Missouri vs. Fordham
Thursday, January 1, 1942, Sugar Bowl Share
No. 8 Fordham beat No. 7 Missouri 2–0. It was their first meeting; after it, Fordham led the series 1–0.
FinalAttendance 73,000Referee: William HalloranThe game on Wikipedia
In the newspapers

The Tacoma times, Tacoma, Wash., January 3, 1942, page 12
Read the text
Fordham Rams Beat Missouri Two Points Total TollY of Contest NEW ORLEANS – Remember thos hard-hitting. fsst-stepping backs who were gong to turn the Sugar Bowl game into a touch down carnival Well. they are still mired in the mud today while two lowly line men carry around the major share Of glory for leading Fordham To 20 victory over Missouri. The winning play of yesier- days Sugar Bowl game came with startling suodenness after five minutes and % seconds of the first period. and most of the throng Of $4,000 peering through n thick curtain of rain, didn’t see what happened. Even those who did see the play didn’t quite under stand u. From its own l0-ysrd line Missouri, was trying TO punt out. Don Greenwood, Tigers substitute end and best kicker, was back to kick from the end zone. Rain was fall ing in torrents. Somehow Alex Santilli. ie5-pound tackle from Everett. Mass, smashed through Missouri’s left side and hurled his chest IN front Of the ball as IL came bounding off Greenwood’s toe. RITINSkI GETS BALL Then there was a made scram- BILE Of Fordham players after 1t with Stanley Ritinski, ls5-pound end from Luzerne, Pa, finally reaching the muddy oval skidding along on his belly. Ritinski elutched at the ball as he went out of the field of play. Steve Hudacek. Ram left tackle. and santilli were right on top of him. The nearest Missouri player was four or five yards away. The question WAS whether Ritinski had possession Of the hall before he went over the end zone line. II he did u WAS n Fordham touchdown. II he didn’t u was q safety. Ref cree w. T. Hoiloran Of Provi- dence, r. l., ruled Ritinsh didn’t have complete posses sion of the hall despite the fact the Ram end got up with the ball In his arms. That’s all the scoring there was two little points on a safety. For the next ~ minutes and 81 sec onds. the two teams, mud-caked and water-logged. struggled up and down the field with neither crossing the others 1e-yard line. The heralded backs Harry Ice. Red Wade and Bob Stedber of Missouri, and Blackie Blumenstock. Steve Filipowicz and Joe Andrejco Of Fordham were shackled by the Louisiana gumbo mud To tell the truth il wasn’t a fit day for man or beast to be playing football game or looking at one. IL not only rained. IL came down in bucketfuls.

Detroit evening times, Detroit, Mich, January 2, 1942, page 1
Read the text
Football Scores oregon state 20. Duke 10 Alabama % Texas A. and NJ p. Fordham 2. Missouri 0 Georgia 40. 7. c. L rs. Tulsa s. Texas Tech o Louisiana College 10 Mexico n. J. c. Smith 10. Lane o. Negro All-St rs Nashville Pros u Langstone -. Morris Brown o. OuaChintA s. Ark. All-StaTs

The daily monitor, Mount Clemens, Mich., January 2, 1942, page 8 (results column)
Read the text
Only Rams 20 vittory Lacks Teedes Oregon Stote Upsets Dope; ‘Bomo Mokes ! First Down, Wins GubSu 0OWUs WINS BY HAROLD CLAASEN NEW YORK, Jan. q up – Everywhere but at New Orleans where Fordham slogged to a 2 to 0 triumph over Missouri touchdowns in the annual foot ball bowl games yesterday were as numerous as New Years Day headaches. At Miami, Georgia and Texas Christian players popped over the goal line with all the regulGrity of habit running the best of resolutions as the Bulldogs OF Southeast Conference triumph ed, 40 to 26. Oregon State got three and Duke two as the West Coast champions fooled everyone but their coach in upsetting the Blue Devils, 20 to 16, in the Rose Bowl game at Durham, N. c. ‘BAMA WHIPS AGGIES And Alabama crossed the dou- BILE stripe four times and Texas A g. M three times in The Grim son Tides 20 to FL Cotton Bowl victory. The Fordham Missouri score wasn’t a surprise. 1t was a COM pliment to the two teams who were forced to play on a field that e m b e d a Louisiana Bayou. Fordham’s two points came early in the first period when Don Greenwood, Missouri end, dropped back to punt and the water : ogged boot was blocked by tackle Alex Santilli of the Rams. The ball squirted through the end zone before Stan Ritinski, Fordham TANKER, got control of it. MIZZUH PASSES CLICK That was all the scoring the $4,000 spectators, most of them peeking from beneath umbrellas, saw although each club gain ed approximately $50 yards and the supposedly non-passing Mid westerners completed three aeriais in five tries. In Manufacturing their upset, the lowly rated Oregon Staters scored first and never permitted the Wanted Duke squad to get ahead, much to the dismay of the $4,000 damp spectators who damned their way into the stadi- UNI built to hold but $4,000. Don Durdan, the slim half back who passes with his left hand, was the payoff player al t h u g h the Beavers winning touchdown was manufactured on a 70-yard pass and run play from Bob Dethman to Gene Gray in the third Period. ONE FIRST DOWN Alabama used the minimum of effort in turning back the Cadets of Texas A e. M, col lecting its four touchdowns while gaining only rs yards by rushing and passing while reg istering but lone first down. The Texans, who could get only three touchdowns, gained 500 yards and Is first downs. The Tides success was tribute to Jimmy Nelson, their ace back, who scampered ~ yards on q punt return and later regis tered from 81 yards out. SINKWICH Is DIFFERENCE Frank Sinkwich, the broken jawed All America halfback was the difference b tw e r Georgia and the Texas Christian the latter eleven dropping it: first Bowl decision in four out ings. Three times Sinkwich flippe6 scoring aerials and once he broke loose on a 43-yard touch down jaunt of his own. He anc his mates combined for q 40 tc 7 lead before the Texans realized the game was under way. On the other B o WI fronts Tulsa’s Missouri Valley cham pions lasted for a fourth perioC touchdown and 6 to 0 verdict over Texas Tech in the Sur Bowl; Langston, Okla, blanket Morris Brown, Is to 0, in the Vulcan Bowl for the Negro championship and L ouisi an, College bested the University o. Mexico, 10 to 0, in Mexico City for the Orchid Bowl crown.
Public-domain newspapers from the Library of Congress’s Chronicling America, found through the American Stories dataset (Dell and Harvard, CC BY 4.0). The text is the machine reading of the page, mistakes and all.
Before kickoff
Our ratings going in
Our ratings (scores only)
Missouri 55% to win. Fordham pulled the upset.
The series
Every Missouri–Fordham gameFordham leads 3–0 in three meetings, counting the two since this game.
| 1951 | Fordham 34, Missouri 20 | |
| 1942 | Fordham 20, Missouri 12 | |
| 1941 | Fordham 2, Missouri 0 | Sugar Bowl |
Around this game
Missouri
- Next gamevs. Fort RileySept. 19, 1942
- SeasonMissouri in 1941
- ProgramMissouri history and records
Fordham
- Next gameat PurdueSept. 26, 1942
- SeasonFordham in 1941
- ProgramFordham history and records

