Recently, your pages carried articles by Constantine W. Curris of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities and members of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association executive committee that merit further comment.

First, we are delighted that the writers agree with the finding of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics that commercialization and the influx of money in college sports are two critical issues before the higher education community. We appreciate their concurrence. Unlike the Commission, however, Mr. Curris fails to spell out in any specific detail what he or his association has recommended regarding control of the arms race, coaches' salaries, commercialization, television, etc. Indeed, we do not know if such proposals exist, but if they do, we would hope he would soon make them public so that they could be added to the discussion.

Had Mr. Curris read the report carefully, he would not be so anxious about the proposed Coalition of Presidents. The Commission's proposal creates a unique structure recognizing sources of authority and decision-making. The Commission recommends that Coalition membership be drawn from the presidential and trustee leadership of the American Council on Education, the Association of Governing Boards, the NCAA and Division I-A conferences. The Coalition, our report states, "should work collaboratively with the NCAA Division I Board of Directors, meeting jointly from time to time to identify priorities for review and discussion, focus on reform solutions, and develop a comprehensive timeline for appropriate action by the Division I Board and by the officers of other higher education associations."

Characterization of such a structure as counterproductive and harmful to reform efforts reflects a narrow view of intercollegiate athletics as strictly an NCAA matter as opposed to one of critical interest to the broader higher education community, about which there should be no doubt.

It should be noted that both the current NCAA president, Cedric W. Dempsey, and the former president, Richard D. Schultz, participated fully in the Commission's discussions about the proposed Coalition and signed the full Commission report. Had they felt it harmful to existing NCAA structure or procedures, we can only assume they would have said so.

The faculty representatives charge that the Commission reports no "findings that have not already been the subject of faculty concern and discussion for years." We find it striking to be criticized for outlining problems on the grounds that everyone already knows about them when there is little evidence that those same critics have been willing to speak out and effectively address them. As we noted in the report, the time is long overdue for faculties to mount sustained, effective campaigns to reassert the primacy of the academic enterprise over the athletic.

Happily, several of the Pacific-10 Conference faculty senates have been active recently, and we applaud their efforts. If the national association has made similar proposals with reference to salaries, commercialization, academic abuses or other specific concerns, we would be delighted to hear them.

We must also point out that that the chair of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association, Percy Bates of the University of Michigan, did in fact appear before the Commission and participated fully in discussions with all members of the Commission. Faculty points of view were presented by others. It is wrong to imply that the faculty voice was not heard. But if faculty truly wish to be involved in reform efforts, they must, as our report says, "defend the academic values of their institutions...speak out on their campuses and...fight aggressively."

The Commission does not pretend to have offered the ultimate solutions to the problems of college sports. Rather, we propose a set of recommendations that we believe could help and have described the problems in ways that should encourage others to offer their own solutions. There is no bravery or particular intelligence in shooting the messenger rather than trying to deal with the bad news, particularly when it is described as old news that everybody knows.

We encourage the constructive participation of those individuals who have the will to act. Surely in the academic community there are courageous leaders who understand what needs to be done. They must also fully understand that failing to act will not put the integrity of intercollegiate sports at issue so much as the integrity of higher education leadership itself.

William C. Friday
Father Theodore M. Hesburgh

The authors are members of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics.