Bucknell at Navy

Saturday, November 8, 1913

Navy beat Bucknell 70–⁠7. It was their seventh meeting; after it, the series stood even at 3–⁠3–⁠1.

AwayBucknell6–⁠4 in 1913
7
HomeNavy7–⁠1–⁠1 in 1913
70

FinalHigh 58°F, low 47°F, 0.03 in. of rain

In the newspapers

  • The Evening capital and Maryland gazette's story: NAVY ATTACK CRUSHED THE BUCKNELL ELEVEN Middies Surprised Even Them. selves by Large Score. VISITORS STRONG IN FLASHES. Great Burst Of Speed at Opening Oi Second Half Gave Them Touch down 0nly Tally Of Season.

    Evening capital and Maryland gazette, Annapolis, Md., November 10, 1913, page 1

    Read the text

    NAVY ATTACK CRUSHED THE BUCKNELL ELEVEN Middies Surprised Even Them. selves by Large Score. VISITORS STRONG IN FLASHES. Great Burst Of Speed at Opening Oi Second Half Gave Them Touch down 0nly Tally Of Season. Further demonstrating that they have one of the most powerful foot ball teams in the country this year, the midshipmen rolled up the big score Of 20 to Z against the Bucknell aggregation Saturday afternoon. Conquerers of the University of Pittsburgh, the team that held the middies to a scoreless tie in the open ing conte st of the season here Buck nell came to Annapolis confident Of holding the sailors to a small score, but no idea of Winning. This Coach Dckins on admitted before hostilities were opened,s but little did he think that his charges would receive such severe trouneing. To the middies the result was more than sweet revenge for the defeat they suffered at the hands of Bucknell last season, IL to 6. BuckneIl was simply outclassed in ali departments Of che game. They could not cope with the Navy’s battering-ram attack that ripped the opposing line asunder The dashing work of the middies in the opening stages of the battle was enough to take the heart out of the visitors, three touchdowns being scored in the first period, and when the first half ended the figures read Navy, 81; Bucknell, 0. Bucknel not only did not get with in distance to score either by touch down or field goal during the first half, but she was unable even to reg ister a hrstdowp, so stiff ives the deiensiye work Of the Navy forwards. And their forward passes, which largely contributed to the victory over Navy last year, were either smeared by the middies or went into miserable attempts. But the middies could not maintain their record of an uncrossed goal, for liz the face of the Overwhelming defeat Bucknell accomplished this, and it was effected nicey. The visitors made the score within few minutes after the kickoff in the second half, through wonderful burst of speed and clever ly executed forward passes. Gdauiec by ) spectacular run Of 80 yards, brought the leather in the Navy 2oue. Two line-smashing plays and a forward pass, Cruikshank to Hopper, or Is yards, carried the ball danger ously near the Navy goal line. In fact, it rested only three yards from the coveted mark. Bucknell, however, failed to make any impression on the Navy line, and Cruikshank was thrown for loss of our yards when he atte mpted a wide-enj run. The next play, how ever, another quick forward pass, Cruikshank to Hopper, sent the lat ter across the line for the touchdown. A minute later Sturgis kicked goal. By this time the middies were fight ing mad, and both teams were playing like demons. Bucknell’s attack. how ever, could not stand the pace long, ilnd soon began to crumble. At this juncture, the watchtul eyes of the officials caught three Navy players roughing it and they were promptly disqualified. Th.se were Howe and Brown, the stawlart guards, and Ingram, at left end. Then too, TIE middies had a number If second-string men in the lineup and it was some time before they got going right. Later, however, the regular backfitld men, Mitchell at quarter, McReavy and Failing at haves and Harrison at full, were sent back into the game. The difference in the Navy attack was at once noticeable, and the rest Of the game was steady procession | by the middies down the fitld, while Bucknell did not again get within | striking distance. The Nav score was made up of ten touchdowns, seven goals aud one goal from place. ment. by Brown, kicked during the first half With the West Point game only two weeks off, the work of the mid dies along all lines IN Saturdays game was such as to give their friends the greatest confidence for a victory over their rivals. They were not only able to gain ground readily on plays through tackle and other parts of the line, but essayed end runs and for ward passes for great gains and ran back punts well. Mitchell and Nichols, the rivals for quarterback, each had a chance TO show himself. While both are heady players and capable in carry. ing the ball, Nichols has something on Mitchell in running through a bro ken field. His zigzag sprint of SO yards for a touchdown was easily the most spectacular play of the game and be also got away several times 1 for shorter oains

  • The Evening star's story: MAKES A BIG SCORE Navy Gives BuckneII Severe Trouncing. FINAL COUNT is 70 TO 7

    Evening star, Washington, D.C., November 9, 1913, page 59

    Read the text

    MAKES A BIG SCORE Navy Gives BuckneII Severe Trouncing. FINAL COUNT is 70 TO 7 Special Dispatch 10 The Star. ANNAPOLIS, Md. November s. Further demonstrating that they have one of the most powerful foot ball teams in the country this year, the Annapolis Midshipmen rolled up the big score of 10 to I against Bucknell this afternoon. Conuuerors of the University of Pitts bursh, the team that held the Middies to a scoreless tie in the opening contest OF the season here. Bucknell came to An napolis confident of holding the sailor lads to small score and no idea of winning This Coach Dickson admitted before hostilities were opened. but little did he think that his charges would receive such a severe trouncing. To the Middies the result was more than sweet revenge for the defeat they suffered at the hands of Bucknell last season, Il to &. departments of the game. II simply could not cope with the Nays battering ram attack. The dashng work of the Middies In the opening stages of the battle was enough to take the heart out of the visitors. three touchdowns being scored in the first period. and when the first half ended the figures read Navy n. Bucknell .. Bucknell not only did not get within distance to score either by touchdown or field goal during the first half, but they were unable even to register first down so stiff was the defensive work of the Navy forwards. and the forward passes. which largely to the victory over Navy last year. were either smeared by the Middies or went into miserable attempts. But the Middies could not maintain heir record of an uncrossed goal, for in the face of the overwhelming defeat 8ucknell accomplished this. and it was Effected nicely. The visitors made the score within a few minutes after the

  • The New-York tribune's story: NAVY WIPES OUT A DEFEAT Procession of Touchdowns Across Bucknell's Goal.

    New-York tribune, New York [N.Y.], November 9, 1913, page 1

    Read the text

    NAVY WIPES OUT A DEFEAT Procession of Touchdowns Across Bucknell’s Goal. Annapolis, Nov. s-Uslng to best advantage the weight and strength OF its powerful and aggressive forwards and heavy. smashing backs. the Naval Academy won this afternoon from Buck nell by the score Of 70 10 7. Bucknell was one OF the three teams which defeated the Navy last season. and the stigma OF this was removed to-day. az that OF the triumph OF Lehigh was wiped out last Saturday During every stage OF the game. except when Bucknell braced remarkably in the third quarter and scored a touchdown. 1t was a procession when the Navy held the ball. McReavey. Harrison. Failing and Blodgett among others crossed the goal line. while Nichols. Mitchell and Vail circlcd the ends repeatedly. The Navy also met with some success with the for ward pass. The Iiup-iD follows:

  • The The Washington times's story: Yesterdays Football Results

    The Washington times, November 9, 1913, page 16 (results column)

    Read the text

    Yesterdays Football Results W. Va. Wes., l6; Georgetown, 6. Villanova, 81; Catholic u, o. Gallaudet, At; Wake Forest, 7. M. A. c., l5; St. Johns, O. v. M. l., IA; N. C. Aggies, l.. Wash. and Lee, II; N. c., o. Vanderbilt, 7; Tennessee, 6. South Carolina, l3; Florida, o.. Auburn, 20; Georgia Tech, 0. Chattanooga, 27; Ky. Central, l8 L. S. u, r.; Arkansas, 7. Kentucky, 81; Wilmington, o. Harvard, 8; Princeton, 0. Dartmouth, “a; Penn, Fl. Navy, 70; Bucknell, 7. Yale, II; Brown, o. Michigan, II; Cornell, o. Army, IT; Albright, 0: ~ ‘‘v’ & Pittsburgh, 10; Lafayette, o. =. Carlisle, 81; Johns Hopkins, 0. Wesleyan, o; Williams, 0. Lehigh, 80; Swarthn,ore, O. Trinity, 50; Haverford, o. Rensselaer,, g.; Schenectady, 6. Muhlenberg, 25; F. and M, 0. Springfield, IS; Hcly Cross, IS. St. Lawrence, o; Hobart, o. Rensselaer,, 6; Norwich, 6. Fordham, RI; Boston College, 27. Maine, g; Bowdoin, 0.

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)

Navy 68% to win. Elo’s favorite won.

Navy leads 10–⁠4–⁠1 in 15 meetings, counting the eight since this game.

Recent meetings
2024Navy 49, Bucknell 21
1925Navy 13, Bucknell 7
1924Bucknell 6, Navy 0
1922Navy 14, Bucknell 7
1921Navy 6, Bucknell 0
1920Navy 7, Bucknell 2

Around this game

Bucknell

Navy