The Saint Paul globe., 1899-11-26

Chicago back field clearly outclasses the
Gopher backs, and it is in the strength
of her backs that Chicago wins the
games.
The Chicago team showed up to a much
better advantage in team work. Every
man was into each play, and wherever
the ball went there were eleven Chicago
players to help it along. Chicago's in
reference was of a high class, and of
kind that is hard to break up.
The Maroons made some long gains on
double passes and delayed passes, which
seemed to completely fool the Gopher
ends. Outside of these fake plays, the
gains of Chicago were made by good
straight plays through the line and just
outside of the tackles.
During the first half Minnesota could
advance the ball but little and only once
did she get within hailing distance of
the Chicago goal, and then 1t was on her
opponents off side plays.
Three times in succession was the
Maroon side so penalized and the ball
thus brought to Chicago's tWenty-yard
line Minnesota could not gain, and
Glover tried place kick, but the wind
turned the ball so that it went about one
foot to the side Shortly after this Min
nesota had the ball within twenty-five
yards of the desired goal line, and with
three yards to gain on the third down
Capt Scandrett signaled for a fake kick,
which failed again. A drop kick might
have been tried with success, as the ball
WIS directly in front of the goal.
In the second half Minnesota's offense
showed wonderful Improvement, and some
good gains were made through the Chi
cago line Cameron, Knowlton and
GIeiner each carried the ball for good
gains, but Knowlton proved to be the
best line bucker on the team.
On the defense the Minnesota back field
did not play the game that they did
against Madison, but this was due to the
fact that the backs were all badly Grip
pied before the game commenced. Cole,
as usual, was everywhere and made some
pretty stops, although the heavy backs of
Chicago were too much for his light
weight. Greiner probably played the best
game of any of the half backs, both on
defensive and offensive work
Minnesota had expected to play kick
ing game and had counted on making
good gains on the punting of her full
backs. But Glover's lame leg told on him
from the beginning, and he was unable to
play his game at all In the second half
he gave way to Knowlton, who played
in better form than in the Madison game.
He was unable to do much in the punting
line, as strong wind was against him.
N1EW . Ot '1f1E GAM Is.
Judge Heffelfnger said Minnesota put
up good strong game. Her backs, how
ever, did not support the linemen as they
should have, but it was because OF the
crippled condition Of the men. Chicago
earned all her points, and won the game
on its merits. Her touchdoU MS were
| secured on straight rushes or delayed and
double passes which deceived the Min
nesota line. Many of Chicagos tricks
which worked to her advantage could not
have succeeded on an older or experienced
team Minnesota was stronger in the
second half than in the first Where she
expected to excel Chicago was in kick
ing, but hereon the whole Chicago at
least broke even, and this was due to the
splendid way in which her backs handled
punts and ran them back
Chicago backs are a wonderful trio and
very hard to get off their feet. The two
lines were about equal in playing
strength.
Coach Leary: Chicago was stronger
than we had anticipated. Our linemen, I
think. played as we'll as their opponents,
and Page, 1 consider, outplayed Speed,
but ChicagO's backfield did some clever
work and their rushing was too strong for
our men to stop. Greiner played a fine
game both on the offense and defense,
and Knowlton made some good gains AMI
several very clever tackles. Our back
field did not play their game in the first
half and gave the linemen poor support.
Tho best team won and we are satisfied
that our men did their duty
Capt. Kennedy, of the Chicago team:
Minnesota is far stronger than any of
the Western teams we have met, which
includes Purdue, Iowa, Beloit and North
western. Her defense play was stronger
than the offensive. We made most of our
gains through the left Of Minnesotas line,
but 1t was because our interference was
better on the plays that went that way"
1t is the general opinion of those who
saw the game that Page outplayed Speed