Return to the 1906 season page

The Aggies finally got a bit of a small breath of fresh air after their tie against Washington & Lee, earning a well-deserved, if short, break. The Techs came home to take part in their first game featured as part of the North Carolina State Fair since their 29-5 win over Guilford in 1902. The Aggies had been on a historical hot-streak: NC A&M had not lost their last 9 straight games, with their most recent loss coming just under a year ago against Virginia. Given that and the obvious talent on display by the Farmers so far in their season, the game was highly anticpated. The match was played on a Thursday, reportedly the most busy day of the State Fair. Potential attendees were also reminded that for the small price of 50 cents (about $14.50 in 2019), they could watch a team who had only been scored upon once throughout the entire season, with guaranteed reserved seats.The Raleigh Evening Times, October 17th, 1906, p. 9; News and Observer, October 17th, 1906, p. 10).

William & Mary's team was, frankly, overhyped by the Raleigh press heading into the game. Reported by Raleighites to have a strong defense, the Orange and White had a 1-2 record, losing twice to Virginia Polytechnic Institute: first in Roanoke by the score of 0-12, and second in Roanoke two days later, 0-28. They did have one win, however, having defeated Norfolk High School 10 to nothing. At the beginning of the season, their team's prospects were "encouraging" though "not so good as they might be" (The (Richmond) Times-Dispatch, September 23rd, 1906, p. F1). Despite this, when the Williamsburg boys opened the season, their team was reported to be "much stronger than expected" but inconsistent overall (The Washington Post, October 7th, 1906, Sporting Section, p. 3). After spending the night in Richmond, William & Mary's team left for Raleigh on the morning of the game (The (Richmond) Times-Dispatch, October 18th, 1906, p. 7).

Unfortunately, very little information about the game is known. Despite the very mild weather, which never dipped below 59 or above 70 on the day , the game was witnessed by very few people, owing to the fact that it had rained most of the day Thursday, as well as the day before. As such, the game was played in a field of mud; as The News and Observer put it, the Farmers were "literally wiping up the mud with the visitors from Virginia" (News and Observer, October 19th, 1906, p. 6). The game was so one-sided and messy that another paper went as far as saying that event was not even a game of football: "There was general regret that the steady rain last evening prevented the game of football that was announced.... The mud was deep and the affair was only a sort of informal scuffle in the mud" ((Greensboro) Daily Industrial News, October 20th, 1906, p. 2).

Appearently eager to wreak revenge on the state of Virginia, the Farmers piled up a whopping 39-0 score before the end of the first 20-minute half. Repeated touchdowns were made at-will by Wilson and Thompson, with Shuford and Eskridge also each running in a score of their own. In addition to the crossing of the goal line, Thompson somehow managed to make at least one goal from field despite the miserable field conditions. According to The Raleigh Evening Times, "Had it been a dry field it would no doubt have broken the high score record for this year." As it stood, the score was the fourth-largest margin of victory ever won by the Farmers up to that point, falling short only of their 1903 beatdowns of Guilford (50-0) and Richmond (53-0), as well as their 1904 season-opener against Guilford (59-0). Though William & Mary's offense picked up in the second half, with the game even reportedly ending with the Orange and White in scoring position, this was less likely caused by a sudden burst of competence by William & Mary and is instead more likely attributed to A&M shifting to a defensive play style after the end of the first half (Charlotte Daily Observer, October 19th, 1906, p. 2).

So little is known on the game that it's actually not possible to even know how many touchdowns were made. We know the team made at least four from the score and number of players credited with a touchdown; additionally, we know that one goal kick (worth 4 points) was made in the first half, and that a touchdown was made but the point after missed in the second half. So by working backwards, we know the team had to score 35 points in the first half. In an era where touchdowns were worth 5 and PATs worth 1 each, this could be accomplished two ways: 7 touchdowns and no successful PATs, or 6 touchdowns and 5 successful PATs. Given the hydroponic field conditions, I would lean towards the former, assuming no points were scored through safeties. Since Eskridge and Shuford each scored a touchdown, the conclusion would be that Wilson and Thompson combined for 5 touchdowns, each scoring between two and three. The second half touchdown was likely a substitute's.

Stars of the game for A&M were, frankly, the entire team. Wilson's fast sprinting and end runs were praised, as was Thompson and "his kicking toe." On the line, Edwards and Beebe were praised for frequently breaking through the Orange and White's line. Stevens, in particular, was mentioned for his ability to stop the run: "no one ever seems to get around him." For William & Mary, not a single player was praised in a single paper. Since no papers gave a line-up of the game, it is impossible to know who played, though it is known from the previously-cited Richmond paper's morning writeup that members of the team included first-year coach H. W. Withers, as well as Captain Hankins, G. A. Dovell, Dade, McDonald, Strong, Ferguson, and B. Dovell. Withers was replaced in late October by former UVA star James Barry, whose instructions were reported to be significantly more superior (Colonial Echo (1907), p. 108).

Speaking of the game, Coach Heston was, generally, displeased. "I am well satisfied with the result of the game, but I am not well satisfied with the spirit the team has been showing for the past week or so. If this spirit continues our season will end up in failure" (The Raleigh Evening Times, October 19th, 1906, p. 7). Given that the Farmers had played four games in just eight days, the players' apathy seems understandable.

Most reports agree that the crowd was fairly small, but in general large considering the poor weather.

William & Mary's season did not improve significantly following their game against the Farmers. They won 10-0 against the Brambleton Business College, of Norfolk, but lost the remainder of their games that season, being defeated 0-24 by Richmond, 4-6 by Randolph-Macon, and 0-6, again at the hands of Richmond. That gave the Orange and White a disappointing 2-6 record to close out the season.