he did not get the team's confidence, and thus should be replaced in that capacity.96 The lack of an equipment man had been a source of friction, and Yost suggested that someone should be employed to handle this. He admitted the pettiness of complaints like this, but reasoned, "we must keep their morale up."97 As Yost had correctly predicted, there was a lot of talk and criticism about the season's work. Regent Gore was apparently unhappy. He wrote Phil Bartelme that, "It is my intention to attend as many of the foot-ball (sic) games this season as I can. I am discouraged over athletics. I felt that we had the material to make a team last year. I was greviously disappointed, not that we were beaten, but at the pitiful showing we made."98 While some of the criticism was directed to Yost's removal, the general tenor appears to have been an expression of confidence in his coaching and the formulation of a concerted student, alumni effort to restore Michigan to national prominence in football. Alumni interest edged toward interference in the game. The University of Michigan Alumni Association of Wisconsin sent a list of resolutions for change passed unanimously on December 9, 1919. They included the call for, "A more modern coaching system based on either more assistant football coaches experienced in the modern game, or a new head coach and experienced assistant football coaches.99 Copies of their resolutions were sent to The Michigan Daily, University 93. Letter, Yost to J. P. Hart, December 13, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 94. Letter, Yost to Mitchell, undated, December 1919 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 95. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 1, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 96. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 6, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 97. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 13, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 98. Letter, Regent Gore to Bartelme, October 2, 1920, Carton 21, UMAP. 99. Letter, Wyeth Allen to Board of Control of Athletics, University of Michigan, December 17, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 87 President H. B. Hutchins, and Mr. C. B. DuCharme (an alumni representative on the Board in Control). At least two applications were made for Yost's coaching position, in spite of the fact that no vacancy had occurred. 100 Other alumni were more generous to Yost in their attempt to assist than the Wisconsin group had been. Mr. J. W. Bennett, president of the University of Michigan Club of New York assured Yost that the New York club was for him and wanted to know what they could do to help.101 There had been much talk at the annual smoker of the University of Michigan Club of Detroit, the week after the 1919 football season ended. Frank Murphy advised Yost that the consensus of conversation he had gathered was that, "We have the first coach in the Land. More self sacrifice on the part of the student body and the Alumni will bring Michigan back where she belongs. Next year things have got to and will go good for Michigan."1102 A committee was appointed at this meeting to hear complaints. Victor Pattengill, who had attended this smoker, suggested that improvements should be made in the areas of: (1) freshman coaching, (2) getting freshmen out, (3) a definite policy regarding supplies and equipment check-in-out, (4) assistant coaching help, and (5) recruiting.103 One of Yost's assistant football coaches, Prentiss Douglass, suggested that the need was for more coaches, coaches' meetings, an equipment man and a closer watch on player eligibility.'1-4 The University of Michigan Club of Detroit translated thought into action by appointing a field secretary, Robert H. Clancy, 1907.105 His objectives were to: (1) promote athletics, (2) encourage gifts, (3) better organize the alumni, (4) encourage cordial relations between faculty and alumni, and (5) bring the University and the public closer.106 In effect, his work centered on two major problems, recruiting athletes and maintaining the eligibility of those already enrolled. The Detroit 100. Letter, John Fitzgerald, Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin, to Bartelmne, December 18, 1919; letter, Myron E. Fuller, football coach, West Virginia University to Bartelme, December 17, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 101. Letter, J. W. Bennett to Yost, December 3, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 102. Letter, Murphy to Yost, December 22, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 103. Letter, V. R. Pattengill to Yost, December 16, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 104. Letter, Prentiss Douglass to Yost, January 19, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 105. Robert Clancy would later serve several terms in the United States House of Representatives. 106. "Report of Field Secretary, Robert H. Clancy, June 16, 1920, to the University of Michigan Club of Detroit," located in June, 1920 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 88 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Club promised a substantial sum for the Tutoring Fund,107 and Walter Bennett promised some aid on this from the New York Club.108 The cooperation of the fraternities and the student managers in problems of eligibility was solicited by Yost. He wrote Alan Boyd, chairman of the Inter-fraternity Council of the University of Michigan as follows: I am enclosing you a list of the best freshmen candidates and of those that have been former members of the Varsity squad, this taken with the list I sent you will cover most of the possible candidates that can possibly be eligible for next years team. The most important thing to be done is to see that each and every one of these men are eligible and available for the team next fall. I would suggest you take these three lists, find out to what fraternity the men belong, and turn such men over to the fraternities for their care, and impress upon them the importance of having these men eligible.109 Student manager Alfred May was to tabulate a list of the professors and the football men in their classes. Manager May and his four assistants would see the professors each month and get the names of those whom the professors regarded as doubtful or not passing. This list would then be turned over to the committee for tutoring.110 Some cases of eligibility were handled either by Phil Bartelme or by Robert Clancy. The latter occasionally came to Ann Arbor to visit a professor or to assist in solving other player problems. Several alumni throughout the state were working very hard to secure outstanding football athletes for Michigan. A great effort was made to secure Doug Roby and Harry Kipke, both of whom were to become outstanding football players at Michigan. Detroit alumni assisted in procuring summer work for them"' so that in August, 1920, Clancy could report to Yost that, "Roby and Kipke are in my office every day. They'll enter this fall with at least a thousand clear and both are good boys.""12 Following Michigan's improved season of 1920, with five wins, two losses and no ties, Yost issued a warning to the Detroit Club against 107. The Tutoring Fund had been in operation since 1912. It was begun by James O. Murfin, James Duffy, and Phil Bartelme. It was considered an excellent method of helping those men who would otherwise be seriously handicapped by participation in athletics. Even ex-Regent William A. Comstock had subscribed $50. The average yearly expenditure from 1912-1916 was $225. (See Minutes of Board in Control, University of Michigan, 1910-1917, March 4, 1916 meeting.) 108. Letter, Bartelme to Yost, January 4, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 109. Letter, Yost to Mr. Alan Boyd, January 10, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 110. Letter, Alfred May to Yost, January 19, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 111. Letter, Prentiss Douglass to Yost, April 19, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 112. Letter, Clancy to Yost, undated, in August 1920 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 89 over-indulging in recruiting.113 Some of his comments began to appear in articles by Costello, Salsinger and Bingsley of the Detroit News suggesting eccentricities in Michigan's athletic recruitment.1l4 Some of the quotes of Robert Clancy were not helping Michigan's reputation.115 Yost advised Bartelme that, "Some of the Alumni are not happy with Bob Clancy talking about 'deals' with athletes. So far as I know no boy has been offered money to come to Michigan. I had a long talk with Clancy and cautioned him...."16 Receiving much adverse criticism, and having spent some of his own money and considerable time, Robert Clancy resigned his position as field secretary.l7 "M" Club President, James Watkins, explained to the membership that: Last year a Committee of the "M" Club made a rather careful study of the athletic situation in Ann Arbor and submitted a detailed report with certain recommendations which were partially put into effect by the athletic authorities. The same committee working with the University of Michigan Club of Detroit attempted to carry out in part one of its own recommendations, namely the securing of better athletic material for the University. The Detroit Club employed "Bob" Clancy of the Class of 1907 as Field Secretary. This work, however, brought forth the criticism that Michigan was proselyting athletes, and objection was made to the pinciple involved. Mr. Clancy has resigned, and since then no one in particular is active along that line.'ls The 1921 Wolverine football team lost but one game, while the 1922 and 1923 teams were both undefeated and Conference champions. The diligent cooperation between students and alumni, uniting behind Yost after the 1919 season, was undoubtedly an important factor in the success of these teams led by All-American, Harry Kipke. The foregoing description of activity following the 1919 football season is not intended as an illustration of the vagaries of some zealous University of Michigan alumni. Further, its purpose is not to portray the dilemma in asking for vigorous alumni recruitment, but not so vigorous as to keep journalists widely read. As stated previously, the major purpose has been to show the leadership of Fielding H. Yost in this return of Michigan to football prominence. At one point in the 1921 season Michigan appeared to be mediocrity113. Letter, Yost to Albert Britt, January 8, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. Yost estimated that this talk was delivered about December 10, 1920. 114. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 17, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 115. Letter, Yost to Murphy, December 11, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 116. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, December 17, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 117. Letter, Clancy to Yost, January 24, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 118. Letter, "M" Club President, James Watkins, to members, June 17, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 90 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY bound, and the Grand Rapids alumni sought the removal of Yost as football coach. The Wolverines lost to Ohio State 14-0 before 42,000 spectators mid-way through an otherwise victorious season. Three days later, at the regular meeting of the Grand Rapids Alumni, the matter of replacing Yost was brought up for discussion. It was referred to a committee of three who reported one week later. The matter was then referred to a larger committee of ten who reported on Novmber 8. Their report led to the adoption of a resolution calling for Yost's replacement. Club President J. Arthur Whitmore indicated that, "There were 74 members present at the meeting. Vote was viva voce with 10, maybe 12 dissenting votes. All discussions and actions in the matter have been entirely dignified and temperate."'9 Six months previously, President Burton had felt the strong student, alumni and public sentiment for Fielding Yost, and this had been crucial in his appointment as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics. The Grand Rapids Alumni were soon to be made fully aware of the unpopularity of their stand against Yost. Hundreds of letters, numerous petitions'121 and newspaper replies121 ranged from disgust and indignation to vehement denunciation of their action.'22 "I ought to erect a monument to those Grand Rapids alumni," Yost stated. "If it hadn't been for them I might never have known how many friends I had and how loyal they are, both to myself and to Michigan."''23 At the annual football "bust" staged by the University of Michigan Club of Detroit following the 1921 season, Captain-elect Paul Goebel of Grand Rapids declared that he was through with his native city, and that henceforth his home would be Lowell or Sparta.124 The alumni and public support combined with the strong finish of the 1921 team to effectively "rescind" the Grand Rapids resolution. When the 1922 team won the Conference championship, it must have been very satisfying to Yost. He saved a clipping from the Detroit Free Press containing the response of 61-year-old Amos Alonzo Stagg to critics asking for his resignation as University of Chicago football coach. "You can tell those felows to come out here 10 years from now if they're still alive, and they'll find me on the job."'1' Yost was on the job again 119. Letter, J. Arthur Whitworth to Mr. Charles Pryor, December 2, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 120. See November and December 1921 folders, Carton 2, UMAP. 121. Several newsclippings in folder entitled, "Material Other Than Correspondence, 1921," Carton 23, UMAP. 122. Ibid. One of these is an article entitled, "Grand Rapids Alumni Are Regular Meal Tickets For Yost," Ann Arbor- Times News, undated. 123. Ibid. 124. Ibid. 125. "Alonzo Stagg To Coach Ten More Seasons," Detroit Free Press, November 29, 1922. N The 1925 team posed for photographers in Chicago prior to the Northwestern game. Not only was the 3-2 loss Michigan's only defeat, it was the only points scored on them the entire season. 92 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY in 1923 and the Wolverines repeated as undefeated Conference champions. Plans were laid, however, for his replacement by George Little from Miami University (Ohio). The latter had been hired as the likely successor to Yost, and had been serving as assistant football coach and assistant director of athletics since the 1922 season. Little does not seem to have been given a free rein in directing the 1924 Wolverines. He was allegedly criticized openly and untactfully by Yost, especially in the loss to Illinois. This was the game in which "Red" Grange scored five touchdowns. After the season, Little accepted the position of Director of Athletics at the University of Wisconsin. Three years later he was still being haunted by that Illinois game. He wrote Yost: I wish you would tell your publicity man not to connect my name only with having improperly set the team against Grange and Illinois. I really believe I did something over there in my three years besides that. In his article last Sunday he tells how you came on the field a few days later to get things straightened out and took over the team, which kind of despairs me.1'2 The article in the Alumnus announcing Little's appointment at Wisconsin began with the following telling sentence, George E. Little, a member of the football coaching staff since 1922, and in almost complete charge of the gridiron campaign during the 1924 season, announced on Thursday, January 22, his acceptance of the pposition of Director of Athletics, which had been tendered him by the University of Wisconsin.127 It may be that Little was drawn to Wisconsin as much by the attractiveness of their offer as by the restraints of being head football coach under Director of Athletics Yost. He maintained a cordial relationship with Yost after leaving Michigan and several years later thanked him, saying, "To you, the man who took me from the minor league in Intercollegiate Athletics and placed me in a major position, I wish to say, is something I shall always cherish in my memories."'28 Yost was again the head coach in 1925 and 1926, with both teams winning Conference championships. Highly regarded as a football wizzard Paramount Pictures employed him as a technical expert in producing a football film, "The Quarterback," during the summer of 1926. Yost accepted their proposal of $500 per week provided a minimum of $1,000 be guaranteed.129 Under this arrangement,130 he worked with the 126. Letter, Little to Yost, February 22, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 127. "Coach Little Goes To Wisconsin As Director," Alumnus, Vol. XXXI, No. 16, January 29, 1925, p. 359. 128. Letter, Little to Yost, February 22, 1938, Carton 10, UMAP. 129. Letter, Yost to J. J. Gain, July 10, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 130. Letter, J. J. Gain to Yost, July 19, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. YEARS AS U. OF M. FOOTBALL COACH 93 i # O Two great All-Americans from the 1926 team that Yost considered his greatest. L. to R. Bennie Friedman and Bennie Oosterbaan. 94 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY company for six weeks and one day, receiving $3,083.35131 and considerable publicity in this, his only film-making endeavor. The record books show very clearly that 1926 was his last season as Michigan's head football coach. Those final four teams enabled Yost to climax his coaching career at Michigan as it had begun, with championships. The following record was compiled by Yost-coached football teams: Ohio Wesleyan was 7-1-1 in 1897,132 Nebraska was 7-3-0 in 1898,133 Kansas was 10-0-0 in 1899,134 Stanford was 7-2-1 in 1900,135 Michigan was 165-29-11 in the 25 seasons of 1901-1923 and 1925 -1926. This overwhelming total of 196 victories, 35 losses and 13 ties currently places Fielding Yost fifth in won-lost records among all football coaches past or present.136 In assessing Yost's greatest strengths as a coach, Ben Oosterbaan described him as commanding the deep respect of his players, preparing these men physically with pre-season conditioning and fundamental skills with a characteristic thoroughness that included testing each player in detail on the football rule book, an unrivaled talent for getting his teams emotionally inspired for each game and uncommonly keen sence of strategy and game generalship.137 131. Letter, Louis Sorecky to Yost, October 7, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 132. Letter, Robert M. Strimer, Director of Athletics, Ohio Wesleyan University to John Behee, April 29, 1969. 133. Letter, Sports Information Office, University of Nebraska, to John Behee, May 21, 1969. 134. Letter, Yost to Mr. George Lucas, April 20, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 135. Letter, Don Liebendorfer, Sports Historian for Stanford University, to John Behee, April 15, 1969. 136. "ND's Rockne, Leahy Winningest," The Blade, Toledo, Ohio, July 28, 1968. 137. Ben Oosterbaan, interview, February 17, 1966. Chapter IV THE YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS The appointment of Fielding H. Yost as Director of Athletics in 1921 involved no commitment to coach football. He was free to either coach a few more years or devote full-time to coordinating athletic programs. The account of his coaching career would read like a fairy tale if Yost had made a definite break from coaching following either the 1923 or 1926 championship seasons. On the contrary, he seems to have had great difficulty in giving up the reins, and openly second-guessed or otherwise criticized "Tad" Wieman in 1927 and 1928. As the 1927 season approached, Yost made the decision not to serve as head coach of the Wolverine team. He wrote Michigan Governor, Fred Green, "I might add, confidentially, that on the evening of September 15th I will announce that I will not find it possible to coach this year." He offered an abundance of work in the construction of new facilities and his work in the physical education program as the major reasons, but added, "I have no idea, of course, of giving up my work as coach permanently."1 To another friend he wrote, There has never been a time in my life when I have been so busy. College has just opened and we are in the midst of a building campaign-a new stadium seating 85,000; a new intramural sports building; a new Women's Athletic Building and a women's athletic field-all under construction and being rushed to completion with a thousand and one details to look after... I have decided that I will not coach the football team this year.2 The September 15 announcement would have meant that "Tad" Wieman was to be given two weeks notice that he would be the Wolverine head coach before the October 1 opener with Ohio Wesleyan. The 6-2-0 record for that season included losses to Illinois and Minnesota in an otherwise very creditable season. Then came the thorough 1. Letter, Yost to Gov. Fred Green, September 7, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 2. Letter, Yost to Mrs. Marie Meloney, New York Herald Tribune, September 19, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 95 96 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY confusion as to who would lead the team in 1928. The Detroit News ran a story in August of that year saying that Yost would again be in complete control of the Michigan team. Several letters requesting verification of this were received by Yost.3 His replies reflect uncertainty, and no effort was made either privately or publicly to refute the story. Then, on October 5, the day before the opening game, Yost announced that Wieman would again be head coach.4 The announcement didn't get very far off campus, and the Detroit News certainly didn't get the word. On Thursday, October 4, their article, "Yost To Name Line-Up Today," described final scrimmage work and Yost's diligent search for a kicker. Friday's paper forecasted a lean year for Michigan. "On this year's squad the 'hurry-up' mentor has only one two-year man, George Rich... and he didn't play regularly as a sophomore... But while Yost is lacking in veterans, Michigan, as often has been stated before, has Yost." The loss through graduation of Oosterbaan, Gilbert, Baer, Palmeroli, Nyland, Grinnell, Harrigan, Babcock, Cook, Domhoff, Puckelwartz, and other lettermen made the 1928 season a re-building year. Still, it was a shock when Ohio Wesleyan beat Michigan 17-7, its first opening game loss since 1888. Upset with having to bear responsibility for this humiliating defeat Wieman complained about the confusion as to who would be in charge of the team. He addressed a formal complaint to the Board in Control, dated October 6, 1928, saying, in effect, that not until October 3 had Yost advised him, and later the other members of the staff, that he did not wish longer to carry the responsibility of the team, but would be glad to assist kickers and passers.> Ensuing events would indicate that Wieman lost his position on the Michigan coaching staff as a result of this statement to the Board, reflecting unfavorably on Yost. Monday's Detroit News began to show more evidence that Wieman was coaching. It announced that as Michigan prepared to meet a veteran Indiana team "Coach Tad Wieman promised a drastic shakeup... When he took over the leadership of the team Wieman announced that many of the 'B' team would be moved over to the varsity." By Thursday Yost was almost completely removed from the coaching picture. The Detroit News described Wieman as turning driver while Yost became only a spectator at the team scrimmage, which saw the freshmen crash through the reconstructed varsity for substantial gains and work the Indiana shift plays with success. On Saturday Yost was not on hand to see Indiana, a team that had 3. Several Letters in August, 1928 folder, Carton 5, UMAP. 4. Letter, E. E. Wieman to Yost, May 9, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 5. Statement by "Tad" Wieman to Board in Control, dated October 6, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 97 never beaten Michigan, score a hard-fought 6-0 victory. He had gone to Nashville, allegedly on business. A story spread through the newspapers that he had abandoned the team, shifting the blame to Wieman for what looked to be a bad year. His secretary did not know how long Yost would be in Nashville, Wieman speculated that he would probably return to Columbus to be present for the Ohio State game on Saturday. Even the Michigan Daily joined in denouncing Yost. Several friends rushed to his aid. Harvey Woodruff of the Chicago Tribune offered assurance that the story had not originated in Chicago as had been alleged. Yost thanked him for the supporting article entitled, "Director Yost."6 Tom Hammond admitted that he could not understand why all the confusion. "You did the same thing last year as I remember," he told Yost.7 Another alumnus, Herbert Wilson of Indianapolis, went so far as to cover up for Yost, although he admittedly did not know what the real facts were. He told the local papers that Yost had gone to Nashville on some "oil business." A copy of the newsclipping bearing this quote was sent to Yost.8 Jim Schermerhorn, Jr. of the Detroit Free Press offered the following advice: Why don't you quiet these foolish rumors by saying, in effect, 'though you've tried several times, you can't divorce yourself from Michigan football.' You tried in George Little and George wasn't so good. You tried in Tad, and I don't feel Tad was quite ready. Eventually, you should have developed the finest coaching system in the country; but even then it will be impossible for you to keep out of the picture. The athletic plant is yours; the coaches are your men; the plays are your plays; the inspiration is your doing... Tell the people that the glory belongs to the coaches and the responsibility belongs to you.9 Ken Patrick, 1929, managing editor, explained to Yost how the whole story got distorted in the Daily. He apologized and expressed sincere admiration for him.10 For the first time Yost made it absolutely clear that he was not coaching the team. Wieman's head coaching role was dramatized in the Detroit newspapers as large photographs of him now accompanied stories of the upcoming Ohio State game. 6. Letter, Yost to Harvey Woodruff, The Chicago Tribune, October 18, 1928, Carton 6, UMAP. 7. Letter, Tom Hammond to Yost, October 23, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 8. Letter, Herb Wilson to Yost undated, October 1928 folder, Carton 5, UMAP. 9. Letter, Jim Schermerhorn, Jr. to Yost, October 8, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 10. Letter, Ken Patrick to Yost, October 18, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 98 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Returning from Nashville on Wednesday Yost watched the varsity squad go through its scrimmage with the freshmen, despite the fact that heavy showers fell almost continuously. He was not abandoning the team. Ohio State maintained the upper hand throughout most of Saturday's game to defeat Michigan 19 to 7. Rumors drifting out of Ann Arbor declared an estrangement between Yost and Wieman. In a joint statement released to the newspapers on October 22, 1928, the two men labled such stories pure bunk. To clarify coaching roles it said that Yost was responsible fully for the team up to October 5, that is, the day before the season opened. "Since that date, Wieman has been the head coach." Further, "there is no disposition on the part of either one of us to dodge or shift responsibility." If the joint statement was designed to clear this entire matter up it failed miserably. The Detroit News called attention to several contradictions. While one sentence called reports of estrangement "utterly without foundation" the next admitted to "minor misunderstandings." The real muddle came with the statement that Yost had been head coach until October 5. It was recalled that "Yost, in a public interview last Thursday, said Wieman had been coach since training season started. He was merely an advisor. At the start of the season, however, Yost said he was head coach and his publicity department made public announcement of this. Soon after, Yost said that Wieman was head coach, something that Wieman did not happen to be aware of. Later, Yost said that he had never said he was head coach. Now... a statement declares that Yost WAS head coach until October 5 and that Wieman has been head coach since that time." If was difficult enough for local alumni to comprehend the situation. Those farther from the campus could only wonder. A news story originating from New York said that the loss of three straight games had aroused considerable comment, particularly among Michigan alumni. They agreed that graduation had depleted the ranks and was the real cause of these defeats. There was bewilderment that Yost should have resumed the job of head coach, since Wieman had shown the previous year that he could lead the team. If Yost had taken up the job for altruistic motives to help Michigan through a stiff schedule when the team was sure to be woefully weak, they were more amazed that he should suddenly have shifted the head coaching assignment back to Wieman on the eve of the first game. Their view was that "Yost has established too great a reputation as a football coach and developer of winning teams to have suffered from one poor season, especially since the dearth of material this year was well known. The major criticism was that Yost had "started a job and didn't YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 99 finish it. His temporary absence on a business trip prior to the MichiganOhio State game, likewise caused some comment."'l Wisconsin made it four losses in a row by winning 7-0, but Michigan began a steady improvement that saw them beat Illinois 3-0, tie the Navy 6-6, beat Michigan State 3-0 and finish with a victory over Iowa 10-7. In spite of the fact that he was not officially in charge of the team until its opening game, Wieman was officially charged with its 3-4-1 record. For Yost to have withheld responsibility until the season opened, and then to charge Wieman fully with the consequences, if technically correct, was certainly unfair. Even in the 1920's the importance of both spring and fall practice under the head coach was recognized. If the justification was that Yost had done the same thing the previous season, it may be that he also took too little respnosibility for the losses of that year. Some men could thoroughly enjoy Yost's vanity. When an item dealing with the construction of the Intramural Sports Building came across Regent Murfin's desk he sent it along to Mr. Shirley Smith, Secretary of the University, with this poignant characterization of Yost: I imagine this is still out of your bailiwick but it should go through you to Brother Yost if he is still on the payroll. Not having seen the last edition of the paper I do not know whether he is head coach, assistant coach, in business at Nashville or posing for photographers.l2 Wieman had not made light of the situation. As the 1928-1929 school year drew to a close, his feelings were summarized in a letter to Yost, part of which follows: As you know, I have never sought to take your place as head coach. At all times I have taken the position, and have repeatedly made the statement to you and others that I would always be glad to serve as your assistant as long as you wished to continue as head coach. On the other hand, if you do not wish longer to direct the work of the football team and if it is desired that I assume that responsibility, I would be much happier and, I think, a more effective worker if I might be definitely and officially appointed head football coach. Although I have acted as head coach the past two years, I have never been regularly appointed to that position. In 1927 it was announced just before the beginning of the season that I was to be 11. "Michigan Men In East Raise Brows, But Hope," Detroit Free Press, October 25, 1928. 12. Letter, Murfin to Shirley Smith, October 23, 1928, Box 5, Murfin Papers. 100 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY in charge of the team that season and last year a similar announcement was made the day before the first game. However, as far as I know, there is no record anywhere of any official appointment. I feel that it is imperative for the welfare of the team and the athletic morale of the University as well as for my own peace of mind that there now be a clear cut understanding among all concerned as to just what the situation is. I might add that it has never been my purpose to make regular coaching my life work. However, under present circumstances, after two rather uncertain years, if you do not wish to take over the reins yourself, if it is decided that I am to be appointed, I shall be glad to have charge of the team for a few years, at least, in order that I might have an opportunity to prove myself as a coach. Wieman closed the letter by saying that, as head coach he would appreciate the advice and counsel of Yost and would want him to take charge of the kicking and passing instruction in the early part of the daily practices whenever possible. "Inasmuch as the personnel of the athletic staff is to be reviewed by your Board at its coming meeting," he concluded, "it occurred to me that that might be an opportune time to consider this matter."13 One week later Wieman wrote Yost: I was both surprised and shocked to have you tell me yesterday that my services with the University of Michigan would terminate at the end of the present Summer Session. I would like very much to have you confirm this in a written statement giving reasons. I wish it to be explicitly understood that because of my long service and devotion to my Alma Mater, it is not my desire or intention to voluntarily sever my connection with the University of Michigan.14 On June 1, 1929, the Board in Control assigned Wieman to the counseling position in the Four-Year Program. He would advise students and supervise and direct some of their practical work in physical education.15 Three days later Wieman accepted this job and stated, "developments have proceeded almost exactly as I anticipated when I first refused Mr. Yost's suggestion that I resign."'6 Out of coaching for just one season, "Tad" was lured to the University of Minnesota to serve as line coach for their head coach H. O. "Fritz" Crisler. An "M" Club committee formed by six Detroit alumni, and headed by one of Yost's former athletes, Neil "Shorty" McMillan, interviewed others and wrote Yost saying that it was their consensus that he had 13. Letter, E. E. Wieman to Yost, May 9, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 14. Letter, Wieman to Yost, May 17, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 15. June folder, 1929, Carton 8, UMAP. 16. Statement by Wieman dated June 4, 1929, Carton 8, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 101 acted correctly in firing Wieman for lack of leadership.17 The letter was used to some extent by Yost in persuading others that almuni concurred in Wieman's removal. With the appointment of former Michigan All-American, Harry Kipke, to coach the 1929 team, Yost's work thereafter was primarily one of directing intercollegiate athletics and maintaining a very close eye on the football situation. Three of Kipke's first five teams were undefeated. The 1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933 elevens were Conference champions, with the latter two being named national champions.18 Then came four straight lean years. The 1934 team dipped to 1-7-0. Improvement to 4-4-0 in 1935 was followed by another 1-7-0 season. A 4-4-0 record in 1937 was not enough to enable Kipke to retain his position. H. 0. "Fritz" Crisler became Michigan's head football coach and assistant athletic director for the 1938 season. As Kipke faced his losing seasons, some of the old criticisms of interference by Yost emerged in sportswriters' columns. In a very clear and definite statement, Kipke assured them that Yost had not been interfering and that all concerned were fully aware that Kipke was the head coach.19 Perhaps the sharpest criticisms registered by a sportswriter during Kipke's last two seasons came from Tod Rockwell of The Detroit Free Press. A former Michigan varsity football players himself, Rockwell bluntly stated that the pressure to pay for a concrete edifice to Yost's personal glory rested upon the young shoulders of the Michigan quarterback. Michigan had to have winning teams to pay the huge debt incurred in constructing athletic facilities. He characterized Yost as being selfish, publicity hungry, and constantly interfering with the football coaches.20 Several indignant alumni wrote Yost asking that the reasons for firing Kipke be made public. They insisted that the University could not base the decision on won-lost records. Yost answered one of these letters by saying, "You state you have seen no satisfactory explanation of the dismissal of Coach Kipke. So far as I know no university has ever made or given out a statement of the reasons why a coach was dismissed... The games won and lost, in my opinion, had little to do with the Board's action."21 17. Letter, Neil McMillan to Yost, June, 1929, Carton 8, UMAP. 18. Les Etter, Encyc., p. 1971. 19. Harvey Patton, Statement given by Coach Harry Kipke, Detroit News, October 6, 1936. 20. George J. Andros quotes Rockwell in his column, "The Press Angle," The Michigan Daily, October 29, 1936. 21. Letter, Yost to F. R. Cutcheon, undated, in January 1938 folder, Carton 10, UMAP. 102 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Asking people to believe that the won-lost record had little to do with the removal of Coach Kipke may have been stretching the truth considerably. There seem to have been other unpleasant factors, however, to which Yost was alluding. Questions had been raised concerning illegal early season practice in Canada during which football Captain Ivan Williamson sustained an injury. There was reason to suspect that Michigan football players, employed by the Ford Motor Company in Detroit, were permitted to practice football rather than do their work. Also, some Chicago alumni had operated a so-called "slush fund" in Ann Arbor to assist football candidates. Two men who had definitely received illegal aid had withdrawn from the University by the time the facts were uncovered.22 Coach Kipke denied any knowledge of the fund. Further, there had been a break between line coach Frank Cappon and Kipke that was well aired in the public press. When the team did not win, the consensus was that the line play and thus, Cappon, was at fault. The resulting general decline in team and staff morale did not help matters. Other coaches of the spring sports were upset when Kipke made it imperative that all football candidates attend spring practice unless they held varsity positions on other spring sport teams.23 Further, Kipke felt that some of his loss of staff rapport was due to things Yost had said that undermined his leadership. Professor Aigler implied that this was true when he cautioned Yost to make his suggestions or criticisms directly to Kipke rather than to any of his subordinates.24 In Yost's defense, there were other factors considered in the decision to release Kipke, but it appears that these were intimately related to the won-lost record. The candidates for the head football coaching position were narrowed to Navy Lieutenant Tom Hamilton, and H. O. "Fritz" Crisler of Princeton. Yost apparently favored the young officer who had led the U. S. Navy team to several successful football seasons and received impressive recommendations. There are nearly a hundred letters and several pictures of Hamilton in Yost's correspondence,25 and the Yosts invited him to their home for dinner. While the content of his letters makes it clear that Yost was very interested in Hamilton's becoming the new Michigan coach, only a few letters regarding Crisler are found and Yost's contacts with him appear to have been urged by Professor Aigler. On two occasions following the 1937 football season, Aigler traveled 22. Informal meeting of the Board in Control, November 17, 1937, located in folder labeled, "Material Other Than Correspondence, 1937,' 'Carton 23, UMAP. 23. Letter, Aigler to Kipke, March 25, 1937, Carton 10, UMAP. 24. Letter, Aigler to Yost, January 19, 1937, Carton 10, UMAP. 25. Letters are contained in January, 1938 folder, Carton 10, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 103 to New York City hoping to induce Crisler to leave Princeton University.26 On this second visit, Crisler was asked to list the changes and other considerations that would make the Michigan position attractive to him or another candidate. Included on the list of conditions drawn up by Crisler were the union of physical education and athletics under a single head who would be granted a full professorship. This gentleman would immediately be appointed the head football coach and Assistant Director of Athletics, becoming the Director upon the retirement of Fielding H. Yost. The Board in Control of Athletics would be solely responsible for intercollegiate athletics and the Director of Athletics would be its chairman. When Professor Aigler wrote saying that President Ruthven found these conditions acceptable, Crisler was brought to Ypsilanti, Michigan by train and secretly driven to Ann Arbor for a meeting with the President and Aigler. The position was assured him at this time, but Yost was not privy to this decision.27 Professor Aigler wrote Yost urging him to see Crisler at the NCAA meeting held in New Orleans that January,28 and approach him about the Michigan coaching position. Yost did so, but never became very interested in Crisler. The decision would be made by the Board in Control of Athletics. This group had for many years been dominated by the persuasiveness of its two leaders, Fielding Yost, the Director of Intercollegaite Athletics who also served as its secretary, and Professor Aigler, its chairman and the liaison between the Board and the Faculty. In this case, the two were diametrically opposed, Yost wanting Hamilton, and Aigler, just as adamant, wanting Crisler appointed. There are conflicting reports about the Board's vote. One source, who preferred not to be quoted, indicated that the Board voted with Yost and hired Tom Hamilton. President Alexander Ruthven then intervened, directing them to re-convene and to select H. O. Crisler. This version was corroborated by Dr. E. D. Mitchell who recalled sitting as a member of the Board in Control at their special meeting held in the Yost home. At that time Lt. Hamilton was selected. A day or so later Mitchell received a phone call from Yost asking him to change his vote casting it for Crisler. Mitchell obliged and the three alumni members of the Board were apparently delivered this same request by Yost. It is possible that, as a favor to Yost, they also changed their votes and supported Crisler. Their resignations followed shortly thereafter. Mitchell did not know the exact role of President Ruthven and Aigler in persuading Yost and the Board to select Crisler. Yost did explain to Mitchell that, in view of his nearness to retirement, Mrs. Yost 26. H. O. Crisler, interview, July 25, 1969. 27. Ibid. 28. Letter, Aigler to Yost, December 23, 1937, Carton 10, UMAP. 104 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY did not believe it was wise for Fielding to impose his choice of a successor on those who would continue to be responsible for physical education and athletics.29 Registrar Emeritus Ira Smith, who was also on the Board in Control at this time and who remains an avid admirer of the late Fielding Yost, was very reluctant to discuss this matter. Finally, he offered this conflicting version. Only one vote was taken at the special meeting held in the Yost home. At that time all Board members except two voted for Crisler, and after this official balloting, Yost approached these two convincing them that the vote should be unanimous.30 It could be that Yost did not favor Crisler's appointment because of his association with "Tad" Wieman. It will be recalled that the latter had joined Crisler on the University of Minnesota staff in 1930 and 1931, and continued on to Princeton University with him the following year. Yost may have even speculated that Wieman would accompany Crisler to Michigan.31 It could also be that Yost favored Hamilton simply because he believed him to be the better man. The larger factor apparently at issue in this appointment, however, was that of uniting all aspects of physical education under a single department head, and making the Board in Control responsible strictly for intercollegiate athletics. Certainly, Professor Aigler was most uncomfortable in his role as spokesman for the physical education program.32 Lt. Hamilton was perhaps viewed as a young man who could handle football coaching quite adequately, but was untested in the administration of physical education. Professor Aigler maintained that Crisler was much better prepared to represent all of physical education and athletics to the Faculty. Yost in no way interfered with Crisler's work3: and he seems not to have interfered with the other varsity athletic programs. His lack of restraint during the football seasons headed by Little, Wieman and Kipke was perhaps due to the feeling that these coaches were "his boys," or, in the case of Little, his choice.34 Additional evidence that the "old order" was passing came that summer when the Regents changed the By-Laws to limit alumni members of the Board in Control to three-year terms and "provided always that no member shall hold office for more than two continuous terms."35 This may have been aimed at curbing the practice of having alumni, loyal to 29. E. D. Mitchell, interview, December 20, 1969. 30. Ira Smith, interview, July 25, 1969. 31. Wieman became the head football coach at Princeton, replacing Crisler, when the latter took the Michigan position in 1938. 32. Marcus Plant, Interview, July 24, 1969. 33. H. O. Crisler, Interview, July 25, 1969. 34. Ben Oosterbaan, Interview, February 17, 1966. 35. Letter, Herbert G. Watkins to Aigler, June 1, 1938, Carton 10, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 105 the Director of Athletics, sit continuously on the Board for a decade or more. Fielding Yost's retirement in 1941 signalled the reorganization of physical education and athletics under a single head, Professor H. 0. "Fritz" Crisler, and delimited the responsibilities of the Board in Control to intercollegiate athletics only. During Yost's athletic directorship the varsity sports program was expanded significantly. To what extent did the idea of adding these sports originate with Yost? There was no evidence in the Yost files to indicate that he was in any way responsible for the addition of football, baseball, basketball, tennis, track and field or cross country to the intercollegiate offerings of the University. These six varsity sports made up the program as he found it in 1921. During the next ten years this number was doubled with the addition of ice hockey,. swimming, wrestling, golf, fencing and gymnastics.36 Student petitions to have the sport of their interest elevated to varsity status had been addressed to the Board in Control from time to time throughout the Board's history. In November, 1914, it received an inquiry into the possibility of financing a rowing team,37 and a student petition for this was formally submitted in March, 1915.3s A petition for varsity cross country was dated December 11, 1914, and in this same month came a request for varsity recognition of the fencing match featuring the University of Michigan at Cornell University.39 Wallace Elliott, manager of the 1920 University of Michigan swimming team, sent the following communique to the Board in Control that Spring: On the basis of the excellent record made by the University swimming team I hereby petition for the recognition of swimming as a formal sport.40 The May 1923 folder contains a series of letters regarding the rifle team's request for minor sports status.41 In the Annual Report of the Board in Control, September 1, 1929-August 31, 1930, Professor Ralph Aigler stated succinctly, The intercollegiate sports that have been added to our list such as swimming, hockey, golf, fencing and gymnastics, were included on the recommendation and request of the students.42 36. Fielding H. Yost, "Financial Reports, February 1, 1931," Carton 7, UMAP. 37. Located in November 1914 folder, Carton 1, UMAP. 38. Located in March 1915 folder, Carton 1, UMAP. 39. Located in December 1914 folder, Carton 1, UMAP. 40. Letter, Elliott to Board of Directors of Athletics, May 10, 1920, Carton 2, UMAP. 41. Letters located in May 1923 folder, Carton 3, UMAP. 42. Ralph Aigler, "Annual Report, Board in Control, September 1, 1929-August 31, 1930," located in folder labeled, "Annual Reports 1912-55," Carton 23, UMAP. 106 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY It may be that the students were influenced by what was happening on other campuses. By 1923, the University of Illinois, for example, awarded minor letters in tennis, golf, swimming, water basketball, wrestling, cross country, gymnastics and fencing.43 On the basis of the foregoing evidence it seems safe to conclude that the idea of adding the six new varsity sports to the program, between 1921-1931, did not originate with Fielding Yost. The corollary question then is, if he did not supply the original ideas, was it through his direction that dreams of having these programs became a reality? The answer seems to be yes. As early as December, 1921, Yost formally called the Board in Control's attention to the necessity of expanding facilities to accommodate more sports. His "Report on Rowing," in response to student petition to make rowing a varsity sport, will later be seen as providing the rationale upon which Yost Field House was constructed. In this report he indicated a keen desire to include hockey, swimming, wrestling or boxing in the intercollegiate schedule as soon as necessary facilities could be provided.44 The question of financing these new sports rested almost entirely with gate receipts from intercollegiate football. "We have been hoping for years to obtain an appropriation from the University which would enable us to engage a competent wrestling instructor," Phil Bartelme informed a young applicant for such a coaching position in February, 1921. He explained that Dr. George May, Director of Waterman Gymnasium, had placed a special petition before the Regents calling for recognition of wrestling as part of the regular gymnasium work and asking for sufficient funds for this purpose. "The regents, however, laid the petition on the table as they have a number of times in the past," Bartelme stated.45 Apparently, it was not until the lucrative gate receipts began arriving from the football seasons of 1921 and 1922 that the new assistant football coach, George Little, who had been given responsibility for "minor" intercollegiate sports, could say, "Coach Yost and I have decided to make ice hockey, golf and swimming university minor sports and.to start wrestling next year."46 It may be that these and other sports would have been elevated to the varsity level regardless of who held the position of Athletic Director in the 1920s. The fact is, Fielding Yost was the Director at that time and did exercise a leadership in instituting the programs and, as we shall see later, developing the facilities for their 43. Letter, E. E. Bearg, University of Illinois Athletic Association, to Yost, May 11, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 44. Fielding H. Yost, "Report on Rowing," December 1921 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 45. Letter, Bartelme to Mr. N. F. Brunkow, February 18, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 46. Letter, Little to W. S. von Bernuth, January 3, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 107 conduct. Further, as authorized by the Regents in their June 22, 1921 resolution creating the Department of Athletics, Yost selected the coaches who guided these intercollegiate programs. Thus, while the original ideas may not have been supplied by Yost, it was largely through his support, and the material success of his football teams that dreams of these programs became a reality. The dilemma of keeping the University's athletic reputation unblemished while at the same time maintaining superior athletic teams must be weighed in this analysis of Yost's impress upon Wolverine athletic history. The Yost files yield very little information on the early years of his coaching career. The following general comment was offered by Edwin Pope: Yost never needed an eligibility committee in his early days. He completely disregarded rules in early talent searches. Later he regretted his carelessness and became an advocate of stringent scholastic standards for athletes. But he never liked to be kidded about these violations...47 In the vigorous recruiting and eligibility campaign that followed the 1919 losing season, Yost solicited the aid of all Michigan alumni. It will be recalled, however, that some of Robert Clancy's comments and other recruiting activities began to be questioned by writers for the Detroit News. Yost then addressed the Detroit "M" Club saying that it was better to lose and to keep the name of Michigan clean.48 Clancy soon resigned and his field secretary position was later abolished. With the very tactful announcement of this by "M" Club President, James Watkins, the University of Michigan seems not to have lost any prestige. Perhaps the only serious attack on the University's policies of athletic recruitment of the 1920's came from the Carnegie Foundation's survey of over one hundred American colleges conducted by Dr. Howard Savage.49 Entitled, American College Athletics, Bulletin No. 23, it was published in 1929. This was to be an impartial and comprehensive report on athletic conditions in United States educational institutions that would greatly benefit administration of these programs,50 and the NCAA strongly encouraged its members to give full support to this survey.51 When Harold W. Bentley visited the University of Michigan, February 47. Edwin Pope, "It's All For Meeshegan, Y'Know," Alumnus, Vol. LXIII, No. 3, October 20, 1956, p. 27. 48. Letter, Yost to Mr. Albert Britt, Editor of Outing Magazine, January 8, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 49. This work has been cited previously and was referred to as the Carnegie Study. 50. NCAA Bulletin, May 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 51. NCAA Bulletin, February 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 108 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY 1-3, 1927,52 he was given free access to the files in the athletic office and other assistance from members of the athletic staff.53 Several letters that appeared to reveal recruiting irregularities were secretly taken from the files by Bentley.54 The Carnegie findings, with their accompanying allegations, were sent to President Little in April, 1929.53 A copy of this particular list of charges was not found in Yost's files, but a letter from Howard Savage to Professor Ralph Aigler in February, 1930, summarized the criticisms.56 Dr. Savage thought the athletic program at Michigan was too highly centralized and that more students should be given responsibility in its administration. The Michigan files had revealed that, although coaches abided by the rule of not making the first contact with a prospective athlete, they encouraged alumni to prompt the boy to write. Then the Michigan coaches would answer his letter. Dr. Savage wanted to see all such correspondence handled by the registrar's office with similar student mail. The strenuous solicitation of young athletes by Alumni clubs and the great number of speaking engagements by the Michigan coaches was attacked. "Michigan stands almost alone in its state of development of speaking tours by members of the athletic staff," Savage asserted. The manner in which loans, jobs, and other forms of aid to athletes was being handled both by the University and various Alumni clubs was also called into question. Dr. Savage described the University of Michigan athletic program as "among the least fortunate in the hundred and more institutions that were studied," and, "it was clearly our duty... to make know these facts," as was done in Bulletin Number 23.57 These allegations were soundly answered by Professor Ralph Aigler in the "Annual Report, Board in Control, September 1, 1928-August 31, 1929."58 When President Little informed Yost of the charges made by the Carnegie Report,59 the files were searched for several days in an effort to locate the letters upon which these charges were based.60 Finally, after the exchange of more correspondence, Yost learned that Dr. Savage had the letters, was going to keep the originals, and the best Michigan could do was to secure photocopies of them.61 Yost and Aigler 52. Summary of findings of H. W. Bentley, April 1929 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. 53. Letter, Yost to Howard Savage, February 1, 1930, located in January 1930 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. 54. Ibid. 55. Letter, Savage to Little, April 17, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 56. Letter, Savage to Aigler, February 14, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 57. Ibid. 58. This report is located in the folder labeled, "Annual Reports 1912-55," Carton 23, UMAP. 59. The practice followed in the Carnegie investigation was to correspond only with the president or faculty of the university in question regarding their findings. 60. Letter, Yost to Savage, November 15, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 61. Letter, Yost to Savage, February 1, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 109 sizzled at this news. They exchanged several heated letters with Dr. Savage. Yost's answers indicate that he was quite capable of holding up his end of the argument, but Aigler's aforementioned "Annual Report" and the discrediting of the Carnegie Report by Major John L. Griffith certainly helped.62 In two letters to Aigler, the Commissioner discussed errors he had found in the Report and wondered why the University of Michigan could be found so remiss while the University of Iowa was given virtually a "clean bill of health."63 Griffith was referring to the fact that irregularities operating at the time of the Carnegie investigation had been recently disclosed at Iowa and were serious enough to warrant their suspension from the Big Ten for nine months. In a memo sent to all the Conference athletic directors, Griffith quoted the preface to the Carnegie Report by Dr. Pritchett and concluded, "the men who were concerned with the investigation started their survey with a premise prejudicial to intercollegiate athletics."64 A further aid to Yost in defending Michigan's athletic reputation was the compliment received from Commissioner Griffith in June, 1929 following a visit to Ann Arbor. I always come away from Michigan with the feeling that you not only have built the finest athletic plant in the world but further that you have built your own ideals into Michigan's athletics and that everything is on a sane and sound basis. I hardly ever make a talk when I do not mention the things that you are doing. Our colleges and universities may well look to Michigan as an ideal.65 Needless to say, the above statement was given the widest possible circulation by Yost. Copies were sent to the President, each Regent, all members of the Board in Control of Athletics, the Alumni Secretary, and several prominent alumni. Throughout the decade of the 1920's Yost did more than just react to negative criticism of Michigan athletics. It was at his suggestion that the Big Ten Conference established its Commissioner,66 whose job it was to investigate charges of illegal recruitment, playing ineligible players or similar actions. The development of sportsmanship and good citizenship through athletics pervaded his numerous speeches to a wide variety of audiences. One very unofficial estimate placed the number of 62. Griffith was Commissioner of the "Big Ten" Conference. 63. Letters Griffith to Aigler, November 2 and 6, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 64. Memo, Griffith to athletic directors, November 26, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 65. Letter, Griffith to Yost, June 24, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 66. Both of the following letters credit Yost with having first proposed the creation of this office: (1) Charles Baird to Yost, June 6, 1922, Carton 17, and (2) Griffith to Yost, March 2, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. Major John L. Griffith was the first to fill this position created in 1922. 110 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY speeches Yost delivered from 1921-1929 at 1,000.67 Because no official tabulation was kept, this figure cannot be verified, but it is a certainty that Yost traveled the country extensively, especially from 1921-1930, speaking reverently of the University of Michigan and advocating wholesome principles to guide athletics. In this capacity, he generated considerable favorable publicity for the University and its athletics. Yost's speeches were sometimes printed in full and given wide circulation. Perhaps most notable was his address, "Educational Aims in Competitive Athletics." It was carried in the April, 1925 issue of the Athletic Journal, the Michigan Educational Magazine, the Pennsylvania State Educational Review,68 and Yost received many requests for copies from educators.69 Yost's correspondence in the 1930's indicated few challenges to Michigan's honesty and integrity in athletics. When the Chicago alumni gave illegal aid to at least two Michigan freshman,70 and when Captain Ivan Williamson returned with a severe injury sustained in illegal early season practices in Canada, Yost seems to have successfully kept adverse criticism to a minimum. Perhaps the strong bond of friendship he had developed with Commissioner Griffith was helpful in this regard. it is worth noting, however, that Yost was not above stretching the truth in setting Michigan up as the pace-setter. For example, a two-hour limit was agreed upon as the length of daily football practice among the Big Ten schools. During the 1929 season some of the Conference coaches indicated to Commissioner Griffith that they were having difficulty staying within the two-hour limit. Griffith had come to rely on the opinion of Fielding Yost and he asked if Michigan was having any difficulty with this rule. His reply was, "We have had no trouble, whatever, in connection with the two-hour football practice rule. In fact we have trouble in getting the boys to practice that long."71 Some of Harry Kipke's September practice schedules, with their time breakdown, clearly indicate that Michigan football practics for September 26 ran from 3:00 to 5:20 and the September 29 practice from 3:00 to 5:15.72 A list of corrections and criticisms to be delivered to the Michigan football team by Coach Kipke, dated October 4, includes the following 67. Chicago Alumni presentation of Yost bust, in May 1928 folder, Carton 17, UMAP. 68. Letter, Yost to Dr. W. H. Barrow,April 6, 1925, Carton 17, UMAP. 69. See several letters in April and May, 1925 folders, Carton 17, UMAP. 70. Informal meeting of the Board in Control, November 17, 1937, located in folder labeled, "Material Other Than Correspondence, 1937," Carton 23, UMAP. 71. Letter, Yost to Griffith, November 13, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 72. Practice schedules, in October 1929 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 1 1 1 statement: "We have so much to do and we are going to do it no matter how long it takes."73 Although intangible and certainly difficult.to measure, one aspect in this research, which we might call "Michigan Spirit," seemed to emerge continuously as a major element in Fielding Yost's legacy to University of Michigan athletics. The "point-a-minute" teams, the 1902 Rose Bowl game and the Yost book in 1905 brought national publicity to Michigan football. A University alumnus practicing law in San Jose, California, William A. Beasley, may have been speaking for a good number of Michigan alumni when he said of the first Rose Bowl game, "We still crow over the Pasadena game."74 Some alumni came to idolize Yost. Edward Parker wrote explaining that he had several photographs on the wall of his bedroom: Dr. Angell, Wenley, Bates and others-the best fighting braves ever in Michigauma... I get a great deal of enjoyment from these photographs, especially mornings; while lying in bed or walking about dressing, I take a look here and there. Sometimes I pause before some likeness and say to myself, 'Well, I wonder how he would tackle that problem?'... Here's the point. May I have your signed photograph for my bedroom?... I will appreciate the favor; and so will other alumni who often visit in my home.75 It was largely through the urging of Fielding Yost, with the help of James Watkins and Elmer D. Mitchell, that a bronze memorial tablet was placed on Ferry Field as a monument to the "M" men who died in World War 1.76 Through numerous speaking engagements, that took him to all parts of the country, Yost advertised the University of Michigan and its athletic tradition. President Burton commended him on this work in 1922 saying: I am tremendously interested in the splendid work which you are doing about the State and country in the interest not only of the Intercollegiate Department of Athletics but also of the University as a whole.77 73. This list is found in October 1929 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. 74. Letter, Beasley to Charles Baird, February 25, 1902, Carton 2, UMAP. 75. Letter, Edward Parker to Yost, April 28, 1936, located in May 1936 folder, Carton 10, UMAP. 76. Letters, Yost to Mitchell, December 21, 1920, January 8, 1921; Letters, Mitchell to Yost, January 5, March 14, 1921, and Mitchell to Detroit Mausoleum Equipment Works, January 4, 1922. All these letters are in Carton 2, UMAP. Watkins was president and Mitchell secretary of the "M" Club. 77. Letter, President Burton to Yost, January 25, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 112 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY In this same letter, the president complimented Yost on a recent speech in New York City, which had been printed in full in the Detroit Free Press, saying, "You are doing exactly the kind of work the University has needed for a long time and I congratulate you upon it." It was not unusual for Yost to receive complimentary mail on his speeches. Miss Pauline Jacobs, a senior in the University, heard him address the "M" Club in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. She wrote, "Michigan Spirit' is not 'bunk,' Sir-You made that very clear to me-and-I thank you."78 The "Michigan Radio Night" programs offer another illustration of Yost's great desire to bring the University and its athletic tradition to the alumni. In anticipation of the April 29, 1922 broadcast, Wayland H. Sanford wrote from his Wichita Falls, Texas home expressing the deep desire to hear this program. He requested that "The Victors" be played at the beginning of the program so that, recognizing it, he could tune in the program properly.79 Harry W. Muller wrote from Fort Wayne, Indiana saying that a big Michigan dinner of alumni and former students of northeastern Indiana was to be held on the eve of April 29, the main feature being the "radio reunion."80 Yost described the enthusiastic alumni response to a friend saying: "Nearly all the alumni associations within receiving distance as far west as Denver and Kansas City have already written me of completed arrangements to hear the broadcast."8l The program featured brief speeches by the football and baseball captains, the all-time All-American halfback, Willie Heston, Coach Fielding Yost, Regents James O. Murfin and President Marion L. Burton. The Michigan Band and Glee Club entertained musically with the "Victors," "Varsity," and the "Yellow and Blue."82 The Yost files indicate that "Michigan Radio Night" programs were again presented on October 31, 1923,83 November 9, 1923,84 September 30, 1927,85 October 4, 1928, and October 30, 193186 and there may have been others. 78. Letter, Pauline Jacobs to Yost, March 23, 1929, located in May 1929 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. 79. Letter, Sanford to Professor Ralph Aigler, April 10, 1922, located in March 1922 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 80. Letter, Harry Muller to Yost, April 24, 1922, located in March 1922 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 81. Letter, Yost to Irvin Huston, April 10, 1922, located in March 1922 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 82. Format for the program and Yost's speech located in March 1922 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 83. Letter, Yost to Edwin Denby, October 31, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 84. See November 1923 folder, Carton 3, UMAP. 85. See September 1927 folder, Carton 5, UMAP. 86. Letter, Yost to Grantland Rice, September 16, 1931, Carton 7, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 113 It was not unusual for former Michigan varsity football men to write emotional letters urging the current varsity men on to victory in the upcoming game. Three fine examples are the letters of Dan McGugin to Captain Paul Goebel prior to the 1922 Ohio State game,87 J. F. Maulbetsch88 and Edwin Denby89 to Richard Sweet, also during the 1922 season. Former Michigan athletes may have been most deeply affected by the growth of "Michigan Spirit," but it did apparently touch others. Shirley W. Smith, Secretary of the University, spoke to the University of Michigan Club of Pasadena in January, 1924. A close friend of Yost's, who attended this meeting, described the address as "full of information, enthusiasm and Michigan spirit."90 Smith mentioned the winning football teams, but said that Yost's highest service to Michigan had been in the teaching and inculcation of that wonderful Michigan spirit.91 Rarely passing up an opportunity to advertise the University of Michigan, Yost sent a Michigan blanket, letter sweater, and some advice to Mrs. Gertrude Wicker, 1914, who was coaching a play presented by the students at Holland High School (Michigan). "I wish to express the thanks of our boys, and my own personal appreciation," wrote Mrs. Wicker, "for the help you gave us in the presentation of 'Strongheart.' "92 When Phil Pack's history of University of Michigan Athletics and Physical Education was published under the title, 100 Years of Athletics, The University of Michigan, Yost ordered two copies sent to every high school in the state.93 The extent to which Yost's energies could be expended in building this intangible "Michigan Spirit" has already been illustrated in his quest for a live wolverine mascot. He simply could not bear to see Michigan outdone by the University of Wisconsin in this case. This desire to see Michigan rise above her competition was manifested in the comprehensive building program conducted in the University between 1922 and 1931. This work is described in Chapter Five, but it is worth noting here that these facilities were virtually unmatched in their time.94 In Yost's brief speech at the dedication of Yost Field 87. Letter, McGugin to Goebel, October 16, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 88. Letter, J. F. Maulbetsch to Richard Sweet, October 10, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 89. Letter, Edwin Denby to Sweet, October 5, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 90. Letter, William Spill to Yost, January 19, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. 91. Ibid. 92. Letter, Mrs. Wicker to Yost, undated, located in May 1922 folder, Carton 17, UMAP. 93. Letter, Yost to Pack, February 12, 1940, Carton 11, UMAP. 94. H. O. Crisler, The Magazine of Sigma Chi, No. 1, January-February 1948, p. 28. 114 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY House, three themes were apparent: (1) service to others, (2) loyalty, and (3) "Michigan Spirit."95 James Duffield wrote to Yost as the Michigan Stadium was completed saying: You have been an inspiration to my sons and the myriad of boys who have passed under your influence, and it is my hope that God in all his mercy may spare you to many more years of leadership at Michigan and its great tradition you have helped establish.96 When a fine Wisconsin basketball team was upset twice by Michigan, the Badger team was criticized in the newspaper as having a "Michigan complex."97 Basketball coach, Dr. Walter Meanwell replied: With old 'Low Scores' admiration for Michigan I heartily agree. It truly should be 'hats off' to an institution that is at once a leader academically and athletically; with facilities for both intramural and intercollegiate sports that are the envy and inspiration of all interested in such; with a great student body of men in whom the masculine ideals of manly sports predominate over other extra curricular interests. Why almost the entire student and faculty group supported their team in its game against us, 12,000 people, and lead (sic) by a band almost as large as those at some of our best dances. Our editorial friend should have seen the game, and have heard Mr. Fielding Yost say to Mr. Little subsequently, 'One can win a few games without a background but it requires tradition to keep on winning. Michigan has just that.98 Michigan athletic facilities were visited by various touring groups in the late 1920's and early 1930's. They were a highlight of the first Michigan State Poultry Tour. Extension Poultryman, J. A. Hannah99 of Michigan State College in East Lansing wrote to Yost requesting permission to tour the campus and see the athletic plant as part of a four-day tour he was arranging.100 As might be expected, Yost made arrangements to have the Stadium, Yost Field House, the Intramural Sports Building and other facilities open for this group.10' In his last few years as Director of Athletics, Yost began "turning back the pages" to reminisce with his outstanding athletes of the past. In 1939, a "Round-Up" was organized, in an effort to bring back to 95. This speech is located in November 1923 folder, Carton 17, UMAP. 96. Letter, James Duffield to Yost, October 20, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 97. Two pages of sports from The Milwaukee Journal, March 17, 1929, located in March 1929 folder, Carton 6, UMAP. 98. Ibid. 99. Dr. Hannah later served as president when this school became Michigan State University. 100. Letter, J. A. Hannah to Yost, August 20, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 101. Letter, Yost to Hannah, August 21, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 115 Ann Arbor all those men who had played on Michigan football teams prior to 1906. This included the "point-a-minute" years.102 Many of them did return October 28, 1939 gathering that morning at the Michigan Union. They intermingled informally, posed for photographers and were served luncheon in the Main Ball Room. Yost then rose to address the approximately 200 present, reflecting upon their yesterdays and paying tribute to Michigan Spirit. The speech so represents the essence of Yost's legacy to Michigan that it is reported here in full: This gathering of the Old Boys of Michigan is something I have anticipated for many months and, at last, here we are, from all corners of the country, all a part of the great family of Michigan men, bound together by fadeless memories which, over a span of four decades or more, grow sweeter and sweeter in retrospect. Here we are, back Home again for a short stay. I have been having a wonderful time all morning among you; this day will stand out as one of the very happiest in a life that, fortunately, has been crammed to the brim with happy times. What a chance this day affords for heart to heart talks and hand clasps. We all love this old place that is Michigan. Just as the sturdy ivy clings to our older campus buildings, so do memories cling to us all. We love Michigan, I repeat-and we love her because she has given us so much to share with others. I look about this room with mixed feelings. I look into the faces of many that I have not seen for sometime. Over there I see "Ev" Sweeley; there I see Jim Duffy and Willie Heston; and there is "Germany" Schultz and Al Herrnstein. It is good, indeed, to see Hal Weeks, and inevitably "Boss" Weeks, that quarterback of quarterbacks comes to mind. Yes, as long as any of us are around, "Boss" Weeks, Neil Snow, Dan McGugin, Curt Redden, Dad Gregory and Hugh White will enrich football memories. "Ev" Sweeley, you came here all the way from Twin Falls, Idaho, and Norcross from as far as Cuba, and our President, Walter Bennett, with Harry Hammond, Spence Scott and Miller Pontius from old New York. This is the first time I have seen Rheinschild since 1905. In a few fleeting hours, you'll be on your way back home again. But many of you make annual pilgrimages to Michigan. Al Herrnstein, I can see you paired off with Willie Heston right now, just as clearly and unforgettably as I saw you during the Christmas Holidays thirty-eight years ago before and after the very first Rose Bowl game. And there's Captain Norcross, who 102. Several letters in July 1939 folder, Carton 11, UMAP. 116 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY At the 1939 Round-Up the Michigan band surrounds the "old-timers" who have formed a block M., -- 1 4th At the Round-Up Yost shakes hands with Willie Heston (All-American in 1903 and 1904) while Adoplh "Germany" Schulz (All-American in 1907) looks on. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 117 we know came here all the way from Cuba. Just a few minutes ago, Norky, I shook hands with your old pal, Harry James, who "way back then" (1903) was your competitor for quarterback and I think I'd still have to give each of you a 50-50 split for the job. In this room is Walter Bennett, Captain in 1898, who with Widman and McLean and Michigan's own composer, Louis Elbel, gave us our first Big Ten Championship and that immortal battle march, "The Victors." Only this morning I ran into Sig Harris-remember him?-who played quarterback for Minnesota in 1902 and 1903 and who has scouted every Michigan-Minnesota game since that time. Remember that Minnesota game of 1903? It was the toughest game of those early days and it marked the first year for Tom Hammond, Frank Longman, Harry Hammond, Joe Curtis, Octy Graham and several more of you-you who have had so much to do with building that intangible, yet very real and actual thing that men and women the country over recognize as the indomitable, fighting, militant Spirit of Michigan. You, my old friends, everyone of you, have had a definite part in building that great spirit; you left it as a precious heritage to the Men of Michigan who have followed you down the Touchdown Trail and they are all of them better men because of it. You built it and, in doing so, you erected a monument to yourselves and the spirit that will symbolize Michigan forever. Willie Heston! You and I got here about the same time after a close association at San Jose. The accident of our simultaneous arrival was ill-timed as it furnished food for comment. It is no more necessary to dwell on Willie's football record than it is to explain that snow is white-both are facts that every fan from eight to eighty knows as well as he knows his own name. You Willie, lest we forget, made 110 touchdowns for Michigan during those four years and helped nail the Yellow and Blue way up there at the top of the flag-pole. Here, in this ballroom of the Michigan Union are more than two hundred "M" men. If the cheers that have applauded each of you were to combine today in a resounding roar, I venture to say it could be heard above the guns in Europe. Many have come great distances for this happy event and I am so glad to see you! Hail to these Pacific Coasters, Sweeley, Rheinschild and Chandler. It was magnificent of them to come so great a distance. But my time is limited, because there are so many things for us to do. We've got to go over to the Stadium and make a block "M" while Louis Elbel directs the band as it plays "The Victors" and we've got to watch the Wolverines defeat Yale as we all know will happen. We're going to re-live once more the youthful enthusiasm -r P<? w A glowing tribute was paid Yost at this testimonial banquet, entitled "A Toast to Yost From Coast to Coast," in Waterman Gymnasium, October 19, 1940. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 119 of 35 or 40 years ago and which we gladly admit is just as real and bright today. This is OUR day, old veterans! My heart is so full at this moment and I am so overcome by the rush of memories that I fear I could say little more if I would. But do let mie reiterate a fact of which you are all so keenly aware at this moment. It pertains to the Spirit of Michigan. It is based upon a deathless loyalty to Michigan and all her ways; an enthusiasm that makes it second nature for Michigan men to spread the gospel of their university to the world's distant outposts; and conviction that nowhere is there a better university, in anyway, than this Michigan of ours. The spirit that inspired "The Victors" and "Varsity" still lives. At half-time the old grads took the field to form a block M, and were surrounded by the Michigan band. Soon the giant stadium was filled with the brilliant strains of "The Victors." It was a priceless moment, a fleeting return to their youth, for men whose college days were so indelibly etched with the drama of football Saturdays and the accolades of the crowd. Their day was crowned by a 27-7 Wolverine triumph over Yale. Moved by this tribute, many of the men composed thank-you letters to Yost, some with eyes moist. "I looked into the corners and into the groups hunting for faces that were gone forever," wrote Harold J. Weeks, "and that saddened me." "I'm on my way home after enjoying one of the most remarkable days of my life. The pleasant recollections of today's highlights will linger on for years to come," A. E. Chadwick admitted. "The block M, with you in the center and your two great All-Americans of all time, Heston and Schultz at the base of each leg of the M, was a sight that I will never forget," was Jim DePree's frank reaction. Paul Jones praised Yost: "It seems to me that it was a distinct and deserving honor to you that so many returned. It demonstrated to you the warm feeling and appreciation which we all have for you, and a recognition of your loyal and outstanding service to a great University." Miller Pontius echoed these sentiments:: "It was a fine occasion-and one which we shall all remember-as a part of Michigan's great athletic tradition, which is built around your person and character."103 Perhaps the finest tribute to Fielding Yost and the "Michigan Spirit" he cultivated was the banquet held October 19, 1940 and billed, "A Toast to Yost from Coast to Coast." That evening 1900 supporters and well-wishers banqueted in Waterman Gymnasium on the University of Michigan campus for nearly four hours. Several short speeches were delivered by dignitaries that included poet Edgar A. Guest, United 103. Several letters in October 1939 folder, Carton 11, UMAP. 120 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY 1J i' 1 i 'i: * Y; I i x.;. The Fort Worth, Texas alumni helped Yost celebrate his 67th birthday with this attractive cake. 777777.=7e;, e.. A 00 i w 1 E i IgsL r It Sit i~p In retirement Yost was surrounded by memorabilia in his Field House office. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 121 States Senator Arthur Vandenberg, University President Alexander Ruthven, Willie Heston, Commissioner John L. Griffith, Branch Rickey (owner of the St. Louis Cardinals baseball team), and others. Music was presented by the Michigan Band and Glee Club featuring a special "Yost March" written by Louis Elbel for this occasion. A 30 minute segment, which included Yost's response, was broadcast coast to coast, live, on the NBC Blue network.104 In the words of Yost's successor, Professor H. O. Crisler, "Coach Yost was a maker of tradition."105 This may have been his most outstanding contribution to the University of Michigan and its athletic programs. The public relations aspect of Yost's athletic directorship ties in very closely with maintaining a positive image of the University and its athletics, because to many of the people with whom Yost corresponded, he was probably synonymous with the University itself. Thus, to answer their letters well was to maintain an attractive image for the University. Yost was indeed a master at this phase of the Director's work, and the following conclusions emerged from an examination of his correspondence: (1) Typically, the length of his answers was well suited to the problem. They might be as brief as his directive to the Ann Arbor Lumber Companyl06 asking them to clear their equipment out of an area planned for new tennis courts, or as lengthy and meticulously documented as his replies to H. G. Salsinger107 of the Detroit Free Press and to Regent James 0. Murfinl08 when their support was badly needed in securing approval for building Michigan Stadium. (2) He knew how and when to use that vague entity, the Board in Control of Athletics, when preferring to avoid responsibility for an unpleasant decision. Using the Board as a shield, Yost would appear completely in sympathy with the complaint and claim to either be working as a friend to correct it, or, if he disagreed with the complaint, he would simply say that it was a Board decision and as their agent he must carry out such decisions. (3) In answering virtually all of his mail, Yost was consistently prompt. (4) Nearly all persons who wrote Yost or his office received replies, regardless of how trivial some of them were. In order to do this Yost 104. "Yost To Be Toasted At Banquet Tonight," Ann Arbor News, October 19, 1940. 105. H. O. Crisler, Magazine of Sigma Chi, No. 1, January-February, 1948, p. 27. 106. Letter, Yost to Ann Arbor Lumber Co., June 25, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 107. Letter, Yost to H. G. Salsinger, May 21, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 108. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 18, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 122 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY must have had excellent secretarial help from Andrew S. Baker, his personal secretary for many years. (5) It appears that copies were made of all correspondence. Handwritten letters that might be difficult to read were typed out and attached to the original. Telephone or other oral agreements were frequently transposed and a letter verifying the conversation was sent to the other party. (6) The language of Yost's letters was frequently well-chosen. For example, there were numerous occasions when he wanted to give the appearance of certainty when he really wasn't sure. In such cases he would say, "So far as I know, no one has ever done this before," or, "To my knowledge, this is the first team ever to perform this feat." Also, a frequent sentence found in his replies was, "I appreciate the concern that prompted you to write." (7) Yost's frequently tactful replies must have helped build good public relations. For example, when Regent William L. Clements complained that his request for football tickets and accompanying $12 check had resulted in very inferior seats, Yost answered quickly. Explaining that part-time help, employed during the busy part of the season, had handled the order, Yost apologized for the unfortunate choice of seats received. He then admonished Clements for not writing "Regent Clements" on the request and assured him, "We desire to give special consideration to our Regents.109 The $12 check was also returned. On another occasion, a Chicago alumnus, Judge Francis Borrelli, had assured the newly appointed municipal judge, Roland Libonati, that he could intercede with Yost and get him a belated award of the varsity "M." Some injustice or other misunderstanding had prevented Judge Libonati from receiving it as a Michigan athlete several years previously. Borelli had apparently gotten Libonati very excited at the thought of receiving this award. The Board in Control was slow in reaching a decision, and, not wanting to look foolish, Borelli made a strong plea to Yost that the "M" be granted. Yost complied sending the Certificate of Award to Judge Roland Libonati saying, "you are now eligible for membership in the "M" Club. The annual dues are $2, or if you desire, you can secure a life membership... for $35."110 It is difficult to see how the Judge could have resisted sending $35, in which case, everyone concerned in this matter would have come out a winner. The Yost correspondence did not reveal whether the Judge bought the life membership. 109. Letter, Yost to W. L. Clements, December 4, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 110. Series of letters in third folder for July 1925. Top letter in this group is Yost to Francis Borrelli, July 21, 1925, Carton 4, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 123 One further example was the concern expressed by Ann Arbor dentist, Dr. Robert B. Howell over the withdrawal of his complimentary tickets and, at the same time, an unpaid bill incurred by the Athletic Association. He wrote Yost asking if something was wrong. Recalling a long service and connection with the Athletic Association dating back to the days of Charles Baird, Dr. Howell did not want "the pride I've had in connection with past teams broken.1'l Yost promptly replied that he knew of no controversy and that the complimentary ticket committee had dropped many names. Their feeling was that the relationship to doctors and dentists should be purely a business proposition. Yost then carefully reassured Dr. Howell, "I want you to know I greatly appreciate the manner in which you've handled the cases sent you..., your protecting the interests of the Athletic Association and giving efficient service. I am very anxious to continue this." Yost then indicated no knowledge of the unpaid bill, but he stated, "When we receive it, it will get immediate attention.1l2 (8) Yost consistently kept those in influential positions informed of his achievements. (9) Complimentary tickets to Michigan athletic contests were customarily sent to influential persons, even after they left office or left the University. Such was the case with many of the ex-Governors of Michigan, ex-President Clarence Little, Dean Day who left Michigan to take a position at Cornell University, and other similar persons of stature. This should have fostered the belief that his friendship extended beyond the search for personal favors. (10) When traveling, Yost would have his mail forwarded. The end result was that often he would receive several pieces of mail while stopping briefly to deliver an address. This would thereby enhance his image as a busy, important figure. He would then answer some of this mail saying, "Your letter came to me while I was in New York addressing the... " The recipient would, no doubt, also be impressed with the busy, important figure of Yost. (11) "Thank You" notes frequently were sent by Yost following his speaking engagements. In this example he also used the occasion to boost the image of himself and the University of Michigan. To Professor Nelson of the University of Virginia, Yost wrote saying he had enjoyed speaking to the students at that University "and to the Student Board in your home... Please send me the names and addresses of your publicity man and the five student members of the Board who were at dinner with us in your home. I am enclosing three copies of poems that I wish you would hand to Captain Sloan of the football team. The 111. Letter, Robert Howell to Yost, October 7, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 112. Letter, Yost to Robert Howell, October 10, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 124 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY 'Ballad of the Yostmen,' written by a Congregational minister... expresses the spirit as I would have the boys who represent the University of Michigan show it in their intercollegite competition."113 (12) When not wanting to become involved in a problem, Yost could often make a graceful exit. For example, Gilbert Greene, a young, aspiring athlete from New Orleans wrote saying he had recently heard Yost speak at Tulane University. He was very impressed and wanted some advice on developing football expertise. Green described himself as 20 years old, 5' 11" tall, weighing 155 pounds, and entering the School of Medicine (perhaps at Tulane). He further stated, But I lack certain things which I wonder if you can help me to acquire by telling me how to get them. I lack speed; the nerve to fall on a ball hard or tackle a man that is rushing head long toward me. I lack weight, height and confidence. How can I gain these... I am green, and do not even know how to punt or throw passes correctly. I hope that you will understand my position and help me. Not for the sake that I will be a star or seek glory, but that I will be able to give all I've got for the team.114 Yost replied, Each boy is an individual case and it is hard to 'prescribe' any definite rules or regulations. Without a doubt your Coach or Trainer can tell you best what to do in order to develop the things you need in football. I believe it would be best for you to see your Coach and Trainer and have a personal interview with them.115 When we examine the plight of black athletes at Michigan during Yost's era, we find abundant evidence of racial bias. Only eleven had earned varsity letters up to 1941. They included six track and field men: William DeHart Hubbard (1923, 1924, and 1925), Booker Brooks (1929, 1930 and 1932), Thomas E. Tolan (1929, 1930 and 1931), Willis F. Ward (1933, 1934 and 1935), William D. Watson (1937, 1938 and 1939) and George W. Allen (1938, 1939 and 1941); three football players: George H. Jewett Sr. (1890 and 1892), Willis F. Ward (1932, 1933 and 1934) and Julius Franks (1941 and 1942); two tennis players: Henry C. Graham (1928) and Daniel G. Kean (1934); and one baseball player: Rudolph T. Ash (1923). All of the track men were good enough to letter the maximum number of seasons allowed (three), and Ward achieved this distinction in both football and track and field. The correspondence of Fielding Yost lends valuable insight into his attitude toward DeHart Hubbard. It was largely through the urging of 113. Letter, Yost to Professor Nelson, March 27, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 114. Letter, Greene to Yost, May 22, 1927, located in August 1927 folder, Carton 5, UMAP. 115. Letter, Yost to Greene, August 16, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 125 Lon Barringer, a Michigan alumni from Charleston, West Virginia, and Yost that Hubbard came to the University. To E. A. Dittman in Hubbard's home town of Cincinnati, Ohio, Yost wrote: There is a colored boy by the name of Hubbard, a broad jumper, who graduates from Walnut Hill High School this year. He is a fine student and a great athlete. Lon Barringer... has already seen this boy and will write you in reference to a plan he has to get this boy to come to Michigan.116 Soliciting the assistance of Dittman, Yost then requested that he see the boy personally, "and use your influence to have him come to Michigan. This boy is a rare athlete in track and would be a wonderful asset to us.117 The prophesy was instantly fulfilled. In his freshman year Hubbard tied the University of Michigan indoor 50-yard dash record and broad jumped 24 feet 63/4 inches. Since freshmen were ineligible for the varsity Hubbard's only outside competition came in the national AAU meet in Newark, New Jersey. He won the junior (24 feet 31/2 inches) and senior (24 feet 51/2 inches) broad jump titles as well as the hop, step and jump (48 feet 1 /2 inches). In so doing he defeated the world record holder in the broad jump, Edward Gourdin of Harvard. Spaulding's Guide put Hubbard on its All-American track team for 1922, and he was listed as the most outstanding American in these two jumping events. Yost described him as "doing well in his classes and... a good boy in every way.""'1 Summer employment was secured for him, in spite of the fact that one of Yost's influential friends admitted, "The matter is a rather delicate one to handle, as you realize that Cincinnati is almost a Southern city, and the colored people have very little status here."l19 Admitting that he was fully aware of this feeling, from his own experience in living in Nashville, Tennessee, Yost assured his friend, "While a great distinction is made socially with the colored people, the greater part of the work is done by colored labor." Again complimenting Hubbard, Yost said, "I know you will find him a bright, alert colored boy and willing to work.120 The distinction with which Hubbard represented the University of Michigan and his country in the 1924 Olympic games more than rewarded Yost's interest in him. Broad jumping 24 feet, 51/2 inches Hubbard joined the elite circle of Olympic Gold Medal Winners. His brilliant Michigan track career closed the following year with a 116. Letter, Yost to E.A. Dittman, July 5, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 117. Ibid. 118. Letter, Yost to Lon Barringer, January 26, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 119. Letter, R.W. Bame to Yost, June 7, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 120. Letter, Yost to R.W. Bame, June 9, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 126 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY double victory at the NCAA meet in Chicago. Sprinting to the tape in the 100-yard dash, Hubbard equaled the NCAA record of 9.8 seconds. Then came a sensational leap of 25 feet 107/8 inches shattering the world broad jump record. Leaving Michigan, Hubbard was employed by the City Recreation Commission in Cincinnati as a "Colored Worker." He had occasion, five years later, to ask a favor of Yost. Plans were underway to form a basketball team captained by Hubbard and play his fraternity brothers in Ann Arbor, if a gymnasium could be secured.121 Yost made the necessary arrangements,122 but when his fraternity backed out, Hubbard had to cancel his request thanking Yost for his troubles.123 In the case of DeHart Hubbard, Fielding Yost seems to have had a very cordial relationship and a high admiration for this young man. The paucity of black varsity athletes suggests, however, that they were not recruited and not entirely welcome in sports other than track and field. Available correspondence regarding a young lad named Clifford Wilson provides some explanation of why no black ever played varsity football for Yost. Herbert E. Wilson, an Indianapolis lawyer and active alumni supporter, became interested in assisting Clifford Wilson's efforts to play football for Michigan. This lad was already in the Wolverine football program, but was apparently having his academic problems and would have to enroll for the summer session to become eligible for the 1928 season. Wilson asked Coach "Tad" Wieman if a colored man could play football on the University of Michigan football team, explaining, "I know while I was in school, Coach Yost would not permit it."124 Coach "Tad" Wieman replied that he "had quite a talk with Wilson two or three weeks ago relative to the problem you suggest,"125 and it was explained to him, There were certain complications that would be difficult for all with a colored man on the squad; that because of this I did not think it advisable for a colored man to be on the squad unless he was good enough to play a good part of the time. In other words, unless he were a regular or near regular, the handicaps to the squad would be greater than the advantages to say nothing of the difficulties that encounter the individual, himself. I assured him, however, that any man who could demonstrate that he was the best man for any position would have the right to play in that position. Wilson took all of this in fine spirit and agreed that that was the 121. Letter, DeHart Hubbard to Yost, January 9, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 122. Letter, Yost to DeHart Hubbard, January 23, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 123. Letter, DeHart Hubbard to Yost, January 25, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 124. Letter, Herbert E. Wilson to Wieman, April 25, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 125. Letter, E. E. Wieman to Herbert Wilson, April 26, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 127 best way to handle the situation. He said he would not care to be on the Varsity squad unless he were good enough to play, and there is where the case rests now. Cliff Wilson went out for spring practice, and Coach Wieman described him as big, strong and fast, but he would not be able to say much more until he had a chance to demonstrate his ability in scrimmages. Coach Wieman, himself a former Michigan football player, further explained to Herb Wilson, During the time that I have been at Michigan we have never had a colored candidate for the team who was good enough to play regularly. At one time we did have a backfield man who, had he been white, would probably have been on the squad as a second or third substitute. In a case like that we decided that it was not worth the friction that would result to have him on the squad. I do not know of any other case where a man's color has in any way affected his standing in athletics at Michigan.126 The absence of blacks from the Michigan football team was by design. Yost did not intend to have them in the program. It took a superb scholar-athlete, Willis Ward, to break the racial barrier. Although he was big, strong, fast, smart, had broken the national interscholastic high jump record, performed as a one-man track team, and made All-State in football, Michigan was not interested in Ward. A Detroit judge, Guy Miller, asked Regent James Murfin to use his influence in getting Ward to Michigan. It was learned that Coach Harry Kipke was enthusiastic at the prospect of landing Ward, but Yost insisted that Michigan had won without blacks and did not need to use them. Miller, Murfin and Kipke "locked horns" with Yost and won.127 Willis Ward performed very well as a varsity end in 1932 and 1933. The Wolverines won Western Conference titles and were crowned national champions both years. In track and field he was a whirlwind in the sprints, hurdles, high jump and broad jump events. Unfortunately, he became almost as well known for being excluded from the MichiganGeorgia Tech football game in Ann Arbor, October 20, 1934, as for football and track heroics. Fielding Yost had become good friends with W. A. Alexander, the football coach at Georgia Tech, and it may be that Willis was overlooked at the time they agreed upon the Ann Arbor game. The potential racial complications were, however, discussed well in advance of 126. Ibid. 127. Interview with Willis Ward, September 9, 1970. 128 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY the actual playing date. In December, 1933, Dan McGugin of Vanderbilt University wrote Yost saying: We had a meeting of Conference coaches at New Orleans last Friday and a group of us were in the room and some one asked Alexander, in a rather joking way, what he was going to do about the detail. Alexander said that Michigan would not play a colored man against Georgia Tech; that this had never been done by the Northern teams in games with Southern teams and he was sure it would not be done. McGugin had talked with Professor Armstrong, Athletic Director at Georgia Tech, that evening and concluded: "I am sure they would not want to play the game if Ward were to take a part." Assuring Yost that this was to be expected of the Southern teams, McGugin offered the recent example of his own Vanderbilt team: Ohio (State) wrote me two years ago about the same thing and I talked with the Board about it and the Board was horrified and was absolutely unwilling to play the game under that condition. I rather had it in mind not to make any particular point on it as we were going to their field, etc. but, of course, could not do.otherwise and Ohio did not play the man. Ohio told me when they scheduled games with the Navy that the Navy had asked that a colored man not play at Annapolis but that they did not ask for that agreement at Columbus. McGugin counseled that, "if you would be embarrassed by not playing him seriously then I believe Tech would quietly prefer to withdraw from the game and maybe the report could be given out that there was a mistake of some kind about the date."'28 The Board in Control of Athletics had a long discussion, one month later, in reference to the Georgia Tech game and how the color problem might enter into it, but no action was taken.'29 Perhaps they believed that Yost, who would be traveling to Atlanta in February for the football Rules Committee meetings, would be able to work something out with Tech Athletic Director Armstrong. There is no evidence that Yost spoke with Armstrong or, if he did, it is not clear what was said. In May, McGugin was still reminding Yost that it would not be possible for Michigan to play Ward: Am enclosing a note from Mr. Armstrong of Georgia Tech. I don't believe you can afford to use colored players as it has never been done in the case of games with teams from this section.130 128. Letter, McGugin to Yost, December 12, 1933, Carton 18, UMAP. 129. Letter, Yost to Aigler, January 30, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 130. Letter, McGugin to Yost, May 2, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 129 During the summer Ward learned that he would not get to play against Tech. It was a terrific blow. How could such action be justified in light of the honor his athletic achievements had already brought to Michigan. Friends called to ask what Willis would do. He decided to quit Michigan. Coach Kipke was soon in Detroit explaining that no other choice was available. Tech would not play against a black. Ward was reminded of the great battle waged by Kipke, Murfin and Miller to get him into a Michigan football uniform. Added to this were the many problems precipited by race that Kipke had helped Ward shoulder the previous three years. He would never do it for another black if Ward pulled out.131 In every Michigan game that season, except Georgia Tech, Ward started and played well. Roy Wilkins, Assistant Secretary of the NAACP wrote Kipke asking if it was true that he had agreed with Georgia Tech not to play Ward. Receiving no reply he wrote again saying a serious moral question was involved. "What about the feelings of negro athletes who have carried the name and fame of the University of Michigan to the ends of the earth with Olympic victories?"132 Kipke had apparently been instructed to ignore all such inquiries. Francis M. Dent, a Detroit lawyer, knew that Ralph Aigler was an influential member of the Board in Control of Athletics. Requesting a direct answer on whether Michigan was going to withhold Ward from the game, he had received a very vague reply that suggested matters of etiquette and courtesy were involved. "This may seem to be a matter of etiquette and courtesy to the Board in Control of Physical Education," Dent replied, but when we take into consideration that Mr. Lett, another colored athlete in the University of Michigan was not allowed to play on the basketball team because of his color, the whole matter takes a different aspect. Some four or five years ago the responsible officials of the University attempted to open a separate dormitory for the colored girl students at the University of Michigan. The Honorable Fred W. Green who was Governor of Michigan at the time, ordered the matter stopped immediately and it was stopped. It would seem that someone connected with the University never ceases in their efforts to create racial discrimination and segregation therein which, as I said in my previous letter, is a direct violation of Act number 32, Public Acts of 1931... Aigler replied that participation in intercollegiate athletics was not a matter of right or duty but of privilege. He also stated that as a well131. Interview with Willis Ward, September 19, 1970. 132. Letter, Wilkins to Kipke, October 11, 1934, Ruthven Papers, Box 14, folder labeled "Board in Control of Athletics," Michigan Historical Collections Library. 130 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY bred host, Michigan should take the feelings of Georgia Tech into consideration. "You might have also referred to well-bred guests," Dent suggested. "I am quite sure that nobody considers Harvard and Washington and Jefferson Universities and Dartmouth College ill-bred because they had sufficient courage to refuse to allow petty intolerance to interfere with the high traditions and principles of their respective schools."133 Joseph H. B. Evans, a 1912 Michigan graduate, also wrote Aigler and sent a carbon of the letter to President Ruthven. To Aigler's statements concerning athletic participation as a privilege Evans remembered, As I look back on the days when I attended every Mass Meeting, I can easily recall the words of various speakers who challenged and reminded the players that these were times when they must not shirk their DUTY to dear old Michigan. In theory, participation is a matter of privilege and one who has met every requirement to obtain this privilege has a Right to be accorded the same consideration as his fellow players. Aigler had stated his belief that, "the home institution and team are in a very real sense hosts to the visiting team. Accordingly, the customary courtesies which well-bred hosts are expected to display toward their guests are to be normally anticipated in the relationships between college and athletic teams." Applying this logic, Evans rebutted with the following analogy: Let's say that I invite guests to come to my home and be a part of the family circle but I find that the guest has an antipathy for my two fine Spitz dogs whose presence adds greatly to our family's enjoyment and pleasure. He still objects to the dogs no matter how gentle and well-bred they may be. Will I put my dogs outside to cater to the feelings of my guest? Most certainly yes. But now suppose that same guest insists that the presence of my daughter, who to me represents one who had held high the family name and traditions, is distasteful to him. Shall I then give way to this whim and banish my daughter from the family hearth during his stay? If I did I should not be worthy of the name of father and my relatives and friends would be right in branding such action as contemptible. There is a distinct difference in the treatment of my daughter as opposed to the treatment of my dogs. In the mind of Joseph Evans Michigan was putting a favored son, Willis Ward, on the back porch while the guests enjoyed their visit.134 A number of University students apparently shared this sentiment and 133. Letter, Dent to Aigler, October 11, 1934. Ruthven Papers, Box 14, Folder labeled "Board in Control of Athletics." 134. Letter, Evans to Aigler, October 17, 1934. Ruthven Papers, Ibid. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 131 began organizing to show their opposition. As the game approached, their campaign gathered momentum and Yost became quite concerned. A sit-down protest in the middle of the football field during the game was rumored. He hired a Pinkerton detective to identify the leaders and report on the proceedings of their big rally the day before the Tech game.135 To this same rally he dispatched a number of students whose job it was to create disorder and thwart any chance this group might have to organize a sit-down.136 Yost's maneuvering proved successful,137 and no incident occurred in Michigan Stadium that October 20th as the Wolverines won their only game of the entire 1934 campaign, over Georgia Tech, 9-2. To Coach W. A. Alexander of Georgia Tech, Yost wrote the following note two months after the Ward incident: I never dreamed there would be so much agitation about the matter. The agitation was developed by a committee of five Jewish sophomore students, four of them from New York City and vicinity and one from Michigan. They did it in the name of 'The United Front Committee on Ward.'138 An editorial in the December, 1934, issue of Scholastic Coach magazine was sent to the Board in Control of Athletics asking for any corrections that should be made before printing. It discussed the question of whether the United States ought to participate in the 1936 Olympic Games in Germany if Germany were to discriminate against Jews in the selection of their team. The editorial then turned to the University of Michigan-Georgia Tech game saying, Willis Ward, a Negro, Michigan's regular right end, was kept on the sidelines. No explanation for this action was forthcoming from anyone officially connected with the Michigan coaching and athletic staff. No official statement was made by the Michigan Board in Control of Athletics. Time, The Weekly Newsmagazine, said, Athletic authorities insisted that he (Willis Ward) should not play because 1) it would be discourteous to Georgia Tech; 2) he might be injured.... There was no authority for the rumor that Georgia Tech had requested Michigan not to use Willis Ward. But there was no doubt that Georgia Tech appreciated Michigan's gesture, because as a reciprocal gesture Georgia Tech kept her star end, Gibson, out of the game... The Michigan Daily said editorially after the game, Michigan's 'principles are incompatible with the South's position 135. Letter, W. H. Shoemack, Superintendent, Pinkerton's National Detective Agency, Inc., to Yost, October 27, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 136. Ira Smith, Interview, July 25, 1969. 137. Ibid. 138. Letter, Yost to W. A. Alexander, December 5, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 132 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY on racial differences. Let Michigan of the future play with those who are of her own eminently worthwhile type.'39 It is clear that while Fielding Yost was the predominant figure in having his coach, Harry Kipke, withhold Ward from this game, the Board in Control of Athletics apparently concurred in the decision. Further, no appraisal of this incident would be fair if we are to use current standards. The following evidence supports the conclusion that Yost was traveling along very much with his times. The Commissioner of the Big Ten, John L. Griffith, sympathized with Yost. He wrote: You were telling me up at Minneapolis about the radical students organization that stirred up the rumpus about Ward in the Georgia Tech game. Can you without too much trouble advise me whether or not there are any other liberal clubs in Michigan... 140 He apparently wanted to be forewarned of any other such radicals. Precedent was certainly on Yost's side. Dan McGugin had revealed this in recalling his agreement with Ohio State. Vanderbilt's demands had been acceded to just as Yost honored the Georgia Tech request. As a matter of fact, Yost learned that even President George W. Rightmire of Ohio State University had concurred in the agreement not to play William Bell against the Navy in Baltimore. L. W. St. John, the Ohio State University Director of Athletics, supplied Yost with all the details: Nothing was said in advance of the Vanderbilt game... Some time ahead of our game, I had personally talked with Dan McGugin told Dan not to be disturbed, that we would not play Bell against him. We handled it in such a manner here that the fact that Bell was not put in the game was more or less a surprise to everyone. For the Navy game, at Baltimore, that year, we were not able to escape quite so smoothly...141 St. John explained that plans to hold Bell out of the Navy game reached Walter White, Secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, located in New York City. White sent the following telegram to President Rightmire: Report has been made to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored people that although after playing in a game last Saturday against Wisconsin he is in good condition William Bell star tackle of The Ohio State University football team is not to be permitted to play in the game on November eighth between Ohio State University and the Navy. Stop. We are informed that in order 139. Editorial in Scholastic Coach, December, 1934, a copy of which was sent to the University of Michigan's Board in Control of Athleaics. November, 1934 folder, Carton 9, UMAP. 140. Letter, Griffith to Yost, November 27, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 141. Letter, L. W. St. John to Yost, October 4, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 133 to prevent charge of race prejudice Bell is being sent to scout University of Pittsburgh team. Stop. We are loathe to believe that Ohio State University would yield to racial prejudice in this fashion and violate canons of good sportsmanship. Stop. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People respectfully request statement from you as to accuracy of reports made to it.142 President Rightmire's immediate reply was that he had never heard of the NAACP! Before he answered any question of the University's good sportsmanship, he wanted to know who had made the charges, what was the nature of this NAACP organization and how it became interested in this subject.143 Upon receiving this information from White, the President concluded the correspondence with the following brief telegram: Since receiving your telegram I have obtained information relating to your inquiry. William Bell will not play in the Navy game. The University is endeavoring to protect him from unpleasant experience of probable race discrimination manifested in a southern city. 144 The President had apparently become convinced that some kind of racial demonstration would take place. He sent copies of his telegraphic correspondence with White to St. John instructing him, Nothing more need be said, or should be said, by any University functionary. I am suggesting that Professor Willaman talk as quickly as possible with Mr. Bell about this whole matter and acquaint him with the telegraphic correspondence before the matter is taken up, as it may be, with Mr. Bell by Mr. White. I believe this early conversation between Mr. Bell and Professor Willaman to be very important, because, as I understand it, Mr. Bell agrees that it is best that he does not make the trip to Baltimore because of the conditions which he understands he would probably meet there.'45 In another illustration of this desire to eliminate unpleasant demonstrations, The Detroit Daily for October 24, 1929 carried the following story under the title, "N.Y.U. Negro Star Out of Georgia Game:" Head Football Coach Chick Meehan of New York University last night ended the controversy over the question of using Dave Myers, N.Y.U.'s Negro quarterback, in the intersectional game between 142. Telegram, Walter White to President George Rightmire, November 3, 1930; this telegram and other correspondence on this incident are all located in October 1934 folder, Carton 9, UMAP. 143. Telegram, Rightmire to White, November 3, 1930; Carton 9, UMAP. 144. Telegram, Rightmire to White, November 5, 1930, October 1934 folder, Carton 9, UMAP. 145. Letter, President Rightmire to Professor L. W. St. John, November 5, 1930, October 1934 folder, Carton 9, UMAP. 134 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY New York and the University of Georgia, November 9th, with the announcement that Myers would not play. 'There will be no unpleasantness in the Georgia game, as we did not intend to play Myers when we scheduled the game and he is not going to play,' Meehan said.'46 As stated previously, precedent was most certainly on the side of Fielding Yost. In some sports there seemed to be unwritten agreements among the Western Conference coaches against playing black athletes. Such was the case with basketball. Leon Wheeler, of the Detroit Athletic Association (colored) appealed to Franklin Cappon, the University of Michigan basketball coach: A large group of interested Michigan people and friends have been deeply interested in knowing whether you would be big enough and break the much talked of gentlemen's agreement and be gentleman enough to let Frank Lett play on your basketball team... The Gentlemen's Agreement is out. It is an individual matter to you as coach of One Big Ten Team to let this boy play because he is capable of making the team according to your own statement.'47 A copy of this letter was sent to Yost. A similar appeal came from Roy Wilkins, Assistant Secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. It was answered January 18, 1934 by Frank Robbins, Secretary to the President of the University: You may be interested to know that Mr. Franklin Lett has been informed by the Board in Control of Athletics that he can, if he desires, come out for the freshman basketball team, the only one, of course, which is open to him at the present time as he is a freshman student in college. I mention this in view of your letter of December 29, which was addressed to President Ruthven.14s Wilkins expressed his gratification for the Michigan stand. 14 He might have saved his praise. Lett was never allowed in the basketball program. While it is true that some black athletes were permitted to compete in Northern universities, from the following example we can see the more subtle pattern of racial bias in this area. A University of Michigan-University of California track meet was scheduled in California during April, 1935, and Willis Ward was a valuable member of the track team. Coach Hoyt inquired as to the problems in seeking ac146. This newsclipping was located in the folder labeled, "Carnegie Report," Carton 22, UMAP. 147. Letter, Leon Wheeler to Mr. Franklin Cappon, January 9, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 148. Letter, Frank Robbins to Mr. Roy Wilkins, January 18, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 149. Letter, Roy Wilkins to Frank Robbins, January 20, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. YEARS AS DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS 135 commodations for Ward on this trip. A former Michigan coach then on the California football staff assured Hoyt as follows: I don't think you will have any difficulties in getting accomodations for Mr. Ward. We had a colored boy on our football squad over the past season. We take him everywhere with us and never mention it to any hotel whether in the Los Angeles area or Bay Region or up in the northwest. We simply assign him a room to himself and that is all there is to it.150 The almost complete absence of blacks in the entire University of Michigan student body is also worth noting here. The Michiganensian for 1938 pictures three blacks out of 1,310 graduates. The 1944 issue shows four out of 816 graduates. With no strength of numbers all black students in the University were forced to resign to the racism of the day. Protests to the president or a regent were likely to draw a prompt and courteous reply but no decisive action curtailing racism. When Miss Marjorie Franklin, a black student, was denied living accommodations in the nursing home with the other students, Oscar Baker wrote Regent Murfin on her behalf: What I desire is a clear cut decision by the Board of Regents. During President Burton's lifetime a similar matter came up in relation to the swimming pool, but without any reference to the Board of Regents, President Burton stated that all students must be treated equally. An American colored girl is refused admission into the dormitory, while a foreign student nurse, a Chinese is granted admission. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People at New York... are interested and our group in Michigan are looking to high minded men like yourself to decide this matter honestly, fairly and according to law and justice. In a resolution proposed by Regent Stone, Baker was advised that it was the opinion of the Regents that: in providing Miss Franklin with living accommodations in a home near the Hospital and board with the other student nurses, the University is acting in compliance with the law and with the published announcements and regulations of the University, and is furnishing her with full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges with the other student nurses, and that Miss Franklin is receiving all the advantages of theoretical and practical instruction and training afforded by the Hospital School for Nurses to the same extent as the other student nurses.151 Again, subtle Northern racism prevailed. 150. Letter, A. J. Sturzenegger to Charles Hoyt, January 24, 1935, Carton 9, UMAP. 151. Letter, Baker to Murfin, May 23, 1925 and the Regents' reply are in May 1925 folder, Box 4, Murfin Papers. 136 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The presidents of the University consistently opposed racism, but it was a fact of American life. An alumnus, Woolsey W. Hunt, sent President Ruthven a newspaper clipping of a track meet showing his son finishing third in a race behind two negroes. He spoke of "extreme repugnance" in seeing black competing with white. Ruthven replied that he did not find such competition objectionable because, "after all, there will have to be a certain amount of association between the races when the boys are through college."152 One final example of Yost's willingness to cooperate with black athletes came in 1936-37 when a fund-raising project was to be sponsored by a large group of black people in Ann Arbor. They were working through what was known as The Dunbar Center to promote a social betterment program for black people, and the goal was to raise $5,000 to purchase a building for their headquarters. The committee in charge asked Yost if they could use the Field House to stage a fund-raising exhibition, in which Joe Louis would box, Eddie Tolan and DeHart Hubbard, Willis Ward, Jesse Owens and perhaps others would perform in sprinting or jumping events. Yost consented to the use of the Field House and even wrote to John Roxborough seeking his cooperation in getting Joe Louis to work with this project. It appears that this exhibition was never held, but Yost did lend his cooperation. In summary, blacks were definitely not within the "mainstream" of Fielding Yost's "Athletics-for-All" theme, at least so far as intercollegiate athletics was concerned. They were excluded from his football teams, although he was very helpful to track star DeHart Hubbard. The practice of keeping black athletes out of intersectional games with Southern teams was well established at the time Willis Ward was withheld from the Georgia Tech contest. In light of other racial practices, the attitudes of his contemporaries and the small number of blacks enrolled in the University of Michigan, Fielding Yost certainly did not stand as the last supporter of an archaic segregrationist policy. In fact, when we consider that his father had fought as a Confederate in the Civil War, and that his home had been in West Virginia and Tennessee the first 50 years of his life, he may have been even more considerate of blacks than might be expected. Thus, while clearly guilty of unjust racial bias, Yost certainly seemed to be traveling along with his times. 152. Letters, Hunt to Ruthven, March 4, 1935 and Ruthven to Hunt, March 13, 1935, Box 15, Ruthven Papers. Chapter V MICHIGAN BUILDS A 'SHOWCASE' OF ATHLETIC FACILITIES Perhaps, from the American standpoint, the most important consequences of World War I were economic. For the first time in its history, the United States became a creditor rather than a debtor nation. The prosperity so apparent in the 1920's gave millions of Americans a taste for leisure hitherto thought accessible only to the wealthy, and changed the living habits of the entire nation.1 Intercollegiate athletics, and especially football, came within the grasp of many more families whose curiosities had been stimulated by the radio and sporting news, and for whom the automobile had brought the stadium within reach. The mushrooming attendance at college football games ushered in the "stadium-building era." In some universities the football profits were used to expand other athletic facilities or programs. Such was the case at the University of Michigan. The University was ill-equipped to provide physical activity for its nearly 10,000 students in 1921. Waterman Gymnasium was often a frantic sight in early spring as varsity track men, intramural and required physical education activities vied for its usage. Men's intramurals utilized the Ferry Field facilities, but the varsity teams were given priority and the field was maintained by the Board of Intercollegiate Athletics. Because of the uneasy calm prevailing between Yost and Dr. Sundwall in 1921, the Intramural Director, Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell, suggested that he might have had a very difficult time getting fields mowed and lined for intramurals had it not been his good fortune to know the grounds-keeper at Ferry Field very well.2 The Club House located on the field, referred to by Yost as the "Field house,"3 was used almost exclusively as a locker room for varsity athletes. Barbour Gymnasium had its limitations, and the women possessed no adequate athletic field. 1. Weston, p. 48. 2. Mitchell described Yost as always cooperative and sympathetic toward intramurals. Interview April 30, 1969. 3. Letter, Yost to Phil Bartelme, April 21, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 137 138 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Such were the problems confronting Dr. Sundwall in 1921 and he recognized the absolute necessity of securing legislative appropriations. President Burton was very much in sympathy and, although they received much encouragement from their trip to Lansing in 1923, no grant was made by the Legislature to build physical education facilities. Their generosity in other areas is quite clear from the tremendous sum of $5 million granted to the University for a variety of new facilities in Dr. Burton's brief four and one-half year tenure. Dr. Burton's death and the appointment of the Day Committee to study these needs, further postponed the construction of athletic facilities.4 "Physical education must reach every student in the university", Dr. Sundwall had written. Nothing is more absurd than the usual custom of requiring only freshmen and sophomores to take daily exercise. Seniors and juniors are in just as great need of daily exercise. Indeed, the faculty also."5 Although an immediate budget increase was secured for the Intramural Department,6 without the facilities this was merely rhetoric. Outdoor facilities for intercollegiate athletics were rated very high by Yost. He thought Michigan's athletic field was the finest in the country with its Club House, football and baseball fields, tennis courts and various playing fields for class teams, all of which covered about 75 acres.7 There were two pressing needs in 1921. First, an indoor facility had been long over-due. Waterman Gymnasium was too small to handle basketball crowds and its sight in the early spring has already been described. Second, football seating at Ferry Field was inadequate. Temporary wooden bleachers were added in 1921 increasing the seating capacity from 21,000 to 46,000, but even this did not keep pace with the ticket requests for the big games. A new indoor athletic facility and a new stadium became the primary concerns of Yost in his early years as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics. The opportunity to dramatize the need for an indoor athletic building came in December, 1921, when several students presented a formal request to the Board in Control of Athletics that intercollegiate rowing be established as a varsity sport at Michigan. The students estimated that a budget of $4,350 would be adequate to finance the new sport. Yost wrote to several universities conducting intercollegiate rowing programs to ascertain whether the suggested $4,350 budget figure was realistic.8 While awaiting their response, he presented an argument to the Board 4. Letter, Sundwall to Aigler, September 1, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 5. Dr. John Sundwall, "University Physical Education and Efficiency," School and Society, November 9, 1918, pp. 549-551. 6. Dr. E. D. Mitchell, interview, April 30, 1969. 7. Letter, Yost to J. P. Hart, December 13, 1919, Carton 2, UMAP. 8. Letters in December, 1921 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 139 entitled, "Report on Rowing," wherein he favored construction of a large field house. The crux of this report follows: We do not have intercollegiate hockey, swimming, wrestling, or boxing, in which many more men would no doubt participate at a much less expense. In fact all four of these sports could be made intercollegiate sports at a combined expense at much less than that of rowing alone. The problem as I see it is how best to expend such funds as are available for the use of athletics at the University of Michigan, considering the cost and the general benefits to the student body as a whole as nearly as possible. We need a new field house very badly. Where is the money to come from to build it? This field house would benefit practically every student on the campus. It would furnish a training place for the track team, basketball team, baseball team, wrestling and boxing, and night practice for the football team. In this building could be arranged seating capacity for 8,000 or more spectators to witness the basketball games, indoor track meets, wrestling, boxing, etc. This field house would furnish quite a lot of revenue while rowing is the source of none. Which route shall we pursue? We cannot have rowing and a field house at the same time as I view it.9 Based on responses to his inquiry, Yost reported to Professor Ralph Aigler, Chairman of the Board in Control, that actual costs of intercollegiate rowing programs ran anywhere from $10,000 to $43,000 per year.10 The request for such a program was voted down by the Board shortly thereafter." "We are considering building a field house... to be 336 feet long and 160 feet wide," Yost informed his predecessor, Phil Bartelme. "Something along the lines of the Northwestern Gymnasium... "12 A very thorough brief depicting the University's athletic facilities and the load placed on them was drawn up by Yost and entitled, "Field House-Ferry Field." It presented a solid case for the construction of a field house, and a copy of it was sent to President Burton. Yost defined the problem and its solution in a letter to the Regents. They were requested to make no demands on the student "athletic fee" or athletic funds for the next five years, except Yost's own salary. Since money used to finance the intramural program was drawn from this student "athletic fee," Yost was requesting that the Board obtain this revenue elsewhere. 9. Fielding H. Yost, "Report on Rowing," December 1921 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 10. Letter, Aigler to DuCharme, January 5, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 11. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, February 23, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 12. Ibid. 140 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The first steel girders of Yost Field House are lifted into place. Ferry Field stands can be seen in the background. The finished product! Field House size can be appreciated when compared with the three automobiles at the far left. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 141 Early estimates were that the building would cost $175,000.13 Later estimates set the cost at from $200-225,000. The Board in Control of Athletics had approximately $100,000 on hand. It was expected that they would pay $50,000 plus interest each year for five years.14 In view of past football receipts, this did represent somewhat of a gamble that the prosperity of the 1920 season would be repeated. President Burton's response was immediate and encouraging. He thought that Yost's report and the letter to the Regents were very good, but he wanted some clarification that the Field House would be available to all students. He advised: It has occurred to me to suggest that possibly it might be wise for you to include a short paragraph stating how this building would be controlled. I assume that it would be under your direction just as Ferry Field is and that also there would be the possibility for the work in Intramural Sports to be carried on there largely as there is cooperation now in Waterman Gymnasium. I think a sentence or two covering this phase of the situation might be clarifying and assuring. 1 At its April 3 meeting the Board in Control authorized construction of a field house to cost from $200-225,000. It appointed a committee consisting of Professors Aigler, Louis M. Gram and Fielding Yost to decide upon the architects for the work. The Regents agreed to make no demands on the "Athletic Fee," or athletic funds, except for Yost's salary, during the next five years.16 It would be difficult to envision anyone more in his "element" than Fielding Yost during the planning and construction of this Field House. He was regarded as the man to consult on structure and function,17 construction materials, labor costs, the shortage of masons,18 etc. If anyone seriously doubted his knowledge of finance and construction, they were soon dispelled. In January, 1923, he gave the McArthur Brick Company of McArthur, Ohio an estimate of the number of bricks that would be needed, the color desired and even requested permission to take a trip through their plant to note the quality of their product.'9 They welcomed his visit, and Yost accepted. His guidance was apparent throughout the completion of the building in the fall of 1923. The Michigan Daily for November 22, 1922, suggested editorially 13. Ibid. 14. Letter, Yost to George Lewis, February 1, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 15. Letter, Burton to Yost, March 15, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 16. Letter, Yost to Mr. John D. Hibbard, April 11, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 17. Letter, Murfin to Yost, July 13, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 18. Various letters sprinkled throughout his correspondence during the summer and fall of 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 19. Letter, Yost to McArthur Brick Co., January 31, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 142 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY that the new field house being erected upon Ferry Field should be named in honor of Coach Fielding H. Yost. The Board of Regents was at first opposed, with the substance of the opposition centering around the feeling against naming a building after someone still living. Fielding Yost assembled a very strong counter-argument and launched a vigorous but subtle campaign to have the Field House bear his name. His counter-argument began to apear in various newspaper articles and alumni club resolutions favoring the name, Yost Field House. In the January 13, 1923 issue of the Daily, L. J. Hershdorfer called the new field house a great stride toward "Athletics-for-All" undertaken largely through the influence of Coach Yost. As a tribute to Yost, he advised that, When the Board in Control of Athletics meets today at noon, it might well bring up for serious consideration the proposed naming of the new field house in honor of the man who for the last quarter of a century has contributed more than any other to the highest in Michigan athletics. A resolution adopted by the University of Michigan Club of Detroit was sent to the Board in Control. It contained Yost's counter-argument that, The naming of buildings and fields after college benefactors is fully justified by precedent, as the naming of Stagg Field in Chicago; Dudley Field of Vanderbilt University; Northrup Field at Minnesota, Tappan Hall, Barbour Gymnasium and Lane Hall at the University of Michigan, etc.20 Throughout March and April, 1923, both students and alumni responded favorably to the movement. In his letter to Tom Hammond, Yost summarized the progress and manifested his eagerness to receive this honor. He wrote U. S. Representative Robert Clancy2l thanking him for the recent boost, and assuring him that the Michigan Daily and its readers were duly impressed.22 Subtle urgings were made to Board in Control alumni member, Jim Duffy, to work for the support of uncommitted Regents.23 The University of Michigan Student Council sponsored a petition under the name of its President, Vernon Hillery, to which approximately 4,000 male students affixed their signatures. It credited Yost with having conceived the new Field House, arranged for its financing, and made it 20. Resolution, U of M Club of Detroit, January 25, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 21. This was the same Robert Clancy who worked so hard for Yost as the field secretary in 1920-21. 22. Letter,Yost to Robert Clancy, April 16, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 23. Letter, Yost to Jim Duffy, May 18, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 143 a reality through the drawing power of his teams and his own personality.24 Perhaps the Detroit Athletic Club News put it most accurately when it stated: Yost does not deserve all the credit for the magnificent new field house, the finest plant of its kind in the world. But he was the one that had the courage to go ahead, confident that Michigan spirit would find a way to finance it. The building will be a monument to his belief in the University and his business sagacity.2; Petitions came from at least 37 alumni clubs throughout the United States favoring the naming of the structure in honor of Fielding H. Yost. The Student Council submitted one. At least 85 personal letters were received by the Board in Control of Athletics favoring this action.26 Faculty opinion generally disapproved naming any structure for a current member of the University staff. If theirs had been the controlling voice Yost's campaign would not have succeeded.27 At their May 25 meeting, the Board of Regents voted to designate the new field house on Ferry Field "Yost Field House." For the second time in a two year period, alumni, students and friends of the University of Michigan had manifested their affection, esteem and loyalty for Fielding H. Yost. Their tribute was crowned by the dedication ceremony in Yost Field House on November 10, 1923. Appropriately, it was a football afternoon, and appropriately, Michigan won 26-6 over the U. S. Marines team on the adjacent Ferry Field gridiron. The Field House was packed to its capacity. Down the center 1,500 marines in close formation stood at attention through the short program. Professor Ralph Aigler expressed Michigan pride in its facilities for student athletics. He saw no need for apprehension over large crowds and huge gate receipts, "so long as the pecuniary profits from intercollegiate games are used wisely in the furtherance of the cause of education... " He praised Coach Yost as the man "whose wise business judgment and the material success of whose teams have largely been responsible for the realization of this dream." Regent Murfin, President Burton and Secretary of Navy, Edwin Denby, followed with vignettes of praise for Yost as a man whose ideals and character had, they believed, been a powerful force in developing young men.28 24. Located in May 1923 folder, Carton 3, UMAP. 25. Detroit Athletic Club News, Vol. VIII, No. 6, June 1923, p. 40. 26. "Petitions To Name Yost Field House," One volume, Carton 24, UMAP. 27. Letter, Aigler to Murfin, February 11, 1926, Box 4 Murfin Papers. 28. "Yost Field House Dedicated,' 'Alumnus, Vol. XXX, No. 342, November 15, 1923, pp. 166-169. 144 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Dedication of Yost Field House, November 10, 1923. Speakers platform is in center of picture, between arched doorways. Yost delivers brief address at Field House dedication. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 145 The total cost of the Yost Field House was $563,168.29 The plan had been to pay $50,000 plus interest each year for five years on what was expected to be a $250,000 building. Final costs far exceeded original estimates and could have provoked considerable concern had it not been for the happy fact of mushrooming football profits.30 Approximately $150,000 profit had been cleared from the 1922 football season while the building was being constructed. The Athletic Association had approximately $100,000 in its account when construction began and arrangements had been made for bank notes totaling $300,000 to pay the remaining costs. The notes were to be paid at the rate of $50,000 plus interest each year, but at no time did the debt exceed $240,000. Riding the crest of postwar prosperity, the football profits of the next two years were such that the entire Yost Field House debt was paid in a total of three years.31 This project had been the kind of exciting victory that could make restless men like Fielding Yost search anxiously for another cause. The search extended from the Los Angeles Coliseum to the Yale Bowl, and the cause was a new football stadium for Michigan. Although' the football seating at Ferry Field had been doubled in 1921, the ticket demand for the big games consistently exceeded the supply. It was Fielding Yost's unpleasant duty to handle the various complaints and quarrels over ticket distribution. In addition, a number of large universities, including Ohio State and Illinois, were building new stadia seating 70,000 to 80,000. Yost was determined that they should not long have facilities superior to Michigan. Upon receipt of a letter from a General Motors' employee saying that Michigan, as a State University, should provide seating for other than students and alumni, Yost wrote President Burton: "We are very dependent on the Legislature at Lansing and it is very desirous that we keep them 'pro-Michigan.' "32 The implication was that legislators might receive similar letters and regard Michigan as being too parochial in its outlook. Dr. Burton expressed his belief that the Legislature's attitude was very favorable. He had "little fear that the State Legislature will lose its interest in the University if we do not instantly provide a larger seating capacity." Confident that "they are a pretty reasonable group of men and understand our problems," Dr. Burton conceded, "We must, 29. Pack, Encyc., p. 1581. 30. There are many factors to which the great discrepancy between early estimates and final costs may be attributed-post-war rise in cost of labor, materials, poorly prepared early estimates, additional embellishments agreed to by the Board or other reasons. It may be that this represents a reflection of poor business judgment by Yost, but his files did not yield the answer. 31. Letter, Yost to George Lewis, February 1, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 32. Letter, Yost to Burton, January 16, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. r: Over 40,000 jam recently expanded Ferry Field in 1922 MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 147 of course, do all we can for those who are interested in the University and who want to witness its football games."33 Yost could have made a strong case for a new stadium based upon the greatly increased demand for tickets, but how palatable would a commercial argument be to the University Senate? Football seating had been increased from approximately 21,000 to 42,000 in 1921. How would the Faculty receive the idea of building a new 80,000 seat stadium in 1924? Yost chose to sail a more academic tack. He would make the need for a new stadium part of a total thrust for wider student participation in sports. To oppose larger football seating would be to oppose student health and "Athletics-for-All." That spring, he delivered a comprehensive report entitled, "A Brief Report and Some Suggestions by Fielding H. Yost, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics."34 He tried to show that his interests and understandings extended beyond the game of football, and that it was in the best interests of the University to set its physical education goals and plan for the facilities to meet them. The need for a new stadium was, to be sure, nestled in the list of "Immediate and Pressing Needs," but appeared as simply one part of the great total picture. It is important to note what Yost did say in this writing, because when another report, The Day Committee's Report was submitted a year and a half later, he suggested that it was virtually a carbon copy of his remarks to the Board in Control, May 31. For this reason, his report is given some detailed attention here. The objectives of education had come to include intellectual and physical education, Yost observed. Not only must the University cultivate intelligence, but "it must build characters that will be trustworthy and dependable and bodies that will be strong and enduring."35 A speech delivered by President Coolidge at the National Conference on Outdoor Recreation, one week earlier, supported this view, and Yost quoted it at length. Feeling very strongly that physical exercise should be required of all students during their four years in the University, Yost called attention to the fact that "twenty-nine states have already adopted legislation making four years of physical education a required part of all elementary and secondary curricula." "To secure universal participation in the right kind and amount of physical exercise," Yost stressed the necessity of four things: 33. Letter, Burton to Yost, January 19, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. 34. "A Brief Report and Some Suggestions by Fielding H. Yost, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics," Presented at Board Meeting, May 31, 1924. May folder, Carton 3, UMAP. This address was reported briefly in The Michigan Daily, July 2, 1924. 35. Ibid. The Ohio State Stadium, one of two compelling reasons why Yost wanted to build Michigan Stadium. The other was Illinois' new stadium. Built in the early 1920s they seated over 70,000. PF: - University of Illinois Stadium. The impact of automobiles on the "stadium building era" is apparent in the foreground. Suddenly the stadium was within reach of the entire family. 150 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY 1. A satisfactory program of required physical exercise for all. 2. The proper allotment of time for exercise by each student. 3. Adequate grounds, buildings, and other facilities for the proper administration of the program. 4. A competent and adequate staff of instructors and leaders. Reviewing student participation in the required physical education program, intramural and intercollegiate athletics, he concluded that, "the program at Michigan reaches in some way approximately all the students but the difficulty lies in the fact that with most of the students, participation in physical exercise is not regular." To do a really effective job of preparing all students physically to lead useful lives, it would be necessary to secure "more ground and buildings, a more complete program and a larger staff for physical education and athletics." He urged that in the belief athletics are integral to education and because the earnings of the intercollegiate contests were insufficient to meet growing needs, other funds should be appropriated to assist in financing the entire program of physical education and athletics. The following eight items were listed as "Immediate and Pressing Needs:" 1. A large and up-to-date gymnasium that would include in its equipment at least three swimming tanks. 2. Improvement of our undeveloped 40 acre tract for intramural athletics. 3. About 50 more tennis courts near the campus in addition to those on Ferry Field. 4. Two new concrete tennis courts on Ferry Field for Varsity use. (To be built by the Athletic Association at approximate cost of $2,000.) 5. Increased seating capacity of football stands. 6. Repairs to South Stand, to be paid by Athletic Association at approximate cost of $8,000. 7. Repairs to drainage system. To be paid by Athletic Association, approximate cost $2.000. 8. University Golf Course. Items 2, 4, 6 and 7 are already started or to be begun soon.3'; It can be seen from this list that Fielding Yost was not restricting himself to those responsibilities (intercollegiate athletics) assigned him in 1921. This report moved boldly into areas under Dr. Sundwall's Department. To attribute this action solely to Yost's aggressive personality or professional jealousy, although these certainly must have been factors, does not account for all the facts. Regent James 0. Murfin certainly encouraged this kind of response. Yost had wanted charge of intramural sports in 1921, and when the President refused, he had been advised by Regent Murfin to, "accept the position as offered, and that 36. Ibid. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 151 later the other would be worked out entirely to my (Yost's) satisfaction if things do not work out for the best interests of Michigan." The Regent would appear to have been very sincere. He commented to Yost that same December: When the question of paying the various intramural assistants arose immediately there sprang up some opposition on the Board of Regents to spending the tax-payers' money for these items. Two things occurred to me-one-we would have no friction on the subject if the moneys were taken from the so-called 'athletic tax,' and two-if we got the department once established and going and had it paid for out of this fund rather than from our general fund, it would in the near future give me an added argument to take this department from where it now is and put it under your control where it belongs.37 Some of the problems were perhaps a result of the close ties between intramural and intercollegiate athletics. President Burton interpreted the Yost Field House as falling logically under the control of the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics, although its justification included multiple University usage, including intramurals. Several of the formerly intramural sports were seeking varsity status. The hiring of George Little as Assistant Director of Intercollegiate Athletics and giving him the responsibility for "minor" intercollegiate sports, brought the Board in Control closer to the intramural work. Yost had called attention, in his "Report on Rowing," to the need for intercollegiate hockey, swimming, wrestling and boxing teams. In January, 1923, George Little wrote that he and Coach Yost, "have decided to make ice hockey, golf and swimming University minor sports and to start wrestling next year."38 At about this same time Regent Murfin advised Yost that he had occasion the night before the Board meeting "to talk over with Dr. Burton the idea of transferring to you the intramural work. He agrees with me this should be done but he thinks it will come about better if you diplomatically broach the subject first to Dr. Sundwall and then the two of you take it up with Dr. Burton." The Regent concluded, "If you know of any better way to bring this about I am yours to command."39 It is not evident whether Yost discussed this matter with Dr. Sundwall, but it is unlikely they would have agreed. "One of my next problems to tackle is the question of Intramural Sports," Sundwall wrote Professor L. J. Cooke at the University of Minnesota late in 1921. "Heretofore, it has been intimately tied up 37. Letter, Murfin to Yost, December 16, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 38. Letter, George Little to W. S. von Bernuth, January 3, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 39. Letter, Murfin to Yost, January 27, 1923. Carton 3, UMAP. 152 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY with Intercollegiate Athletics, and consequently is dominated to a great extent by the aims and objectives of the latter." "I have always felt that Intramural Sports should not in any way be separated from Physical Education."40 Professor Ralph Aigler also encouraged Yost to think in broader terms. The Board in Control spent several thousand dollars in grading, seeding and generally fixing up a triangular piece of land just south of Ferry Field. Proposed construction of a road through the area threatened to eliminate this small field. In reply to President Burton's inquiry into the importance of this parcel of land, Professor Aigler answered: I realize that the Board in Control of Athletics is now charged only with the management of Intercollegiate athletics. The fact that the intramural work is no longer in our charge, however, has not lessened our interest therein, and we have proceeded as before in our endeavor to provide adequate facilities for a general all-round program of physical education. Obviously work of this character can be handled best in connection with the facilities already on Ferry Field and those used in connection with intercollegiate athletics. The tract of land in question frankly would not be of much use to us for intercollegiate contests. Our aim in developing this property, in spending the money which has been spent during the past year, has been entirely for the furtherance of the interamural program.41 Having addressed himself to the health, physical education, recreation and athletic needs of University of Michigan students, a new football stadium was soon portrayed by Yost as the key to meeting these needs. As of October, 1924, the Board of Regents was not ready to sanction a new or an enlarged stadium regardless of whether Yost presented his case in a comprehensive report or not. A member of the University of Oklahoma's stadium-union building committee received this reply concerning Michigan's plans for a stadium from Frank E. Robbins, Assistant to the President. Mr. Robbins sent a copy of the letter to Fielding Yost. It said: There has been and still is much pressure brought to bear upon the Athletic Association to construct a large stadium. Perhaps it is worth while stating that during the past year a set of resolutions was passed by the Regents of the University which stated that in the judgment of the Regents the most satisfactory solution of our problem would be the completion of the concrete stand, as heretofore planned, one unit of which is already in existence. The grounds upon which this action was taken were the feeling that amateur 40. Letters, Sundwall to Cooke, October 26 and December 19, 1921, Sundwall Papers, folder labeled "Division of Hygiene and Public Health 1921-22." 41. Letter, Aigler to Burton, September 19, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 153 collegiate contests should not be transformed into a public spectacle, that intercollegiate athletics should primarily be conducted for the students and alumni of the competing institutions, their friends, and families, and that the construction of a great stadium which would permit of huge crowds at the important games would be for this very reason impracticable in a small city like Ann Arbor. This may be taken as the official view as at present stated by the Board of Regents.42 A word here in explanation of the above mentioned "completion of the concrete stand, as heretofore planned," should be helpful. In 1914, concrete stands were constructed on the south side of Ferry Field, seating 13,600, as the first stage of a projected U-shaped stadium.43 Funds to complete the project were not available, so temporary bleachers had been constructed as necessary. The massive post-war interest in college football was felt at Michigan also. Ferry Field facilities were taxed to the limit during the 1920 season, and a handsome season's profit had been realized. The Board in Control then examined the feasibility of completing the U-shaped stadium. James H. Cissel, professor of structural engineering in the College of Engineering was assigned to prepare a report on this question. Louis M. Gram, professor of civil engineering and a member of the Board in Control, discussed the stadium situation with Fielding Yost. "If we build north stands like the south, we will have only 42,000 seats. This will be inadequate 10 years from now." He suggested recognizing the error of building at Ferry Field and recommended constructing temporary wooden stands to meet the current emergency. Then, at a later time, on a new site, build a stadium on the order of Yale Bowl or the University of Washington Stadium.44 Yost was not sure this was a good idea. He discussed the problems encountered at Princeton, Harvard, Yale and Washington stadiums with crowds as large as 50,000 or more and the traffic jams that ensue. "Perhaps we should just have concrete stands on both sides and bleachers on the West end. Besides," he reasoned, "where would we get the money to build a new stadium?"45 Professor Cissel's report, dated January 22, 1921, graphically projected increased student enrollment, alumni growth, and the changes in transportation being effected by the automobile. He, too, recommended a new stadium on a new site. The Board in Control voted to construct the temporary wooden bleachers on the north side, bringing the seating 42. Letter, Frank E. Robbins to John Dierdorff, October 9, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. 43. Pack, Encyc., p. 1581. 44. Letter, L. M. Gram to Yost, January 13, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 45. Letter, Yost to L. M. Gram, January 18, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 154 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY capacity to 46,000,46 and postponing the decision to build on a new site to a later date. The position of the Board of Regents in October, 1924, was certainly no deterrent to Fielding Yost's plans for a new stadium. He made a searching inquiry into financing, design, and construction of several of the recently completed stadia in the country.47 The property owned by the Ann Arbor Golf Club appeared to present the best site, and Yost wrote notifying their membership of this. He assured them they would be given a fair price for their land.48 The Board in Control approved his resolution to build a new stadium on a new site at their March 28, 1925 meeting.49 Yost next instructed Tom Hammond,50 a recently appointed alumni member of the Board in Control, to send copies of the resolution to the Daily, Professor Aigler, all the Regents, the President's office, and W. B. Shaw, the editor of the Alumnus. A sportswriter for the Detroit News, H. G. Salsinger, appeared to differ with Yost on the stadium question. Few sportswriters would challenge Yost, and this was a rare occasion for Salsinger. Opinions of some alumni and others opposed to Michigan's stadium plans were given voice in his sports column. Yost responded instantly with a lengthy barrage of facts accounting for the work done in the University's intramural and intercollegiate athletics programs to benefit all students. He brought in the arguments of other universities and the size of their stadiums. The general effect of his rebuttal was to leave no doubt that he would brook no opposition by the newspapers to his stadium proposal, and that he could carry his end of the argument.51 In a letter sent to each of the Regents, Yost pointed out a widespread interest among Michigan citizens for a favorable response to stadium expansion and its relationship to the question of "Athletics-for-All": During the last two years I have met with over 200 different groups of citizens of the State of Michigan and am continuously asked, 'How can I get a ticket to football games?'... I feel certain that it is our duty in-so-far as possible,... to make a reasonable effort at least, to provide them with an opportunity to visit our University and be present at our football contests. It is only by an enlarged 46. Pack, Encyc., p. 1581. 47. Evidence of this may be found in his correspondence from October 1924 to March 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 48. Letter, Yost to Ann Arbor Golf Club, March 17, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 49. Letter, Yost to Mr. Bernard Green, March 30, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 50. Mr. Hammond, one of Yost's "point-a-minute" football players, received the appointment as alumni member of the Board in Control largely on the strong recommendation of Fielding Yost. 51. Letters, Yost to H. G. Salsinger, May 21 and 25, 1925; Salsinger's reply, May 22, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 155 plant and facilities that a larger program of 'Athletics for All' can be put into effect.52 Yost informed Regent Murfin that the University Senate Council approved the idea that a new stadium was needed and that it should not be an enlargement of the present one. "There was just one man, Professor Phillips, in the Senate Council, opposed to this idea. So far as I know, practically all of the faculty and students are in favor of this idea."53 Ensuing events did not support this conclusion. Professor Ralph Aigler delivered his annual report to the Senate Council on the Board in Control's activities, May 11, 1925. He sought approval of the idea of a new stadium. Certain members of the Council expressed the opinion that intelligent handling of the problem required information regarding all phases of the athletic situation. At the close of the discussion, the President was requested by 'the Council to appoint a Senate Committee to study the entire athletic situation. Acting President, Alfred H. Lloyd,54 announced the appointment of such a committee under the date of May 15.5' Its members were, Chairman Dean Edmund E. Day of the Business School, Dean of Students Joseph Bursley, Professors Ralph W. Aigler, Alfred Lovell, and A. E. Boak. Their work came to be called the Day Report. Appointment of the Day Committee was apparently viewed with disdain by Fielding Yost. "As I understand it," he wrote Regent Murfin, "the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics was placed under the Board in Control of Athletics by the Regents for the purpose of administering, supervising and conducting a reasonable program of intercollegiate athletics. The inference now prevalent is that a Committee of Five has been appointed to 'investigate' and determine what this Department should or should not do." He cautioned, "The average boy of athletic instinct will not look kindly toward Michigan if he thinks there is opposition to athletics. He will go where a program of athletic expansion is moving rapidly forward and with fine spirit of cooperation of the Regents and Faculties of the institution."56 With the appointment of Dean Day's Committee, Yost sent the Dean a copy of his May 31, 1924 report to the Board in Control of Athletics.57 Enclosed also was a speech he had delivered to the Illinois School52. Letter, Yost to Regent Victor Gore, April 7, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP; same letter to other Regents. 53. Letter, Yost to Murfin, April 5, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 54. President Burton was stricken with a fatal heart attack, February 18, 1925. 55. "A Report on University Athletics," Supplement to the Michigan Alumnus, January 30, 1926. 56. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 26, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 57. See: "A Brief Report and Some Suggestions by Fielding H. Yost, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics," Presented at Board meeting, May 31, 1924, May folder, Carton 3, UMAP. 156 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY master's Club in Bloomington.58 "I have read both with much interest," acknowledged Dr. Day. "I am sure your views will be of material assistance to our committee, and that we shall desire to call upon you further for information and counsel.59 While the Day Committee members were doing their research, Yost was fast at work developing support for the stadium from all sectors. Opponents must be answered; the Regents had to be convinced of its necessity; the Alumni must be informed with the right kind of arguments; and the support of the public press had to be won. Articles criticizing the new stadium proposal were published by University Professors Robert C. Angell and C. H. Van Tyne. Yost sent Angell's article to Arthur Vandenberg, editor of the Grand Rapids Herald.60 "I have read your letters of the 14th and every word of the exhibits enclosed. I agree with you 100% (sic) in your position," Vandenberg assured Yost. "Count on me for whatever support and assistance I can give you. We will chat about the matter-face to face-commencement week."61 The suggestion came from Western Conference ("Big Ten") Commissioner, John L. Griffith, that Yost meet Professor Van Tyne's complaint that intercollegiate programs are only conducted for a few highly trained athletes and the spectators, by suggesting that the faculty make physical education compulsory for the undergraduate throughout their four years. "As it is you and the other directors have been doing everything that you can to get the entire student body interested in physical education activities. They won't avail themselves of it."62 Yost confidently replied to Griffith that the opposition to a large stadium could delay, but had no chance of preventing expansion, because although the Senate Council held veto power over the Board in Control, the Board of Regents held veto power over the Senate Council.63 To make such a statement, Yost must have felt that his support among the Regents was substantial. He must have been supremely confident of his ability to rally the alumni and to win support in the public press. When the Daily quoted Regent Murfin as being concerned that stadium costs might interfere with donations for the Michigan League, paying the debt on the Union, or in securing a new gymnasium, Yost flew at him with abandon. Reviewing the stadium question to date, Yost 58. See: F. H. Yost, "Educational Aims In Competitive Athletics," May 1938 folder, Carton 10, UMAP. 59. Letter, Dean Edmund Day to Yost, June 6, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 60. Letter, Yost to Vandenberg, May 15, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. It may be of interest to note here that Mr. Vandenberg later became a United States Senator from Michigan and remained a close friend of the Yost's. 61. Letter, Vandenberg to Yost, May 16, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 62. Letter, Griffith to Yost, May 21, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 63. Letter, Yost to Griffith, May 22, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 157 declared, "Stripped of all its camouflage the issue is SIZE of the stadium and whether the University of Michigan owes any duty or obligation to the alumni, friends of visiting teams and citizens of the State of Michigan when considering seating capacity for football contests." Continuing, he quoted reports issued by the Regents in which they had stated, "The University of Michigan belongs to the people of the State." After enumerating the major universities that had already built stadiums, Yost reminded the Regent, You must know I am interested in a new gym, the League and the Union. In my report to the Board in Control of Athletics last June, I called attention to the need for a new up-to-date gymnasium with three swimming pools; also 50 additional tennis courts on and about the campus; an 18 hole golf course, and development of the entire 40 acres now owned by the University (South Ferry Field) for intramurals... I honestly believe, if the Board in Control is permitted to go ahead with the program as outlined, that inside of five years we will have a stadium, 120 additional acres of land, an eighteen hole golf course, forty acres of land developed for the intramural program and a new building along the north side of the present football field where the wooden stands now are located which would provide additional basketball courts, squash courts and handball courts, and that we will have a new gymnasium either thru state appropriations or from private donation or gift. Concluding his lengthy rebuttal, Yost offered the reminder that it was through football games that Henry Ford came to the University on four or five different occasions, and that the demand for tickets came from state legistative officials including the Governor.64 Regent Murfin's reply was immediate, brief and resigned. "You made a mistake," he advised Yost, "when you went in for football instead of for law. As an advocate either orally or in writting you have no equal." He had taken the liberty of sending Yost's letter to Regent Stone.65 Having won Murfin to his view was perhaps the most critical event in Yost's quest for the regental support so essential to the stadium proposal. Regent Dr. Walter Sawyer of Hillsdale was an admirer of Yost. Very often, Yost would have copies of his speeches or published articles sent to, among others, members of the Board of Regents. Earlier in the year Regent Sawyer had responded saying, "I have read with interest and pleasure a copy of your address. As I have said before, you are a great missionary and a great influence, and your power for good is very great."06 64. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 18, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 65. Letter, Murfin to Yost, May 20, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 66. Letter, Sawyer to Yost, January 8, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 158 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY That fall, Regent Sawyer thanked Yost for tactfully handling "the matter of the W. W. Cook request for tickets to the Naval Academy game." He took this occasion to add, "I hope your plan for a larger stadium may go through. If some of the opposition could be in your shoes for a while they would realize what you have to contend with. Intercollegiate athletics and contests are here and must be provided for even though there may be factors that we would like to eliminate. We can't today go counter to so general a sentiment for them."67 The ploy utilized to steer alumni and public opinion involved using the Alumnus, the mails, an alumni meeting and the sports pages of several dailies. Michigan's first graduate manager of athletics, Charles Baird,68 was urged by Yost to write an article for the Alumnus favoring the stadium proposal. Accompanying this request was a favorable editorial from the Ann Arbor Times, letters published by Robert C. Angell and C. H. Van Tyne in the Daily opposing the stadium, and some other information to be used in constructing the requested article.6' Yost arranged with the Alumnus to have an article of approximately 2,500 words written by Baird to be published in the issue of the week of June 1.70 Baird obliged one week later with the requested writing, saving 200 to 300 words for Yost to finish the article as he so chose. He explained that about one-half of the article was quoted from the materials Yost had sent.71 Yost added about one page *2 to the article and sent the completed copy to Baird, who noted its appearance in the Alumnus.73 A form letter was prepared for mailing some thoughts from Fielding Yost to "My dear Alumnus." It contained a rather full explanation of the proposed plans for a new stadium and the program of athletic expansion approved by the Board in Control of Athletics, and "now awaiting approval of the Board of Regents." An attachment to this letter outlined the objectives, program, organization and expansion planned in the administration of the intercollegiate and intramural athletics programs. With this information in full view of the alumnus, Yost then drew attention to what he regarded as the key issue: The issue at the base of all discussion is the stadium and whom we should permit to attend our games? Does the University owe any obligation or duty to the alumni and citizens and taxpayers of the State who own and maintain the University? Should these people who might want to attend the games be taken into consideration in 67. Letter, Sawyer to Yost, October 6, 1925, Carton 4, UMAP. 68. Mr. Baird later donated the bells in the Burton Tower carillon. 69. Letter, Yost to Baird, May 18, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 70. Letter, Yost to Baird, May 20, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 71. Letter, Baird to Yost, May 27, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 72. Letter, Yost to Baird, May 30, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 73. Letter, Baird to Yost, October 6, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 159 making plans for a stadium? The stadium hinges upon the answer to the above questions. I trust you will give this matter careful consideration. And when you have full knowledge of what we are trying to do here at the University, your reactions would be appreciated.74 A University of Michigan Convention was to be held in Detroit, June 10, 11 and 12, and Yost had been asked to speak to the assembled alumni. He welcomed the opportunity and arranged to have Bernard Green, an architect with whom he had been doing preliminary planning, show sketches of the proposed stadium and give an oral explanation.75 Having spoken to a number of newspaper editors meeting in Grand Rapids, Yost received this reply from Michael Gorman, managing editor of The Saginaw News Courier: "Your talk at our editors meeting... gained just about unanimous support for your stadium project. I cannot see that the Regents can do else than give approval in the face of the conclusive figures you present."76 The fact that Michigan football teams had been Conference champions in 1922, 1923, and 1925 undoubtedly aided Yost's argument with the students, sportswriters, general public and regents. The Day Report was presented in January, 1926 and received formal approval of the Regents on April 22. It recommended a new stadium on a new site. Just as Yost had predicted, the decision was delayed, but not denied. This report has been called one of the country's finest expressions of the purposes and perspective of intercollegiate athletics. Not only did it provide a stadium, it became the basis for a comprehensive building program at the University of Michigan and a reorganization of its system of control of intercollegiate athletics and physical education. One important conclusion drawn was that neither intramurals nor required physical education programs were fully appreciated by the students or given full enough recognition by the University. While the men had a one year and the women a two year physical education requirement, students received no hourly credit for this work. The staff and facilities for the men's intramural and required programs were inadequate, while those for the women were even more serious. The need for improvements at Palmer Field (outdoor area for women's activities) seemed so imperative to the Committee that a special study was undertaken by Professor Lovell and comprehensive plans were prepared for regrading the fields and adding materially to the equipment.77 74. Form letter, Yost to "My dear Alumnus," May 19, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 75. Letter, Yost to Bernard Green, May 23, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 76. Letter, Michael Gorman to Yost, July 6, 1925, Carton 4, UMAP. 77. "A Report On University Athletics,"' Supplement to the Michigan Alumnus, January 30, 1926, pp. 4-8. This is the work referred to as "The Day Report." 160 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY It was recommended that "two years should be required of men as soon as necessary staff and facilities can be provided; the desirability of increasing the requirement for both men and women to three or even four years should be carefully considered... Formal credits for work in physical education-perhaps one hour each semester-might well be added to the requirements for the bachelor's degree." A new, larger and better equipped gymnasium was deemed necessary. Facilities for intramural sports were termed inadequate and recommendations were made for "additional ball and hockey fields, swimming pools, and tennis courts; a golf course; a skating rink with equipment for artificial ice; and men's minor-sports building... and a field house for the women." The intercollegiate athletics programs were described as wellequipped, having numerous staff and excellent facilities since the completion of the Field House. The only serious problem was that of the stadium, for which impending costs of replacing wooden bleachers and the limitations of both the seating and the Ferry Field site called for a new stadium on a new site. The Day Report thus agreed that football seating for 50,000 was inadequate. While some proposals called for 100,000-150,000 seats in a double decked stadium, the Day Report settled on a figure of 70,000. The Committee did not intend for their approval to signal the construction of a new stadium with the vague expectation that other physical education facilities would follow. The Report stated:... the Committee definitely recommends that if and when a new stadium is constructed there be built concurrently a minor-sports building for the accommodation of indoor intramural athletics among the general student-body. Furthermore, the Committee, as has been stated, has been much impressed with the imperative need for improvements in the facilities for women, and urges early action to improve conditions at Palmer Field. A second condition was imposed. A reorganization of athletic control was to be undertaken with a view to placing the formation of athletic policy under the authority of those charged with the determination of more general educational policy. "There must be no state within the state; no athletic system independent of the educational system." It was recommended that all parts of the athletic program be brought under unified control with the President and faculties given the prevailing voice. Specifically, it was recommended that the Board in Control of Athletics be increased by five members, one of whom would be the Director of the University Division of Hygiene, Public Health and Physical Education. The remaining four would be representatives of the University Senate appointed by the President of the University. This MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 161 would give the Board in Control of Athletics a membership totaling 16, two of whom would be the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics and the Director of the Division of Hygiene, Public Health and Physical Education serving ex officio; eight would represent the University Senate; three would represent the alumni and three would be appointed from the student-body. All eight of the representatives of the University Senate would be appointed by the President with the consent of the Regents. This reconstituted Board would then be charged with responsibility for all parts of the general athletic program at the University-required physical education and intramural sports as well as intercollegiate athletics.78 At the time the Day Report was completed, Yost was in Florida. Assistant Athletic Director, "Tad" Wieman, wrote him offering the opinion that the Report was very favorable: Of course, the fact that President Little is in the chair, the stand he has taken on athletics, materially flavored the tone of the report. Also, the openly admitted favor with which the Board of Regents looks upon athletics.79 In his inaugural address, President-elect Clarence C. Little devoted fully 20 per cent of his speech80 to making it unmistakably clear that he regarded intercollegiate athletic competition as a wholesome and vital force in University life and that some professors were prone to be myopic in their outlook towards athletics. His forceful stand may have been one reason why he was invited to sit as a member of the Board in Control of Athletics, an invitation he accepted. Professor Ralph Aigler, who had been a member of the Day Committee assured Regent Murfin that, "This is a chance that must not be lost to make a real forward step in re-organizing our physical education program. My 13-14 years of experience in dealing with these problems has convinced me as to the desirability, if not actual necessity, that all of these physical activities (gymnasium, intramural, and intercollegiate athletics) should be headed up in one place, person or group." He continued: If we have all physical education under our control, we must have faculty support. We must have a numerical preponderance of men from the academic side on the Athletic Board. As the Board is presently arranged there is absolutely no chance of faculty support and thus we will fail. On matters of business the judgment of DuCharme, Hammond, Yost and Duffy would be preferable to that of 78. Ibid. 79. Letter, Elton "Tad" Wieman to Yost, January 19, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 80. The subject of athletics covers two of the nine pages bearing the entire address in the Alumnus for November 7, 1925. 162 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY any like number of faculty men, but not so with reference to educational questions. Now there are business problems to be faced in an athletic program and the advice men of business of course should be sought, but the big issues are educational.sl The three gentlemen referred to by Professor Aigler, namely Charles DuCharme, Tom Hammond and Jim Duffy, were the three alumni members of the Board in Control. Copies of this letter went to Yost and Regent Beal. Yost's did not contain this confidential P.S. frankly stating faculty opinion of him. As for myself I should be quite content with that, (Yost's plan for having six faculty to five non-faculty), for I have so much confidence in the Coach's soundness, but you could not make the people on the campus generally believe that he would fairly represent the educational side. Reacting to the above letter, Yost pointed out to Duffy: By reading this letter carefully you will notice that there is just one thing troubling Ralph, and that is what has always bothered him, and that is faculty control... Under his suggestion, as usual, he does not care to have any member of the faculty of the Department of physical education classed as a 'faculty' member. This view is entirely wrong. I am either a member of the faculty or I am not... My idea on the reorganization of the Board in Control is that there be six faculty members (one of which would be me), three alumni members, and two student members.s2 This would have been an ideal set-up for Yost. Having consistently controlled the student and alumni votes he could, with his vote, exercise full control of physical education and athletics. The chances of winning faculty approval of this were absolutely zero. Through Regent Murfin, Yost pushed hard for approval, but the idea never received serious consideration. There were some things even Murfin could not do for him. Sundwall had advocated unified control of health, physical education and athletics from the inception of Michigan's program. He certainly would have agreed with Aigler, Yost and Murfin on this score. Surprisingly, he also agreed with Yost on the make-up of the Board, stating that "Large committees are not conducive to efficient work."83 Dean Whitney sent Murfin a rather lengthy statement of his views on Yost and the organizational chart for physical education. "I am sending you this graph," he explained, "in order that we may have some 81. Letter, Aigler to Murfin, February 8, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 82. Letter, Yost to Duffy, February 9, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 83. Dr. John Sundwall, "Remarks and Recommendations Relative To Day Report," located in February 1926 folder, Carton 4, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 163 working basis for ironing out the little misunderstanding that seems to exist on the part of our friend Yost." In this physical education graph you will notice that Brother Yost is placed at the head of the practical part of physical training and Dr. Sundwall is placed at the head of the scientific side of physical education, and that the two focus in the Dean of the School of Education, the President, and... the Board of Regents. I am sending this to you in order that you may see the basis on which I am trying to iron out this misunderstanding with Mr. Yost. The chief difficulty is that Mr. Yost insists that he is 'director' of the four year course-both men and women-and that this claim is a source of irritation on the scientific end of the work... Personally Mr. Yost and I can get along without the slightest misunderstanding, but others resent his claim to the title of the directorship. This was brought into the foreground last fall when the program for the big games contained an advertisement of the four year course signed by F. H. Yost, 'Director.' The feeling even was so high that one of the Deans raised the question in the weekly conference of Deans. President Little skillfully shut off debate by saying that was a matter which came within the jurisdiction of the Dean of the School of Education. I have discussed this matter with Mr. Yost a number of times, and I am inclined to think we can come to an understanding on the basis of the graph sent you and thus eliminate all discussion and irritation here on the campus.... I believe we shall come to some satisfactory conclusion, though, of course, you know Mr. Yost's old statement, namely, 'I don't care for honors, what I want is power." Mr. Yost is a great old scout and I am exceedingly fond of him, but I do believe it will be best for all concerned if we could work this matter out on the lines indicated... Murfin replied that he had had at least twenty talks with Yost concerning his connection with the School of Education. "I admire him as much as you do and I think I know his peculiarities about as well as you do. He preaches cooperation and coordination but when it comes to practicing this he is away off the track... As you very aptly point out, he wants to be boss without conferring or consulting with other faculty people, with you or anyone. I think," Murfin concluded, "before we die we may ultimately teach the 'Old Man' the theory of the University organization." Bringing Jim Duffy up to date, Murfin reported that President Little was anxious to adopt the precise number of Board members outlined in the Day Report. While this was out of harmony with his own views 164 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Murfin admitted, "I do not care to lock horns with our new President quite so early in the game." In a more startling revelation the President informed Murfiin that a canvass of the University Senate showed the majority of them believed football should be abolished. "I knew that used to be the case," Murfin told Duffy, "but I supposed time had put some red blood into the anatomies of some of the ultra-erudite." The Michigan campus was no exception. President Little knew of three presidents of Conference universities who wanted football abolished. Two of them would settle for cutting the number of games down to three, and one proposed that no one should be allowd on the football team until he was a senior. Murfin wasn't sure whether all this planning by the Conference presidents was due to the building of great stadia, the publicity and prosperity that attended "Red" Grange's professional football debut, or "maybe the marvelous publicity given to our 'Shrinking Violet' in charge of intercollegiate athletics in Ann Arbor." In the interest of "Athletics-for-All" Murfiin felt that some modification of the present structure and duties of the Board in Control was dictated by the psychology of the day.84 Instead of creating a Board of 16 members, the Regents set the total at 14 and provided that nine of these should be members of the University Senate, three alumni and two students. The previous Board had 11 members. Dr. Sundwall, Professor Robert C. Angell and President Little filled the three new openings, the President in an ex-officio capacity. It will be recalled that Professor Angell had been one of the outspoken critics of Yost's stadium construction plan, and Yost complained to Regent Murfin, "I cannot understand why it is necessary to punish me by adding to the membership of the Board, and especially one Bob Angell whose whole attitude seems to be to oppose anything as it is or as it should be."85 Regent Murfin answered that, "after Dr. Little conferred with me on the subject we both felt to put him on the inside where he could learn what he was talking about would prove sufficiently educational to ultimately make him a booster instead of a knocker."86 The powers of the Board in Control were technically enlarged April 22, 1926, when the Day Committee's Report was accepted, but official delegation by the Regents came January 6, 1927. The Board in Control of Athletics, among other powers already vested, was specifically given the following authority and responsibility: 84. Letters, Whitney to Murfin, February 19, 1926; Murfin to Whitney, February 22, 1926; and Murfin to Duffy, February 25, 1926, Box 4, Murfin Papers. 85. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 6, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 86. Letter, Murfin to Yost, May 7, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 165 a. The Board in Control of Athletics is responsible for the administration of intercollegiate athletics, intramural sports, and recreational activities, and the required work in physical education for men and women. b. The immediate concern of the Board in Control of Athletics is the development of a comprehensive program of physical training, -including staff, grounds, and equipment, whereby all students in the University and members of the Faculty will be given ample opportunity for daily exercise and physical development. c. The Board in Control of Athletics should carefully consider with a view to gradually putting into effect the recommendations of the Day Committee relative to a two, three, and four-year program of required physical education.7 The new Board took on the appearance of unity both in structure and authority. The presence of President Little, Professors Angell and Sundwall was expected to balance academic and athletic interests. Unfortunately, Sundwall stayed with the Board only three years (1926 -1929) and President Ruthven resigned his seat soon after replacing Little as head of the University in 1929. This left chairman Aigler, a law professor, to serve as liaison between the Faculty and the Physical Education and Athletic Department. No single person was made director of the entire Department until Yost's retirement in 1941, but, as could be expected, he emerged as the power figure of the new Board. In 1931, Yost described the Department's operation by saying that Dr. George May was the head of the gymnasium for men, Dr. Elmer Mitchell was in charge of the intramural program for men, and, Dr. Margaret Bell was head of the gymnasium and intramural program for women. "I have charge of the intercollegiate athletic program and as a representative of the Board, keep in contact with May, Mitchell and Bell in the administration of their programs."88 Perhaps in their determined effort not to designate Yost as Department Chairman, the faculty was showing resentment for the way in which he had usurped more authority than originally granted in 1921. There probably was continued ill-feeling because of the pressures he applied in seeking a broader appointment than Director of Athletics that same year. Some undoubtedly interpreted his work in planning the physical education curriculum as being arrogant and uncooperative, characteristics hardly to be desired in department chairmen. In spite of his numerous speeches and articles, given wide publicity and expressing sound principles for the conduct of athletics, examples of Yost's practicing what he advocated had not always been demonstrated very clearly. 87. Regents Proceedings, 1926-29, January 6, 1927 meeting, p. 126. 88. Letter, Yost to J. M. Cates, January 27, 1931, Carton 7, UMAP. 166 FIELDING YOSTS LEGACY Of course, many of those who favored restricting Yost's role may have simply been jealous of his wide publicity, popularity and excellent salary. Before attempting to summarize Yost's influence on the Day Report it should be helpful to understand his attitude toward this research. It will be recalled that he sent Dean Day a copy of his May 31 report and a Bloomington, Illinois speech he had delivered. The Dean diplomatically included the essence of Yost's ideas in the final report. Yost then both publicly and privately sought to portray the report as being virtually identical to his own presentation to the Board in Control one year previously. He is quoted in the Daily of April 4, 1926 as saying: The action of the Board of Regents in approving the construction of a new stadium is certainly pleasing to me because it means a great deal in our future program of athletics and physical education at Michigan. A year ago last March, the Board in Control of Athletics had completed an exhaustive study relative to a new football stadium and had made a report to the Regents. This report considered in detail the relationships of a new stadium to the general program and the acquisition of additional facilities for the physical training of students, such as more tennis courts, a golf course, another field house for general activities, a winter sports pavilion and other units in a broad plan... By totally ignoring the Day Report, approved one month previously Yost sought to discredit its significance. He does not mention the fact that he had absolutely no authority to issue statements or a broad plan, in 1924, for physical education and athletics. Remarks similar to those made in the Daily can be found in a letter to Paul A. Elliott of The Muskegon Chronicle. The latter was one of the very few newspapers in the State that had taken issue with Yost, largely in the belief that the athletic program at Michigan was reaching only one in ten students there, and that Yost was more interested in the race for large stadiums than for "Athletics-for-All."89 Yost's response to Elliott was that, "my recommendations of one year ago are the ones that will be followed here," but he closed by saying, "We are pleased to know you are working for a better Michigan."90 Were the Day Report and Yost's May 31, 1924 report essentially redundant? The answer must be no! While obvious deficiencies in facilities and staff, as well as the general desire of physical educators for a wider requirement, are central to the theme of both reports, the Day Report said things Yost could never have admitted. 89. Letter, Paul A. Elliott to Yost, April 30, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 90. Letter, Yost to Paul Elliott, May 1, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 167 It said that intercollegiate athletics, and especially the football program, was out of balance with the physical education program in many respects. Three so-called "evils" of athletics were focused upon: (1) proselyting athletics, (2) excessive publicity to the athletes and (3) the preeminence of the coach, especially the football coach. It called for Conference action to limit these three. While Yost had long been interested in intramural facilities for men, there were few indications that the women's needs would have received the very high priority given them in the Day Report. Also, while Yost's report did not deal with the size of the new stadium or the structure of the Board in Control, he certainly differed with the Day Report on both issues. Perhaps most important of all, where the Yost report pointed out the need for facilities other than the new stadium, the Day Report absolutely guaranteed that an Intramural Sports Building, a Women's Athletic Building and a Stadium would be built concurrently, and would be financed from the same general plan. In fairness to Yost, it should also be pointed out here that he could not have guaranteed the construction of these facilities. He had no authority to make such a guarantee and was already taking great liberty in even suggesting a program to meet these needs. The new Board in Control of Athletics agreed upon a broad plan for constructing and financing new intercollegiate athletics facilities. Needless to say, Yost enthusiastically immersed himself in this massive undertaking. At a meeting early in July, 1926, they appointed a Stadium Building Committee. It was moved by President Little, and seconded by Mr. DuCharme, that Professors Aigler, Yost and Clarence T. Johnston comprise this Committee, with Aigler serving as Chairman. They were given authority to "appoint the General Engineer for the building of the stadium and to let contracts for the excavation, placing of abutments, drainage, etc., so that this work may proceed immediately."91 Professor Lou M. Gram served as a temporary replacement for Aigler who was in California for the summer. The Osborne Engineering Company with Bernard L. Green as their chief architect was awarded the contract for designing the Stadium. Green, a Michigan graduate, had been discussing the stadium and planning with Yost for quite some time. It will be recalled that he gave a presentation to the Detroit Convention of Michigan alumni in June, 1925. It is tempting to conclude that this was simply a case of Yost rewarding a loyal alumnus with a lucrative engineering contract, but this is not true. Yost was a thorough business man. Green and the Osborne Engineering Co. had built other stadia or large athletic facilities. Yost sent letters 91. Letter, Yost to Aigler, July 13, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 168 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY requesting verification that their work had been of high quality and received very favorable replies concerning Green and the Company. Also, as another check, he wrote to two other close Michigan alumni friends who were prominent in the construction business for their guidance in his early negotiations with the Osborne Co. Thus, while it is true that he was pleased to employ a Michigan graduate as engineer of the stadium, he was well armed with supportive facts had his choice been challenged. There can be no doubting Yost's influence on the design and construction of the Michigan Stadium. He had for several years been continously in contact with the construction of other stadia, had reviewed their blueprints and noted their financing plans.92 Preliminary planning with Bernard Green had long been completed. Many, many letters in the Yost files show him combing every detail in planning, constructing and in final preparation for the dedication cermonies of the new Michigan Stadium, October 22, 1927. When discussion of the R. Mercier Company's work in constructing the Stadium drainage system came before the Board in Control, April 28, 1928, Yost prefaced his remarks by the statement, "I have lived on the job from first to the last."93 The plan for financing the Stadium was part of a general scheme for constructing several major facilities-the Stadium, the Women's Athletic Building, the Intramural Sports Building, the Weinberg Coliseum, the addition of several tennis courts and the University Golf Course being included. The Board in Control of Athletics resolved, at their November 6, 1926 meeting, that "the Chairman and Secretary of this Board be authorized and empowered to borrow $1,500,00 or such part as found desirable... and issue 3,000 bonds @ $500, 3 percent interest per annum."94 This was pretty much in keeping with Yost's thinking and the recommendation of the Day Committee. The point on which Yost differed with the Day Report (and his wishes prevailed) was the football ticket purchase privilege that was used as a selling factor in issuing the bonds. The University of Pittsburgh had employed this idea quite successfully, and he wanted to repeat their success. The first bonds were sold on August 20, but they moved at a disap92. Letter, Yost to Regent Ralph Stone, April 27, 1925; in folder labeled, "General Reports of the Board of Athletics," Carton 22, UMAP. Also, "Stadiums" a 49 page paper presented by Gavin Hadden to the New York Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers, May 20, 1925, a copy of which was kept by Yost. Located in folder labeled, "Material Other Than Correspondence, 1925," Carton 23, UMAP. 93. Minutes of Board in Control, April 28, 1928, in folder labeled, "R. A. Mercier," Carton 22, UMAP. 94. Minutes of Board in Control of Athletics, 1910-1927, November 6, 1926 meeting. Located in Athletic Office, University of Michigan. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 169 pointing pace during the next six weeks. In a letter sent to several newspaper editors in Michigan on October 13, 1926, Yost confided, "We have sold less than $400,000 worth of Stadium bonds. Confidentially, we do not want the public to know that the bonds have been going disappointly slow. We need to let the public know that more seats does not mean no sell-outs. The demand will increase also. Enclosed is a speech I will give over WWJ on Friday, October 15th at 8:00 p.m. Feel free to quote from it."95 As the 1927 football season neared sales began to pick up and the drive was soon successful. The Day Report had recommended that the general design of the stadium "should represent the utmost simplicity. No attempt should be made to give it the form of a monument or memorial."96 Their recommendation was in keeping with Yost's ideas. As to the question of size of the stadium, the Day Committee did not subscribe to the view that "the University is bound to provide acommodation for all who wish to attend the games and are able and willing to pay a reasonable price of admission." While they did not doubt that, "the University is bound to serve the State unreservedly as best it can," it also believed that, "the University is just as clearly bound to protect its educational integrity. It is an institution of higher learning, not a purveyor of popular entertainment."97 The design approved by the Regents called for 70,000-75,000 seats.98 Yost's advice was that a capacity of up to 100,000-150,000 might be called for in future years. Agreement was reached on the 70,000 figure, but the approved design called for footings constructed so that the stadium could later be increased to exceed 100,000 seats.99 As the construction was brought to a close, he had 15,000 wooden bleacher seats erected on the wide concourse at the top of the stadium, bringing its capacity to 85,000. It thus surpassed the Illinois and Ohio State stadia in seating. Closely related to the size was the question whether tickets should be allotted to students, faculty, and alumni exclusively or at least as a priority. The mood of the faculty favored this, and Dean Day represented their view. Yost was opposed to it. As the 1927 football season approached, the Board in Control asked Yost and Dean Day to determine, with President Little, the best plan for tickets. Favoring their availability to the public without restriction, Yost wrote President Little, "Whether it should be true or not, it re95. Letter, Yost to several newspaper editors in Michigan, October 13, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 96. Day Report, p. 6. 97. Ibid., p. 6. 98. Letter, Yost to Hon. Andrew B. Dougherty, May 11, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 99. Ibid. 170 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Yost oversaw the construction of Michigan Stadium to the last detail. This new Packard was presented to Yost by alumni at the dedication of Michigan Stadium. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 171 mains a fact that at present there is no better way to develop and maintain an active interest in the university on the part of our citizens than through our intercollegiate contests."100 On another occasion he quoted from Regents reports to the State Legislature in 1921, 1923, and 1925 and in University bulletins where the Regents had said, in effect: "The University of Michigan belongs to the people of the State."101 When the Regents laid the Alumni preference resolution on the table for the 1927 football season, Yost's argument had won.102 Another "Michigan Radio Night" was beamed over WWJ on September 30, 1927, one day prior to the opening game against Ohio Wesleyan.103 Yost used this opportunity to bring the listeners up to date on the progress of Michigan's new facilities and to stress that, "only by the profits from football are these other facilities made available."104 Reminding the radio audience that the formal opening of Michigan Stadium would be the October 22 Ohio State-Michigan game, Yost announced that 88,000 tickets for this were applied for the first day of September.105 A capacity crowd that included the Governors of Ohio and Michigan and the Presidents of Ohio State and Michigan, saw the Wolverines win 21-0. In a half-time cermony, the Detroit Alumni Club presented Fielding Yost with gifts totaling $5,050 in value, including a Packard eight, a clock, a barometer and silverware.106 At the meeting of the Board in Control, September 25, 1926,107 a five-man Committee on Budget and Planning was appointed consisting of Professor Ralph Aigler as Chairman, Dean Edmund Day, Professors W. A. Frayer, Fielding H. Yost, and John Sundwall.'08 The broad plan for constructing the other major athletic facilities was formed by this group. Their next undertaking would be the landscaping of Palmer Field and the erection of the Women's Athletic Building thereon. The Regents approved the planned improvements of Palmer Field at their November 4 meeting, and the following month a committee was appointed by the Board in Control to guide the work. "President Little moved that Aigler, Dr. Sundwall, and a Board member selected by Aigler" (he selected Fielding Yost) "together with Dr. Bell and another representative of the Office of Advisors of Women" (Miss Beatrice W. 100. Letter, Yost to President Little, May 25, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 101. Letter, Yost to Charles Sink, May 23,1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 102. Letter, Yost to Henry Grinnell, June 28, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 103. This was the first football game played in the new Michigan Stadium. 104. Fielding Yost, "Making Athletics For All A Reality," speech delivered September 30, 1927 on "Michigan Radio Night," Carton 5, UMAP. 105. Ibid. 106. Letter, Robert Clancy to Yost, August 11, October 21, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 107. Letter, A. S. Baker to Dr. M. Bell, September 4, 1932, Carton 7, UMAP. 108. Letter, Ralph Aigler to committee members, October 16, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 85,000 see Michigan defeat Ohio State 21-0 in the formal opening of Michigan Stadium, October 22, 1927. Michigan thus surpassed both Ohio State and Illinois in stadium design and seating capacity. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 173 Johnson was selected) "be a committee to get plans and estimates for the Women's Athletic Building." Yost was then authorized to proceed with both the purchase of several properties neighboring Palmer Field and the grading of this Field.109 At this same meeting, $250,000 was appropriated for the work on Palmer Field and the construction of the Women's Athletic Building.110 With the arrival of March, 1927, Fry and Kasurin Co. of Ann Arbor began excavation on Palmer Field. Fielding Yost seems to have been in touch with their work,1ll and made suggestions that would harmonize the grading work with the building design. 112 At their March 5 meeting, the Board in Control discussed both the bids for completing the Stadiumll3 and plans for the Women's Field House. We get some idea of just how active the Board was by noting that the previous day, March 4, Chairman Aigler had met with another committee of five to discuss a site and an architect for the Intramural Sports Building. The Day Committee's call for concurrent construction was certainly being implemented. By the end of the 1927 summer, Palmer Field had been graded and sodded. With the purchase of several properties, some unsightly houses were removed from the area. An ornamental stone wall was erected along its Fourteenth Street boundary. In September, Yost received a letter from the University Secretary, Shirley Smith, saying that an extension of Huron Street from Fourteenth Street east to Observatory was being planned to relieve congestion near the Hospital. At this point, Yost took action that conceiveably was important in averting this serious threat to reduce the size of Palmer Field. The problem, Yost contended, was one of parking space and not street space. With consummate argumentative skill he gave an itemized account of the work that had gone into developing the Field, stating that, "This extension would render more land on Palmer Field useless than was purchased by the Board in Control for approximately $85,000."114 He concluded that, "If, therefore, the extension of Huron Street... is to do real harm to the general University development 109. Letter, A. S. Baker to Dr. M. Bell, September 4, 1932, Carton 7, UMAP. 110. Letter, Yost to Professor Pyre, April 21, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 111. Letter, Yost to Wieman, March 15, 1927; Wieman to Yost, also March 15, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. Briefs describing the grading, tiling and top soiling work, upon which bids were made, are signed by Yost and H. H. Atwell, Registered Civil Engineer. These are located in folder entitled, "Osborn Engineering Co., Estimates on the Stadium, 1926-27," Carton 22, UMAP. 112. Letter, Yost to Fry and Kasurin, April 15, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 113. It will be recalled that the Stadium was constructed in two phases; the foundations and drainage, etc., and then the upper structure and seating. 114. Letter, Yost to Secretary Shirley Smith, September 3, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 174 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Women's Athletic Building with putting green in foreground. Ot 4 jE ~4 Nl CT~ a' ~L Intramural Sports Building occupies site formerly held by Ferry Field's east stands and pressbox. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 175 plan and not relieve the parking congestion near the University Hospital, it certainly should not take place."115 Whether it was due to Yost's letter or some other reason, the proposed extension of Huron Street was never implemented. It would be just as inaccurate to say Yost was unsympathetic to the needs of the University's women students as it would be to say he championed their cause. While not nearly as actively interested in promoting new facilities for women as he was for the men's intercollegiate and intramural programs, he wrote to a friend: I might say that I am convinced that no better use has ever been made of athletic incomes at this or any other institution than the development and equipment of a suitable place to carry on the physical education activities of this group of students (women) who have, to some extent, been heretofore neglected. He concluded by saying, "It is fully as urgent that the women have these essential facilities as it is that the men have them."116 A banquet was held April 18, 1928 under the planning of Dr. Margaret Bell and her staff for all those who were responsible for the Women's Athletic Building. Fielding H. Yost received an invitation to attend.117 The Building was formally opened in May, 1928.1ls Construction of the Intramural Sports Building was planned by a Board in Control committee of five men. Professor Ralph Aigler served as chairman. Professors Fielding H. Yost, Louis M. Gram, Elton "Tad" Wieman, and E. D. Mitchell were named to it.119 As a member of this group, Yost was apparently party to the work of planning and constructing the building, but there is scanty evidence of it in his correspondence. They met March 4, 1927 to discuss a site and an architect.'20 On two occasions the previous month, Yost had predicted with confidence the site ultimately chosen for the building.121 He sat with the Committee to hear the plans and recommendations of Smith, Hinchman and Grylls Co., on May 16,122 and on July 26, 1927 he anticipated that the contract for the construction of the building would be closed, "in a day or two."123 Several pieces of mail indicate that Yost was active in the selection 115. Ibid. 116. Letter, Yost to Mr. Earl Babst, May 2, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 117. Letter, A. S. Baker to Yost, March 30, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 118. Ruth Gjelsness, "Physical Education for Women," Encyc., p. 2002. 119. Letter, Aigler to Yost, February 28, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 120. Ibid. 121. Letters, Yost to C. L. Brewer, February 21 and Yost to Coon-DeVisser Co., February 17, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 122. Letter, Yost to L. M. Gram, May 11, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 123. Letter, Yost to J. A. Whitworth, July 26, 1927, Carton 5, UMAP. 176 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY of the lockers used to furnish the Intramural Sports Building.l24 When the construction was completed actual costs exceeded estimates, and a three-man arbitration committee had to be formed to determine whether the costs should be borne by the engineer or the contractor. Yost consulted with a good friend in the construction business to determine the best way to select the committee.125 It is not clear whether Yost served on the three-man committee or not. A letter signed by the secretary to Mr. Christensen, Treasurer of the University, relative to Charles T. Wollen's inquiry into the Intramural Sports Building was referred to Yost. It said, A new Intramural Sports building has just been completed by the Board in Control of Athletics of the University of Michigan and I am, therefore, referring your letter to Mr. Fielding H. Yost, who had charge of the construction of this building. I believe Mr. Yost can give you the information you desire.126 While this would appear to be conclusive evidence that Yost was very actively involved with all phases of the planning and completion of the building, it is difficult to know how much confidence to place in this secretary's analysis of who guided the project. Very little supporting evidence is found in Yost's correspondence. By contrast, literally stacks of letters can be presented to show his involvement in the building of Michigan Stadium, the University Golf Course and the Weinberg Coliseum. Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell stated that Yost did most certainly shoulder the over-all responsibility for constructing the Intramural Sports Building, but, because of the concurrent work on the Stadium, he delegated responsibilities to "Tad" Wieman and Mitchell. Wieman, who was closest to Yost, worked more with the larger matters such as architects and building materials. Mitchell was consulted on the function of the building and the sports program it would accommodate.127 The completed Intramural Sports Building and the various stages in the construction of other athletic facilities were described by Yost, October 4, 1928, on another "Michigan Radio Night" program. Listeners were assured that Michigan was making rapid strides toward achieving her goal of "Athletics-for-All." He re-emphasized that, "the new stadium with its increased earning power is the key to this whole program."128 124. Letter, Yost to Durabilt Steel Locker Co., May 28, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. This is a letter authorizing them to furnish the lockers in accord with vote of Board in Control; other letters in this and earlier folders on this topic. 125. Letter, Yost to Jim Baird, December 17, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 126. Letter, Secretary to Mr. Christensen to Charles Wollen, August 20, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 127. Dr. E. D. Mitchell, Interview, December 20, 1969. 128. F. H. Yost, "Athletic Facilities At Michigan," Michigan Radio Night, October 4, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 177 Another project that concerned Yost during the winter of 1928 was the installation of an ice refrigeration unit in the Weinberg Coliseum. During the "lull" brought on by the Day Committee's research during the summer of 1925, the Board in Control purchased the old Weinberg Coliseum with the expectation of providing skating for all University students and faculty, as well as the varsity hockey team.'29 Sometime early in April the Board had appointed a committee to "study the possibilities of an artificial ice skating and hockey rink,"130 and Yost was a member of that Committee. The previous winter he had already begun seeking preliminary information as to size, operating costs and maintenance expenses for an artificial ice skating rink.'31 With the formation of the committee, he then requested similar information from each of the Conference universities,132 and the Board in Control then purchased Weinberg Coliseum. No further action was taken because of the Day Committee's study. At its February 1928 meeting the Board in Control decided to proceed with the installation of an ice refrigeration plant sufficiently large for providing ice skating in the Coliseum.133 Professor H. C. Anderson, of the University's mechanical engineering faculty, seems to have assisted Yost in the selection of refrigeration machinery.'34 With its installation, the rink was then open for ice skating. In June, 1928, the Board in Control moved to begin construction of tennis courts on Ferry Field. The following frank, terse letter from Yost to the Ann Arbor Lumber Company, quoted in full, is indicative of his administrative ability in handling such minor problems: Dear Sir, We have started today to grade and finish a group of tennis courts on our land adjoining yours, so this is to request that you remove all of your lumber, wagons, etc. from this area. We have had no objection to your using this land, but since we need it, we must request you to vacate it at once.'35 The above letter is not unlike many others found in the Yost files illustrating his frequent good judgment in the length and succinctness of such correspondence. 129. Letter, Wieman to Matt Mann, July 17, 1925, Carton 4, UMAP. 130. Letter, Yost to Voss Ice Machine Works, New York, April 20, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 131. Letter, Yost to George Brown, January 14, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. 132. Letters in April 1925 folder, Carton 3, UMAP. 133. Letter, Yost to the Linde Canadian Refrigeration Co., February 29, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 134. Letter, H. C. Anderson to Yost, June 11, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 135. Letter, Yost to Ann Arbor Lumber Co., June 25, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. iQ University Golf Course with Michigan Stadium in background. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 179 There were 24 tennis courts on the campus in 1920-1921. Seven years later that number more than doubled.'36 In 1934 Yost boasted that the University had 57 outdoor and 4 indoor courts (the latter being in the Intramural Sports Building). Eight of the outdoor courts were concrete, the rest were clay surfaced. This total of 57 included 16 that were reserved for play by women students and located on Palmer Field. When not in use, they were available for mixed doubles.137 The last major facility for sports constructed while Fielding Yost was Secretary of the Board in Control (1921-1941) was the University Golf Course. The need had been recognized as early as 1917 when the Report of the Intramural Department for that year indicated over 100 students had responded to a meeting called for those interested in golf. As the Ann Arbor Golf Club would only admit a maximum of 35 students to membership, a large number went away dissatisfied. The report concluded, "It is believed that interest in golf is growing and that eventually means will have to be taken to provide space for enthusiasts in this activity."'138 When the Day Committee was appointed, Fielding Yost had been appointed chairman of a committee to plan a new University course.139 Further work was discontinued until the completion of the Day Report. In the fall of 1928, Yost made a vast inquiry as part of his planning for the golf course. Many letters were written to determine the best architects available, potential care-taker, design, and similar questions.1'40 Construction was underway by the summer of 1929, and it was expected that the landscaping would be completed by October 1. Another year would be needed for the grass to be ready for play.'4' An enormous correspondence with various nurseries was conducted by Yost in the Spring of 1930. Several orders were placed that brought the landscaping near completion.'42 This was an area in which Yost had developed considerable expertise. Gardening had been one of his hobbies, and he had experimented with planting several kinds of shubbery and fruit trees on his property in Walling, Tennessee. 136. In a speech entitled, "Notes on Address of Fielding H. Yost, Annual Meeting of the Ninth District University of Michigan Clubs, June 11, 1929, Pontiac. Michigan," Mr. Yost reported the total number of tennis courts in 1920-1921 was 24; in 1928 the number was 60. Carton 6, UMAP. 137. Letter, Yost to Clifton Price, October 22, 1934, Carton 9, UMAP. 138. Floyd Rowe, "1916-17 Report of Intramural Department," May 29, 1917, Carton 1, UMAP. 139. Letter, Stanley Pelchar to Yost, and Yost's reply, July 3, 1925, Carton 4, UMAP. 140. Many letters in November 1928 folder, Carton 5, UMAP. 141. Letter, Yost to Bill Frayer, July 24, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 142. Many letters can be found in February, March, and April 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. Also, one entire folder labeled August 1930, is devoted to Golf Course correspondence, Carton 7, UMAP. 180 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY The University Golf Course was informally opened for play September 26, 1930.143 It was described by Yost as "eighteen holes, fully watered on greens and fairways, with a complete drainage system.144 Its completion brought to full reality what had only a few years earlier been something of a dream. To examine Yost's correspondence during this six-year period is to become awestruck by his phenomenal energy and productivity. The quantity and variety of his mail is enormous and diverse.145 There is no doubting his complete involvement in the program. What may be seriously doubted is his own version of his role. In a speech to an alumni gathering (June, 1929) he boasted openly, saying, in effect, that he was personally responsible for the entire work. The following quotation is from that address: In 1919-20 Michigan's athletics were at a low ebb. Most all of the Conference Colleges had grown rapidly. Their athletic plants, programs and personnel had greatly increased. Michigan alone was, and had been for a long time, standing still. I recognized that it would be impossible for Michigan to win her fair share of intercollegiate contests under the then existing conditions. My first thought was to cease coaching and give all of my time to business interests. However, my great interest in, and love for Michigan controlled my decision. So I undertook the task of 'building' an athletic plant and physical exercise program at the University of Michigan that would equal or surpass that of any other university in America. I began this job with the motto, 'Making Athletics For All A Reality.'146 Apparently there were some who could not swallow all of this version. They argued that the Day Committee forced the Board in Control and Yost to get busy with problems other than intercollegiate football. Professor Ralph Aigler presented some impressive ideas on this score in the Annual Report of the Board in Control (1929). They offer an important dimension to our assessment of Yost and are quoted here extensively. "During the last year," he said, "a considerable number of people gained the impression that the expenditure of such a large percentage of 143. Letters in September 1930 folder announce this to several alumni and friends. Carton 7, UMAP. 144. Letter, Yost to Ray Butler, April 12, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 145. It may also be of interest to note that with all this absorbing activity and extremely heavy mail to answer, Yost still took the time to write his son, who was attending school out of the state. 146. Fielding H. Yost, "Notes On Address Of Fielding H. Yost, Annual Meeting of the Ninth District University of Michigan Clubs, June 11, 1929, Pontiac, Michigan," Carton 6, UMAP. MICHIGAN'S ATHLETIC FACILITIES 181 the three million dollars, above referred to" (he had itemized expenditures for permanent improvements) "for things designed to be useful for the student not in intercollegiate athletics, was made by the Athletic Board only as a result of pressure from high quarters." Recalling his 16 years of personal experience on the Board, Professor Aigler had found it fully appreciative, "that provision must be made for the physical development and exercise of the student body in general," even as early as 1913. In that year the pioneer Department of Intramural Athletics was formed. Dean Whitney, the previous Board Chairman, had "many times pointed out the high desirability of a University golf course, on approximately the site on which we now have it, but financing such an undertaking at that time seemed utterly hopeless." Dean Vaughn had pointed out the need for several large structures in which games might be played in the winter. Similar references appearing frequently in the annual reports reflect a "well settled policy of the Board to provide a program of 'athletics for all.' To anyone familiar with the facts it is ridiculous to say that these wonderful additions to our facilities are the result of a lately developed idea or that we were driven to take the steps." "Why then, it may be said, was not something done about it long ago? The answer is purely one of finances." Aigler pointed out that the Board in Control had always paid its own way, and "the period of large financial returns for us began only a few years ago." The building of the new Ohio stadium in 1922 ushered in a new era in middle western collegiate athletic finances. "We have profited not only by our own increased attendance, but the doubling, trebling and quadrupling of capacities at our sister institutions. Football incomes with us have been increased at least ten times as compared, say, with the average of the period 1910 to 1921." "Immediately following the beginning of our larger receipts, in 1922," Aigler reported, "we find work started on the Field House... No doubt neither Dean Vaughan nor Dean Whitney ever thought of claiming any credit for originality in their ideas regarding facilities." 'Athletics-forAll' was a commonly accepted idea among the Board members. Identifying Yost's position in this vast material expansion, Professor Aigler stated, It is not inappropriate, however, at this point to say that the Board and the University generally have been extremely fortunate in having had, during these last eight years, Mr. Yost as the active executive head of our athletic work, a man to whom projects involving $500,000 or $1,000,000 were merely part of the day's work. In translating what for years had been mere plans and dreams into the actualities that may be seen in a tour of the University's 182 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY physical education equipment he has been remarkably efficient, and the burden has been very largely his.147 This recognition might have come to Yost with great ease except for his unabashed public pronouncements in which full credit was claimed for the work. This must have tempted his opponents to insist that the work would never have been done without the pressure of the Day Committee. Just as the prosperity of the 1920's had prompted the construction of new athletic facilities, the Depression of the 1930's precluded retirement of the debt incurred. Of the original $1,500,000 in three per cent bonds issued, the total outstanding as of February 15, 1941 was $862,100. No bonds had been retired from 1931 through 1936.148 This tremendous debt had to be cleared before Yost's successor, H. 0. Crisler, could undertake any other needed projects. The bonds were finally retired on October 15, 1947.149 147. Ralph W. Aigler, Annual Report, Board in Control of Athletics, University of Michigan, September 1, 1928 to August 31, 1929, Carton 23, UMAP. 148. It is interesting to note that one frequent explanation for not funding intercollegiate athletics from the University Treasury has been that the University then becomes too dependent on winning teams to maintain its budget. From 1926-1941 the separately financed intercollegiate program was faced with the urgency of fielding winning teams to attract large crowds and pay debts that were not incurred from intercollegiate athletics alone. 149. Conversation with secretary to the University of Michigan Director of Intercollegiate Athletics, January 5, 1970. Chapter VI YOST AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION The professional preparation of physical educators and athletic coaches was offered in a four-year course for regularly enrolled students and a summer school of six weeks length for coaches already in the field. Both programs were conducted through the School of Education. Almost as soon as Yost's appointment as Director of Athletics was confirmed, he set hastily about to establish the curriculum for the four-year course, quite independently. With the assistance of Intramural Director Elmer D. Mitchell, a complete listing of courses to be offered was developed. It was based upon the catalogues of the two previous summers when physical education courses had been offered at the University, on the curricula of other universities and Yost's own ideas.' "We have agreed upon 107 hours required work for the four-year course in Physical Education, Hygiene and Athletics," Yost told the outgoing Director of Athletics, Phil Bartelme in 1921. "The other 13 hours will be electives. I have prepared some data for a bulletin which I left with Dr. Meyers, Chairman of Whitney's Committee."2 Dr. Sundwall had not been consulted on any of this curriculum planning. In this same letter Yost said, "The President returned Monday and I had about 10 minutes talk with him at the Union but he did not mention our friend Dr. Sundwall. I do not know when he is coming or what he will do when he gets here." Yost apparently believed that the curriculum planning had been completed. This work was actually done in vain, because when Dr. Sundwall arrived in Ann Arbor, planning was begun anew. The curriculum eventually adopted was very different from that drawn up by Mitchell and Yost.3 The next step was to advertise the course to all high school students. A circular was prepared to be sent to high school principals asking 1. Elmer D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. 2. Letter, Yost to Bartelme, September 7, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 3. Elmer D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. 183 184 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY if any of their recent graduates might be interested in enrolling. A general outline of the course was to accompany the circular.4 A letter dated September 10, 1921, was drawn up to be sent to all "M" Club members, signed by Yost. It informed them of his new position and all that the work would entail. Statistics describing Michigan's athletic record compiled against Western Conference members and a synopsis of what had been done in intramural athletics were also enclosed. The recipients were requested to give the information about the four-year course to local newspapers and use the athletic statistics to supplement it.5 Professor A. S. Whitney (former Chairman of the Board in Control of Athletics), had been appointed Acting Dean of the newly created (May, 1921) School of Education in which the coaching school and the four-year course would be conducted. Yost informed the Dean that he had been fast at work planning the course. He also laid claim to having had the original idea for installing such a course, and generally brought the Dean us to date as follows: On February 11th the Board of Regents established a Department of Physical Education, and Judge Murfin sent a copy of this resolution to me. Later I outlined the things which I thought the work in this department should cover. This outline included a four year course in Physical Education and a Summer School for Coaches. I am enclosing a description of these two courses. So far as I know no one had previously suggested that a four year course in Physical Education, Hygiene and Athletics be given at the University. About the 16th day of August I took the matter of the curriculum of this four year course up with you and was put in touch with your Committee on Program of Study-Myers, Berry and Whipple Several meetings were held by your committee before we finally decided on the work selected...6 Shortly after his arrival in Ann Arbor, Dr. Sundwall called a staff meeting to discuss the new four-year curriculum. Yost appeared at this meeting to challenge Dr. Sundwall's authority in calling the staff together.7 This confusion was justified because the Regental Resolution delegated responsibility to both men for assisting the School of Education in the training of physical educators and coaches. Physical Education had no single director. The "co-directors" were being paid equal salaries. From the outset the working relationship between Yost and Sundwall was far from harmonious. How much ill-feeling can be at4. Circular in September 1921 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 5. Form letter, Yost to "M" Club members, September 10, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 6. Letter, Yost to A. S. Whitney, September 12, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 7. E. D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 185 tributed to faulty organizational structure and how much to Yost's overbearing personality is debatable. Although Yost had written in mid-September describing his curriculum planning efforts, Dean Whitney's reply did not come until November 22. In his firm statement the Dean attempted to make very clear just what Yost's responsibilities were with regard to staff and curriculum in the four-year course. He quoted extensively from the Regents Resolution establishing the two new departments (June 22, 1921). Especially noted were those references to the School of Education stating, in effect, that Yost must plan the educational program through the Dean of the School of Education and that the salaries and appointments of all assistants, teachers, or instructors participating in giving courses in the School of Education were also the responsibility of this School. He assured Yost, I am anxious to aid in drafting and publishing a separate announcement outlining to the full the courses offered in the summer session, and later the courses to be offered during 1922-23, but with the understanding that in every case these suggestions and recommendations must receive the approval of the Acting Dean and the Faculty of the School of Education.s The bulk of the planning in the four-year course fell to Dr. Sundwall. The question of how much credit to assign instruction in sports skills and theory of coaching classes was resolved with his "block" idea. This consisted of lumping several sports or theory of coaching classes into one coure entitled, "Theory and Practice of Physical Education and Athletics." Three hours credit was assigned to the course and it was offered each of the eight semesters (24 hours total). The contents of the block could be altered by the physical education staff without having to consult the education faculty. The entire curriculum was arranged in five groups: (1) the theories and practices of phyiscal education and athletics, (2) studies concerning structure, function, normal growth and development of the human body, (3) studies of abnormal processes, their detection, prevention and treatment, (4) studies in the theories, principles and practices of general education and (5) general education and electives permitting some specialization. When Yost saw the proposed curriculum he and others in the department opposed it. Fielding H. Yost, E. E. "Tad" Wieman (Assistant Director of Athletics), Elmer D. Mitchell (Intramural Director), and Dr. George May (Director of Waterman Gymnasium) jointly signed a proposal entitled, "A Revision of the Four Year Curriculum in Physical Education, Athletics, and School Health."9 8. Letter, A. S. Whitney to Yost, November 22, 1921, Carton 17, UMAP. 9. Undated proposal located in December, 1921 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 186 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY Their major complaint was that the curriculum proposed was too health-oriented. Too many labs were required. Some of the courses were not applicable to coaching. The opinion was advanced that of the 93 men students enrolled for the Four Year Course, 90 desired to be activity men-gymnasium instructors, athletic coaches, or playground teachers-and not health education men.10 No immdeiate effect of this protest is apparent. The curriculum remained largely unchanged in 1941 from that published in the 1921 catalogue. In fairness to the objections of Yost, et al., two of the courses in the original program, epidemiology and bacteriology, were later dropped. Dr. Mitchell indicated that some of the courses would have been taken with the medical students and the physical education majors would have operated at a considerable disadvantage." Students were enrolled in the program for the first time in the fall of 1921. This was apparently made possible by the fact that the first two years consisted largely of general education courses. In 1923-1924, the professional program in Physical Education, Athletics and School Health was designated Department "F" of the School of Education. The chairmanship of this department was filled by Dean Allen S. Whitney (1922-1927), Dr. John Sundwall (1927-1930), Dean James B. Edmonson (1930-1936) and Professor Elmer D. Mitchell (1936-1942).12 Thus, the "director" of physical education in its second year was neither Yost or Sundwall. Dean Whitney had to assume the leadership to maintain staff harmony. On one occasion, when all seemed to be going well, he wrote Regent Murfin: Our course in Physical Education has been in operation for four years and for four years I have tried desparately to bring the two sides together-the one under Yost and the one under Dr. Sundwall. You will rejoice with me when I tell you that last week we had a committee meeting to thrash over the course of study and it ended in a love feast. Everybody happy and everybody satisfied. There is only one thing that does not set quite right with Mr. Yost. He says that the Regents gave him the full direction over this course and therefore he should have it. He does not seem to realize that it could not work out as he had interpreted it. As stated, however, he has grown perfectly sweet tempered about it but still feels that he ought to be given full charge or else the ruling ought to be changed. He also stated that he and I would never have any trouble but what would happen if either of us dropped out cannot be predicted. Sometime I must go over this with you and see if we cannot modify it to the satisfaction of everybody. 10. Ibid. 11. E. D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. 12. Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell, "The Professional Preparation of Teachers," Encyc., p. 1990. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 187 Murfin understood Yost only too well. He replied supportively: I have never been able to get Brother Yost to appreciate the fact that you were Dean of the School of Education and he is in charge of the Department of Physical Education in that School. He has grown so accustomed on the football field to being answerable to no one that he does not realize there is a Board of Regents, a President of the University and a Dean of his School who must be consulted and have supervisory charge of his work.'3 The real problem was Yost's relation to Sundwall, not to Whitney! Interestingly, Murfin failed to focus on that. His statement that Yost was in charge of the physical education is a little confusing also. Acceptance of the Day Report brought all phases of physical education and athletics under the Board in Control. Whitney then relinquished leadership of Department "F" to Sundwall who was to share the responsibility with a fourteen-member Board. Sundwall left the Board after construction of athletic facilities was completed. Law professor, Ralph Aigler, as chairman of the Board, became the spokesman for physical education on the Michigan campus with Yost acting as the "go-between" for the men's and women's programs. Not until the retirement of Yost in 1941 was a single individual, football coach H. O. Crisler, given clear authority for the direction of physical education, through the School of Education. The extent to which that either solved or continued problems is for later research to answer. Approaching retirement as Dean of the School of Education, Whitney wrote Sundwall acknowledging his contributions to the four-year course. Yost took issue saying: I have just secured the following information which is quoted from a letter written by you to Dr. Sundwall. A few students appeared for enrollment and the course was thus launched. In the fall you assumed your duties as Director of Public Health and in charge of all gymnasium and mural activities. Naturally we appealed to you for assistance and the program, as formulated, was largely your work. You were entirely responsible for the sequence of sciences and for the block work and for many other features which made this school quite unique in the country. Indeed, the program as now formulated is largely your work and the work of your staff, and I am writing to express my great appreciation of your assistance. We could have accomplished little worthy of commendation without your aid.'l4 13. Letters, Whitney to Murfin, April 8, and Murfin to Whitney, April 9, 1925, Box 4, Murfin Papers. 14. Letter, Yost to Whitney, June 21, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 188 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY More than just a little disturbed by this generous award to credit to Dr. Sundwall, Yost pressed for an explanation saying, I am at a loss to know why you made this statement since the curriculum in the Four-Year Course in Physical Education is and has been almost identical with the curriculum prepared by the committee appointed by you to meet with me. This committee was composed of Messrs. Berry, Whipple and Meyers. I have the original curriculum and have had intimate knowledge of every change that has occurred in this curriculum.'5 Dean Whitney responded one week later with the following letter: My Dear Director Yost, As I remember it my statement to Dr. Sundwall is at least substantially correct. You are responsible for the four-year course idea, and you and your staff are wholly responsible for the content of the "block" for men. Furthermore, we could not have administered the course without your cooperation. On the other hand Dr. Sundwall is responsible for the "block" idea, for the sequence of the sciences, and for securing the cooperation of the faculty which gave the fundamental sciences. Without this cooperation we could not have succeeded. It is true also that other men as well as women cooperated in formulating and carrying out this work. You have probably forgotten that our first curriculum covered only the first two years and was largely academic. You have also probably forgotten that the curriculum submitted by your committee contained no "block" idea at all and it was this idea that appealed to the campus. You have probably also forgotten that the curriculum was tempered every year until its present form was reached. I hadn't the slightest intention of reflecting on you or your work in my statement to Dr. Sundwall. On the other hand he has given a large amount of time and thought to the course and deserves full credit therefore.10 Perhaps Dean Whitney conceded the original idea for a four-year course to Yost merely to appease him. The facts certainly do not support it. The need had been addressed to the Board of Regents in the annual report of the Board in Control and again from the State Department of Public Instruction before Yost had even considered coming to the University on a full-time basis. Professor Ralph Aigler, who authored the Board in Control's annual report, and Floyd Rowe, 15. Ibid. 16. Letter, Whitney to Yost, June 27, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 189 the former University of Michigan Intramural Director who authored the directive from the State Department, would both seem to have prior claims to this credit. Plans for a School of Education through which teacher training courses could be conducted were also underway. To step in at this time and lay claim was not atypical of Yost's penchant for adulation. While his influence does seem to have been very considerable in the four-year program generally, the Summer School for Athletic Coaches was clearly Fielding Yost's responsibility. The plan to offer courses for athletic coaches during the summer was presented by Dean J. R. Effinger of the College of Literature, Science and the Arts. It was implemented in 1922 under the sponsorship of the School of Education.17 Yost did not have to work with Sundwall. He was the recognized expert on coaching, and only had to gain the approval of Dean Edward Krause who administered the Summer Session. A proposed six-weeks course, without University credit, and a budget of $5,000 were submitted to Dean Krause with Yost's assurance it had been thoroughly tested. The entire structure was taken from the' successful University of Illinois Summer School for Coaches.'1 Agreement on curriculum and budget was reached with ease. By December Yost received assurance that the salaries and his choice of instructors had been approved. Arrangements were then made to have Major John L. Griffith of the University of Illinois, advertise the course in his newly installed magazine, The Athletic Journal.19 Disturbed by the decision not to grant University credit for the work, Yost wrote a very persuasive argument for credit in a letter to Dean Whitney.2" He also assured Regent Murfin that at "all the Conference Colleges where a summer course is given credit is allowed for this work. This puts Michigan at a great disadvantage as no credit is allowed."21 The following January, Dean Whitney reported that the Educational Council and the Faculty of the School of Education had voted to grant credit for the work.22 The Board of Regents concurred,23 so only the work done by those men in the first summer school (1922) was not 17. Elmer D. Mitchell, Encyc., p. 1991. 18. Letter, Yost to Dean Krause, November 3, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. The Illinois course had been in operation for eight summers, and had 392 enrollees for the 1921 summer. Yost had received a complete (103 pages) set of Coach Zuppke's notes taken in shorthand by a student in the Illinois course. 19. Letter, Yost to Griffith, January 30, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 20. Letter, Yost to Whitney, May 16, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 21. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 12, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 22. Letter, Whitney to Yost, January 15, 1923, Carton 2, UMAP. 23. Letter, Murfin to Yost, January 27, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP; Regents Proceedings, 1920-1923, p. 716. 190 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY given University credit. This change should be attributed primarily to the urgings of Yost. The task of organizing and presenting the Summer School was attacked with the same exuberance and attention to minute detail that typified Yost. The varsity coaching staff, plus Mitchell and Dr. May, were utilized in teaching the courses. Besides the popular varsity sports, individual grades were given for work in first aid, graded sports for various levels of students, techniques for administering physical examinations and the administration of athletics. To advertise the physical education and athletics programs, a letter had been sent to members of the "M" Club and an ad was carried in The Athletic Journal, but Yost made a broader attempt to reach large audiences through his public speaking. Radio, although still in its infancy,24 was quickly adapted by him to bring news of Michigan's new programs to many alumni. The April 29, 1922 "Michigan Radio Night" broadcast served as Yost's forum for explaining that Michigan wanted top varsity teams as well as the participation of all students in some form of athletics. "Through the Four-Year Course we will provide leaders... Through the Summer Course we will increase efficiency... but," he urged his audience, "we need the help of the tremendous force of Michigan's 50,000 alumni."25 As the four-year professional preparation program began to meet the needs formerly served by the Summer School for Coaches, the latter became unnecessary. It was discontinued in the 1931 summer with the shift in emphasis moving to graduate work.26 Also, Dr. J. B. Edmonson, Whitney's successor as Dean of the School of Education, wanted to see a few of the women physical education staff employed during the summers, and they soon offered a few short term sports institutes.27 In all aspects of the Summer School for Coaches, Fielding Yost's influence and direction prevailed. The required (service) physical education program was a different story. When the proposal to build Michigan Stadium came before the University Senate in 1925, consent was given, through the Day Report, only on the condition that facilities for the physical education of students other than varsity athletes be constructed also. This was exactly President Angell's line of reasoning in 1890 when student interest in intercollegiate football and baseball was growing so rapidly. To provide balance he acquired a field, built a large gymnasium and installed a 24. The first radio station, KDKA in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, began broadcasting in 1920. 25. Program for the April 29 broadcast is located in April 1922 folder, Carton 2, UMAP. 26. Letter, J. B. Edmonson to Yost, October 29, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 27. Ruth Gjelsness, "Physical Education for Women," Encyc., p. 2004. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 191 required program of physical education. Now, in 1925, the Michigan Faculty wanted to balance the growth of intercollegiate football with fields, gymnasiums and more required physical education. The Day Report specifically recommended that two years of physical education should be mandatory for the men "as soon as necessary staff and facilities can be provided; the desirability of increasing the requirement for both men and women to three or even four years should be carefully considered."28 This is the only phase of the required program with which Yost had any real involvement. When it appeared that the Women's Athletic Building and the Intramural Sports Building would soon be available for use, a committee consisting of Fielding H. Yost, Dr. George May, Elmer D. Mitchell, and "Tad" Wieman drew up a resolution in keeping with the Day Report's recommendation. It called for students in the University College to take two years of physical education.29 The first year would consist of required subjects, the second year electives. At its February 25, 1928 meeting, the Board in Control approved this resolution.3~ It was not furthur acted upon, at the suggestion of President Little, pending Faculty approval of his University College proposal.31 At their May 24 meeting, the Regents indicated a willingness to go ahead with the program instead of tying it to the University College controversy. 32 The Board in Control voted again, at its October, 1928 meeting, to submit this recommendation to the proper University authorities, and a committee was appointed to work out a detailed program for the two years' work.33 That following May, President Little instructed the Board in Control to submit this plan to the faculties concerned for their approval.34 The frustrations encountered in promoting the University College idea led to the resignation of President Little and the appointment of Professor Alexander Ruthven as his replacement. On March 5, 1930, notification came to Yost from President Ruthven that "the faculty of the college of Literature, Science, and Arts has rejected the resolution passed by the Board in Control of Athletics, increasing the requirements in Physical Education for Men."35 This rejection took Yost very much 28. Day Report, p. 7. 29. "Report of Committee," February 25, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 30. Letter, Yost to May and Mitchell, February 27, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 31. Ralph Aigler, Annual Report, Board in Control, University of Michigan, September 1, 1928 to August 31, 1929, located in folder labeled, "Annual Reports, 1912-55," Carton 23, UMAP. 32. Letter, President Little to Professor William Frayer, Acting Chairman of the Board in Control, May 31, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 33. Ralph Aigler, Annual Report, September 1, 1928, to August 31, 1929, p. 8. 34. Letter, Little to Frayer, May 31, 1929, Carton 6, UMAP. 35. Letter, President Ruthven to Yost, March 5, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 192 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY by surprise. In a lengthy reply, he reviewed statements issued by the Board in Control and the Day Report, and their approval by Faculty and Regents. All of this made passage of the two-year requirement seem a mere formality.36 While in California, Professor Aigler was informed by Yost of this rejection. "The news of the Lit. faculty flabbergasts me," he confessed. "What became of all those fellows that were constantly criticizing us for not doing more for the ordinary student? Have you learned what it is they object to?"37 Yost should have been able to learn their objections. The five-man LS&A committee included his good friend, Professor Louis M. Gram,38 who had served as a member of the Board in Control and had worked closely with Yost in the construction of athletic facilities. If he did learn their reasons, Yost did not convey this information to Aigler by letter, but the matter was not allowed to rest. The passage of a resolution by the University Council on March 7, 1932, provided for a committee to make a study of the present requirements in physical education at the University of Michigan and elsewhere. They were to also consider the place of physical education in the organization of the University; to express an opinion as to whether the requirements in physical education should be determined by the Council for the whole University or by the several schools and colleges; and to make definite recommendations embodying the results of their study.39 It was explained that some confusion had arisen as to just what the present requirements in physical education, particularly for women, really were.40 The committee, under the chairmanship of Professor Nathan Sinai, was expected to clarify this. Serving with Professor Sinai were Professors Margaret Bell, J. C. Brier, P. E. James, D. L. Rich and Elmer D. Mitchell. On December 12, 1932, the committee filed the first part of its report, dealing with the matter of requirements. Among the recommendations it submitted were: (1) that the one year of required physical education for men and two years for women be continued, and, (2) that the requirements in physical education be determined by the several schools and colleges.41 This recommendation, for some reason, seems to have preceded a report by Professor Mitchell on three studies of college and university physical education requirements conducted in 1921, 1927 and 1932. The main conclusion drawn from these studies was a trend in 36. Letter, Yost to President Ruthven, March 28, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 37. Letter, Aigler to Yost, April 7, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. 38. Other members of the committee were Dean G. W. Patterson, Professors E. Lorch, C. H. Fessenden and A. H. Lovell. 39. Nathan Sinai, "Report of the Committee on Physical Education," May 3, 1933, Carton 8, UMAP. This is the work referred to as "The Sinai Report." 40. Aigler, Annual Report, 1928-1929, p. 6. 41. Ibid. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 193 favor of the two-year required program.42 Mitchell's research did not alter the Committee's recommendations. On May 3, 1933 the Sinai committee filed the second part of their report and expressed no confidence in the Board of Control as a coordinator of student physical education. They recommended that physical education be removed from administration by the Board where it was being smothered by intercollegiate athletics. The Board was pictured as operating in a dual capacity.43 As a corporate body it expended funds collected from intercollegiate athletics and student athletic fees to be used for maintenance of intercollegiate athletics and that part of the athletic plant, exclusive of Waterman and Barbour Gymnasiums, devoted to physical education and intramural athletics. As an executive committee, the Board operated to approve the budget for physical education, recommend appointments. and otherwise perform the functions of such a committee in a School or College. With only minor exceptions, the costs of providing personnel in physical education were borne by the University. Thus, the Sinai committee concluded, "although this view gives the impression of a compact and unified control of intercollegiate athletics and physical education, such organization tends to stress intercollegiate athletics. From an academic standpoint, physical education has a greater value than intercollegiate athletics. From a financial standpoint, the reverse is true." Overriding financial concerns were dictating that the Board's executive committee activities be placed in a position secondary to its activities as a corporate body.44 It was recommended that the titles of "Director of Waterman Gymnasium" and "Director of Intramural Athletics," be abolished and that these activities be combined in one office, that of "Director of Physical Education for Men." This single Director and the Director of Physical Education for Women would serve on a three member Executive Committee on Physical Education, the third member to be designated by the President. These recommendations were presented at the May 3, 1933 meeting of the Council. After some deliberation they were referred to the Council's Committee on Program and Planning. While awaiting this latter committee's report back to the Senate Council, Fielding Yost responded by drawing up an eight-page brief on the development and control of the physical welfare programs for students at the University of Michigan.45 He stressed that the present 42. E. D. Mitchell, "The Status of Required Physical Education in the Colleges and Universities of the United States," March, 1933 folder, Carton 8, UMAP. 43. Sinai Report, May 1933, Carton 8, UMAP. 44. Ibid. 45. F. H. Yost, "A Short History of the Development and Control of the Physical Welfare Programs for the Students at the University of Michigan," May 1933, Carton 8, UMAP. 194 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY system was one of unified control. Financial expenditures, including those not designated exclusively for intercollegiate athletics, were meticulously reported. Attention was called to the division of authority existing in the 1921-26 period and Yost stated, "when the required physical exercise and intramural sports programs for men and women were in charge of the Division of Hygiene, Public Health and Physical Education, nothing was done to provide any facilities to carry on the intramural programs for men and women." The present plant and facilities were pointed to with great pride, and the addition of six varsity sports, having brought that total to 12, was also detailed.46 The Council's Committee on Program and Policy commended the Board in Control of Athletics for the conscientious manner in which it had performed its duties.47 It then recommended that the name be changed from the Board in Control of Athletics to the Board in Control of Physical Education; that the Chairman of the Board be made a member of the University Council, ex officio; and that in matters of Faculty Personnel and Budget in the Departments of Physical Education and Intramural Athletics, only the Faculty members of the Board in Control of Physical Education be allowed to vote.48 These recommendations served as a compromise on the Sinai Committee's recommendation to remove physical education from the Board in Control completely. The major outcomes of the Sinai Committee's work and deliberations of the University Council were the following resolutions approved by the Regents in February, 1934: (1) that the name of the Board in Control of Athletics be changed to the Board in Control of Physical Education, (2) that the Chairman of the Board in Control of Physical Education be made a member of the University Council ex officio, (3) that a Health Committee be established to administer the requirements in physical education, and its membership was to include the administrative head of the College or School of the student whose physical education needs were being reviewed, a representative of the Health Service, a representative of the Board in Control of Physical Education, and in cases involving women students, the Dean of Women or her representative, (4) all students entering the University were to take a physical examination, (5) all students entering the University from secondary schools were required to complete satisfactorily a oneyear course in Physical Education, and any requirement beyond this one year would be made by the Health Committee in accordance with the needs of the individual concerned and (6) that any individual re46. Ibid. 47. Aigler, Annual Report, 1928-1929, p. 8. 48. Ibid. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 195 quirement in Physical Education, made by the Health Committee in addition to the one-year course, would be considered as a Health and not as a credit requirement.49 The single most important change introduced by these resolutions was the establishment of the University Health Committee, and this action baffled Professor Aigler. "Aside from the fact that the several faculties had voted to reduce the requirement in the case of women, and the further fact that the staff of the Michigan Daily had interested itself in a movement to reduce the requirement for women," he reasoned, "nothing had come to the attention of the Athletic Board indicating that the recommendation of six or seven years earlier that requirements be advanced was unwise or unsound."50 Rather than increase the physical education requirement, a move toward more flexibility made it in fact a one-year.requirement. A survey of 25 universities completed in 1938-39 revealed that the University of Michigan ranked in the lowest quarter with respect to credit and requirement for physical education. The University did not give credit and required only one year of work.51 By this date, students were permitted to select activities in the first semester as well as the second.52 The Yost files indicate that his only involvement in intramurals was in providing facilities to be used in this program. His part in constructing the Intramural Sports Building has already been discussed, and it was largely because of this outstanding building that the University was admired as a leader in the intramural sports movement.53 Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell, the Director of this program for many years in the University of Michigan, credits Fielding H. Yost with having the most to do with making this building a reality.54 Coaching varsity sports or directing the intercollegiate athletics program was not deemed worthy of academic rank in 1921. Phil Bartelme, who preceded Yost as Director, had explained to Yost that this position did not carry faculty rank and that there was opposition to granting it unless the Director held an academic degree in physical education.5< He recalled that, At a meeting held in Dr. Hutchins' office over a year ago between the Deans and the faculty members of the Board in Control and the writer, there was considerable said by Dean Vaughn as to the in49. Proceedings of the Board of Regents, September 1932-June 1936, Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, February 1934 meeting, p. 247. 50. Aigler, Annual Report, 1928-1929, p. 7. 51. E. D. Mitchell, Encyc., p. 1985. 52. Ibid., p. 1984. 53. Elmer D. Mitchell, Interview, December 20, 1969. 54. Ibid. 55. Letter, Bartelme to Yost, June 15, 1921, Carton 2, UMAP. 196 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY consistency of granting a man a professorship as the head of a department of physical education unless he had gained a distinctive reputation in this field of work. His view on this particular phase of the situation seemed to be approved by nod or a few words by the other deans present... Following this line of thinking, no faculty rank accompanied Fielding Yost's appointment as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics in June, 1921. Taking the matter to his influential friend, Regent Murfin, Yost contended that, "So far as I know the Graduate Director and the head coaches at all the Conference Colleges except Michigan are either Professors, Associate Professors or Instructors in the university."50 Dr. George May, Director of Waterman Gymnasium and E. D. Mitchell, Intramural Director, were given faculty rank because their work fell under Dr. Sundwall's Department of Hygiene, Public Health and Physical Education. Regent Murfin referred to these appointments in replying to Yost's letter. "At that time Dr. Burton and I frankly stated to the Board of Regents that this was the first step toward a general policy of this description."57 To get an accurate determination of faculty ranking for coaches throughout the Conference, Yost sent a brief questionnaire to the other athletic directors. The returns made it clear that several of these universities were facing this same problem. Choosing his facts carefully, Yost again appealed to Regent Murfin in February, 1923,8 receiving this more promising response: We were already (sic) at our last Board meeting to give you faculty rank, which you ought to have. Dr. Burton very properly suggested that instead of the request coming from me it should come from the Board in Control of Outdoor (sic) Athletics. He is taking the matter up with Professor Aigler and I am taking the matter up with Jim Duffy.59 The Regent expressed confidence that if the proper resolution were passed at the next meeting of the Board in Control, he could put it through the Board of Regents.00 Shortly thereafter the Board in Control and the Faculty of the School of Education passed resolutions requesting faculty ranking for both Fielding Yost and George Little, the new assistant football coach and Assistant Athletic Director.6' During the school year 1923-24, these two were appointed Professor and Assistant Professor respectively of the Theory and Practice of Athletic Coaching 56. Letter, Yost to Murfin, May 12, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 57. Letter, Murfin to Yost, May 13, 1922, Carton 2, UMAP. 58. Letter, Yost to Murfin, February 9, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 59. Letter, Murfin to Yost, March 3, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 60. Ibid. 61. Letter, Yost to Jim Duffy, May 28, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. EFFECTS ON PHYSICAL EDUCATION 197 in the School of Education."' Yost had been without academic rank his first two and one-half years as Director, and achieving it was due largely to his own requests through Regent James O. Murfin. On various occasions thereafter, Yost addressed the problem of faculty rank for all University athletic coaches to President Little, Regent Murfin and Dean Whitney.63 In 1928 this academic recognition was extended to the entire coaching staff.4" Phil Pack's history of University of Michigan athletics stated in 1940: All of Michigan's full-time coaches are members of the faculty of the School of Education, with academic rank, and teach their respective subjects during the four-year professional course, the graduate course and during the summer sessions.";) A check of University staff and faculty directories indicated that this academic recognition was continuous from 1928 to 1941, the end of this study. No evidence was found to indicate that Yost had anything to do with determining the staff for any phase of the women's physical education program, intramurals or the service program. Authority to select the faculty members who would conduct the professional course was delegated to the Dean of the School of Education by the Regents' resolution of June 22, 1921. Dr. John Sundwall, as Director of the Department of Hygiene, Public Health and Physical Education was to select staff for this work, and Fielding Yost, as Director of Athletics, was authorized to select the athletic coaches with the approval of the Board in Control of Athletics. There was, of course, an overlap in the use of teaching staff, because several of the coaches taught activity and theory of sports classes in the professional curriculum. There were two appointments that seemed to bear more directly on the physical education program than on coaching, and in which Fielding Yost was very instrumental. At his suggestion, assistant football coach, Harvey C. Emery was made Instructor in Physical Education in the School of Education for the University year 1925-26 with compensation at the rate of $3,400 per year.6" The School of Education Faculty wanted to involve coaches more intimately in the teacher preparation program by establishing a counselor to the male physical education 62. Proceedings of the Board of Regents, September 1923-June 1926, Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, p. 161. 63. Letters, Yost to Murfin, February 10, 1926, and Yost to Dean Whitney, May 18, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. Letters Wieman to Whitney, January 30, 1928, and Yost to Dr. Sundwall, November 30, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 64. Letter, Elton "Tad" Wieman to Dean Allen Whitney, January 30, 1928, Carton 5, UMAP. 65. Pack, p. 70. 66. Letter, Secretary Smith to Harvey Emery, June 27, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 198 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY majors. A Princeton graduate whose parents were of substantial wealth, Emery proved an unfortunate choice for the counselor's position. Unable to understand that some of the students in physical education had to work their way through college, his counsel was not very effective.67 He soon resigned, but the faculty position continued and was awarded to Frank Hayes. On June 1, 1929, shortly after he was fired as head football coach of the Michigan team, "Tad" Wieman was given this appointment. He appeared to be sincerely interested in harmonizing intercollegiate athletics with the educational objectives of the University. Similar faculty admiration for him had been evinced four years previously. When George Little resigned to become Director of Athletics at the University of Wisconsin (1925), Wieman was promoted to Assistant Director of Athletics while retaining his assistant football coaching responsibilities. The School of Education saw fit to appoint him Assistant Professor of the Theory and Practice of Physical Education with compensation at the rate of $1,000 per University year.68 This represented a change because Yost's professorship referred only to athletics. Wieman's appointment to the counselor's position in 1929 was viewed with optimism by faculty in the School of Education.69 However, after just one year out of coaching, he was lured to the University of Minnesota to assist the head coach there, H. O. Crisler. Yost also recommended Dr. J. R. Sharman, Director of Physical Education and Health for the State of Alabama, to a position on the University Education Faculty.70 This came at the time when emphasis was shifting to graduate work in Physical Education (1930), and Dr. Sharman, who did no coaching, joined the Michigan faculty and taught some of these courses. Other than the above, there was scant evidence of Yost's having influenced the selection of teaching staff for the physical education program other than those hired chiefly as coaches. 67. Elmer D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. 68. Letter, Secretary Smith to Elton Wieman, June 27, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 69. Elmer D. Mitchell, Interview, April 30, 1969. 70. Letter, Yost to J. R. Sharman, April 24, 1930, Carton 6, UMAP. Chapter VII SUMMING UP When his contribution to athletic programs is scrutinized, Fielding H. Yost was less an originator than an ambitious and resourceful coach. This was evidenced by his football teams and his book, Football For Player And Spectator. As Director of Athletics he again was much less a creative thinker than a strong, outspoken and energetic administrator. This was evidenced by his role in the addition of six varsity sports during the 1920's, his evangelistic efforts to promote educational values through athletics, his relationship to the coaches who succeeded him, the matter of participation in University of Michigan athletics by blacks, his rapport with various University policy-making groups, and the molding of a proud "Michigan Spirit." In the construction of physical facilities for physical education and athletics, Yost was again less an originator than a dynamic and thorough planner who insured the quality of these projects. While many different people clearly contributed to the vast building program conducted from 1921-1931, Fielding H. Yost emerged as the single individual upon whom this burden fell most heavily and to whom the credit should flow the most generously. These facilities brought the dream of "Athletics-for-All" closer to reality. Yost does not seem to have possessed either the educational background or the confidence of the Faculty to have very many of his ideas accepted when his role in the development of physical education programs is examined. Conducting the Summer School for Coaches (1922 -1931) was perhaps his only contribution of note in this area. In summary, Fielding Yost's legacy to physical education and athletics in the University of Michigan was a boundless energy, an admirable executive capacity, and a consuming desire for widespread athletic involvement. While the original ideas were not always his own, he played a major role in bringing them to fruition. The Michigan athletic facilities reflect his broad planning and knowledge of finance and construction. Inspiring leadership was apparent in his many excellent football teams. The positive image of Michigan conveyed both by gridiron successes and public speaking was a subtle and perhaps the most unique aspect of Yost's legacy to the University. On several major issues facing college football and University of Michigan athletics, how 199 200 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY ever, Yost's attitude and leadership were certainly not commendable. Other potential contributions were limited by his inability to win favor with the Faculty. While this research may have answered several questions, it has raised many more. Some may never be answered. For example, would the University's athletic facilities have been completed regardless of whether Yost or another athletic director had held the post in the 1920's? If Dr. John Sundwall had had his way, what would be the organizational structure of physical education and athletics in the University today? Why was it that Michigan, often claiming to be "Champions of the West," did not play Notre Dame University's football team from 1909-1941? Also, why was Yost so highly regarded in the public eye, while he encountered substantial opposition from the University Faculty? Acting on the premise that even conjecture, when so designated, may be helpful to a later historian, I'd like to speculate on these questions. On the issue of athletic facilities, it may have taken many years longer to reach the development attained by 1931 if Yost had not acted persistently to gain the additional seating and revenue provided by Michigan Stadium. The Great Depression followed quickly on the heels of the prosperous 1920's, and while legislators could be persuaded to grant funds for many University needs, physical education and athletics were unlikely to enjoy a high priority. The Faculty sought to restrict the size of Michigan Stadium lest the University become a purveyor of popular entertainment and lose sight of its educational goals. Yost saw the larger crowds not as a deterrent to academic goals, but as providing a closer and healthy alliance between the public and their University. He was probably right and the Faculty wrong. Further, he did not intend to see Michigan's football seating surpassed by rival Ohio State or Illinois universities. Having recently completed the Yost Field House, he must have also realized the potential for similar construction represented by larger gate receipts. Another athletic director may have also guided the construction of Michigan's athletic facilities, but to surpass the plant as it stood in 1931 would have been most difficult. If Dr. John Sundwall had had his way, physical education and athletics might have traveled the same path as the current School of Public Health, and may have been a School of Physical Education and Athletics in the University of Michigan today. The plan looked good on paper and Michigan was not opposed to trying out a new idea. This School could have done revolutionary work in the field of human performance with its close link to the medical research facilities and the gifted varsity athletes. It is also possible that major conflicts would have arisen regarding athletics under Dr. Sundwall's leadership. The scienceoriented curriculum might have pitted physical education majors against SUMMING UP 201 pre-med students in the same classrooms, and eliminated a number of less academically gifted but capable athletes aspiring to be physical educators. Also, the views expressed by Dr. Sundwall in articles written previous to his arrival at Michigan make it clear that he was upset with what he termed the tail (intercollegiate athletics) wagging the dog (physical education). Any attempt by Dr. Sundwall to modify or reduce the emphasis given to intercollegiate football in the 1920's might have spawned the same divisions of program and faculty allegiances that actually plagued its development from 1921-1941. Why was it that Michigan, often claiming to be the "Champions of the West," did not play Notre Dame University's football team from 1909-1941? South Bend was a relatively short distance from Ann Arbor, and the Irish fielded nationally prominent teams under Coach Knute Rockne (1917-1930). This question was not answered conclusively, but a few letters found in the UMAP suggest that coaches Rockne and Yost were not the best of friends. Their failure to meet on the gridiron seems more than coincidental. Two letters refer, without detail, to a controversy between Michigan and Notre Dame universities stemming back to their 1909 football encounter.' A series of three very heated letters were exchanged between Rockne and Yost in 1923.2 At issue was the advice not to play Notre Dame, being offered liberally by Yost to other members of the Big Ten. Yost believed that the Irish, by following rules less strict than the Conference and compiling an excellent winning record, were obtaining all the advantages of the Conference without any of its restrictions.3 Another factor was referred to by South Bend attorney, Charles Wattles, as "the hurdle race episode in 1923."4 Yost's rapport with Rockne in the fall of 1923 was so impaired that he asked Harry Hammond in New York to get him two tickets to the Army-Notre Dame game at South Bend explaining, "I do not know of any Notre Dame man I can take this matter up with, at least in time to be of any benefit."5 The following fall Rockne displayed no ill-feelings in writing to borrow a copy of Yost's, Football For Player and Spectator (1905). Rockne wanted to use the book in his coaching course at Notre Dame to show those young coaches how little was really new in football techniques and fundamentals.6 He complimented Yost for pioneering contributions to college football. It appears that this respect was not mutual. 1. Letter, Andrew S. Baker to Yost, January 22, and Yost to Baker, January 27, 1936, Carton 9, UMAP. 2. Letter, Rockne to Yost, June 14, Yost to Rockne, June 18, and Rockne to Yost, June 23, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 3. Letter, Yost to John L. Griffith, December 23, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 4. Letter, Wattles to Yost, December 8, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 5. Letter, Yost to Hammond, October 9, 1923, Carton 3, UMAP. 6. Letter, Rockne to Yost, August 5, 1924, Carton 3, UMAP. 202 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY When the University of California at Berkeley became interested in securing Rockne's services following Notre Dame's undefeated 1924 season, California President, W. W. Campbell, asked Yost's estimate of Coach Rockne.7 Yost wrote: I believe I realize just what you want to know about Mr. Knute Rockne, of Notre Dame University, South Bend, Indiana. In the first place, Notre Dame University is a Catholic institution. These institutions for some reason or other, have been a rather independent lot so far as going into any organized group where the administration and control of intercollegiate competition is concerned. They have been very independent with their own rules and regulations regarding scholastic standing and eligibility. MaZny of the rules governing competition in the Western Conference are not enforced at Notre Dame. In other words, Notre Dame athletic teams have many advantages from just a purely competitive standpoint. Knute Rockne is a graduate of Notre Dame University but is a Protestant... His reputation for sportsmanship is good so far as the game is concerned. I do not know the extent of his interest in all around physical development. My information is that he is interested only in competitive athletics. In my opinion, he would 'fret' under the administration and restrictions as exist in our Western Intercollegiate Conference Universities The Western Conference has had a rule since 1906 that coaches salaries shall be in keeping with the salaries paid other members of the faculty. I think this rule very sound. I believe that all the football coaches in the Conference are members of the faculty of their respective universities, and that the athletic program at each of our universities is administered as a integral part of the education program. I do not want to do Mr. Rockne any injustice. Personally he is a very likeable fellow. I am writing you frankly and confidentially President Campbell thanked Yost for his comments indicating, They have influenced my point of view, and I think also of the two or three officials in the Southern Branch of the University who have responsibilities as to intercollegiate athletics... I have urged Assistant Professor Miller, who is the Dean of Men of the Southern Branch, to endeavor to have a conference with you as part of his trip to the east. We appreciate anything you can do to assist us in finding the right man to serve as Director of Athletics in the Southern Branch.9 7. Letter, President W. W. Campbell to Yost, February 23, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 8. Letter, Yost to Campbell, March 14, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. 9. Letter, Campbell to Yost, April 1, 1925, Carton 3, UMAP. SUMMING UP 203 Yost's contempt for Notre Dame was further increased following a speaking engagement in 1926. He wrote Big Ten Commissioner, John L. Griffith, complaining that the Irish were taking advantage of the Conference: I was in Battle Creek at the Battle Creek College football banquet and found that they have played Bronson Hall, of Notre Dame, in one of their football games... In other words... they are without restriction, they have competition for all their teams, hall teams, freshmen teams and second teams-they can play as long as they like and can be absent from college two weeks, and so far as I know, never have a man ineligible scholastically that was a good varsity man. In other words, we are furnishing all the funds and prestige to help maintain this institution athletically in.the course it is pursuing.10 A few weeks later, Yost answered an inquiry from a Los Angeles insurance man by saying, There are many reasons why Michigan does not compete with Notre Dame. I am enclosing you a copy of an article which purports an interview with Rockne. You will see from this that he wishes to be free and independent... Thus, they should confine their schedule to universities with like ideas of freedom of action and rules of eligibility."1 After the 1909 season, Notre Dame did not again appear on the University of Michigan football schedule until 1942. Prior to his retirement Yost contracted the home-and-home arrangement that saw the Irish lose to Michigan 32-20 in South Bend in 1942 and win in Ann Arbor the following year 35-12 before 86,408 spectators. No further games were scheduled and 1943 marks the last meeting of these two teams to date. Recently, Michigan has completed steps that will return Notre Dame to the football schedule. Perhaps the most fascinating and incongruous aspect of Fielding Yost was the consistently high public regard in which he was held and the much different attitude displayed by the Faculty. The key to understanding this may rest in the vantage point of these two groups. Publicly, Yost was characterized as a clean-liver and a widely-publicized winner who made good his boasts. Popular sentiment called for a winning Michigan team, a seat in the Michigan Stadium and all that accompanied this entertaining football spectacle. Yost appeared to be trying to provide just that, while the Faculty were restraining his efforts. He made extensive use of personal speaking engagements, newspaper 10. Letter, Yost to Griffith, December 23, 1926, Carton 4, UMAP. 11. Letter, Yost to Harold Herbold, January 18, 1927, Carton 4, UMAP. 204 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY and radio to bring University of Michigan athletics and wholesome principles of citizenship to many Americans. Recurring themes in these addresses were loyalty and service to the University. He became a master at describing personal tributes paid him by admiring alumni as a manifestation of their loyalty to the University. Yost's drive for publicity and self-proclamations of genius were enthusiastically endorsed by sportswriters and brought him wide recognition off the campus. Consistently displaying an evangelistic certainty, Yost cleverly prefaced statements with "So far as I know... " or "All those I have talked to say...," enabling him to sound positive in spite of incomplete knowledge. Sheltered from any facts other than those presented by Yost, the general public was unlikely to distinguish between his exaggerations and his accomplishments-both of which were sizeable. Yost's coaching successes, popularity with students and alumni, or his extensive publicity, may have evoked professional jealousies among some faculty members. The fact that his salary had consistently been much larger than that received by most of them no doubt had the same effect. Aside from these factors, however, the Faculty surely assessed him differently from what the general public did. They were concerned that in the interest of assembling winning teams many of the ideals propagated by Yost were being sacrificed. He had not been eager for reform in 1906 when it appeared to reduce Michigan's and his chances for gridiron success. He had been the last of Michigan's head coaches to join the Faculty on a full-time basis. As a speaker, Yost admonished those who placed great pressure on coaches to win. As Director of Athletics, he could not endure a Michigan coach who suffered many losses. It may be that these replacements were made necessary by inferior performance of duties or because team and coaching staff morale were at a dangerously low ebb. In his public speeches, Yost never suggested that these kinds of realities must be faced. He was bitterly opposed to the non-intercourse rule passed by the Western Conference preventing members from playing schools not following its rules and regulations. Its specific effect was to prevent Michigan from playing football against Minnesota after the Wolverines had withdrawn from the Big Ten. Once Conference membership had been re-established, Yost advocated enforcement of the non-intercourse rule to the extent of encouraging Big Ten members not to schedule games with Notre Dame University. There may have been Faculty resentment resulting from pressures Yost brought to bear in 1921 as he sought broader academic responsibilities than the Deans and President Burton chose to give him. They looked upon the curriculum as their domain and perhaps some faculty men remembered the popular pressures that prompted the Regents in SUMMING UP 205 1908 to negate faculty control of athletics, apparently to the satisfaction of Yost. It is certain that the Faculty had a clearer view than the public of Yost's exuberant and perhaps arrogant approach to curriculum planning in 1921, to his usurpation or responsibilities specifically delegated to Dr. Sundwall in the 1920's, and to his inability to permit the men who succeeded him as football coach a free reign. To some faculty members Yost may have appeared as a man obsessed with himself and intercollegiate football. In fairness to Yost, he did develop an interest in other phases of physical education and athletics after becoming Director of Athletics in 1921, but even as late as 1933 the Sinai Committee concluded that he and the Board in Control had not been altogether successful. Serving on this seven member Committee that described the Board as being preoccupied with intercollegiate athletics were Dr. Margaret Bell and Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell, the Directors of the Women's and Men's Physical Education programs respectively. There appeared to be a discrepancy between what Yost advocated for others and what he did when personally confronted with the problems. Perhaps many of the University faculty interpreted this as hypocrisy and thus showed little confidence in his leadership. These uncomplimentary aspects of Yost's life were not given the publicity, of course, accorded Michigan athletic triumphs, the sound advice to youth and Yost's work in the University to promote "Athletics-for-All." Thus, determining where Fielding H. Yost and his proponents have been too laudatory and his opponents too disparaging has made the measurement of his legacy to the University of Michigan very challenging. 206 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY October 20, 1946, THE PASSING OF A LEGEND. Bearing the Yost coffin and L. to R. J. Fred Lawton, Ben Oosterbaan, Matt Mann, Bob Brown, Andy Baker, and Paul Goebel. Bibliographical Notes I. Primary Sources A. Letters and Papers The University of Michigan Athletic Papers (UMAP) provided the primary source material upon which the research was largely based. Housed in the Michigan Historical Collections Library on the University of Michigan campus, this collection is unmatched for its thorough and intimate portrayal of Yost's career. His business and presonal correspondence make up the bulk, and is contained in 26 numbered cartons with approximately 6,000 pieces of mail or other written material per carton. If a Yost press release was colored to suit his purposes, and there were obvious examples of this, he often stated the facts frankly in another letter to a friend. Yost's habit of saving detailed written material, such as personal income data, both complimentary and uncomplimentary letters, telegrams, and a variety of reports, speeches and numerous other printed information provide a wealth of historical background data. Frequently he made carbon copies of handwritten correspondence that might otherwise have been difficult to read. He would have several copies made of letters or agreements that he considered important, and he often set down telephone or other oral agreements in writing, promptly sending a letter recounting the conversation to the other party. The Michigan Historical Collections Library also supplied several scrapbooks kept by the Yost family filled with news clippings describing Yost's speaking engagements, the exploits of his teams and other memorabilia. Approximately 40 other volumes held copies of Yost's speeches; correspondence and notes made in 1921 on establishing the Physical Education Department; correspondence in preparation for the dedication of Yost Field House; news clippings following the publication of Yost's book in 1905; reports and resolutions of the Board in Control of Athletics; football play books; football scouting information; structuring of the Summer School for Coaches; and other similar materials. Several other collections in this Library served as a cross check on the UMAP. They were the papers of Dr. Sundwall, Regent Murfin and University presidents 1901-1941. B. Newspapers, Magazines, Published Reports, and Books In spite of the vastness of the UMAP, several issues of The Michigan Daily, the University of Michigan's student newspaper, The Michigan Alumnus, the University of Michigan's Alumni publication, and the 207 208 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY University of Michigan, President's Report, issued annually, were invaluable in describing the development and regulation of Michigan's intercollegiate athletics where the UMAP did not supply answers. The Detroit Times carried Fielding Yost's "My 30 Years In Football," a syndicated series of approximately 50 biographical articles. Yost's own book, Football For Player and Spectator (1905), gives his view of the game in those "point-a-minute" years. C. Interviews Six interviewees lent guidance and verification to this research. Mrs. Fielding H. Yost, wife of the subject of this work,- discussed many aspects of her husband's life and work in several interviews. Mr. Ben Oosterbaan, one of Yost's finest football players and a University of Michigan football and basketball coach,himself, reflected on Yost's coaching ability and direction of athletics in three interviews. Dr. Elmer D. Mitchell, in three interviews, answered numerous questions concerning Yost and Michigan's programs and facilities in physical education and athletics. Dr. Mitchell came to know these subjects well as basketball coach, Intramural Director, Chairman of the Physical Education Department and faculty member of the Board in Control during his service to the University that spanned 1917-58. Mr. Ira Smith, Registrar in the University from 1925-55, was interviewed on three occasions. Mr. Smith also lent his file of Yost materials accumulated during several years as chairman of the Athletic Eligibility Committee and as a member of the Board in Control of Athletics. Professor H. 0. "Fritz" Crisler, who succeeded Yost and served as head football coach (1938-48), Director of Athletics (1941-68), was interviewed at the close of the research. At this same time, an interview was conducted with Professor Marcus L. Plant, current secretary of the Board in Control of Athletics in the University of Michigan and past President of the NCAA. Through his intimate association with fellow Law Professor, Ralph Aigler, a dynamic force on the Board in Control from 1913-35, Professor Plant was able to lend insight into Aigler's thinking not elsewhere available to this study. II. Secondary Sources A. Histories of the University of Michigan The following six monographs served as general guides in the evolution of programs and facilities in the University. Elizabeth Ferrand's, History of the University of Michigan, 1885, and Edwin Humphrey's, The Michigan Book, 1898, provided very early accounts. They were supplemented by Burke A. Hinsdale's, History of the University of BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES 209 Michigan, 1906, and Wilfred B. Shaw's, The University of Michigan, 1920. A more recent view of this growth and development was found in Kent Sagendorph's, The Story of The University, 1948, and Howard H. Peckham's, The Making of The University of Michigan, 1817-1967, 1967. B. Histories of Physical Education and Athletics in the University of Michigan Perhaps the most helpful source in this area was The University of Michigan, An Encyclopedic Survey, Volumes IV (1958) and VI (1952), prepared under the editorships of Wilfred B. Shaw, Walter A. Donnelly and Ruth Gjelsness. The University's Intramural Directors, Earl N. Riskey and Rodney J. Grambeau, wrote that program's history. Les F. Etter, for many years the Wolverines' sports publicity director, chronicled the intercollegiate athletics programs. Elmer D. Mitchell, former chairman of the Program of Physical Education for Men, and Howard C. Leibee, Director of the Service Program, prepared the history of the physical education program for men. The women's program was covered by Ruth Gjelsness. Dr. Mitchell also wrote the description of the fouryear teacher preparation course in physical education. Marcus L. Plant prepared the section on administration of Intercollegiate Athletics. Similar accounts that were brief, but meticulously researched, were, "Intramural Athletics At The University of Michigan," by Rodney J. Grambeau and Robert Bowen, Jr., and "The Beginning Of The Four Year Curriculum In Physical Education," by Lua Bartley. Both of these articles appear in Studies In The History of Higher Education In Michigan, Claude Eggertsen (ed.), 1950. Philip Pack, who became the University's first sports publicity director in 1925, has published the only book surveying the history of Wolverine intercollegiate athletic teams, 100 Years of Athletics, The University of Michigan (1837-1937), (1940). He included a brief description of the origins and growth of the physical education and athletics programs with a heavy emphasis on pictures, scores and records. A limiting factor in the account of the physical education program is its clear reflection of Fielding Yost's biased editing. Three other sources were read, but contributed very little of substance to this research: (1) Howard L. Robert's, The Big Nine, 1948, devoted four chapters to University of Michigan football; (2) J. Fred Lawton wrote poetically about the man he idolized in, "Hurry Up" Yost in Story and Song, 1947; and (3) The Magazine of Sigma Chi, No. 1, January-February, 1948. This entire issue is dedicated to its recently deceased Fraternity Brother, Fielding H. Yost. It is a symposium of tributes to Yost and covers many of the great moments of his life. 210 FIELDING YOST'S LEGACY C. Histories of American Football A heavy reliance was placed upon The History of American Football, by Allison Danzig (1956), who reported sports for The New York Times for over 30 years. Likewise, Howard J. Savage's American College Athletics (1929) was utilized here. Perhaps better known as the "Carnegie Report," it was an attempt to make an objective survey into the problems of recruiting and subsidization of college athletes. While its success in this latter purpose may well be challenged, the detailed account of early organization in college football was very valuable to this research. Dick Lamb and Bert McGrane have prepared a fine account of football at the State University of Iowa from 1872-1964 in their, 75 Years With the Fighting Hawkeyes, 1964. D. Histories of Physical Education in the United States The general accounts relied upon most heavily were, History of Physical Education, by Charles W. Hackensmith (1966); A Brief History of Physical Education, by Emmett A. Rice, John L. Hutchinson and Mabel Lee, 1958; A World History of Physical Education, Deobold B. Van Dalen, Elmer D. Mitchell and Bruce L. Bennett, (1953); and Making of American Physical Education, by Arthur Weston (1962). E. Dissertations in the History of Physical Education and Athletics Four dissertations completed in the University of Michigan supplied background material on the early development of physical education and athletics. They were, Kooman Boycheff's "Intercollegiate Athletics and Physical Education at the University of Chicago, 1892-1952," (1954); Bruce Bennett's "The Life of Dudley Allen Sargent, M.D., And His Contributions To Physical Education," (1947); Elmer D. Mitchell's "The Growth Of Physical Education And Allied Movements In The State of Michigan: A Study Of Institutional Acceptance And Integration," (1938); and Arnold Flath's "A History Of The Relation Between The National Collegiate Athletic Association And The Amateur Athletic Union Of The United States, 1905-63," (1963). t I r"I I)-, 114K A