Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-12-07
MAJOR AND MINOR
FOOT BALL TEAMS
Bushnell Ranks the Little Fel-
lows as Well as the
Big Ones.
By Edward r. Bushnell.

BY EDWARD II. Bushnell.
The selection of the eleven best foot ball
players for their respective positions
in the United States. the championship
team OF the country, as well as the
placing Of the other elevens in the order
of their records and strength. are just
now the intensely interesting problems
on which foot ball enthusiasts and critics
are working. Fortunately every such
selection, from Walter Camp down to the
humble newspaper scribe. Is only an
opinion. nothing else. Some critics. by
reason Of their better judgment and more
extensive observation Of the contendin0
teams and players, are in q better posi-
ton than others to judge of the relative
merits of this or that player or team.
But even two critics who have seen the
same teams play throughout the season
in the selection OF their players and the
ranking Of the teams-all of which 1n-
dictates the futility Of relying too much
on a single individual selection. II some
pitted against each other there would be
grave danger Of the second teams de.
feating the first.
When it comes to ranking the leading
elevens of the country one has something
tangible with which to work, but even
here there is chance for wide diversity
OF opinion, especially if the two rival
claimants for the premier honors do not
meet. This year no one can dispute the
fact that Harvard and the University OF
Pennsylvania are the only teams which
have claim for championship honors.
A very peculiar condition exists con-
corning these two teams. With the ex-
ception that Pennsylvania played two
more games than Harvard their records
are identical. Both won all their games
with the exception of one, each being
tied once Harvard was held to 6-6
score by Annapolis. while Pennsylvania
a raGulf
dams.
Harvard and Pennsylvania met but two
teams in common, Brown and the In
dams. Pennsylvania disposed of Brown
1910. while 6-3 was the best Harvard
could do with Brown. This game would
Indicate superiority on the part of Penn
sylvania. But the Indians. who tied the
Quakers Go, were swamped 40 by Har-
ward. Two other games which should
be taken into consideration were Har-
vard-Navy and Navy-Indians In the
former Harvard would have been de-
feated but for lucky tumble by the
dams trounced the Navy 1876 and were
then soundly beaten by Harvard Attep-
ton is called to these scores merely to
show the unreliability of comparative
scores when the two principals do not
meet. There is universal regret that tar
ward and Pennsylvania have been unwill-
ing or unable to patch up their differences
so that the two best teams in the country
could come together.
1t is almost useless to argue whether
the shifty, open game that Pennsylvania
played could overcome the steady. Old
fashioned line-plunging game which char
acteriZed Harvard. The supporters OF the
two teams have plenty of material with
which to argue the matter, with honors
even, until doom'S day. The only way out
of the dilemma. and which ought to ap-
peal to all fair-minded persons, to
bracket Pennsylvania and Harvard for
first place. Yale is certainly entitled To
rank next, with Dartmouth fourth Cor
nell on her seasons record is entitled 10
fifth place, with Princeton sixth.
How Minor Colleges Stand.
1t will be noticed in the foregoing that
none Of the minor colleges has been con-
sidered in the ranking OF the big six"
Brown. by virtue of her good games
against Yale and Harvard. may have
been stronger than Princeton. Syracuse
and Lafayette. as we'll as West Point and
Annapolis have good claims against the
leaders but it should be remembered
that the minor colleges, with the excep-
ton OF Brown and the Indians, do not
play the severe schedules that the big
six do. If they did they might not he
ranked as high as they are. 1t is certain
ly unfair that team which makes a
phenomenal showing i'm one big game and
an Indifferent showing against weak
teams should be given preference over
members Of the big six" all OF whose
opponents, with the exception of the flrst
few. are real trouble makers.
The correct ranking of the eastern
teams should be somewhat as follows:
], Pennsylvania-Harvar 3, Yale; 4.
Dartmouth; 5, Cornell; 6. Princeton.
Minor colleges-7, Brown; 8. Syracuse; =.
West Point; 10, Annapolis; IL, Amherst;
u, Williams.
1t will be noticed that the Indians are
not ranked here. This Is due to the fact
that the Carlisle Indian School cannot be
ranked as a collegiate institution. III IL
were the Indian eleven would deserve to
be ranked either within the ranks of tho
big six or at least at the head OF the
minor college teams.
Turning to the west there is no doubt
that Chicago Is the champion or That
section, but. judging from the results or
the Chicago-Cornell and Pennsylvania
Cornell games, the western champions
are some distance behind the east A
fair ranking of the western teams would
be: !, Chicago; 2. Wisconsin; 3. Illinois; 4.
Minnesota; g. Indiana; O. Perdue.. As
the Michigan eleven Is neither east nor
west and closed its season disastrously
1t is impossible to rank the Wolverines.
Records Of Teams.
As a fitting close to the discussion .
the relative strength Of the leading teams
CONTINUED on Fifteenth Pase.)