Yale's resources extend even to the use of the "shoestring," the desperate violation of all generalship whatsoever in the effort to win. The Blue has been the greatest rallying team between the halves, not so much because the "Yale spirit," about which we read so much in the newspapers, has been aroused, as because there have been capable men at hand to correct technical faults that have come to light in the first half. And a Yale team of the first half has often been so little astray from the fundamentals of Yale football, that the brief intermission was all that was needed to set it right. Little things make larger differences in the play of a Yale eleven than in that of any other. These sudden changes in form have resulted not from sudden change in theory, but from change in execution. So when the spectator says of a Yale team that it does not look like a Yale team, he unconsciously means that it has not shown resource, and has appeared to lack power. Yale has not had as many wonderful backs as one or two other elevens, but there has almost always been a great line - if not a great line, then a good one. Yale has won more games with poorer backs than any other university, and that means power in the line properly applied.

Harvard football has almost always been brilliant, even in defeat, but has suffered too often one of the penalties of brilliancy, a tendency toward erratic performance as a team. It is only in the last few years that the Crimson's type of play has settled down to something approaching finish. There have been great forwards at Cambridge, but after all, the lasting impression one gets of Harvard football is that of a brilliant backfield. The list of splendid Harvard backs is as long as one's arm, and they have been men who too often have been on a losing team. For some unknown reason the schools that "feed" the Crimson seem to send up better backs than forwards, and at this writing it seems certain that Harvard will be well equipped behind the line for years to come.

With plenty of material for the backfield the natural tendency is toward quickly made formations and a rapidity and sweep of play not found in elevens which are more dependent upon the work of the forwards. It was natural, of course, that Harvard should show advances in individual backfield play far beyond the ordinary, and with the excellent material at hand Harvard has imposed more duties upon the back than upon the forward. The season of 1912 was a fair sample, when a single back was told off now and then to take care of the most dangerous man in the line of the opposing team, with the result that individual interference at Cambridge is worth copying when the dependable men are at hand.

Photo. by Paul Thompson.