The CRIMSON, in its article on the team at the beginning of the season, claimed that we had this year promise of a better team than for some time past, but that there was no use in thinking for a moment of facing Yale or Painceton, unless our radical fault was overcome-high tackling. High tackling lost us the game Saturday, and high tackling will continne to lose us every game we play against a good team. Why it is that a player of average brains cannot learn in six weeks to takle low, when he knows that he would thereby almost double the effectiveness of his play, we, in our ignorance, cannot see. Nor do we see why a Harvard captain and foot ball committee cannot give their men to understand that they have got to do as they are told, and play as they are told, at the risk of not getting on the team,-as well as the foot ball powers of Yale or Princeton, a Yale or Princeton eleven will complete alter their method of play in a single year (and that means nothing in the world but coaching), whereas, our men seem to think that if they play hard, and keep in training, they have done duty, and no one has a right to find fault. They may have been told to tackle low or fall on the ball every day for two months, but that makes no difference. They shed what coaching they get as a duck sheds water. What foot ball at Harvard needs is, more time, thought, theory, and experiment by men who are competent to coach ; a public sentiment that shall make a big, strong man lose caste by refusing to come out and play ; and, above all, surbordination among the players, willingness to do as they are told, to little matters that seem to them unimportant, to strive for "good form" in foot ball as if they were striving for the "good form" in the Harvard stroke. Head work, public sentiment, and a progressive, learning spirit. We have got to make more of a business of foot ball, if we are to keep pace with these other colleges.