Appendix - Matrix - Michigan State University

volved in a movement aimed at overthrowing the
United States government by using athletics for their
publicity value. It even stated that the movement was
ultra-leftist and communist oriented and was led by
people who advocate the Marxist-Leninist ideology.
The allegations are ludicrous. The NCAA seems to be
exploiting that old American phobia about communists
being under every bed in the country and now, on
every gym floor and football field throughout the land.
Such tactics have been discredited before and in this
case, probably will be again. San Jose State is now
contesting the NCAA's action in excluding that school
from championship intercollegiate competition on the
grounds that the ban amounts to a selective reprisal for
S.J.S.'s role in the athletic revolt. And even such an
establishment-oriented sports publication as Sports
Illustrated agrees. An editorial appearing in the January
26, 1970, issue of the magazine states that "If the
NCAA wanted to support the argument of San Jose's
President Dr. H. W. Bums that the banning of S.J.S.
represents an act of selective reprisal, it could not have
done it more effectively than by publishing the onesided,
oversimplified editorial in its news letter accompanied
by an abridged report on a speech by an
FBI official ... and by banning S.J.S.... essentially
under dubious circumstances."
At the NCAA Coaches Association meeting in
1969, there was a resounding approval of motions
aimed at bringing about greater discussion of problems
in athletics, whether of an athletic nature or not. But
there was also a widely prevalent sentiment that a
harder line should be taken against protesters against
athletic policies at colleges and universities. The two
goals are obviously incompatible. If the NCAA thinks
it can talk itself out of its present dilemma, it is sadly
mistaken. Corrective action is the only recourse. Until
Preface to the Paperback Edition • xxii
such action is taken, the revolt will continue and will
escalate.
The United States Olympic Committee and the
International Olympic Committee also have reactednot
by moving to correct unjust conditions but by
passing motions promising censure for any athlete
engaging in protest activities during future events held
under the auspices of either group.
Perhaps the most positive indication of the longterm
impact of the revolt of the black athlete in America
have been the following developments:
Since the first edition of this book came off the
presses, no less than nine other authors, most of them
sports figures or reporters, have written books which
are similarly critical of the sports establishment in
America.
There is an increasing restlessness among white
athletes as they realize more and more that it is not
only the black athlete but whites, too, who are exploited
by organized sports in America.
An increasing number of sports reporters are assuming
their true role as the moral and ethical guardians
of athletics, men such as Stan Isaccs, Dave
Burgen, as well as others mentioned in the text of this
book.
Moreover, academic courses are now being offered
for the first time at some of America's major universities,
courses aimed at exploring and analyzing the
social psychology of sports.
And finally, there is an obvious and fervent "new
consciousness' among people, not only in America but
throughout the world, about what sports is and what it
should be.
This book then is in part the story of the creation
of that consciousness, of some of the people who
started and who continue to press the revolt in athletics.
It essentially details where we have been and where
Preface to the Paperback Edition • xxiii