- TOP PLAYERSOffensePABLO S. TORRE | August 20, 2012
- TAMPA BAY buccaneersENEMY lines WHAT A RIVAL COACH SAYSJune 28, 2012
- Faces in the CrowdJune 11, 2001
The team was undefeated and was scored upon only once by the Naval Academy, which at the time (1943) was ranked No. 2 in the nation behind Army. Incidently, Choo Choo scored three touchdowns, and afterward in the locker room Captain Billick Welchel, the Navy coach, came in and, on locating Choo Choo, made him an offer to attend the Academy. Charlie refused as "he didn't think they were so hot."
It was a memorable day. I have often wondered what has happened to all those great guys and can only hope that life has been kind to them.
With every professional football team today operating out of virtually the same offensive formation and with the sophisticated defenses honed to near perfection, it is not surprising that there are complaints about boring, low-scoring games and constant suggestions for rule changes to liven things up. Pro football doesn't need any rule changes. All it really needs is to use more variety in the offense and to bring back some of those great old formations like the single wing and the double wing. The only trouble is there are no Justices, Walkers, Trippis, Kazmaiers or Lauricellas around to make them go. And it's a pity.
UNEVEN TIE BREAKER?
I propose: 1) that the referees be given the task of choosing which end of the field to utilize, taking into consideration the field and wind conditions and 2) that the ball remain at that end of the field for at least an equal number of attempts from the same 15-yard line. This would save time in marching up and down the field and allow teams to operate under the same conditions, thereby avoiding any protests on this score. It also would save wear and tear on players already dogged after a full game.
However, lest the fans at the unused end feel slighted, this proposal could be modified to allow each team two attempts at the first end chosen, a brief five-minute intermission, then two more attempts at the other end.
It should be apparent, and even more disturbing, that what we are paying twice for is no goods at all. Our return would seem in fact to be purely negative—decrements in both environmental quality and the amount of available foodstuffs. Alternatively, Shelton may reflect on the resultant trend of his recent grocery bills and conclude that he is being billed three times for the goods he does get.