Among the very first to realize the value of the "loose ball" game under the new rules, Princeton opened out the play to the limit, and maintaining the terrific speed that had been typically Princetonian from the earliest days, played the game in the spirit as well as under the letter of the rules, with a stubborn courage of conviction that should have yielded even more victories. There are certain features of Princeton's play that to this day are debatable, and that are frequently censured by the non-partisan, but there can be no doubt of Princeton's honest belief in the new football, and sincerity of purpose in working it out along original lines. In 1912, to be sure, the Tigers took up the Minnesota shift, used in the East prior to that time by Yale, but took it up with a more thorough realization of its possibilities than was the case with Yale. At New Haven it had been of value as a "rescue play," but at Princeton, the Tigers were quicker to seize its fundamental principles entire and to realize that without any too much weight, and with the principal dependence upon sheer speed, the play was admirably suited to the Nassau school of football.

There has never been in any other Eastern university anything to equal for high speed the tackle run that for so many years was the outstanding feature of Princeton's play. Its effectiveness has varied, of course, but the fundamental principle has remained to be the admiration of all followers of football, of whatever gridiron school. The Princeton sentiment is for open football, and I think always will be. The game to the Princetonian is spectacular, and certainly, with individual opportunists like the Poes, John DeWitt and Sanford B. White at hand from time to time, there has been everything to create that sort of "atmosphere." Undoubtedly as the various "schools" of football approach a standard Princeton's methods may not be as salient as they have been in the past, but the Tigers have certainly demonstrated convincingly the value of speed to the game, and in the matter of following the ball, one of the best supports of very fast play, have been almost uncanny. This following of the ball, indeed, belongs to the "atmosphere" of football at Princeton. Princeton football as a type, then, means tremendous pace, with the deception that goes with pace.

Pennsylvania has played some of the most sensational football of any team in the East. It is only in the last few years that the Quakers have seemed to get down to something approaching a plan of generalship that can be handed down from one coaching squad to another, preferring as a rule to do the unexpected, to put faith in special plays, and to use these in any part of the field and trust to their brilliant execution for victory. The old time "guards back," of course, was in the nature of a planned game, for this was a play that would bear constant repetition, and was so powerful in its nature as to constitute an entire offense. With the radical changes in the rules, however, and the necessary abandonment of the "guards back," the Quakers have developed a style of play that has not always stood the test of the keenest criticism but has shown the most remarkable variety. The Quakers were among the first to change the established order of the backs and to work out a system of open football that was a puzzler to those elevens that had not been working along much the same lines. Unexpected plays were made in unexpected spots, and these plays were often successful even when violating the rules of generalship as they had been worked out at other leading institutions and depending upon sprinters in the backfield. It would be interesting to see how the Red and Blue method would work out once more against an eleven that uses the accepted Eastern generalship. In 1912 against a rebuilt Cornell eleven playing a systematic style of game the

Quakers seemed to have developed a system of their own. Their choice of plays on the various downs was quite different from what it had been in the past, but I think, had the material been a little better, the Red and Blue would have gone back to some of its old methods and would have used greater variety of play than was in evidence in that particular game.

The old form of the onside kick and the field goal from placement are peculiar to the Quakers, and like Princeton, the Red and Blue fought desperately to make something of the onside kick that was barred by the rule changes of 1912. Like Princeton, Pennsylvania deserved better luck with this well conceived and well executed play. But to-day as always Pennsylvania may be relied upon to make a play for the play's sake, and with an apparent utter disregard of consequences, should anything go wrong. It is this tendency that makes it one of the most interesting elevens in the country and leaves the impression that without the variety that has marked it in the past football at Pennsylvania would be of little moment. Indeed, with such a typical tendency toward variety the work of Pennsylvania may have a considerable effect on the generalship that is to come.

Two great fundamental differences mark Eastern and Western football. First, the Western coach usually bethinks himself of the offense before he tackles defense, while the Easterner is primarily absorbed in defense; second, there does not seem to be the same sustained power in attack in the West that one finds in the East. The Western runner does not stop when tackled as was his wont some years ago, but there is no gainsaying the fact that the Westerners do not keep their feet as do the Easterners, while at the same time showing in their entire theory of attack greater deception than is to be found in the East. Indeed, the West seems to believe more in deception than in execution. At least the stress is on deception. There are Eastern football men, too, who believe in deception and use it to the best of their ability in coaching teams, but on the whole they do not seem to feel that the deception is quite so important. The type difference, then, is the difference in the conception of the play and of what the men concerned in it must be expected to accomplish.