The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-11-15


PRINCETON. y. j.. Nov 1.-THE last
time Yale and Princeton played II football
game in which there was as free scoring
by both sides as to-Gay WAS away back in
the middle OF the '9Os The score at that
time was 20 to 10 in favor OF Yale and
then. az now. Yale had the more prolific
scoring devices and the Tigers threatened
In the second half
weighty 10 which arose to-day was
what might have been done by the Tigers
had they begun their straight rushing
earlier. II they had they might have
scored earlier. and then again Yates de-
fence. which was freshor then and plenty
able 90 stop what few attempts at rushing
Princeton did make at that stage, might
have folled more rushing Just as IL did foi.
what there was up to the last quarter
Again the Tigers had they rushed more
previously might not have been as strong
at it at the nnish. Another big ''if' was
what back field consisting of Click.
Moore, Dickerman and Law might have
done had 1t been in all through. Click
at quarter surely impaired drive and
cohesion to the attack which were the best
Princeton has shown.
In the first half Yale gained by rushing
=
much Yale outfought the Tigers in that
half and also meaning that Princeton
didn't try to rush much. but stuck to the
kicking game In the second half Yale
gained by rushing 100 yards to Princeton's
l22 The total gains at the running game
were 2S7 yards By Yale. 1871 by Princeton.
Yale Keeps Faith In Passing.
Yale made thirteen first downs and
Z - IL. tV,. AT
downs to PrinCeton's none in the first
half, and IL seemed to he Nales fixed
policy to outscorc Princeton and to go
about IL by scoring early. That Is, the
Yale men believed their game could pro-
duCe more points than Princetons, and
that notion swaycd them rather than
being concerned with what Princeton
nigh: do In accommodating points More
over they We're not to he disturbed in
, carrying out their plans for more points.
| Early fruitlessness Of their plans. de-
pending largely on tho passing game,
didn't disturb thsir faith In It, and II
WAS this sticktoitiveness which helped ma
t.rialy in their victory The Tigers often
stopped Ysle's lateral passing. but they
couldn't stop it always, nor its variations.
When II did go II was big gain play,
which helped great deal.
| The figures are eloquent on the forward
pass score. Yale gained seveuty-two
yards to Princeton's none. Verify, the
forward pass. measured by the Harvard
and Yale games was fiZZle at Prince
ION this year, Yale had too good a back
field defence for the Tiger forward pass.
Yale came down to Princeton. better
equipped In attacking plays than Prince
ton. came down with wider range of
plays.
Princeton Outshone In Painting.
! In the punting game Yale outdld
| Princeton. Legore punted admirably as
to distance and placed his kicks better
| than in most games this year. Once he
kicked so low that his ends couldn't cover
the balls flight. but that was from bad
| pass. But he appeared to be IN too
much OF hurry several times to get his
! kicks away. and. for that reason punted
/ into the line once Then, too. he was IN
too much of hurry with his goal kicks,
applying his toe too hurrledly after the
! ball had been placed on the ground by
| mis- assistant.
| SIN, Yale benefited from the fact that
| Legorc outpunted briggs and Law. neither
| ~ whom was consistent. In the first half
! Wales punts averaged thrty-ninc yards
to Princeton's thirty-slN in the second
half they averaged forty-two yards to
! Princeton's thrty-siX; furthermore. Lee
cores. average was reduced by the fact
that one of his punts went into the line
and made no distance Whatever.
owing to the fact that the work on
both sides IN preventing the run back of
kicks was Indifferent In quality both van
hack kicks freely, '~inceton being slightly
the better. The Tigers ran puntS back
1873 yards to Saln's 1871. The handling Of
punts VIM pretty good, Ysle's better than
prlncetons. Legorc was the beet catcher
In the backhed. There was no wind to
speak of, and neither side cared much
| about letting a kicked ball strike the
! ground They preferred taking 1t on
the hy. hut Legore was much more pro-
hclent at Judging a kicked bail than the
! Prlncetonians who played bac,
] Fumhes were few and OF small con-
sequence A loose ball waR pretty wei
! followed Penalties were frequent and
holding and interference with faiI
I catches. They were pretty we'll divided
Yale was disciplined s!xty-fve yards and
| Princeton sixty,
Roth sides Tackle Poorly.
A detail In which there was funda
mental weakness was tackling Yalc's
tackling wasn't up to big game standard
but II was better than Princeton's MI
merous times the Yale runner shook him
self loose. and an insuficiency of sure
hard thigh high tackles cost many a
yard.
Princeton. when her attackers woke up
made excellent use OF a limited range OF
plays and executed those plays with pre-.
cision and speed Running plays were pu,
through effectively In connection with q