Editor's Note:
Each week during the football season, BuckeyeXtra.com will bring subscribers the original coverage of an event in the life of legendary Ohio State coach Woody Hayes, taken from the archives of The Columbus Dispatch newspaper. These stories, photos and clippings predate the Internet era and are being presented in digital form for the first time.

*  *  *

CONTEXT: Only a tie with TCU marred a perfect season for Ohio State in 1961, and the Buckeyes were named national champions by the Football Writers Association of America. In a shocking twist, however, the Faculty Council voted against accepting an invitation to the Rose Bowl. These stories about the vote and the student reaction were published on the front page on Nov. 29, 1961.

OSU Students Parade in Bowl Ban Protest 7000 March Down High St. To Statehouse, 'Hang' Fullen

Seven thousand Ohio State University students staged a massive demonstration on the OSU campus and in downtown Columbus Tuesday night, protesting a Faculty Council ruling in turning down a Rose Bowl bid.

Afflicted with a bad case of "rose fever," the leaderless, nameless, high-spirited but orderly throng tromped around the Ohio State Oval, into and out of the Faculty Club, then marched three miles down High St. to the Statehouse and back again to the campus.

Student demonstration continued on a smaller scale Wednesday noon as several hundred students assembled on the Oval, marched on the Faculty Club and proceeded to the traditional rallying point at 15th Ave. and High St.

At no time was the Tuesday night demonstration a riot. Perhaps it needed only a leader. Or perhaps the inherent good sense of the students precluded a leader taking over.

As far as anyone could remember, it marked the first time OSU students marched all the way Downtown in a demonstration. It also appeared to be one of the largest student uprisings in recent years.

Chanting, "We want the Rose Bowl" and "We want a re-vote," they strung up numerous effigies, mostly of Alumni Secretary Jack Fullen, but caused little damage.

Many hid their faces behind handkerchiefs and bandanas. One girl, when asked why, remarked, "So we won't be identified and thrown out of school."

Most students, when asked their names, refused to identify themselves, yet many others mugged for the benefit of cameramen.

Students were vague as to the origin of the rally, but by early evening they were streaming out of fraternity and sorority houses and dormitories and congregating on the Oval.

Norman Rovick, international affairs commissioner for the student senate, told The Dispatch, "Somebody called the radio stations and told them there would be a rally at 8 p.m. and they broadcast it."

Rovick said the activity started when the Faculty Council decision became known, but that the rally was not "well-organized."

By 6:30 p.m., the core of the demonstration began forming at 15th Ave. and High St. and gradually began marching toward President Novice Fawcett's home.

With the discovery that Fawcett was apparently not at home, the crowd turned and marched on the Faculty Club where they succeeded in breaking into the lobby and dumping a straw-filled dummy and a sign, "Roses for Bucks."

Once outside the Faculty Club, students strung a Fullen effigy to a lamp post and set it afire.

At this point, the demonstration appeared to be breaking up, but as students swarmed toward High St. it picked momentum again and the mob spilled over into the street and began the march downtown.

They filled High St. from curb to curb, jamming traffic.

Downtown, Columbus police blocked off Broad St. between 3rd and High Sts. and the mob surged onto the Statehouse grounds.

At 10:10 p.m., Police Chief George Scholer addressed the crowd over a cruiser loudspeaker:

"I think the majority of Columbus is for you and the Rose Bowl," the chief said.

The crowd roared approval.

The chief continued, "Now you have made your point. Let's not spoil it."

He urged the crowd to break up. It did so.

From comments picked up at random, no one really hoped to change anything -- they just wanted to let off steam.

"What can they accomplish?" asked one student observer. "We're still not going to the Rose Bowl."

Hayes Takes Unviolent Attitude

Coach Woody Hayes, always outspoken and always a fighter for any benefits for his players, couldn't conceal his disappointment with the decision, but showed the sportsmanship he preaches on the football field.

"I would not want football to drive a line of cleavage in our university," he said. "Football is not worth that. No one should even feel sorry for himself. That's the worst thing you can do. The best thing is just keep your mouth shut.

"We must not let anything happen at this university to cause animosity between the students and faculty. I respect the integrity of these faculty men who voted against the Rose Bowl, even though I may question their intelligence on this one issue."


*  *  *

Trustees Refuse To Intervene in Bowl Ban

BULLETIN -- The Ohio State University board of trustees will not intervene in the Rose Bowl controversy, OSU President Novice G. Fawcett announced Wednesday in a prepared statement. He had no comment on a possible faculty-wide vote.

"All had an opportunity for adequate debate. The voting was honest. I consider the issue closed," Fawcett said.


By WILLIAM FULWIDER

Slim hopes existed Wednesday that Ohio State university's football team might play in the Rose Bowl despite a negative vote by the Faculty Council which sparked a student demonstration Tuesday night.

Observers noted that three actions remain, although they are considered faint possibilities:

* The Board of Trustees, the final authority on policy, can overrule the Faculty Council .

* The trustees could ask the council to reconsider its secret ballot vote of 28 to 25 against the Jan. 1 trip.

* Forty faculty members could petition to convene the entire faculty to vote on the issue.

The secret ballot used by the Faculty Council was the first on a Rose Bowl issue and first in the memory of several observers.

The student demonstrators were oblivious of the faculty dissenters' reasoning.

And that was to tear down OSU's image as the football capital of the world and enhance its reputation as an institution of learning by denying the Pasadena trip.

Athletic Director Richard Larkins and the three others who spoke in favor of the Rose Bowl were simply out matched by the well-prepared and voluble anti-bowl faculty members.

The salient question was the university's reputation "whether it be one as a center of learning or one as the football capital."

Most eloquent opponent was Marvin Fox, an associate professor of philosophy. He asked, "What educational objectives would accrue in our team's playing in the Rose Bowl?"

"If we reverse the action of two years ago (when the faculty council voted against renewal of the Big Ten Rose Bowl pact), we make ourselves a kind of a laughingstock.

"But if we had clarity of self-respect by turning it down we would win all kinds of acclaim all over this country."

Even a professor in the physical education department, Bruce L. Pennett, spoke against the Rose Bowl. He called the game between OSU and UCLA a "mismatch, to be rather brutal."

And by playing a team OSU beat 13-3 early in the season, "We have everything to lose and nothing to gain," he added.

"Only those in favor of the Rose Bowl are those who want a nice vacation and to get away from the Ohio winter."

And declared Anthony A. Nemetz, associate professor of philosophy, "We have a tailor-made opportunity to destroy the image of being the football capital."

Dean Roy M. Kottman of the agriculture college was the strongest spokesman for the Rose Bowl.

"I think we're confusing the question" of wanting to be academically great or going to the Rose Bowl, he said. "I don't want any part of denying the team this honor."

"Certainly it's a tough enough job to get the support of the public and the legislature. Something like this would help us. I think people are wise enough they don't rate everything (at OSU) by football."

*  *  *