Michigan differs in no respect from other American universities in the general and, some would have it, the extravagant interest in outdoor sports which have come to be defined under the general term “athletics.” This emphasis on contests and games of strength and skill is universal and is woven into the very fabric of student life in all our universities and colleges. We cannot therefore avoid the conclusion that it is an inevitable and characteristic expression of the American spirit. It is only natural for the sons and grandsons of the men who settled this country to take an interest in wholesome and vigorous sports; in fact it would be a sad commentary on the degeneracy of the modern generation if such an expression of their inheritance were not evident. But a distinctively American attitude towards sport is also manifested in the intense personal and university rivalries developed, the very rock upon which the modern system of inter-collegiate athletics rests, no less than in the genius for organization and systemization which has, within the last twenty-five years, made organized athletics such a tremendous factor in the life of all American universities.

Whatever changes the future is to bring in the development and control of inter-collegiate athletics, our universities cannot very well escape the fundamental fact that they have become an integral part of our university system, and that, rather than attempting a change by radical measures, they can best correct any present abuses by wise regulation, by a constant effort toward a modification of the present overwhelming emphasis on the one game, football, and above all, by a consistent encouragement of universal participation on the part of the students in some form of college sport. This, in fact, is the latest development. It is not so much a reform as a return to older traditions, from which we have departed only in comparatively recent years, as the following review of Michigan’s athletic history will show. This survey is offered, however, not so much because of its relation to the general development of the present-day attitude toward sports in American universities as because it may have particular interest for every Michigan graduate, whether he counts himself a radical or a conservative in matters athletic.

It goes without saying that there was almost no thought of organized sport in the early days. Nathaniel West, ’46, once told the Washington alumni, that “among our athletics were various forms of activity the foot race from a quarter to a half mile, baseball, a few rods from the stile,” and what will seem certainly a novel event to a modern athlete, “sawing our own wood and carrying it upstairs.” Edmund Andrews, the President of ’49, has also left a record of his time.

Athletics were not regularly organized, nor had we any gymnasium. We played base-ball, wicket ball, two-old-cat, etc., but there was no foot-ball nor any trained “teams.” There was mere ex tempore volunteering. We had jumping wickets in the same way. Fencing and boxing were totally neglected. The Huron River furnished little opportunity for boating.

This we may take as a fair picture of athletic activities for many years. Cricket was undoubtedly the first sport to be organized in the University, as the Palladium for 1860-61 gives the names of the eight officers and twenty-five members of the “Pioneer Cricket Club,” while the Regents’ Report for June, 1865, shows an appropriation of $50 for a cricket ground on the Campus, the first official recognition of athletics in the University. The game of wicket, which was a modification of cricket, was played with a soft ball five to seven inches in diameter, and with two wickets (mere laths or light boards) laid upon posts about four inches high and some forty feet apart. The “outs” tried to bowl these down, and the “ins” to defend them with curved broad-ended bats. It was necessary to run between the wickets at each strike.

The need for a gymnasium was speedily recognized, but the agitation for it among the students continued for thirty years before the present building was finally completed in 1894. The first gymnasium was an old military barracks which was transformed into a gymnasium of a sort about the year 1858. It stood near the site of the old heating plant at the side of the present Engineering Building, and as it was very open to the weather, resting only on poles sunken in the ground and with a tan bark floor, it was used only in warm weather. The apparatus consisted of a few bare poles, ropes, and rings. Even this make-shift was short-lived, for in 1868 the class of ’70 erected a “gymnasium in embryo” described by a graduate of ’75 as “two uprights with a cross-beam and ropes dangling from eye-bolts the remains of some prehistoric effort towards muscular development,” which was to be found “back of the Museum"; otherwise the old North Wing. Mark Norris, ’79, thus pictures the comparatively primitive state of athletics in the University of his day:

The athletic side of the University was almost wholly undeveloped in 1875. There was no organization and no chance for systematic work. The absence of a gymnasium and practice ground will account for this. Football was a contest between classes, and a mob of 100 to 150 men on a side chasing the pig-skin over the Campus was a sight to make the football expert of today go into convulsions. We had a little base-ball of the “butter fingers” type. At one time we had a boat-club, which navigated the raging Huron above the dam in a six-oared barge.

But with the opening of the year 1885 the old rink, later to become the armory, was fitted up as a gymnasium and a great impetus was given to all athletic interests, which by this time were beginning to be organized. As a natural result the student demand for a real gymnasium was becoming more and more vociferous. As far back as 1868 the University Chronicle had voiced the sentiment in a two-column editorial, in which the writer thus describes the awful state of the University, when the only form of exercise was the opportunity to,

walk around two or three squares, down to the post office and back to our rooms again. This already has become a melancholy task; but we must choose it, or its sadder alternative, the old buck-saw. True there are students among us who will have exercise if cramming professors are ever so vexed. They will not study on Sunday; they escape to the woods, admire nature desecrate the Sabbath. They find relaxation at the billiard table, make effigies in the night to be burned in the morning, remove side-walks, dislocate gates, or arm-in-arm parade the side-walk singing: “Happy is the maid who shall meet us.”

By 1865 the efforts of the students resulted in a fund of something over $4,000. The Legislature that year almost gave the necessary appropriation for a gymnasium provided the students contributed what they had raised. But the project finally fell through and it was not until 1891, when Joshua W. Waterman, of Detroit, long a patron of sports in the University, offered to give $20,000, provided a like amount be raised from other sources, that the building became assured. Three years later Waterman Gymnasium was at last completed at a cost of $61,876.49 toward which sum private donors had contributed $49,524.34. The $6,000 which the students eventually raised through so many years of effort were used for equipment. The new “gym” was 150 feet long by 90 feet wide, with a running track in the balcony of 14 laps to the mile. These accommodations proved ample for many years; but the recent growth of the student body finally made an increase in space imperative, and in 1916 an extension of 48 feet was added at each end, making the main floor 248 feet long with a ten-lap running track.

The interest in all forms of outdoor athletics, which was developing rapidly by 1890, made an athletic field no less necessary than a gymnasium. The corner of the Campus where the Gymnasium now stands, which, from the earliest days of baseball had been devoted to athletics, was crowded and inconvenient, even for practice games; while the old fair grounds in the southeastern part of the city were not under University control, besides being ill-adapted to college games. The streets and Campus were popular for impromptu games, although the arm of the law was unduly active in the spring, and “the batting of balls” was conspicuously forbidden on a sign which long decorated the south wall of the Museum. The Regents recognized this need of a great playground, however, and purchased what is now the south ten acres of Ferry Field in 1891, though it was not opened to the students until 1893. This went by the name of “Regents’ Field” until 1902, when the Hon. D.M. Ferry of Detroit gave an additional twenty-one acres lying between the old field and the University, and furnished funds for the present impressive entrance gates and ticket offices, since which time it has been known by the name of the donor. Subsequent purchases of neighboring property have increased the total to nearly eighty acres. Though this is by no means all in use at present, thirty-eight acres are graded, drained, and enclosed on three sides by a high brick wall. Two great stands, one of concrete, accommodate nearly 25,000 spectators at the “big games,” while an attractive club house at one end furnishes accommodations for the players and members of visiting teams.

An effective student athletic organization was only less tardy in making its appearance than the long-awaited gymnasium and athletic field. In contrast to the modern student journals, the earliest files of the Chronicle are distinguished by their exceedingly rare references to athletic events, and then only in a very occasional modest item giving the immodest score of some class contest, such as the baseball game between ’71 and ’72 on May 29, 1869, when the score ran 50 to 36. Shortly after this time came the first student athletic organization, informally known as the “Baseball Clubs” which became the Baseball Association in 1876. A similar Football Association was organized in 1873 and continued until 1878 when both clubs were merged in the first Athletic Association of the University. This was the organization responsible for the student fund for the Gymnasium. But successful as the new organization proved in financial matters, it soon fell into the almost inevitable desuetude of so many student undertakings and finally, in 1884, fell “victim of the football and baseball teams which it sought to control.”

Its successor was the present Athletic Association, organized in 1890 through a consolidation of all the athletic interests in the University. This Association was long maintained almost exclusively by the students whose voluntary membership was marked by a little “athletic button” of varying design, without which no student in good standing with his fellows would be seen. With the establishment of a general athletic fee, or “blanket tax,” by the University in 1912, which admitted the student to all athletic events and was paid with the other University fees, and with the growing influence of the Board in Control of Athletics, the character of the Athletic Association gradually changed. However, the organization still continues to elect its officers and Board of Directors, who elect the three student representatives on the Board in Control from a list of six nominated by the Board. The student managers of the athletic teams are now appointed by the coach, the captain of the team and the retiring manager. Since 1899 the general direction of the affairs of the Athletic Association has been in the hands of two men, Charles Baird, ’95, who was appointed Graduate Director of Athletics in that year, and Phillip G. Bartelme, a former member of the class of ’99, who succeeded him in 1909, and now holds the title of Director of Outdoor Athletics.

The first attempt at organized collegiate sport in the University dates from the time of the Civil War, for it was in 1863 that baseball was first introduced among the students. Two men are given the credit, John M. Hinchman, ’62-’65, who had been a member of the Detroit Club, and E.L. Grant, ’66, who as a freshman became interested in accounts of the game as it was being played by a few clubs in and around New York. With some of his friends he wrote for information in the spring of 1863, and later ordered bases, balls and clubs, and proceeded to lay out a diamond on the northeast corner of the Campus which was afterward maintained by the University.

Baseball in those days differed considerably from the present game; the pitcher was restricted to an underhand delivery; the catch of a foul bound meant an “out”; strikes were not called; and bases on balls were unknown; while owing to the straight-arm pitching, the batting was much heavier and the scores larger. There was not much of a team in 1863, but the effort resulted in the organization of the first University Baseball Club in the spring of 1864, with Hinchman, who was the catcher, as president and captain. The members of the team had no uniforms and paid their own expenses, as no admission was charged for the games. While the opposing teams and the scores are not on record, the nine was judged highly successful and was very popular. In the fall of 1865 the team defeated Jackson, Ypsilanti, and Dexter and was in turn defeated by a team from Lodi Township near Ann Arbor. General interest in the game was evidently spreading rapidly.

In 1867 the Club was groomed for the championship of the State; student subscriptions were solicited; class nines were formed to give them sufficient practice, and the dignity of white uniforms was at last attained. Finally the team, accompanied by seventy supporters, it was long before the day of “rooters,” traveled to Detroit and met the Detroit Champions. The game lasted three hours and a half, included six home runs, and was won by the University with the wholly satisfactory score of 70 to 18, Detroit being unable to hit Blackburn the University pitcher sufficiently, though, judged by modern standards, his record was not exactly a “shut-out.” A return game, however, played in the fall resulted in the defeat of the University 36 to 20, while the final game of the series, a year later, ran to eleven innings with the University finally winning 26 to 24. Soon after this the Detroit team disbanded and for some years baseball languished in the University; partly because of the lack of opponents for so redoubtable a nine, and partly because the first enthusiasm for the game had waned. Interest revived somewhat in 1873, but aside from inter-class games the only available opponents were mostly professional clubs from the neighboring towns, who were ordinarily outclassed by the college men. With the abolition of the old straight-arm pitching in 1875 and the calling of strikes established, the extravagant scores began to be materially reduced.

Michigan’s first inter-collegiate baseball game was with Wisconsin on May 20, 1882. It was played at Ann Arbor and resulted in a victory 20 to 8. This game came as a result of the formation of an Inter-collegiate Baseball League, composed of Michigan, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Racine, in which the Varsity easily won the championship. Unsatisfactory arrangements for the traveling expenses of the team, however, caused Michigan to withdraw from the League the next year and the nine was forced once more to fall back upon the professional and semi-professional teams in neighboring cities. Oberlin appeared upon the schedule in 1886 and Michigan Agricultural College twice defeated the Varsity the following year. But if these years saw no remarkable schedules, the team was, nevertheless, steadily improving. The fielding average of the ’88 team was .908; and though less can be said of the batting, two members, McDonnell, ’88, and McMillan, ’86-’89, had averages of .448 and .406 respectively. The Chronicle also was jubilant over the financial success of the ’88 season which left a surplus of $50 in the treasury, after “elegant new suits” had been purchased.

Confidence in the ability of the team led to the first Eastern trip in 1890, which resulted in a close and exciting 2 to 1 victory over Cornell at Ithaca, May 16. From this time on Cornell and other Eastern colleges appeared with fair regularity in the schedule. Games with Harvard and Yale were arranged in 1891, and every candidate was pledged to strict training after February first under Peter Conway, a famous National League pitcher. The trip resulted in a creditable record; and although the game with Yale was lost 2 to 0, only three hits were scored off the pitcher, Codd, ’91, a record for the Varsity almost as welcome as a victory. The game with Harvard, won 4 to 3, was peculiarly satisfying to the tired team, which had already played six games, and had had, in the words of Captain Codd, “as hard a course of training as any University team had, up to that time, ever undergone.... We had given our Eastern antagonists a pretty good ‘practice game,’” (the Harvard manager’s term). Conditions were reversed the following year when Yale was defeated 3 to 2, but Harvard won 4 to 2. Michigan returned to her Western rivals in 1893 and was almost uniformly successful for several years.

An Eastern trip in 1894 was less fortunate, for it resulted in an unbroken series of defeats from Vermont, Dartmouth, Harvard, Princeton, and Cornell. The spell with Cornell was broken, however, in 1895, when Michigan won a decided victory 11 to 0, at Detroit, and had some revenge for previous defeats. E.C. Shields, ’94, ’96l, center field and captain of the team that year, has described the winning of this game as the “most satisfactory moment” of his athletic career; the team was the best Michigan had ever had, and the game after the first few innings became a successful struggle on the part of the pitcher, Sexton, ’98m, and his team-mates to make it a “shut-out.” Since that day Michigan has more than broken even in her games with Cornell.

Baseball at this time was genuinely popular; all of the classes in the Literary Department as well as many in the professional schools had their own teams, which not only gave the Varsity good practice but played in a league among themselves, while the fraternities also had a league of some years’ standing. This popularity of the national game was soon to pass, however, with the increasing vogue of football, and it has never regained the pre-eminent place it held in student favor during the period which ended in 1900, though, it has always had many enthusiastic followers.

The year ’99 saw an especially strong team, which not only was successful in the West but at least divided honors on the first Eastern trip of some years. Particularly spectacular was the final game with Illinois which won the championship. Michigan had already won two out of three games, but with a victory in the last of the series Illinois saw a chance to claim the Western honors. In the sixth inning Illinois had men on second and third and no one out. Guy Miller, ’98, ’00l, otherwise known as “Sox,” was put in as pitcher, and though he had won a hard game the day before, he struck out the next two batters. The last man was put out easily, and Miller held the rest of the game safely, with a final score of 4 to 2.

Two fairly successful years followed, marked, however, by a uniformly disastrous Eastern trip in 1901. Then followed in 1902 “the most unsuccessful baseball season in years,” though the end came with a victory over Cornell, 7 to 4, largely through the efforts of Michigan’s greatest all-round athlete, Neil Snow, ’02, in the last contest of his athletic career. He was responsible for six of the seven runs, bringing in three men with one three-base hit, while he himself managed to score on a poor throw.

A final defeat from Illinois the following year just missed the championship of the West for Michigan. It is worthy of mention that it was at this game, on which many undergraduate hopes were centered, that the custom of singing “The Yellow and the Blue” in defeat as well as in victory was inaugurated. The Western championship rested with Michigan in 1905 and again in 1906, but this was destined to be the last time for many years. Much of the success of these two teams was due to Frank Sanger, ’07l, who was considered the best college pitcher in the West.

With 1907 begins another story. Michigan was now out of the Conference and there began a progressive decline in interest in baseball. Many small colleges soon appeared on the schedules, and in 1908 the South began to figure prominently in the earlier season games. A few games with Eastern colleges relieved the monotony, but the results were far from being always satisfactory. Two interesting games with the Japanese students of Keio University ended the season of 1911. While the University won both games with scores of 20 to 5 and 3 to 1, they demonstrated how apt the Oriental has been in picking up the fine points of the great American game. Some amends for an unsuccessful season were made on June 26, 1912 by a thrilling 2 to 1 victory over Pennsylvania before the thousands of guests and alumni who had gathered to celebrate the University’s Seventy-Fifth Anniversary.

The painstaking efforts of Branch Rickey, who had been coach of the team since 1910, and later became manager of the St. Louis American League team, began to show results in 1913. The following year Michigan, in spite of no significant Western games, had some justification for claiming the national championship through victories in two series of games with Cornell and Pennsylvania, the acknowledged leaders of the East. This record was due in no small part to the prowess of one player, George Sisler, ’15e, who, from his first season in 1913, showed the extraordinary ability that made him not only Michigan’s greatest baseball player but one of the best all-round players in the history of the game. While in the University he alternated as pitcher and left fielder and was captain of the team in 1914. This was the year Carl Lundgren began his successful career as baseball coach. An unexpected weakness in critical games and an unfortunate discussion over professionalism were probably the reasons for the poor success in 1915 of what was essentially an unusually competent team, while a nine composed almost entirely of inexperienced players counted heavily against the 1916 record.

With the declaration of war in the spring of 1917 all forms of athletics were suspended. The value of outdoor sports, as a means of developing the physique of the future soldier, as well as the powers of leadership and co-operation so necessary in military service, was not at first recognized, and only after the baseball and track seasons of 1917 were long past was a more reasonable attitude toward collegiate athletics inaugurated as a result of an earnest plea on the part of the Government that, as far as practicable, they be re-established.

Michigan’s return to the Western Conference early in 1918 was marked by her first undisputed baseball championship since 1905, the team winning nine out of ten Conference games played. This record was practically repeated in 1919, the Varsity winning all but one out of a schedule of thirteen games, and that one not with a Conference college. The 1920 season was equally satisfactory.

Football was introduced in the University a few years after the establishment of baseball. The first record of a game appears to be the following notice in the Chronicle of a game played on April 23, 1870.

The first foot-ball match in the University of late came off on Saturday last, between the fresh and sophs. Seven goals, or byes, or tallies, or scores, or something we are not au fait on foot-ball phraseology constituted the game, which was won by the freshmen, the sophs coming out second best each time. Foot-ball is a new institution on the Campus, but bids fair to be popular, at least on cool days.

This was not strictly the first appearance of the game, as the sophomore class in 1866 had secured a football, and the resulting impromptu contests had aroused some patronizing comment in the college paper. But this first effort was short-lived, and the sport went “to a grave too cold by far.” That this death was “greatly exaggerated” is suggested by the paragraph quoted. As a matter of fact football steadily grew in favor from that time, although in its earliest years it was by no means the game we know now. There seemed to be no hard and fast rules, at least not according to the Michigan practice of the early ’70’s. It was largely, or more properly, entirely, a kicking game, with any number up to thirty on a side. This made it particularly popular as a vehicle for class rivalries, and we have record of one game in 1876 in which forty-two sophomores were defeated by eighty-two freshmen, though the result was different when the two sides were equalized in a later contest. The number of participants in class games was not always limited to eleven players as late as 1889-90. The number of goals requisite to win a game also varied, depending upon a previous agreement of the two sides. The popular attitude toward football, and the status of athletics in general is amusingly suggested in the following paragraph which appeared in the Chronicle, October 19, 1872:

The base-ball ground is well filled on these pleasant afternoons. The games of foot-ball, base-ball and cricket are played at the same time. It is quite laughable for an outsider to witness the consternation of the players of the two more scientific games when the mob engaged in the other sport comes towards them.

By 1872 all four classes had their teams and the four captains formed a loose football organization, which became a Football Association the following year. Modern football, the Rugby game, was introduced in 1876 by Charles M. Gayley, ’78, better known to generations of Michigan students as the author of “The Yellow and the Blue,” and now Professor of English in the University of California. No inter-collegiate games were played, however, until May 30, 1879, when Michigan defeated Racine at White Stocking Park, Chicago, 7 to 2, in what was probably the first inter-collegiate contest in the West; certainly no game had ever attracted such attention or drew such crowds as this one. I.K. Pond, ’79, in after years to be the architect of the Michigan Union, made a touchdown in the first half, and a goal from the field by De Tar; ’78, ’80m, accounted for the balance of the Varsity’s score, while a safety was all that was permitted to Racine. In the autumn of the same year Michigan played a tie game with Toronto at Detroit. Four cars filled with students accompanied the team and demonstrated the growing popularity of the Rugby game. The team fully deserved this support, for the Canadian eleven was more experienced and even the Chronicle acknowledged that they excelled in almost every part of the game. The following fall Michigan won a second game at Toronto, 13 to 0, much to the disgust of the Canadians.

For some time there had been a growing demand for a series of games with Eastern colleges. As a result Michigan’s first invasion of the East came in the fall of 1881. The outcome was far from discouraging, in view of the inexperience of the Michigan eleven and the greater interest in the game in the East; for though the Varsity was uniformly defeated, the scores were by no means overwhelming. The game with Harvard was lost 4 to 0, and those with Yale and Princeton, 11 to 0 and 13 to 4.

Inter-collegiate football was dormant the following year, but in November, 1883, a second Eastern trip resulted in another clear demonstration of the greater advantages the game enjoyed in the seaboard colleges. The game with Yale was a decided defeat 46 to 0; but Harvard barely avoided a tie with a 3 to 0 score; Wesleyan won 14 to 6, while the one victory for the West was over Stevens Institute 5 to 1. The Harvard game was the greatest disappointment as Michigan, with a much better team than in the previous game, had hoped for victory. All the circumstances, however, were unfavorable. The only possible schedule called for a game with Yale the preceding day, and a series of new rules were flashed upon the team as the only ones under which the Easterners would play. The game, which was played November 22, was an exceedingly close one, however, and the first half ended with neither side scoring, and most of the play in Harvard’s territory. A failure to kick goal following a score by Harvard in the second half still left hope, though Harvard repeatedly saved her goal by kicking. Finally a Harvard man ran out of bounds on Michigan’s twenty-five yard line and the ball was thrown out from that point according to the rules then in force. Michigan secured it and by using the one trick play in her repertoire, the time-honored fake run, Prettyman, ’85, the manager of the team, started off with Killilea, ’85l, as his interference behind him, as the rules then demanded. The opposing full-back was ready for them, but just before the tackle the ball was passed to Killilea, who went on for the touch-down while Prettyman went head-on into the Harvard full-back, calling “down” in accordance with the plan. The Harvard umpire insisted that the ball was “down” where Prettyman had been tackled, and the referee ordered it back to the middle of the field and then called the game on account of darkness. The Michigan team arranged immediately to stay and play another game the next day. But instead of playing, Harvard pleaded faculty interference and paid a $100 forfeit. An eleven that could play Yale one day, Harvard the next, and then be ready for a third game, made a profound impression, however, and created great respect for Western grit and sportsmanship.

After this venture into the lime-light there came several years of comparatively minor games, due largely to the fact that few teams were available as competitors. For many years Albion had a regular place on the schedule and was regularly defeated, save in 1891, when it won for the first and last time. The Chicago University Club, the Windsor Club, the Peninsular Club of Detroit, and Notre Dame were the principal opponents until the first game with Cornell in 1889. The result of this contest, 56 to 0 in favor of Cornell, was discouraging, but in a second game the following year the Varsity managed to score five points against Cornell’s twenty. This score came as the result of a long field goal by James Duffy, ’92l, who three years previously had won the first Varsity medal for breaking an inter-collegiate record, with a drop-kick of 168 feet 7-1/2 inches, surpassing Yale’s previous record of 157 feet, five times before he was satisfied.

A new era in the history of football at Michigan began in 1891, when with a fair schedule and an experienced coach, Frank Crawford (Yale, ’91), ’93l, the systematic development of a team began; though it was not until several years later that football assumed the undisputed supremacy it now holds as a college sport. Cornell won twice that year and gave Michigan her first experience with “real interference and fast play.” Michigan took her first Western trip the following year. The team was coached by Frank Barbour, a classmate of Crawford’s at Yale, and for the first time played a complete schedule with the leading universities of the West, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Chicago, with varying success. The Varsity lost most of her principal games in 1893, Minnesota winning for the last time in twenty-seven years, though a final victory over Chicago, 18 to 10, was some compensation for the earlier defeats.

The autumn of 1894 saw the beginning of a long series of remarkably successful seasons, which lasted with one or two partial relapses until 1906. These twelve years were not only Michigan’s “golden age” of football, as far as the game itself is concerned, but also one of the longest series of almost uniformly successful seasons in the history of any of the larger American Universities. It is true that a decisive defeat from Cornell, 22 to 0, marred the early season in 1894, but a second game, 12 to 4, redeemed the record. This was Michigan’s first victory over a rival of long standing. The team was a formidable one, equally strong on offense and defense, and included such well-known names in Michigan’s football annals as H.M. ("Mort”) Senter, ’90-’95, m’95-97, end; Gustave H. ("Dutch”) Ferbert, ’97, end in ’94 and later half-back; G.R.F. ("Count”) Villa, 96l, tackle; F.W. ("Pa”) Henninger, ’97, guard; and “Jimmy” Baird, ’96, quarter-back. W.L. McCauley, Princeton, ’94, who had entered the Medical School, proved his ability as a coach during this and the two succeeding seasons.

Previous to this time there had been little supervision of athletics on the part of the Faculty, and no attention was paid to the composition of the teams or the academic standing of the players. When the general Athletic Association was organized in 1891, an Advisory Board of three non-resident alumni and four Faculty members was established, though at first it had slight influence. The Faculty members were becoming impressed, however, with the significance of the growing interest in athletics all over the country and realized the necessity of some form of effective supervision.

Up to this time there had been no real distinction in the West between professional and amateur. The question came home to Michigan as the result of a disclosure that two men on the 1893 track team were sub-freshmen, not yet in college, although they entered the following fall. The Athletic Board promptly requested the resignation of the captain of the team and published the facts. The Faculty was also aroused. The result was the organization in 1894 of the Board in Control of Athletics, which ordinarily has had the final word in the administration of athletic affairs since that time. It is at present composed of four Faculty representatives, elected by the University Senate, three alumni, appointed by the Regents, three students appointed by the Directors of the Athletic Association, and the Director of Outdoor Athletics.

The year 1894, therefore, aside from the beginnings of a real football team, was important also because it saw the awakening of the Faculty to its responsibility in athletic affairs, and a corresponding growth in the whole University body of higher ideals of inter-collegiate sport, with the University “started fairly and squarely on the road to athletic cleanliness.” The movement thus inaugurated resulted in the establishment of the Western Inter-collegiate Conference on February 8, 1896. This is a body composed of representatives from the athletic boards of seven (later ten) leading mid-western Universities, which has aimed from the first, not only to regulate and standardize the conditions of all forms of inter-collegiate athletic competition but also to maintain a high ideal of amateurism in college sports. The formation of this body, which soon came to be the most powerful influence in the West for clean athletics, was due in no small part to President Angell, who was instrumental in calling the first meeting, as well as to Dr. C.B.G. de Nancrede and Professor Albert H. Pattengill, the Michigan representatives at that first meeting. Professor Pattengill’s interest in outdoor sports was lifelong. His was the moving spirit in the Conference through many years; and to him, more than to any other, Michigan owes, not only the present effective organization of athletics, but the securing of Ferry Field and its equipment.

The records of the football teams of 1895 and 1896 were quite overwhelming for those days, 266 points to their opponents’ 14 in 1895 and 262 points to 11 the next season. The only disappointments were a 4 to 0 defeat from Harvard in 1895 and a 7 to 6 victory for Chicago in 1896. A season of uninterrupted victories in 1897 was again cut short by a defeat from Chicago 21 to 12 in the last game. Chicago had now come to occupy the chief place on the schedule and the seeds of that rivalry which was later to prove so unfortunate in Western inter-collegiate affairs were already being sown.

An unbroken series of victories marked the 1898 season, with the Championship of the West decided by a thrilling 12 to 11 victory over Chicago. At the end of the first half in this game the score stood 6 to 5, a touchdown for Michigan and a goal from the field by Chicago’s great punter, Herschberger. One of the most spectacular runs in Michigan’s football history came in the early part of the second half when C.H. Widman, a freshman, broke through between left end and tackle, ran down the field sixty yards, broke away from the Chicago full-back, and squirmed across the remaining five yards for a touchdown. Chicago’s subsequent touchdown made the score a close one but left the championship, the first in three years, with Michigan. The center on this team, W.R. Cunningham, ’99m, was Michigan’s first player on an All-American Team.

This team had been coached by a number of the older players, a system that was followed again in 1899, but with no brilliant success. A change came in 1900 when Langdon Lea, of Princeton, took charge. He instituted some revolutionary changes and insisted on the fundamentals of the game, always the weak point of Western football. The season, however, was not a great success, and in the final game with Chicago, Coach Stagg, with his famous “whoa-back” formation, was able to take advantage of Michigan’s weakness in backing up the tackles, and won with a score of 15 to 16.

The record for the following year was very different. Fielding H. Yost, who received his football training at the University of West Virginia and Lafayette, was called to Michigan from Stanford and entered upon his long and successful career as Michigan’s football coach. Not only has he proved himself time and again a master of football strategy, but his insistence on the highest ideals of sportsmanship has been one of the strongest factors in the development of clean athletics at Michigan.

The new coach undeniably had good material to work with in his first team. Most of the men comprising it had been well trained in the finer points of the game by his predecessor and included such exceptional players as Captain Hugh White, ’02l, tackle; Curtis Redden, ’03l, end; Neil Snow, ’02, full-back; Harrison S. ("Boss”) Weeks, ’02l, quarter; and Everett Sweeley, ’03, half-back; while to this list were added that year Martin Heston, ’04l, one of the greatest backs in the history of the game; the center, George Gregory, ’04l; and the old reliable guard Dan McGugin, ’04l. This team under Yost’s astute and resourceful direction proved invincible, and became one of the greatest elevens in the history of football. Whether it could have dealt successfully with the Eastern champions will always be a question, but it certainly found little effective opposition in the West; for the final record showed an uninterrupted succession of victories with not a point scored against the team. The total tells the story, 550 points to 0; with the University of Buffalo beaten by the extraordinary score of 128 to 0. The final game of the season was played with Stanford at Pasadena, California, on New Year’s Day, 1902. The quality of the team was shown by the fact that they won by a score of 49 to 0 in spite of the fact that they had been in training for four months, and left Michigan in zero weather to play in what was to them a summer heat. Snow was given a place that year on Caspar Whitney’s All-American Team, while Walter Camp selected Snow, Weeks, Heston, and Bruce Shorts, ’01l (tackle), for the All-Western team.

Except for the fact that the eleven was scored upon twice, once by Case and once by Minnesota, the record in 1902 was much the same as in 1901, 644 points to their opponents’ 12.

Although there were many changes in the team the following year, there was a consistent development of team-work, which, combined with Heston’s extraordinary ability in carrying the ball, enabled Michigan to go through the season with only one score against the team, in a tie game with Minnesota. The 1904 team, though it was scored upon three times, was also uniformly victorious under the leadership of Heston, who was twice given a place on Camp’s All-American, as well as his All-Time All-American team chosen in 1910. The 1905 Championship passed to Chicago, however, though the team was scored upon only by the two points which lost Michigan the final game with Chicago. This defeat came as a result of an error in judgment which cost Michigan a safety instead of the touch-back that might easily have changed defeat into at least a tie. The following men composing this team were very generally selected for All-Western honors; Thomas S. Hammond, ’06l, half-back; Joseph S. Curtis, ’07e, tackle; and Henry F. Schulte, ’07, guard, who were members of the 1903 and 1904 elevens, and Adolph ("Germany”) Schulz, e’04-09, center. Not a little credit for the record of this team must also be given to the captain, Fred S. Norcross, ’06e, while John C. Garrels, ’07e, end, destined to hold a record only second to Niel Snow, as an all-round athlete, and Walter ("Octy”) Graham, ’08e, who proved extraordinarily active at end and later at guard, in spite of his 215 pounds, first won their “M’s” as players on the 1905 eleven.

Meanwhile a change had come in Michigan’s relations with the other universities composing the Western Inter-collegiate Conference which eventually led to her withdrawal from that body, and brought to an end for some twelve years all competition with her natural rivals in the West. This action applied to all forms of inter-collegiate sport, but the agitation centered almost exclusively about football and may therefore be properly mentioned in this place. For some years there had been developing throughout the country a powerful opposition to inter-collegiate football which began with the introduction of the Rugby game. The old-time open game had been replaced by powerful mass-plays, dangerous to limb and even to life. The conditions under which the “big games” were played had little reference to wholesome college life, the essential amateur spirit was fast disappearing, rivalries were becoming bitter, as was the case between Michigan and Chicago, and in fact the whole academic spirit was threatened by the exaggerated emphasis on this one phase of college sport.

Michigan took the initiative for a reform, through a letter from President Angell, calling for a meeting of representatives of the leading Western universities in Chicago in January, 1906. All the institutions represented at this meeting were unanimous in the feeling that drastic measures were necessary; Wisconsin even asked for the abandonment of the game for two years. The result was a series of demands for fundamental reforms, including the abolition of the training table and excessive gate receipts, a modification of the professional coaching system, and finally a provision that no freshmen should be allowed to take part in inter-collegiate contests, and that no student should participate more than three seasons.

This action was a bomb-shell whose fragments disrupted the student and alumni bodies of all the Western Conference colleges. Criticism became intense, but eventually all the nine Conference colleges accepted the new rules with certain amendments except Michigan, where a four-year contract with Yost made special difficulties. The student body and many alumni felt aggrieved at a clause in the new rules which made the three-year playing rule retroactive, thereby barring out several of the most prominent players, including Garrels, after their junior year. They therefore demanded that Michigan sever her relations with the West and seek her future opponents among Eastern universities. Implicit in the whole discussion also was the question as to whether the Faculty was to have the last word in the control of athletics. This was the fundamental demand of the Conference, while the effective opinion at Michigan favored a broader control by students, Faculty and alumni, in which the final decision was to rest with the Board of Regents. This view was accepted by the Regents; changes were made in the organization of the Board in Control of Athletics which limited the authority of the Faculty, and Michigan, by simply refusing to abide by certain of the rules of the Conference, automatically ceased to be a member in 1908. For twelve years, 1906 to 1918, Michigan put to the test the conviction of the students and many alumni that Michigan could find satisfactory opponents elsewhere than in the Conference. The result was not encouraging, for on the whole these were lean years. The football schedules proved unsatisfactory and though Michigan won her share of games, interest and enthusiasm waned correspondingly, while the baseball and track teams suffered even more. Henceforth the principal opponents were Pennsylvania, Cornell, Syracuse, and for a time Vanderbilt.

During the seasons of 1907 and 1908 the team was defeated in the principal games, though one player, Schulz, not only won a place on Camp’s All-American team in 1907, but was also the second Michigan player chosen on his All-Time All-American. Things went a little better in 1909 and 1910. Pennsylvania was finally defeated and Minnesota, who appeared temporarily on the schedule for two seasons, as a result of her desire to play Michigan and her own dissatisfaction with the Conference, was twice defeated and Michigan was able to claim the rather empty honor of an unacknowledged Championship of the West. Albert Benbrook, ’11e, guard on these two teams, was given an All-American position by Walter Camp.

For the first time since 1894 Cornell appeared on the schedule in 1911 and defeated the Varsity, but lost in turn the following year; a record for the two years which was just reversed with Pennsylvania. Both teams were decisively defeated in 1913 and Pennsylvania again in 1914, but a game with Harvard on Soldiers’ Field in 1914 resulted in an honorable defeat for Michigan with a score of 7 to 0. Though Harvard had not been particularly effective up to that time the Michigan team made a strong impression, and John Maulbetsch, ’17p, left-half, was placed on practically every All-American team as a result of his work in this game. The unsatisfactory basis under which Michigan was maintaining her relationship with the East was shown, however, by Harvard’s unwillingness to play a return game in Ann Arbor the following year. This was perhaps fortunate as events turned out, for Michigan was unusually weak in 1915 and the 1916 record was not much better, with defeats from both Cornell and Pennsylvania.

Ever since Michigan had taken her stand on the Conference, there had been vigorous discussion, but the unanimous approval necessary for a return was absent. The unfortunate end of the 1917 football season, however, led to a renewal of the discussion. Eventually the Board in Control passed a resolution giving the Faculty, as represented by the Senate Council, a veto over the actions of the Board. This was eventually approved by the Regents and the way was open to resume athletic relationship with the universities of the West in the fall of 1917.

Though the ban on inter-collegiate athletics which followed the declaration of war in April, 1917, had been raised before the 1917 football season at the urgent plea of the War Department, the team was seriously weakened by the enlistment of many of its best players. This happened everywhere, however, and Michigan came through the schedule with fair success, though defeated by Northwestern in the one Conference game of that year. But in 1918 war-time conditions were felt more severely, particularly in the general disorganization incident to the S.A.T.C. regime, while the ravages of the influenza epidemic multiplied the difficulties. Nevertheless Michigan managed to survive the season not only undefeated but with some claims to the Western Championship. The record in 1919 was very different, however, with defeats in all the Conference games played save with Northwestern, a disgrace which was at least partially retrieved by the 1920 eleven, which lost a hard-fought battle with Illinois by the honorable score of 6 to 7 and won from Chicago, 14 to 0, and Minnesota, 3 to 0.

Though informal running, jumping, and hurdling matches as well as wrestling and boxing always had a certain degree of popularity among the students, track athletics, as a form of inter-collegiate sport, was not organized until football and baseball had been recognized for some time. A University Athletic Club was organized in 1874, with the captains of the running and jumping squads among the officers, though no public contests were held, apparently, until 1876 when the first “athletic tournament” took place on the Fair Grounds. This was followed in June, 1879, by the first Field Day, with the 100-yard and 220-yard dashes, standing long jump, baseball throw, ten-mile walk, and a fencing contest among the principal events. The next year saw two such tournaments, under the auspices of the Football and Baseball Associations respectively. The merchants of Ann Arbor gave prizes for these contests, some contributing medals, while one firm gave two boxes of cigars and another “the best hat in the store.”

By 1884 the program became very elaborate, some twenty events were scheduled with records of one hour and 51 minutes for the ten-mile walk, 26-1/2 minutes for the three-mile walk, and 2.33 for the half-mile run. Such events as a standing jump backwards, a three-legged race, and passing the football and punting also found place on the programme, which was concluded by a Rugby match. Particular interest was taken at this time in running, and it is told by one of the members of the football team that almost defeated Harvard in 1883 that an impromptu race at Buffalo, while they were waiting for a train, went a long way toward defraying the expenses of some of the men, who were paying their own way. The outstanding track athlete of the day was Fred M. Bonine, ’86m, whose record in sprints led Michigan to enter the Inter-collegiate Athletic Association, where he won the 100-yard dash in 10-3/4 seconds at New York in 1885. This was Michigan’s first and last effort for some years; and track athletics had a fluctuating career until the Northwestern Inter-collegiate Athletic Association, composed of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Northwestern, was organized in 1893. The first Field Day of this organization was held June 3, 1893, with Michigan the winner with 52 points against 45 for Wisconsin, her closest competitor. Michigan did not again win first honors until 1898, and then, after taking third place in 1899, she held the Championship banner for five successive seasons, 1900 to 1904, and once more in 1906. During this period the Varsity was also very generally winning dual meets with Cornell, Wisconsin, and Illinois, though she lost to Chicago in 1901 and 1902. Michigan also won the four-mile relay race at the Pennsylvania Relay Meet for six successive years, 1903 to 1908, and made the best record of any university entered in the track events scheduled at the same time.

After 1906 the Eastern Inter-collegiate Meet necessarily came to hold first place in the schedule, and here also Michigan always made a creditable record though never succeeding in taking first place. The team returned in 1907 with second honors, and then held third place for five successive years, 1910 to 1914, with Pennsylvania, Yale, and Cornell usually leading in different years. The Varsity fell behind, however, in 1915 and 1916. Owing to war-time conditions no meets were held in 1917, but Michigan’s return to the Conference fold was marked by two successive Western Championships in 1918 and 1919.

This long and honorable record in field sports has been made possible by consistent encouragement of well-rounded teams in which all branches were carefully developed, through the extraordinary ability of Keene Fitzpatrick, perhaps the greatest athletic trainer and track coach in the country. His acceptance of a similar position at Princeton in 1911 was a great loss to Michigan, where he had served for sixteen years.

As early as 1897 Michigan held several Western records. The first of Michigan’s all-round athletes was John F. McLean, ’00, who not only won regularly the hurdles and broad jump, equaling or bettering the Western records, but was also half-back on the football team. Charles Dvorak, ’01, ’04l, also held the Western record in the pole vault, while Archie Hahn, ’04l, speedily developed into one of the country’s greatest sprinters, equaling several times the world’s record in the 100-yard dash of 9-4/5 seconds, which still stands. He returned to the University in 1920 as trainer of the various athletic teams. Neil Snow also completed in 1902 his remarkable record of eleven out of a possible twelve “M’s” open to him, by tying with another Michigan man, Barrett, in the high jump at the Conference Meet, and taking second in the shotput. Nelson A. Kellogg, ’04, came decidedly to the fore in 1901 in the long-distance runs, and ended his college career with a record of 9.57-1/2 in the two-mile.

The organization of a Cross Country Club in 1901 was directly responsible for the long list of relay victories at Philadelphia. The 1905 team, composed of H.P. Ramey, ’07e; H.L. Coe, ’08e; I.K. Stone, ’05; and Floyd A. Rowe, ’08e, set the world’s record for the four-mile and lowered it again in 1906 to 18 minutes 10-2/5 seconds, while the individual members of this team were almost invariably to be counted on as point winners in every meet.

John C. Garrels, ’07e, is also to be reckoned among the great all-round athletes; not only was he one of the best men on the football team but he was a consistent winner in all the track meets, taking first in both hurdles and second in the shotput at the Eastern Inter-collegiate in 1907. Among more ephemeral stars of this period was Ralph Rose, who remained in college just long enough to set the record in 1904 for the hammer throw at 158 feet 3 inches and for the shotput at 47 feet 3 inches. The records of two men, Ralph Craig, ’11, and Joseph Horner, ’11, were the striking features of the next few seasons, Craig winning the two dashes in the Eastern Inter-collegiate in 1911, equaling the record in both, while Horner won first in the discus, second in the shotput, hammer throw and broad jump, and third in the high jump. Harold L. Smith, ’16, also won the two dashes in 1915 and took a first and a second the following year, almost equaling Craig’s record.

Michigan’s two Conference Championships in 1918 and 1919 were assured by the extraordinary ability of Carl Johnson, ’20, who took three firsts in 1918 and four in 1919, breaking his own record with a broad jump of 24 feet 1 inch, setting a new record for the high jump of 6 feet 2-1/4 inches and winning both hurdles, thus gaining 20 of Michigan’s 41-1/2 points, a performance never equaled in a major inter-collegiate contest.

The particular favor with which football, baseball, and track athletics have always been regarded has not prevented a healthy interest in other sports. Though cricket and wicket died somewhere about 1872, for the Chronicle remarked in 1875 that not “even the ghost of a cricket bat” had been seen for two years, and football “was in its decline,” baseball was exceedingly popular and a general interest in boating was developing which promised to “equal if not supplant it in popular favor.” Shells were purchased, entertainments for the new Boating Association were given, and for a time the new sport flourished. But the nautical resources of the Huron and Whitmore Lake were all too slender and after a few years the enthusiasm died, though occasionally talk of a Varsity crew springs up.

Tennis came into vogue about 1880. An Association was established as early as 1883 and we have it, once more on the Chronicle’s carefully qualified authority, that “athletics in general have given way to lawn tennis to a certain extent.” The Tennis Association was merged, with the other separate athletic bodies, into the general Athletic Association in 1890, and by 1897 when Michigan first participated in the Western Inter-collegiate tennis matches, the members of the team were awarded the Varsity letter. Henry T. Danforth, ’03; H.P. Wherry, ’03; R.G. St. John, ’06l, and Reuben G. Hunt, ’06l, were members of the four teams which led the West in the years from 1901 to 1904, the last championship until 1919, when Walter Wesbrook, ’21, captured the singles, and with Nicholas Bartz, Jr., ’20, the doubles at Chicago.

The return to the Conference also gave a great impetus to the development of basket ball as a major sport. Though Michigan’s first teams have not been remarkably successful, the players are now awarded the Varsity “M,” and interest in the contests is growing rapidly, partly because the game itself is fast and exciting, demanding even greater quickness and stamina than football, and partly because the season fills in the interval between the end of the football and the opening of the baseball and track seasons in the spring. A swimming team has also been organized under a competent coach, but it is probable that no great progress will be made until the completion of the tanks in the Union and the Gymnasium.

The women of the University have not been far behind the men in the development of athletics. Not only have they always been loyal supporters of the University in inter-collegiate contests, but they have their own organized athletic interests which have been no small factor in the development of the distinctive life of the women in the University. This has come largely through Barbour Gymnasium, completed in 1897, and the Palmer Athletic Field for women, which was purchased some twelve years later.

The Gymnasium, as its name implies, was largely made possible through a gift of property in Detroit valued at $25,000, by the Hon. Levi L. Barbour, ’63, ’65l, of Detroit, Regent of the University from 1892 to 1898, and from 1902 to 1907. The building eventually cost $41,341.76, and includes not only the gymnasium proper, 100 by 90 feet, completely equipped, but also two large parlors and a series of offices, the headquarters of the Women’s League, as well as a small auditorium and stage above, seating about 600 persons, named in honor of the President’s wife “Sarah Caswell Angell Hall.” Palmer Field was made possible through two gifts, the first of $1,500 from the Hon. Peter White, Regent from 1904 to 1908, and the second of $3,000 from ex-Senator T.W. Palmer, ’49, of Detroit. It comprises a rolling six-acre tract, just south of the Observatory, and therefore within easy walking distance of the Gymnasium.

These gifts not only ensured systematic physical training for University women, but also quickly led to a broader interest in sports for women, as is shown by the pictures of three women’s basket-ball teams in the 1903 Michiganensian. Since that time there has been a continuous and consistent development under competent instruction, with special emphasis placed on basket ball and such outdoor sports as cross-country walking, hockey, baseball, tennis, swimming, and archery, all of which are supported by a Women’s Athletic Association. During the war also a drill company was organized under officers of the S.A.T.C.

In closing this review of the development of athletics in the University it may not be amiss to emphasize the fact that the present status of collegiate sport is not without its inconsistencies and dangers. There is real peril for mens sana in an overdeveloped corpore sano. The general and healthy interest in all forms of outdoor sport of earlier days has been all but lost in this era of specialization. Nowadays the Varsity team too often is far from being the apex of a pyramid whose foundations lie in a widely distributed and wholesome interest in sports for their own sake. Too often we have the spectacle of high-school students coming to our universities with their careers all made for them, because of their ability in athletics, bringing with them a spirit of professionalism utterly foreign to university ideals. And yet all this has come as a natural result of the heritage of the American college student, of enterprise, resourcefulness, and love of outdoor life and sports.

The ideal, of course, is a general participation of all students in some form of outdoor games, and toward this those who have the best interest of inter-collegiate athletics at heart are working. A Department of Intramural Athletics has been established for some time, which seeks to develop a general interest in all kinds of sport; tennis, for which Ferry Field is admirably equipped with eighteen courts, boxing, gymnastics, swimming, cross-country running, hockey, indoor baseball and hand-ball, to say nothing of an increasing emphasis on class and fraternity football, base-ball, and basket-ball teams.

The difficulty which faces those who seek to develop this programme to its utmost lies in the attitude of many students and alumni, whose sole interest in the University is to see that she maintains winning teams. They fail to see that there is more in the annual “big game” than nine or eleven supreme athletes brought together to “represent” the University. Fortunately there are many more who view the whole question in its proper perspective, men who are no less thrilled by the contagious enthusiasm of the annual big games, and who recognize them as an inevitable and not undesirable factor in our college life, but who seek to bring athletics into a sane and wholesome relationship with the academic life of our universities. That is the principal consideration which underlies all the discussions which have arisen in the past and which are inevitable in the future, as long as American youth, on the one hand, maintains its vigorous and enterprising spirit, and our universities, on the other hand, insist on their prerogative as institutions where fundamentally the things of the spirit must rule.