Quantcast HuskerMax

cole_rules (160K)
SPOKANE PRESS, Dec. 16, 1907

SPOKANE PRESS, DECEMBER 16, 1907 MUST RESTRICT THE FORWARD PASS Wm. C. "King" Cole, coach of the Nebraska university football team, has written an interesting article on the new rules for The Press, and suggests some changes for the benefit of the game. TOLEDO, 0., Dec. 16. ?Any changes made In the rules should foe made to Improve the game for the player. The question should foe, is it a good game to play? Not, Is it a good game to watch? If it is a good game to play, it lr of necessity a good game to. watch. The player is to be considered before the spectator. The forward pass and onslde lclck lwve wmuirht p-reiit chnncp "KING" COLE Under the old rules, one familiar with a team could tell with reasonable certainty what it would do In a given contest. Under the present system surprises have been frequent and a well executed pass or the lucky bound of an onslde kick has often decided a contest in favor of an inferior eleven. The onslde kick is good as It stands. The defense for the play must be open and consequently often enables the side carrying the baa to gain Its 10 yards in the required number of downs. The forward pass opens great, possibilities. Hut. the indiscriminate use of tbe play leaves too large a hole for luck to enter the game. When we consider the advance the pass had made during the past two years, the outlook leads one to believe it will open possibilities for development along undesirable lines. The rule necessary to restrict the play will require careful study upon the part of the rules committee. A rule confining the scrimmage line to proper distance from the point where the ball Is snapped might solve the problem without eliminating the pass. Forfeiture of the ball on the second down, after failing to make the pass, would prevent its indiscriminate use. There has been some talk of reducing the value of a goal from placement or drop. There is a possibility that such a change will be made, but It is not best to juchp to the conclusion that the play shall count for less than four points on the ground that a touchdown is harder to score. Take the case of a team carrying the 'ball close to its opponent's goal line several times and failing to score because of a wet field. Suppose it finally kicked goal from its opponent's 15-yard line. Would it be fair to reward this offensive strength with but two or threo points? It would appear that, if the points are reduced from four to either three or two, the side trying for and making a goal inside its opponent's 15-yard line should be given the subsequent advantage of receiving the ball, as stated above, on a kick-off from the opponent's 35-yard line