The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-12-05

80
nevertheless, which can be ap-jI
preached nationally and logically by, |
making a careful analysis of the play
of these two great elevens against
each other, against their common
rival, Wisconsin, and by their general
records for the, season.
Analysis of Play.
To proceed to this analysis:
Take the Observation-Disclosures game
during the first half. BY referring to
the official chart it is found that dur
/ ing this half Michigan obtained first
down only four times by rushing the
ball, while Minnesota rushed the ball
for first down sixteen times. Mime i
sofa gained a total of 122 yards,
Michigan total of 65 yards; Mime
sofa kicked five times, Michigan
kicked five times: the longest punt
made by Minnesota (FIarris9 u yards,
shortest 80 yards, average ~ yards;
| the longest punt made by Michigan
| CMaddock) ~ yards, shortest 33 yards,
average 81 yards; Minnesota ran back
punts % yards, Michigan ran back
punts yards; penalties inflicted on
| Minnesota 40 yards, on Michigan 70
yards; the longest steady advance
made. by Minnesota was SO yards, by
Michigan Is yards; the longest single
run made by Michigan (Heston) was
II yards, by Minnesota (Davies) 10
yards. Minnesota and Michigan each
attempted one place kick for goal and
each failed. Only twice during the
half did Michigan secure the ball in
Minnesota's half Of the field and then
only on fumbles made by Minnesota,
Minnesota securing it again each time
by holding for downs, once after three
plays and once after six Minnesota
had the ball in Michigan territory re-
peatedly, once being held inside the
Michigan fifteen-yard line after stead
lily advancing the ball So yards, and
yard line on afunble after an advance
of 20 yards. At the end of the half
the bali was in possession Of Mime
sofa on Michigan's thirty-yard lir1e. "
Second Half in Michigan Game.
1T is impossible to read this analysis
and not admit that Minnesota clearly
outplayed Michigan at every point
during the first half tof the game. In
the second half the two teams were
about everl-Michigan outplayings Min
nesota during the first period and Min
nesota outplaying Michigan during the
second. An analysis here again shows
the, following facts. Michigan made
first down by rushing 16 times, Mime
sofa made first down by rushing IL
times: total yards gained by Michigan
during the half 113 yards. by Mime
sofa 119 yards; periods of steady adj
vance by Michigan were as follows,
6 yards, 1 yard, 38 yards and SO yards
with touchdown, the latter advance be-
ing the only time in which Michigan
had the ball In Minnesota territory dur
ing the half Advances made by Min
nesota were Is yards dosing ball on
downs on Michigan sttwelve-yard line)
4 yards, 10 yards, 4 yards, 35 yards,
/1,o11 Is M{o1,s ~,
6 yards, (ball lost ON Michigan's TWEEN
ty-yard ltne) and 5 yards with touch
down.
In this half. Michigan kicked five
times and Minnesota kicked five
times: . Average distance, Michigan
Longest kick by. Michigan, 4S yards;
longest kick by Minnesota, 43 yards;
shortest kick by Michigan, 23 yards;
shortest kick by Minnesota; 20 yards;
Michigan ran back kicks but once, Is
yards; Minnesota ran back kicks three
respectively; total 81 yards. The
penalties. inflicted on Minnesota, So
yards; on Michigan, 80 yards ~
Up to the time when the touchdown
was made by Michigan, Minnesota had
advanced the ball but 20 yards by
rushes,. while Michigan had rushed fol
113 yards. After the Michigan touch.
down, Michigan was thrown for a loss
every time they attempted to rush
while Minnesota rushed the ball 81
yards, scoring a touchdown, and run
ming back kicks 81 yards. $3.50
If the Michigan team was in better
training than Minnesota, as claimed
they were played completely off rthei
feet during the last period Of tn
3 game, Considering the last half, !;
fair basis for Judgment would plac,
the work Of the two teams about on al
equality, while taken as a whole Min
nesota seems to have played the bet
ter football and have had the 2bes
of it.
The Wisconsin Games @
The other standard Of 'comparisol
between Michigan and Minnesota j
furnished by the games played b
these two teams against Wisconsin
Michigan played Wisconsin on tllei
own grounds at Ann Arbor, Nov. ]
while Minnesota played Wisconsin o.
Thanksgiving Day in Madison, tn
home Of the badgers, where traditio,
has it that the gophers have neve
! been able to win. 1t would seem, Their
that the task before Minnesota wa
"a the more difficult. To analyze thes
~ ~ games:
20 Against Wisconsin in the first hal
81 neither Michigan nor Minnesota wer
~ able to score, tho Wisconsin was abou
at equally outplayed by each.
ie !! In the second half of her gam
a. Michigan secured the ball inside Wi:
IN 'consin's fifteen-yard line on q tumble
lg kick, and rushed the ball over for
tn touchdown. They also kicked tN
Us goals from the feld-one from tt
10 45-yard line. Michigan could not rus
ry the ball steadily up the field and ha
OF she not received the ball on a fumb
vo close to the goal, would not hal
ne scored a touchdown. Minnesota, {
us the other hand, carried the ball f,
as steady gains at all times, securi1
u.s. three touchdowns by steady advanc
n of SIS yards, IS yards and 70 yards r
't- spectively. Michigan rushed the be
u against wisconsin 268 yards, viii
Sc Minnesota carried the. ball $50 yarc
OK wisconsin carried the ball IS var
IS against Michigan and So yards again
ou Minnesota.
is These facts and figures seem clear
to indicate that Minnesota played
we stronger and more formidable gan
m against Wisconsin than did Mfchiga
TO and when it is taken into consider
ms ton that Minnesota's performan
lc- was upon Randall field, while Mich