the university. This was a highly flexible system, loosely monitored, and at the extreme were some players who played for different universities on different days or for a college team one day and a professional team the next. Most of the recruiting of the time was done by mail, and the major participants in this effort, aside from the players and the college coaches, were alumni and high school mentors. The dean of admissions was a very powerful individual in this process, for he controlled who got in and how much the athlete would receive for his services (Rooney, 1987, 16-17).
As the system developed and competition increased, opposition to the recruitment and subsidization of players also increased. Such criticism was highly ineffective, though. The NCAA condemned recruiting, but still the system grew in importance. In the 1920s there were numerous violations of the amateur athletic code, bringing a call for reform. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching responded with a study of American college athletics th
...