262 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



In all 135 letters were sent out: 78 to players upon college teams; 

 39 upon public school teams — mostly high school — and 13 to players 

 upon athletic-clubs and other unclassified teams. 



Before discussing the particular replies to the letters, I wish to say 

 that I recognize fully that in appealing for information to football 

 men I am going to interested witnesses for testimony. If these men 

 had not been partizans of football they would not have played the 

 game and consequently would not have been injured. Yet the ques- 

 tions are largely those of fact and not of mere opinion, and I doubt if 

 we should in any important way impeach their testimony. I recognize, 

 too, a possible basis for criticism in my making the loss of time from 

 class work the criterion for judging the seriousness of the injury 

 suffered. It is probably true that one might meet with serious or 

 even ultimately fatal mishap on the football field without immediate 

 incapacitation for classroom work. Yet such cases would be in all 

 probability exceedingly rare, and the question of class-absence taken 

 in connection with the next two questions would seem to be sufficiently 

 conclusive. If one had lost no time from an injury which at the time 

 of answering the query — some weeks later — was entirely recovered, 

 it would seem as if the injury was of no great consequence. Certain 

 it is that no interference with the main aim of college life, i. e. study, 

 had been suffered. The only other sufficiently definite criterion for the 

 measure of the injury would be that of enforced absence from foot- 

 ball practise. This does not seem to me to be as fair a basis of judg- 

 ment as the other, since it means to measure the perfection of phys- 

 ical condition not by an ordinary, but by an extraordinary, physical 

 stress. It would also involve the problem of saving a man for a 

 particular game rather than keeping him out purely and simply be- 

 cause of the injury, and would thus tend to introduce error. 



Up to the time of writing this paper (January 20), 84 replies have 

 been received, 60 of which are from college men, 22 from high- 

 school players and 2 from others. Twenty-four letters, have been re- 

 turned marked by the postmaster 'no such person in the directory.' 

 An analysis of the 60 replies from college men shows the following 

 somewhat interesting facts : 



First, that 14 of the number assert the entire falsity of the report ; 

 in one or two instances the man had not even played the game in 

 question ; in the rest, any injury whatsoever is denied. 



Second, the 46 other college men acknowledge the report as true 

 in a general way. Of this number, however, 24 say that the injury was 

 the merest trifle and that no time whatsoever was lost from classes. 



Third, the time lost from college work on the part of the 22 college 

 players who specify some loss as follows: 



