THE SPORTS DOPE

Defense acquired a brutal glamor in the sport of pro football a decade ago, but Harvard's version over the same years has remained an anonymity. Think of the Crimson defenders and who stands out? There is no Sam Huff riding down the enemy's key runner, no Big Daddy Lipscomb flattening the quarterback, no Erich Barnes crawling inside receivers' shirts. And yet,-over the last 24 games, Harvard has held its opponents to 7.2 points a game, an average that would make Vince Lombardi green with envy.

Spectators may not be immediately impressed, because the results show up not in spectacular plays but in the final score. The defense is as conservative as the most vocal critics accused the offense of being two years ago. The idea of a "monster back" or "rover," which has caught on with many other League teams, is too much in the nature of a gamble for the Crimson. But while it is hard for the average fan to appreciate, Ivy coaches paid their respects to Harvard's defense by selecting Cantabs to four of the eleven All-Ivy defense spots last season.

The key to understanding the Harvard system lies in the phrases "contain defense" and "position responsibilities." The first describes the general philosophy of Head Coach John Yovicsin and long-time assistant Jim Lentz. The theory is simple: give up short yardage but prevent the long gain. It is the "three yards and a cloud of dust" school in reverse. As long as they give up no more than four yards a play the defenders are dong their job. Statistics show that the best teams rarely can run more than 14 plays in succession without a mistake, and poorer teams less. So Harvard is willing to give up to three first downs per drive and wait for the error--a fumble, interception, big loss--which will stall the opposition short of the end zone.

The execution of this theory depends on the "position responsibilities." Defense is more than just eleven guys trying to get to the ball carrier as quickly as possible. The main job for the players is to hold their areas and disrupt any opponents' moves into their territories. The moves are lateral, along the line of scrimmage, not vertical, into the enemy backfield.

The anchor of the defense is the middle guard. His assignment is to plug the gaps and lend tackling support from one end of the line to the other. To evaluate the play of Stan Greenidge, the Crimson's All-Ivy middle guard, you wouldn't count the number of times he throws a quarterback for a loss. Those occasions are freaks: when Harvard catches the offense off guard with a defense switch or when the Crimson finds itself in a position where it needs to gamble. Rather, watch Greenidge hold his position against a single blocker. If one man can move him out of the way Greenidge is not doing his job. But if he can fight off the block and be in position to move to both his left and his right (but not ahead) depending on the flow of the play, then he is succeeding. If two men are required to take out the middle guard, then the responsibility shifts and a line backer or tackle should be left free to make the play.

In another common example, stopping an end sweep is more, than the responsibility of the end. The end's primary responsibility, in fact, is the off-tackle hole. On a sweep, he holds his position, the corner-back moves from the outside and is responsible for turning the play in, where pressure from the linebacker, tackle, end, and safety should combine to stop the play.

Harvard's pass defense fits in with the contain play of the line. If the opposition completes a pass for less than ten yards, the Crimson secondary is not necessarily negligent. The time to start faulting the deep backs is when a receiver gets behind them for a long reception, or worse, a touchdown, but that event has been an extreme rarity in recent years. Harvard generally sticks to a strict zone defense, with the two safeties and the weak-side cornerback covering the deep zones, the strong-side cornerback and opposite end covering the flats, and the linbackers in the middle.

This zone can't stop a short, accurate passer as only tight man-to-man coverage might, but it avoids the danger of an outstanding receiver's faking and breaking free for a touchdown. And while Harvard will give up more yardage through the air than on the ground, the enemy faces greater risks along this route: interception, incompletion, or loss.

There are two other elements that go into Harvard's defense and turn the theory into a winning combination. One is the players themselves. A contain defense relies on reaction. The performers must learn to read the moves of the offense and then assume their appropriate responsibility. Familiarity and experience are vital to success. That is one reason Harvard stuck with its Oklahoma five-man alignment through the years, even while other Ivy teams moved to other systems. It is also a reason why you won't find sophomores-in the starting lineup. "It takes more than one year to learn our defense," says Captain Don Chiofaro, who likes the unspectacular Harvard system the more he is used to it.

The second key ingredient is surprise. Harvard mixes up its zone pass defense with man-to-man coverage, and Chiofaro has six or seven alignment variations he can still call in the defensive huddle before each play. Catching the offense off-guard is just as much a goal for the defense as catching the defense unprepared is for the attack.

It is impossible to defend strongly against everything, so being adequately prepared is essential. Harvard coaches study opponents' earlier games and try to detect tendencies in cretain situations. The defense is given a game plan just as the offense is.

If they are surprised, they can get burned. But as long as the scouting is perceptive, players' reactions and management of their positions is strong, and theory is sound, Harvard's defense should be one of the best. So far it has been.