Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-11-17
ON THE GRIDlRlON,,
Aftermath of the Yale and
 Princeton Game.

Blues Made Better Gains All Around
 But Were Handicapped on Fumbles
 Receipts of the Game Biggest on
 Record.
 It is interesting to note, in contrast to what was looked for, that Yale's center was not such a weak spot, but that in the early part of the game Princeton made more gains on plays directed just outside of tackle than from tackle to tackle. Yale could do little on plays outside of tackle but made most of her gains between the tackle positions indicating good often sive work in the center of Yale's line. De Witt did not break through the cen ter when he. blocked Mitchell's kick and scored 8 touchdown. He went through between tackle and end, which was a smooth play on Princeton's part to block kicks. The Yale plan of the quarterback passing the ball for kick proved fatal. Time was lost, and the passing could have been no worse if the center had passed the ball di- rect. In bunting, Mitchell of Yale made good, and also made a name for himself as a kicker. Princeton, incl dentally, has been kicking field goals against Yale with regularity since 1899. Poe drop kicked one in 1899, Mattis did likewise in 1900, De Witt repeated the performance in 1902, and De Witt made place kick in 1903.
 Yale gained more ground than Princeton in rushing, gained more by kicking and more in running back kicks Figures are as follows:
 Rushing-First half, Yale, ITO yards; Princeton, 127. Second half, Yale, 70; Princeton, s5. Totals, Yale, 249; Princeton PIP.
 I1icking-First half, Yale 3S6 yards; Princeton, 359. Second half, Yale, 452; Princeton, AS. Totals, Yale, S38; Princeton, SO7.
 Running back kicks-First half, Yale, B yards; Princeton, 35. Second half Yale, 52; Princeton, 50. Totals, Yale, 125; Princeton. S5
 Yale made total of 65 rushes to Princeton's 5S, lost yards in rushing to Princeton's 8, and ran back kicks to Princetons 5. Yale kicked p times and Princeton 21, and Yale made fumbles to Princetons 6. Three times Yale lost the ball on a tumble and Princeton twice. Yale lost the ball on downs once and Princeton once. Yale lost 50 yards on penalties and Princeton none. The foregoing figures serve to show how close the game was. Had they been reversed and Yale won, it would have been "Yale luck"
 Commenting on the game, Captain De Witt of Princeton says: we realized that Yales wrought iron line was going to count for great deal in stopping our line plays, and conse- Quently we depended a great deal upon end runs to gain our ground. To Yale belongs unlimited credit for the plucky, nervy game her men played when handicapped by injuries as un- derstand some of their players were. Their attacks were at times almost 1r- res1stible and I think in the long run excelled ours, though at critical mo- ments our line showed its true mettle by holding and thus prevented more than the first six points Yale scored. Our back field all through the first half seemed unable to handle M1tchellls we'll placed punts without fumbling; in fact, the men were more uncertain at. catching the ball than I have be- fore seen them this year. '.'
 "I think, on the whole, Yale's attack proved the stronger of the two, while our defense was able to withstand the hammering plays better than our op- ponents. Several of the Yale players, understand, were very badly used up after the game. and if any injuries were received that will incapacitate any of our opponents for the final con test of the season, am sure there is not a man on our team who will not be sorry"