The Washington times., 1932-12-13

or spectacular in the way of a
When said Mr.. John Public sees
what he wants, he is inclined to
the mistaken idea that a good
coach and his team win because
of a battling offense. However,
players, coaches and trained OBJ
servers know that execution of as
signmentS, far more than the play,
makes for success.
George Washington University
presented an attack in 1882 that
was pleasing to spectators. AS a
result the Colonials drew large
crowds. It is well to remember
that back of the thrilling attack
ing plays flashed by the colorful
ColonialS were many hours of
faithful practice effort by mem
bers of the squad, by the coaches,
by the trainer, doctor, scrub
managers and other attaches.
Any given style Of attack will
look good to spectators if used by
players whose talents individually
and collectively fit that style. G..
WIS style of play was ideally suit
ed to the material available to
the Colonial coaches. Catholic
UniverSity'S style, too, was admir-
ably fitted to the type of material
on the Flying Cardinal squad.
Coaches Pixlee, Walsh, Myers
and Lee, atoG. W., and Bergman,
Cotton and Vlk. at C. u, managed
to get maximum out of their play
erS on most occasions.
Suited to Material
Maryland's style of attack also
was suited to material at the Old
Line school. However, it appeared
to this observer that failure of the
Terrapin line to develop caused
the squad to lose more games than
it won.
During the season of 1892, YER
Satility of attack was the mark
of both G. w. and C. u, At times
Maryland appeared ready to flash
a versatile attack also, but green
material interfered materially with
the plans of Coach Byrd and his
assistants.
G. w. and C. U. each had good
strength in the ball-carrying de-
partment as reflected by excellent
line thrustS and plays directed at
the tackles and flankS. At times
it seemed that the line -thrusting
offenSe might have been devel.
oped to a higher degree of perfec-
tion by G. w., but one key player,
a potential fumbler (heavy chest,
probably caused concentration
on off-tackle slants and cut
backs rather than straight-ahead
thrustS. r
Armed With Tricks
G. W., C. u, Georgetown and
Maryland all were armed with
tricks enough to keep the defense
guessing, but superior execution
of assignments by G.. w. and C. U.
gave them decided advantages.
Failure of Hoya and Terrapin
lines in their more important con-
tests of the year made it appear
that their teams lacked attacks
Of deception and power. However,
at C. U. and G.. w. superior execu-
tion of fundamentals, and fine
forward wall offensive charges,
gave the attack of both elevenS
excellent deception and power. A
number of powerful runners INC
Carver, Sheary and others), sup
ported by superior front-line play,
gave both G. w. and C. U. at
tacks real power.
It seemed to me that the coach
ing StaffS at G. w. and c. U. ex-
hauSted every good probability of
the formations used. Both took
clever advantage of threat men
in the backfield, and Of the spe-
cial qualifications of their spe-
cialty men. Both staffS were wise
enough never to permit practice
sessions to grow irkSome or mo-
notonous, and both were masters
OF taking advantage of time.
Lacked Time
Maryland was hampered a bit
by lack Of time to prepare special
defenseS and attacks for certain
games.
Members of the G. w. and C, u.
squads knew football rules and
strategy. Maryland's players, as
a group, as stated, were rather
green. Mental uneasiness both
cred Georgetown's players I'D to
the final day of the Hoya season.
Timing of plays was mastered
by G. w. and c. U. to a satisfac-
tory degree. Both squads were
blessed with men possessed of
special qualifications, G.. w. prob
a hl,, lnuirnn ,,nnrn nf thin 4.....