THE KENTUCKY ALUMNUS IQ
We note as another comment on the game that Woodard and Swango
did not play for State College, because their names had not been on a list
sent to Georgetown. It will be noted that these men had last appeared as
Centre athletes. 'There was then and for some years later, no "one year
rule” to prevent such a practice and there was considerable of this shifting
around of athletes,——in most cases going where there were the greatest
pecuniary inducements. There were no such inducements in the case of
» these two young men however. They simply left Centre because they
were disgruntled at something over there, matriculated at the Calhoun
. Business College, which had an aiiiliation with State College similar to
that of Smith’s Business College with K. U., and presented themselves on
the State College grounds as candidates for the team.
On October 25 State played Centre at Danville, the game ending in
confusion over a contested decision, during which the referee gave 2
points for an unkicked goal to Centre. The State team refused to allow
it to be kicked, affirming that the touch down had been made after the
ball had been whistled down by the umpire. The official score was 6 to 4
in favor of Centre. The contesting teams were as follows:
State College Centre.
Hobdy (Ed) ................ R. E. .................. Van Winkle
Lyle (Irvin) ................. R. T. ...................... Hudson
Jolly ....................... R. G. ..................... Hudgins
Woods (now one of trustees) .... C ............... . ........ Bedford
Steely ....................... L. G. ....................... Bayer .
Garred, ’94, captain ...... . .... L.T. ............... . ...... Cubbins
Gardner (Sandy) ............. L. E. ....... . .... Douglass (Franc?)
Bryan, ’93 ............ ` ....... R. R. ............. . .......... Ke y Z
Redmon ..................... L. H. ........... Hardin (now Rev.) g
Alford, ’ 96 ................... F. B. ............. . ...... McDinnar
Carey ................... ° ..... Q ......................... Merrill
There was an attempt to get a second game Played between these (
two teams, which led to considerable acrimonious discussion by corre-
spondence and in the newspapers over the proposed constitution of the l
teams. ·
In a communication in the newspaper of October 27, Berry, coach, (I
of Centre, defended their proposal to play Cook and Crawley in their p»
next game——admitted to be inelligible—on the ground that they were l
l added to offset Woodard and Swango whom State was proposing to play. I
( He also compl·ained bitterly that State College was the "only oneof the `
i Kentucky Colleges which objected to playing coaches." The game was l
4 never played. A
i K. U. defeated Georgetown that year 64 to 6.
E November 4 of that year was such a bad day that all games were_at _
l iirst declared oif, but the weather clearing, a hastily arranged game with
5 .
*I I