Throughout October the big elevens play only the simplest football, in. order that the material may be brought to a high state of efficiency without, through the medium of complicated and advanced formations and plays, taking the minds of the men off their individual work, which at this stage of the campaign is paramount. But since through this month many games, perhaps one or two rather hard ones, will be played, the team must have a set of fairly effective plays. On attack six, or even fewer, of the fundamental formations ought to suffice, with a simple kick formation, one or two forward passes, and a fake kick. The greater part of the time of most of the men will be put in on the defense, for the first object of a football team is to keep its opponents from scoring.

Right here there is a sharp division of opinion between East and West. The Westerners argue that "the best offense is the best defense," while the Easterners maintain that, if an eleven can count upon keeping its opponent from storing, nothing worse can happen to it than a scoreless tie. When Western teams meet the Western theory seems to be satisfactory since both are coached on the same fundamental line, but it frequently happens that when a good Eastern defense meets a good Western attack there is a sudden cessation of Western scoring. The rule does not hold good in games between Michigan and Pennsylvania since this particular Eastern team has for many years been 75 noted for a fast and versatile attack rather than a sound defense.

There is no doubt, however, that in recent years the Westerners have done more in the way of building up a defense than when the game was young in that section. It has been a slow process, for attack has always had an extreme fascination for the hustling Westerners, and the other side of the game, apparently failing to enlist much interest, has not been sufficiently emphasized. The East may learn a few things from the West on attack, while on the defense the situation is reversed.

There is a growing feeling among the best coaches that both on attack and defense, since the shifts have gained rapidly in popularity, and since the defense must shift rapidly to meet the shifted attack, thus bringing the defensive players opposite new faces from time to time, it is a good plan to remove the emphasis from the nomenclature of the positions. In a shifted attack and defense the defensive tackle will find himself sometimes facing an attacking guard, an attacking center, or even an attacking end. If he has rooted in his mind the fact that he is a right or left tackle, as the case may be, instead of an all-round forward, to be played wherever the shifting fortunes of the game command, there will often be a hesitancy in finding his place, and a consequent falling off in his efficiency as an individual.

He will be apt to take his position with relation to another player in his own line, rather than with reference to the changed position of the attacking forwards. A small matter, it would seem at first glance, but a formidable one in the light of practical experience. Much the same thing is true of the attack. Under modern conditions the distinction between right and left halfback is often wiped out, and the four men behind the line become simply plain backs to be used in varied formations regardless of the side of the line behind which they take their positions. On defense the backs usually follow the right and left system, but the forwards often find themselves well out of the normal, balanced line-up in which they began the game.

There are occasions, too; when because of individual peculiarities, the guard and center change places on the defense, or upon which it is deemed advisable to"twinup" guards or tackles in order to strengthen the weaker side of the line. The concensus of the best opinion, therefore, leans to the numbering of the positions, so that the men are called upon by number rather than by title. But since the balanced formation is still very much in the game, it would be well to use even numbers on the right side of the center and odd numbers on the left. This system has been followed in the accompanying diagrams. The center is numbered 1, and the left guard, tackle and end are numbered 3, 5, and 7, respectively, while the right guard, tackle and end are numbered from the center outward, 2, 4, and 6. Left halfback is No. 9, right halfback No. 8, fullback No. 10, and quarterback No. 11. Thus, Jones is told to "go in at No. 5" instead of at left tackle, and Smith is ordered to "go in at No. 11" instead of quarterback, and so on throughout the team. These numbers may or may not be worked into the signal system, but I am not convinced of the advisability of numbering the players for signal purposes, and believe that the plays should be numbered, save in the extremely early part of the season, when numbers for the players and the openings may be used to advantage, thus making matters as simple as possible for the candidates, who have enough to think of in absorbing individual coaching without becoming involved in a complicated signal system.

In considering attack and defense of the fundamental order I shall follow the Eastern system of beginning with the defense. There is less clash of opinion both East and West over defense than over offense. The principal disagreement seems to rise out of the system of using the center and the ends. Some coaches prefer to keep the center always up in the line, depending upon his work in breaking through and closing up openings in his own position and through those occupied by the guards on either side of him. Others cling to the theory of the "loose" or "roving" center, at least between the two twenty-yard lines and on the first three downs. Nearly all coaches send the center up into line when it is obvious that the opponents are about to kick.

There is a great deal to be said for the "loose center" theory, especially if the player in question be not too heavy, and very fast, as well as quick in diagnosing the plays. In the diagram, Fig. 1, the normal attack and defense formations of two teams playing the "balanced game" are shown, and in this instance the White center is playing in the loose, or roving style made famous by men like Congdon and Ket-cham of Yale, Grant of Harvard, as well as Torrey and other well-known Pennsylvania pivot men. Indeed, so far as I can learn, the credit for the innovation belongs to the Quakers, though in that I may be mistaken. It requires no more than a glance at the diagram to realize the advantage in range of the "loose" position, provided the defensive center be clever enough not to be drawn away from his immediate post by false attack, and fast enough to get out and tackle as far as the ends.