New-York tribune., 1909-11-08
Princefon:S Strength in Line
Game with Dartmouth Marked by Lack of Variety in
the Attack Used by Tigers.

find. He performed IN a clean and work.
manlike manner, got through TO spoil sew
eral plays before they were started. and
covered punts in a thoroughly satisfactory
ways
1t was behind the line that most D,
PrincetOn's weakness lay and in Bergin that
IL was largely concentrated. There is little
that can be said OF him that was not said
yesterday. His faults call for no analysis.
They showed plainly in the play. and were
obvious enough There is one possible ex-
cuse for Bergin. however. as far "a his ap-
parent lack OF Judgment Is concerned. He
ran his team as IL he had orders not 20 dis
play anything for the consideration OF the
Yale scouts. Murphy and DAILY, who were
present. and II he did have such orders hs
must have Obeyed them TO the letter.
The Princeton attack consisted OF i've
plays. There was a straight line buck,
split play of tackle. ordinary end run.
a forward pass and an Onside kick II
that is the offensive repertOry on which
the Princeton coaches are depending 20 beat
Yale. they are certainly a misguided set.
H. on the other hand. Bergin had permis-
sion TO employ more varied attack and
forgot 70 do so through losing his head.
third substitute ought 70 be able TO beat
linn for the position
There are indications. however. that he
had such orders The forward pass that
Princeton employed. for instance. was a
loose and imperfect affair. Mccormick in
variably made IT on fake kick, stepping five
yards TO the right never 20 the left, and
then hurting the ball straight down the field
II was a new pass for Princeton, but II
was an easy one 70 break up. and 1t will be
a surprise 70 see II attempted against Yale.
The Onside kick wasn't really used at all,
and was haphazard affair on the two Oc-
casions when it was tried, although il was
recovered once, even So
Making all allowances for Bergin's posi-
BILE orders. however. he showed poor judg-
ment in the second half, and he could have
had no orders requiring him 10 make poor
passes 10 his backs and 70 fail 10 return
punts.
Read was the best OF the Princeton
backs. decidedly. although he didn't play
long. He is finished and powerful half
back. skilled in end runs and IN making
forward passes. Cunningham ran too far
across the field on plays around the end.
and 81 did Sparks. although the latter has
improved wonderfully in this respect The
backs were not played as close to the line
did better work in consequence.
Hart was I powerful plunger He hit
the line hard. kept his feet we'll. helped
the other backs when they carried the ball
and was OF great help on the secondary
line OF defence. But he was too mechanical.
too lacking in originality. 10 give the i'm
preston Of a really great fullback He
did not show the impetuOus fire and dash
that are characteristic OF Coy. and. for
that matter, Of Marks. Of Dartmouth
McCormicks superb punting was a
source OF delight 20 the surprised on
lockers. who scarcely knew who he was.
so quietly has his ability been developed
Yale will have by no means as great an
advantage in this respect as had been ex-
pected. Mccormick kicks had dis
tsnce. height and elusiveness 20 recon-
mend them. They had height enough 10
give his ends time 20 get down without
losing any great distance, and they were
exceedingly hard for the Dartmouth backs
10 handle.