Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-12-24
BY VI c. BYRD.

fairs IN the big colleges IN the east, and
when they meet mkt week TO DISCUSS
,b. sections which to thslr way OF think
tng bava not Given sat19faot3on they
lii at+.mnt To make alterations 10 con-
form 70 thedS IDEAS. Whether OF not
there will be much difference In the code
which Is to be dSafted for NEXT year and
the one which WIS in vogue during the
season lust past isS q question tns1 VIII
NOT be answered Until after representa-
,,ves of the different colleges have met
and thoroughly thrashed out the many
ideas which will undoubtedly be pro-
sented. 1t is certain, thou4R, that the DIE
schools In the east want az revision and
will secure It If possible.
IL every suggestion made I'M regard 70
the foot ball rules was accsPteo anu
carried out the game next year WouIo
ne so much different from whaS 1t has
been In the past that It could Aaroy
be rophesied az to just what aa.eo.
would take place in the public atih'19saIe
toward the gridiron sport nor what G1-
ference IT would make In the style Oh
play The whole situation, though. sums
itself up into the following and as sucA
Will probably be the problem that WIN
have to be solved by the commif1ee wnen
it has its annual meeting. Practically
every big school IN the east is In FAVOR
of doing away with the forward pass
and reducing the distance to be gained on
downs to either six or eight yards. Inc
claim Is made among the larger tnsutu-
lions along the Atlantic coast tnat the
defense is SO much stronger tnan t9e
offense that it is practically Impossible
for q team to gain hrSt down WIN any
thing like consistency.
Out in the west there Ia general opin-
ion that the present system has mace
good and that 1t should at least be given
another years trial; The nrst .acuoa
that are desired In that section. while the
latter mentioned will stand pat on the
code as it now exists. with few minor
changes. Just what will be the result OF
it Is probable that some kind OF a COM
promise will be made BY which each fac
ton will get as nearly what 1t desires as
possible.
East May Get Changes.
1t is possible that the east may get
the radical changes that it desires. but
whether or not it would be advisable to
effect such changes Is a question. The
great cry among the northern and east
ern schools Is to abolish the forward
pass, it being held that as q sround-gain-
ing play it Is useless and that 1t fails TO
keep the defense opened up enough to &C
compllsh we'll what 1t Is mainly intended
for. Under the present conditions II rs
eastern institutions that the defense Is
too strong for the o1ense, and that 1n
many instances the team which is really
the stronger 10 not the one to WIN. aho
that often when two teams OF almost
equal strength are playing neither can
gain ground consistently. There nave Deen
suggestions made as 70 the aooiltlon Oi
the forward pass and shortening OF the
distance to be gained or else allowing
four downs to mako the required ten
yards. It being held that in such q case
the offensive team would have more
chance to score points than unoef the
Instances that the runner should De al.
lowed to receive assistance from at ieast
one of his teammates. These In the
main are the changes which nave oeen
Provided the changes mentioned were
made there il no question that 1t would
cause a retrogresston as TAR as the plans
made two years ago are concerneo. JuSt
a great outcry by the public. in gen
eral that it was deemed advisable 10
make radical changes. that the game
might be protected from the bitter COM
ment and opposition IL was receiving from
adverse public opinion. and for that rea,
SON the code was amended until play did
not resemble the old-style FOOT pail, IN
, which man would be carried down the
field by his comrades after he was tao
kled The changes bettered the game In
almost every way.
AS a playing proposition It may have
put some coaches at sea to devise an AGE
u,late offense under the new system. Dut
in the main foot ball did not suffer any
from the overhauling that IL received the
winter following the fall OF 1903: That
some of the changes suggested oy the
game in jeopardy again IL certain. Sup
pose the forward pass be abolished. then
what will be the result? A continual
hanlmering at the line. There WIN be III
~ v,fa IN
there was before the forward pass came
into existence-and that means great
increase in the number OF serious INJURIES
Under the present conditions. the defense
Is given much rest by the offense as far
the hammering received by plung1ng
backs is concerned, and that alone pre-
vents many Of the hurts formerly re-
ce:ved when in play after play the de-
when tired out into a mass OF swtriing
plays covering the man with the ball
Now the defensive man does not have to
do that on every play, and consequently
there is never the same chance for him to
be hurt. AS for the rule allowing rum
ners to be showed and pushed along, there
is not one chance in hundred Tor 1t TO
be passed. for the reasons mentioned
above And after all it appears that the
shortening Of the distance gained or the
allowing on four downs to be had in
which TO gain the first down. would tend
10 strengthen the offense to greater ex-
tent than is really desired. The foot ball
ff1oguis of the east claim that under such
: conditions the players would have tenden-
s,y TO take more chances, and 1t really
> world result in playing a more open game.
Such assertion appears to be rather
" ridiculous. If the coaches in the east re-
ftFse TO allow their men to take chances
nov. when they know that they must
fake them If they 10 gain with any
consistency, then it is a surety that they
3. 'sould never allow any play to be run
t7Ttft "a Vored of the chance variety when
e t:Ie% were sure that the chances We're IN
favor of them making the distance On
4fe or Ine-plung:Fs tactics.
Coaches Fear to Take Chances.
fhc whole situation I'm regard to the
, ,a4. sums itself up In this. that the
'+ssies haze just about failed to take
advantage of the opportunities offered
;licn undcr the new system, and they
Want to go back to the conditions with
Vbicil they are more familiar. This or
Else they have failed to take chances with
,apiays that might have gained ground for
aItkefn caused them to gain ground on
, '6thcrs. i; Is no secret that had Harvard
lad an open style of play to combine
With lies close-that il might have kept
the defense opened--it would have been
able to gain ground against any eleven
In the country. because il had behind its
line men who did greal work In that
direction even with the defensive team
playing for that kind of play only
The argument is brought forward that
teams were not able to score. and that
off, nar11d b<. h,tslt hot i