When the presidents of the member schools in the New England Small College Athletic Conference (NESCAC) meet on Dec. 14, they will have their last opportunity to discuss the sweeping athletic policy changes before they are implemented next year. The changes will limit competition in the postseason, whether it be the NCAA or ECAC tournament, to only one NESCAC team and formally establish NESCAC as a playing conference which will set schedules and other requirements for all member schools. The presidents unanimously adopted this proposal at a similar meeting on April 22, 1998 with the goal of deemphasizing athletics in favor of academics.

Such policy changes, rather than deemphasizing athletics, would intensify competition among already fiercely competitive athletic programs, as each seeks the single NESCAC postseason bid. In fact the single opening would make every basket, run or goal that much more important. Coaches and players clearly believe that it is unacceptable to give up during moments of competition; why then would these same teams deemphasize athletics at a time of increased athletic ferocity?

Second, the proposed consolidation of NESCAC into a cohesive decision-making body that will set policy for the 11 member schools is fundamentally flawed. Each school has distinct priorities and philosophies and inherently looks out for itself. Why would Amherst want to limit the control it has over athletic-or any-decision-making? Why would Amherst want to place limits on the number of positive athletic experiences its athletes can partake in? The faculty just voted to deemphasize athletics in admissions and the College has lowered the number of admitted athletes by 25 percent. Clearly, we can control our own destiny; there is no need to hand the reins over to a potentially harmful body.

Amherst and many NESCAC peer institutions are known first and foremost for their academic accomplishments, not their Division III athletic programs. Although these schools of overachievers tend to carry that success into sports programs, their national reputations are solidly academic.

So, we applaud the conference's efforts to further clarify this reality. However, the roundabout policy implementation they approved will hinder, not help the goal. The policy changes, as they stand, will only intensify competition-possibly forcing already doggedly competitive schools to admit more athletes than otherwise-and serve to further emphasize athletics. It is possible to keep admission standards high, deemphasize athletics, maintain a strong athletic program and send multiple teams to postseason tournaments-but only if Amherst controls its own athletic destiny and refuses to buy into the proposed NESCAC changes.