I collect a fair amount of college football memorabilia and I came across something very interesting (at least to me) in a stack of papers recently. It was a copy of a letter written by a USC assistant coach to the President of the Tournament of Roses Committee. The date? December 10, 1935. Some of you history buffs may get a kick out of some of it. Note the references to the old coaches of the 1930s. Here’s how it goes (I had to type it all out):
Mr. C. Hal Reynolds December 10, 1935
825 East Orange Grove Ave.
Pasadena, California
Dear Hal:
Now that the 1936 Rose Bowl game is all set, and it looks like it ought to be a great game, how about looking ahead and planning for a Big 10 team for the 1937 game, or for years thereafter?
I firmly believe that the attitude of the Big 10 can be changed by going at the situation in the right way, and once Big 10 teams are permitted to play in the Rose Bowl, the future success of the game with tremendous gates is assured.
Here is my idea of how the Big 10 can be approached and won over. See what you think of it.
In Southern California, there are a large number of Big 10 graduates and most of the Big 10 schools have clubs like the Purdue Club, the Illinois Club, the Minnesota Club, with headquarters at the University Club in Los Angeles.
Suppose right after the Rose Bowl game in January, you contacted all these clubs, and arranged for a meeting at the University Club, at which every Big 10 man in Southern California is urged to be present.
At this meeting, ask the Big 10 alumni of Southern California to select a representative, a former Big 10 football player if possible, but a man with personality, who can talk to a football coach or a university President equally as well, and who can arrange to take the time to go back East in February, and make the complete round of the Big 10 schools.
The Tournament of Roses’ part of the scheme would be to pay the expenses of this man.
All Big 10 alumni in Southern California or anywhere, would be requested to give letters to their representative of introduction to anyone at their University of influence, and especially to the football coaches, Directors of Athletics, and the Presidents, or any faculty members on the athletic boards.
Say this representative would start with Purdue University at Lafayette. Noble Kizer, head coach and Director of Athletics, is a close friend of mine, with whom I have talked at great length re: the Rose Bowl game, and who is very much in favor of it, for Big 10 schools.
On January 29, 1934, while at Lafayette, Noble Kizer took me in to see Dr. Elliot, President of Purdue, and I had a half hour’s talk with him regarding the Rose Bowl game, and set up. At first he was against a Big 10 school playing in the Rose Bowl, but after I talked to him, and he asked Kizer about the time required to practice and make the trip, what he thought about it, etc., he changed his attitude, and said he was open to reason on this matter.
I could give the Big 10 representative a letter to Kizer, who in turn would take him in to Dr. Elliott, to whom he would show his credentials as representing Big 10 alumni and the Tournament of Roses, and a start will have been made.
I am sure that Kizer will personally introduce this representative to “Bo” McMillan at Indiana and see that he had the right entree there.
Howard Jones is a close friend of Zupke, and I believe would give this representative a letter of introduction to him , and pave the way by writing ‘Zup’ himself. I do not believe that Zupke would be averse to the Rose Bowl game.
Bierman at Minnesota, Schmutz at Ohio State, Waldorf at Northwestern, Shaughnessy at Chicago, and Solem at Iowa, can all be approached with an open mind, and will all O.K. the Rose Bowl game. Howard Jones could help with letters to Iowa, and with other Big 10 schools and coaches.
Spears’ situation at Wisconsin may call for another coach there, but the future will iron out this situation.
Kipke seems to be on the spot, and Yost may be hard to win over, but you will remember he wanted Michigan to come the last time S.C. played in the Bowl, but the other Big 10 schools gave him thumbs down.
This representative would be able to get the real situation at each school, starting with the Coach, then the Director of Athletics, then the President, and if possible the Board of Athletic Control, and be able to break down what resistance there is, and give the Tournament of Roses and the Big 10 alumni in Southern California, and, in fact, all over the country, the real inside ‘dope’ and set up at each of the ten universities.
With this data, additional pressure could be brought on the schools holding out, if any, and this same representative could request the Big 10 to be present at the spring meeting, and again appear before them all together, and ask for a favorable vote.
I believe any money spent by the Tournament of Roses on such a representative would be well spent, and in time bring back their investment thousands of times over.
Let me know what your reaction is to this idea, and if you believe it would be possible to work this out.
I know that “Bill” Hunter will give you S.C.’s cooperation, and “Bill” Spaulding could be contacted at U.C.L.A. to help out with letters or introductions where necessary.
I sincerely believe that if this plan or a similar plan were carried out, that in the future, BIg 10 teams will be seen in the Rose Bowl.
Hope you make a million dollars on the 1936 game.
Sincerely,
Clifton Herd
So wrote USC assistant coach Clifton Herd to the head of the Tournament of Roses in December of 1935. It wouldn’t be until 1948 that the Pac-10 and the Big Ten would come to an agreement that the winners of each conference would play each other in the Rose Bowl. But as you can see, the genesis of the idea could have come as early as 1934 (or earlier).
And as a follow up, in February of 1936 came this item in the Los Angeles Herald:
Trips West Sighted
Although no official news was forthcoming from the rules committee today, Noble Kizer of Purdue and Fielding Yost of Michigan did take time out to declare that the time may be coming when Big Ten teams will be able to play in the Rose Bowl game. It seems that Big Ten coaches have already voted in favor of allowing the Western Conference champion to come west once every three years, but that faculty members are still violently opposed to post-season games. If the time ever comes when new faculty officials are in control it may be that the Far West will see a Big Ten team in Pasadena again.
And finally, this last note from Herd on meeting Michigan’s head coach Fielding Yost:
Met Yost at Michigan Club meeting at the University Club. He was gruff, an uninteresting talker and did not think the Big 10 would be favorable at this time to a Rose Bowl game.
I have another letter that I will type out soon from a Michigan alum, class of 1902, who recollects the first Rose Bowl and the issues the Wolverines faced with going to California, as he lobbies for the Big Ten to once again head out West.
It’s amazing how college football was so important, even in the depths of the Depression.
One last note, I came across another letter to Howard Jones that sounds like it could have been written by a modern blogger, as it complains about bias against the West Coast’s footloose-and-fancy-free style of play that utilized laterals and (gasp!) actual passing. Here’s the key passage. It is responding to an old Los Angeles Times columnist named Sid Ziff, who apparently had gotten someone’s dander up. The Gonzaga game referenced was played in 1922:
You’ve most likely read Sid telling us that the West Coast is slipping, forgetting that when USC beat Notre Dame, 16-14 (in 1931), USC almost play for play did what ND did to Ohio State. And tell Sid that we used laterals in that game, too. Also, that a team called Gonzaga with a passer named Stockton (whoa, what a basketball coincidence!), showed a West Virginia team more passing in seven minutes than the East ever knew and that was when Sid was in diapers.
The more things change…..
