Why October 17, 1883 is most appropriately the birthday of American football

A lost milestone of America’s greatest pastime - How moving away from Rugby Football Union points to evolved scoring coupled with scrimmage and downs defined a new sport

1883 is the strongest candidate for when American football became a fully distinct sport. While it’s clear that American football did not emerge as a sport in a single instant, the 1880–1883 reforms collectively did the trick, culminating in the rule changes implemented on October 17, 1883. On that day, the 2nd Intercollegiate Football Association (hereinafter IFA) met in New York City to adopt a new numerical scoring system, replacing the confusing hierarchy of goals from the Rugby Football Union, to determine the winner. By assigning specific point values to successfully completed play outcomes, the 2nd IFA effectively finalized the transition from Rugby variant to a distinct sport: American Football. This change ensured the game was not only played differently than Rugby but also won by a different set of standards. Rugby prioritized goals — they dominated formal victory determination — American football prioritized cumulative point valuation and therefore strategic incentives fundamentally changed. Strategy, mechanics, and scoring are the three pillars that make the whole system work.

Many of you know the history, but I invite you to read this article for my interpretation of:
- what defines a new sport?
- how and why the sport of American football emerged? and conclude with
- what constitutes American football?

I’ve placed these developments within the broader context of history, particularly 19th- and 20th-century history. I look forward to your thoughts, even if our interpretations differ.

In a prior post, I defined that a sport requires several conditions: a governing body, codified rules, competitive opposition and physically demanding activity requiring dexterity and skill. The valuation of play should be internally consistent with the sport’s mechanical logic. To qualify as a new sport, however, there must also be significant mechanical and strategic differences from any progenitor sport, if one exists. Its win-condition should be materially distinct if derived from that of a progenitor sport, to no longer remain a variant candidate.

The birth of intercollegiate competition began with rowing between Harvard and Yale in 1852 so you can see these intercollegiate athletic events were just “getting going” shortly after the mid-19th century mark; it's not like sporting competitions were rampant for a long time.

Some have argued that the sport of American football began 1869, 14 years earlier than 1883. That interpretation, however, benefits from closer ontological scrutiny. The start of American Football is not 1869 because that game referenced was based on Association Football and not Rugby Union. The latter provided the principal structural foundation for college football and hadn’t even codified the rules that served as that foundation. In fact, all those supposed “league” games played in the U.S.A. between 1869 to even 1882 should be reclassified, either as “transitional Association-football derived contests” or “transitional rugby-derived contests” or “games that weren’t yet American football,” but that’s getting a little ahead of the story. I need to first provide additional context by addressing the years before and subsequent to the 1880s.

We need to briefly discuss the term “football” because a lot of confusion develops due to it. In fact the conflation fallacy of suggesting “1869” results from semantic ambiguity and equivocation. Ball games in human cultures are as old as time, and football was used as a general catch-all term for various chaotic games played by commoners. The term football dates back to 14th century England to encapsulate rough, unorganized “mob” games played by commoners on foot or involving feet, distinguishing them from aristocratic games played on horseback. Such “mob” games, which weren’t sports, continued on through 19th century England and the United States, including various forms of student-sanctioned brawls flourishing on campuses, on both sides of the Atlantic under the guise of an athletic endeavor. “Bloody Monday” on the northeast corner of Harvard Yard, chaotic brawls on the New Haven Green and Ballown played in Princeton were mass, disorganized and brutal affairs involving a ball in which university administrators eventually stepped in to suppress due to their extreme violence and public disruption. Nevertheless, an attempt to standardize ball game rules among the schools made sense so students could attempt to play one another under a single set of rules rather than each student body having its own rules.

With “football” continuing to refer to all these various local games played with widely differing rules, one version gaining a little more early traction in England centered around kicking and dribbling (i.e., controlled, small kicks) a round ball. To differentiate it from all the other types of football in 1863, their proponents added the adjective Association, to go by Association Football (a.k.a., soccer) and came up with a set of rules. Eight years later there, many weren't satisfied with this new established game, having a desire to both kick, carry and use hands among other differences, and split out to codify their own set of rules and went by Rugby Football Union. Both before and after this period, soccer and rugby were developing side by side and competing with one another at various schools in England, adding to the confusion; eventually both established themselves as sports and bled over to this side of the Atlantic. With the exception of Gaelic football and Australian Rules football, the hybrid rugby / soccer ventures to this day still haven’t taken off, even if they are still alive and kicking. And mixing and meddling these distinct rules becomes a muddled affair which had been known to transpire. (The first written rules of Rugby Football—known as the "Laws of Football as played at Rugby School"—were high school student-led and published in August 1845 but this game didn't initially broadly take hold. Those chaps ended up becoming lawyers and helped formulate the 1871 Rugby Football Union rules.)

Here in the U.S.A., we took football as our own term, but as I’ve illustrated, it had long-time usage among various games that had cross-over but also clear splits among them, all of which people classified as "football;" It's like saying, I'm having "exotic" cuisine; there's Asian, African, Middle Eastern, Pacific Island, Latin American, and other regions with a multitude of levels within each of those sub-categories.¹ So because someone says they were playing football that does not mean it's a root for American Football; the latter’s root was clearly Rugby Union and not all the other various antecedents. Parke Davis inadvertently led people down a mistaken path by focusing on the 1869 Rutgers versus Princeton match as the birth of American football; that was an intercollegiate game played (17 years after the first intercollegiate contest) but it wasn't American football; it was some sort of early version of Association-rules football. Sometimes when you are so involved in something, it's hard to see the forest for the trees.

What was an early pivotal moment was the second game of the Harvard-McGill series on May 15, 1874, in what was basically Rugby Union. Some McGill players missed the train trip and they only had 11 men available, inferring more were planning to make the trip. 15 to 20 was more of a standard for Rugby. Among the many different types of “football,” at the time, using 11 to 25 per side was the most common range, and Association Football’s rules didn’t even specify the amount of players. This game was monumental, however, because Harvard liked the fact that players could pick up the ball and carry it, as they saw fit, until they were tackled. Furthermore, a leather-covered, oval-shaped ball was significantly easier to tuck into the crease of one’s arm than a roundish ball Harvard had been using up until that point. All that was new and novel and the way Harvard students wanted to proceed, taking on Rugby Union as their own.

Both Harvard and Princeton liked Rugby Union so much that they lobbied Columbia to adopt it, as the three schools created the 2nd IFA, an intentional split from the effort, three years prior, that sought to adopt 12 Football Association rules of London, with carrying the ball not allowed.

So the 1st IFA (1873) had been a short-lived attempt to standardize soccer-like rules, while the 2nd IFA (1876-1893) adopted Rugby Football Union rules. The 2nd IFA should not be confused with the 1st IFA. They were different organizations with distinct efforts and opposite core objectives; the latter driven by Princeton and Harvard's initiative. While Princeton, Columbia and Yale participated in both, the 2nd IFA represented an intentional shift away from Association Football to Rugby Football Union. The intention of Princeton and Harvard, who managed to get Columbia and Yale to switch allegiance, was to play Rugby Football Union among themselves and all the other universities that wanted to join them.

The 2nd IFA was almost entirely student-developed and student-led; it was not endorsed by university presidents but that didn't make the association's efforts any less viable as a sport. Students from these universities initially adopted Rugby Football Union rules for themselves. In 1876, college athletics were largely considered "extra-curricular" activities that some university administrators viewed with indifference or even active disapproval. In fact, university presidents didn't use to be the flag bearers of college football. Later, Harvard President Charles Eliot threatened to ban the sport and the first official Ivy "League" agreement, signed November 20, 1945, was an effort to prevent American football from becoming a public spectacle that overshadowed academic life. The university presidents presciently feared a surge in the commercialization of college sports and wanted to ensure athletes remained true to their studies.

So back to the late 1870s, Harvard, Princeton, Columbia and Yale did not intentionally try to create a new sport. They set out to play Rugby Football Union on US soil and did so for a number of years; it contrasted to those playing soccer. This was not like a Dr. James Naismith’s assignment situation. American football came about later through the iterative rule changes to an existing sport, primarily proposed by Yale and its soon to be rules committee representative Walter Camp, but even he at first wasn’t setting out to create a new sport; rather, he began by playing and enjoying the existing game. On November 30, 1876, Yale beating Princeton 2 goals to 0 was still clearly more understood as Rugby Union played in Hoboken, NJ, USA and not yet American football; there was no line of scrimmage, system of downs or distinct scoring model.

In the early version of how Rugby Football Union was played, the outcome of games was determined by successfully kicking goals — if you scored more goals you won. The 2nd IFA Rules Committee did want to clarify certain things, so in 1877 they specified that a touchdown, one way to achieve a kick opportunity, had to be held to the ground in the “in-goal” area rather than simply carried across the line; this was aligned to Rugby Football Union. Another area they sought clarity on was how to determine the winner, if tied on goals, so efforts were made to clarify what the tie-breakers were but there wasn’t always uniform treatment established for these situations, so Princeton and Harvard pushed to give some weight to touchdowns. The 2nd IFA body also wanted clarity on what happened after a tackle, but when some attempts were made to reach out to the Rugby Football Union for rule clarifications, their Committee wasn’t responsive in a manner that was actionable.

From the beginning, Yale had also been attending the annual 2nd IFA meetings and playing games based on the Rugby Union rules, but wasn't “officially” joining the association because Yale wanted to move to 11 per side (as well as didn’t want to be beholden to the association’s minutiae), with Harvard, Princeton and Columbia holding fast to the Rugby Football Union number of 15. That scenario unfolded for four subsequent years. Camp’s senior year was the same year Yale officially joined the association; Yale’s motion to move to 11 per side continued to be denied.

In this case, the 5th year, 1880, was the charm, with Camp as a medical graduate student, finally convinced Harvard, Princeton and Columbia to reduce the number of players from 15 to 11 per side. This coincided with Harvard’s need for a reduced field size in order to accommodate Harvard's desire to use Jarvis Field, that also included a running track, for the games to be played.

Furthermore, Walter Camp introduced the “line of scrimmage² and snap from center to quarterback” first, who had to hand it off or pass it backward. This replaced the Rugby scrum but the game didn’t have the behavior or visual identity of American football at this juncture. In rugby, if you are in front of the ball, you are offside and cannot participate in the play. Initially, players trailed the runner closely on either side, but eventually, they moved in front, which was technically an interference foul, but was rarely enforced by referees. The 2nd IFA Rules Committee was punting this matter down the road and made no effort to immediately change this rule, which had been in place from the beginning.³ Only later were players that were “ahead of the ball” officially sanctioned to block, which had continued to be a violation of rules since the beginning.

So as you can see, the football rules were still not standardized or enforced at first across the contests, and there was no system of downs since that wasn’t even a “thing” until the following year. A number of games weren’t following the IFA rules at all. When Washington & Lee and Virginia Military Institute were playing a “football” match in 1881, it was under rules that were a variation of Association Football rules with no ball carrying, only kicking the ball down the field; that’s a variant of Association Football played in the U.S.A. and not the sport of American Football.

Moreover, many of the games that did attempt to follow the most recently established rules devolved to a team maintaining possession indefinitely, making no attempt to advance the ball or score to protect a lead or ensure a tie, so not resembling American football when the outcome is of consequence. Particularly notable was a November 24, 1881 game between Yale and Princeton, the dubbed Block Game. The two sides entered undefeated and for the first half Princeton simply held the ball without an attempt to advance, and in the second half, Yale did the same. The game ended 0-0 with players standing around just holding the ball the entire game. The public and media were furious at what transpired. It was boring and frustrating; and while many historians classify this contest as early American football, I argue it is more accurately understood as rugby-derived antecedents. The system of downs and distinct scoring model needed to be in place.

The following year, 1882, Walter Camp proposed a "system of downs⁴," — units of actions — whereby a team must advance the ball five yards within three downs (later changed to 10 yards in four downs) or forfeit possession. The "continuity" in Rugby Football Union continued to be chipped away. This rule change made the game about "inches;” if a player used the customary safe rugby-style wrap, the ball carrier could often fall forward for an extra yard or two; to prevent this, players wanted to stop players in their tracks or force them backward. Still, a 2 goals to 1 final score could have the first team scoring no touchdowns and the second team scoring 3 touchdowns; I’d argue that this is more accurately understood as rugby-based precursors, that doesn’t have the appearance, form and function of American football to me. It’s the alignment of the strategic structure, play mechanics and scoring system that’s the trifecta to hit.

The next year, 1883, Camp introduced a total points scored system, including the amount of points varying by what was accomplished (e.g., touchdown, extra point, field goal or safety), effectively move away from counting goals. Now you have three distinct and materially impactful changes that begins a new sport, American football. Now the scorelines and parallel white lines running sideline to sideline every five yards joined forces to not look like Rugby football any longer, but resembled a new sport.

Over time in the 1880s, the English began to view Rugby Football Union played in the U.S.A. as eventually a "corrupted" version of their game but weren't really paying attention to what was going on in their former colony; though soon, Camp’s proposed scoring system caught England’s attention as Rugby Football Union followed the American football lead and moved to a point-scoring system of their own. The English also updated its rules to penalize a player who intentionally carried or kicked the ball back into their own goal, which had been something they allowed previously.

In the 1870s and the first part of the 1880s, players and spectators referred to the sport they were playing as Rugby football or Rugby to distinguish it from Association football or Soccer, which had its proponents. In fall 1883, the term Rugby was still used but by the late 1880s, football or gridiron began to be increasingly employed and Rugby faded from use, in regard to this new sport, during the next decade.

The shift from rugby to American football was unplanned and gradual. Until the committee formalized the point value system on October 17, 1883, there was no unified authority to mandate a numerical score over the traditional Rugby Union goal counts that the 2nd IFA adopted. The new points scoring system was the final added ingredient for a novel sport offering and fully-aligned to the new strategic framework and gameplay mechanics established. This coincided with growth in printed publications, beyond those used for intercollegiate competitions, which created relevant books, such as The Sports and Pastimes of American Boys (1884), which published rules along with an introduction to sports further assisting football’s growth. Edison films would follow in the early 20th century, at which point American football had established itself as the principal fall sport.

Perhaps if the Rugby Football Union had been more collaborative in nature, during the late 1870s, it might have slowed the rate of America’s divergence from Rugby Union but instead material differences arose between Rugby Football Union as played in England and what had started out as such in the United States.

Why 1883, and not 1880 or 1882 is a fair question, and while it’s short in length, the answer has required me to be comprehensive, to provide context and address each juncture as well as to refute other dates proposed, though I’d like to sum up with this short repartee: 1880-1883 does reflect the evolutionary start of American football, and as I’ve posited before, 1880 undisputedly began a rugby union variant. By 1883 sufficient change had occurred to consider it a new, intercollegiate sport distinct from Rugby Union.

Walter Camp was a passionate athlete. He generally desired clearly written rules and found some of Rugby Football Union’s rules too vague. Camp suggested practical improvements to the sport of rugby, which he generally loved, even if he did find the contested possession of the scrum to be too “chaotic,” “random” and to be an “unattractive struggle.” He introduced measures to attempt to address those perceived shortcomings / objectionable features and promote more efficiency and structured order in possession; the result was a rugby variant. Camp first tackled eliminating any element of chance to allow a team more assuredness to execute a set play.⁵ A couple seasons later, Camp addressed how the game could often become a slow-moving physical contest, blindly pushing against each other without necessarily generating forward progress. His new system of downs placed more pointed emphasis to advance the ball towards the opponent’s goal or it would be forced to turn the ball over. When Walter Camp next recalibrated scoring values to better reflect the effort required by the rules, he ultimately transformed it into a new, distinct sport.

So it didn’t occur in one fell swoop and was not preplanned, but over three years and 5 days it happened. American football thus became among the earliest major team field sports to formally center victory on differentiated numerical valuation of distinct play outcomes; that was indeed both a shift in aim and clear departure between the two sports and unique for the time. No doubt Camp deserves the title of the “father of American football” even if a myriad of people have contributed to this sport’s development over the years.

I don’t believe the birthday of football is 1906, a date 23 years later, because the changes made that year were to “save college football,” which was “on trial” which in itself reflects that the sport was deemed already in existence even if its fate hung in the balance. Both the forward pass and later unlimited substitution significantly changed the nature of American Football, but the line of scrimmage, schedule of downs and how points are scored and their varying amounts made American Football, defining broadly how the game is played and won.

Having discussed what a new sport is and how American football came about, it’s time to define it. American football is a team sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field, marked by goal line and goalposts at each end, and a gridiron pattern comprised of familiar, painted 5-yard lines to make it easier to track progress.⁶ The team with possession of a ball, that is much closer in shape to oval than round,⁷ is called the offense and they attempt to advance the ball down the field. The team without the ball is called the defense and they attempt to stop the offense’s advance and to take control of the ball for themselves. The offense must advance the ball (now 10 yards, originally 5 yards) in a series of (now 4, originally 3) downs (a unit of action or play). If they fail to achieve that amount of yards, they turn over the football to the defense. If they succeed, they are given a new set of downs and yards to go. Points, of varying amounts, are scored by successfully completing different plays: advancing the ball across the opposing team’s goal line scores a touchdown, and that also affords an opportunity for the offense to try for extra points; kicking the ball through the opponent’s goalposts results in a field goal. Lastly, the defense can score a safety by stopping an opponent with the ball behind the offense’s own goal line. Infringement of rules constitutes a foul, and various penalties are imposed. The length of a college football game has varied but has always been at least one hour. The team with the most points at the end of the game wins.

I have argued that the 1883 adoption of differentiated numerical scoring, coupled with the line of scrimmage and system of downs that were recently established, finalized that transition because it altered not merely play mechanics, but the very logic by which victory was determined, creating American football into a strategically and structurally distinct sport. And we could watch an American football game, as described above, unfold between some future Ivy League teams (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia and Penn) after October 17, 1883. Because of these changes, from this point forward, college football expanded greatly, continuing at first as an entirely student-led movement, often operating outside of—or even in defiance of—official university administrators. The appeal stemmed from the adopted code of playing rules Walter Camp instituted to Rugby Union, which were recognized as now distinct from English Rugby, resulting in this new sport of American Football.

1. Ultimately wide ranging, separate and distinct, while still others deciding they’ll pick and choose among the offerings and insist on a fusion; a few of which like Indo-Chinese are divine.

2. Derived from Rugby Football Union’s scrummage / scrum, scrimmage defines an imaginary line from where teams face off before a play begins. For Rugby (scrummage / scrum) and for the emerging sport (line of scrimmage), their associated terms represent the point of departure for a restart of play.

3. A later rule change allowed players that were “ahead of the ball” to block, effectively ending the interference penalty for such actions that had been a part of its Rugby Football Union rules all along, which the 2nd IFA had embraced.

4. Also derived from Rugby Football Union but used in a transformative manner. In Rugby, down indicates a play’s conclusive end and the restarting of play — either, when a player was tackled and could no longer move or the player had successfully crossed the goal line to achieve an attempt at try. In the emerging sport, down represents one of 3 or 4 attempted “units of action” or plays to gain sufficient yardage or score. The term shifted from the result of an end of play signaling the beginning of the next one to the opportunity itself for the offense to continue its effort with a discrete play or potentially surrender possession of the ball.

5. While chance exists in a rugby scrum, the way a ball exits is overwhelmingly a matter of skill and coordinated technique; the team with the “put-in” retains possession roughly 92% of the time, demonstrating that the exit is a controlled, practiced maneuver rather than a random outcome.

6. Which explains why it is sometimes referred to as Gridiron Football.

7. The ball was a rubber bladder covered in leather, which helped ensure the rugby style of oval or egg-shaped remained consistent.