Omaha daily bee., 1911-10-22
Yale
and Harvard
Measured by Expert

new YORK, oct 2i--Thc most inter-
ssung DIT % news foot bali followers
can secure "a tais time OF the season Is
= line ON Harvard ana Yale. Anyone WAC
can furnish q comparison ~ hero and
his chatter" L. devoured With relish.
The first man OF Importance 20 20 on
record 10 regard to the respective power
land strength OF the two elevons Is Tim
Iarlin. the able coach OF Holy Cross.
AT present there isn't a man whoge OBJ
ise.vations regarding the respective deve!-
opment Of the teams at New Haven and
Cambridge can be cherished moro than
IarlxIns. lie watched every move OF
10th teams In the games against Holy
Cross. Yale defeated his team by a
score OF 20 to 0, while Harvard. week
T, later, won over the worcester eleven by
The small score OF TO 0.
Il is early in the season 60 make com.
I PARSONS. which the writer appreciates.
but as Yale and Harvard meet but three
same teams II bears heap OF interest
just the same. Brown and Princeton are
4 the only other elevens that clash with
both the Crimson and the Blue. and these
games come later in the season.
Il watched the work OF both Harvard
and Yale closely" says I.arkin. land
found very little difference in the two
rushlines. Yale did appear to be trine
more Aggressive. az that Holy Cross
was unable to gain much ground by our
regular attack against either team. The
forwards OF both teams were stRunch
when Holy Cross was in possession OF
the ball. but I must say that neither did
much breaking through on our plays.
- anA Xn1H
games was our attack upset before u
reached the line OF scrimmage. but rather
alnothered. Yale turned our end plays
in quicker than Harvard did, and that
accounts for the fact that our attack at
Cambridge did not seem as powerful "a
az New Haven. Harvard's tackling In
close scrimmage was awfully hard, how
ever.
In wendell, Harvard has a back who
/ am sure stands head and shoulders
above any player Yale has behind the
line. but aside from having Wendell, the
Crimson's backfield. as II performed
against Holy Cross. did not seem TO be
as well developed as Yale's. AZ far as
weight went, the backfields seemed to
be equal. but at New Haven the backs
worked much better together.
THE fact that Yale had been longer
on the field than Harvard counts for a
whole lot. naturally but make an allow
ance for this when / analyze my impress
aIon that the New Haven eleven at pres
emit is a better machine than Harvard's.
I'm the game against Holy Cross both
Harvard and Yale displayed a lot oil
crudeness. but the New Haven individ'
ual players seemed 20 be working Out
the lines on which they have beer
coached better than the Harvard individ
uals did. still, my team would haV'
held Yale 90 much smaller score thar
tho twcnty-six points scored against then
had e played the same brand OF foot bal
al New Haven that II did az Cambridge
Harvard has a wonderful player u
smith and he did some coriSing worl
down tho field, but the New Haven end
looked immense against us and appeare
10 me as though they we're capable OF be
ing developed into first class men 70
The big games which como later. Hol
CROSS did so much fumbling agains
Yale. and there was such erratio pass
sng back from center that we did no
nave the same opportunity TO try on
omen game as against Harvard.
Three torWhru passo9 w 49," -
last half at Cambridge completely foole
the Crimson's defense and II was onl
because the fleet Wendell overtoo
o,Brien that we did not secure a touch
down. We would have registered fel
goal. too. had not Monahan's pass
ythaien rolled along the ground To
sure, FELTON, came through fast and wa
credited with breaking up the play.
Taking the two games. must "a
that Yale's work was the smoother an
there we're not 90 many plays made D
the blue men in which the team SCENE
disintegrated.