Varsity Reverses Form In Cornell Shellacking
Line, Powerful Against Columbia, Crumbles
Harvard looked like the Columbia team of last week--only worse on offense. Cornell looked like Harvard of last week--only better on defense.
It was as bad as it sounded over the radio. The Harvard players looked tired when they started. They should have been. A. 40 to 6 score requires a lot of pushing around.
Contrary to what the score may indicate, the Varsity was not out-classed--as it was last year against Virginia. It was just completey out-played. And the out-playing was all in the line.
The Crimson showed better running backs than did Cornell. Hillary Chollet never ran with the finesse which Chip Gannon used on his 43 yard run shortly after the start of the second half. Frank Miller did not run back a kick all afternoon the way Ken O'Donnell did for 37 yards after Cornell's third touchdown.
Cornell Won in Line
The contest last Saturday at Ithaca was one of the most distinct examples of a game won entirely in the line that this bureau has ever seen. The Harvard line was out-charged on all but a handful of plays.
Cornell's line blocked decisively, Harvard blockers were like a bunch of old men stretching before open windows in the morning. But the Big Red defenders were not open windows and, being mostly sophomores, they did not respect age.
Poor Crimson Tackling
When it came to tackling, the same attitudes prevailed. The Big Red line tackled viciously. Harvard linemen, however almost fell over backwards to hug the Cornell ball-carriers. But the latter seemed to avoid the fraternal show of Ivy League affection.
A thumbless man could count the tackles made by the middle of the Crimson line during the afternoon. By closest count, the seven men who occupied those slots were in on but eight tackles-- exactly on less than was made by line-backer Phil Isenberg.
Cornell Scouting Hurt
There are many reasons why Harvard showed a complete reversal of form from the Columbia game. Some of them can be pinned down like the difference between not being scouted last week and being scouted thoroughly this week, or Cornell's use of 20-odd defenses compared to Columbia's sticking to a single defensive formation throughout the game.
Some of the reasons are ephemeral--like the difference between the morale of a team which has scored an amazing up- set the week before and the morals of a team which barely squeezed by a school winless in over a year; the difference between the attitude of a squad which has slept in its accustomed quarters and another which has traveled by train or bus for about 20 hours of the 36 immediately before the game.
But the game is over, and therefore, unimportant Columbia has proved that Harvard can win Cornell has proved that Art Valpey can wave no mingle wand which makes winning automatic.
Valpey is a confidence inspiring coach with a fine system of play. It is not up to the individual members of the squad to play Columbia-style ball or suffer a lot of Cornell style afternoons