I went to 1 high school football game because a group of friends asked me to go that night. It was my high school(Bellaire) vs Madison (team vince young was on senior year). I think the end game score was 7 to 70+. I never had so much fun in a game because we lost by so much!
All of you guys slamming this coach are idiots
He was in support of a continuous clock. It's not his fault that the other team sucked that bad and somebody didn't agree with the continuous clock.
I think the continuous clock rule would be just fine if a team is winning by that much. Issuing a suspension is going way too far. What if the players don't agree with the coach and run the ball anyway? The coach would be held responsible
He was in support of a continuous clock. It's not his fault that the other team sucked that bad and somebody didn't agree with the continuous clock.
I think the continuous clock rule would be just fine if a team is winning by that much. Issuing a suspension is going way too far. What if the players don't agree with the coach and run the ball anyway? The coach would be held responsible
I remember a game from High School that was easily the best game I ever watched. The final score was 76-45. My team won, and they had 711 yards rushing! It was incredible.
Back in HS, our football team triple-digited the scoreboard once - opposing score 0. nobody bitched, and this was inter-divisional play (we're 3A, the opponent was 1A)
We did belong in a higher division, though. That year was completely and totally dominant (as have been the years since).
Also, my girlfriend's indoor soccer league limits the point spread to 10. If you're under by 10, no more points will be added.
Her team sucks so bad that this happens nearly every game. One game, I counted the score to be at least 50-0. You can actually see the reason her team sucks so bad, too. Most of them are inexperienced players and don't have that "I'm here to win, and I'll be damned if I'm going to let a landslide stop me" attitude. She has PLENTY of practice from High School sports - she just gets pissed off as the points rack up, and plays harder and meaner. Not so much for the rest of the team.
Backing off, either on the part of the winning team, or on the part of the losing team, is just plain bad sportsmanship.
We did belong in a higher division, though. That year was completely and totally dominant (as have been the years since).
Also, my girlfriend's indoor soccer league limits the point spread to 10. If you're under by 10, no more points will be added.
Her team sucks so bad that this happens nearly every game. One game, I counted the score to be at least 50-0. You can actually see the reason her team sucks so bad, too. Most of them are inexperienced players and don't have that "I'm here to win, and I'll be damned if I'm going to let a landslide stop me" attitude. She has PLENTY of practice from High School sports - she just gets pissed off as the points rack up, and plays harder and meaner. Not so much for the rest of the team.
Backing off, either on the part of the winning team, or on the part of the losing team, is just plain bad sportsmanship.
Or we could just grow up and accept the near total meaninglessness of sports and related activities and concentrate on actually educating our kids for a change. *shrug* Just a thought.
I played in various school and community leagues until I was 13 and my parents let me stop. I'm not horrible at most sports, but certainly not skilled in many either. Seriously though, there is an argument against the value placed on sports in America; especially within schools. Yes, I'm biased because I generally hate them, but it doesn't mean there isn't a good argument anyway.
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
i agree we are not teaching the children as well we should. But i feel that sports are also needed (same with music every child should know how to play something) for a well balanced person.
i have particpated in every sport i could up until i got out of college. i feel that made me a better person in business and college.
I know what you mean, but when I played football in high school I loved the pressure and all the commitment I put on myself. My parents didn't care either way if I played, I put the focus on it, not the school. To me your post comes off as schools are forcing kids to play sports, but I loved it when the school took football games seriously and allocated funds towards the program etc.
I hope I didn't come off that way, because it's not how I feel. I find society places the importance on sports, but I was never pressured by the school itself.
GagHalfrunt
Lifer
- Apr 19, 2001
- 25,284
- 1,998
- 126
That's not how HS football in Connecticut works. I played here and as we were really good we were often on the winning side of big blowouts. Teams are divided into leagues, usually based on geographic areas. You play all the teams in your league regardless of size or ability. At the end of the season the teams are divided up for the state championships based on size of the student body. The small schools play off for the S crown, the mediums for the M crown, etc. You can't do things any differently and have it be effective as team strength varies from year to year. A team that's great one year could suck when their best players graduate, if they only played against great teams based on last years record they could lose every game by 50 points. A team that was weak one year can be unstoppable the next. If they were moved into a weaker division they'd win every game by 50.
I played varsity as a freshman and only got in at the end of blowouts. My sophomore year I played on special teams and as a sub for a few plays a game. By junior year I was on the field for almost every down except at the end of blowouts. In fact, the majority of the guys on the team played both offense and defense and played almost every down. The second and third stringers only got into the game when the outcome was already decided. How on earth can you give a third stringer his only chance of the year to play and then make him go out there and take a knee because the team can't risk scoring? That's ridiculous. What about a 45-0 game where the other team is trying to score just to avoid a shutout and throws the ball. If the defense intercepts on the 2 yard line is the player supposed to intentionally step out of bounds on the one just to avoit making the score 51-0?
Being on the losing end of a blowout never hurt anybody. Although something should be done about the FEW coaches that do run up the score. Perhaps a review board could discipline coaches who are up 57-3 and still have their starters in or those who are throwing bombs in the 4th quarter of a 45-0 game. But no coach should be penalized for having a good team and no second stringers should be penalized by not getting to play their hardest on their few chances to perform.
this is why high school stats mean jack sh!t. It's too easy to run up the stats in one or two blowout games, inflating the figures for the season. Think about this the next time you hear some douchebag reliving his glory days, talking about how he threw for 8 touchdowns in one game in high school. Not that hard to do when you're playing a team that has no ability whatsoever.
okay here goes.
this is the most bullsh1t rule i have ever heard.
what happens if a coach puts his 3rd string team in, does he have to tell them just to kneel? you know, the team that hardly gets to play?
hell no, if i was that QB i would be like fvck it, and do what i knew i could do. show some skill, i wouldnt run what the coach was running, and then i would tell the governing body that they should really just shove it and it was I who made the choices, not the coach. so suspend me as a player, not the coach.
i wanted to fvcking play, not pussy foot around like a pansy ass mofo.
this is the most bullsh1t rule i have ever heard.
what happens if a coach puts his 3rd string team in, does he have to tell them just to kneel? you know, the team that hardly gets to play?
hell no, if i was that QB i would be like fvck it, and do what i knew i could do. show some skill, i wouldnt run what the coach was running, and then i would tell the governing body that they should really just shove it and it was I who made the choices, not the coach. so suspend me as a player, not the coach.
i wanted to fvcking play, not pussy foot around like a pansy ass mofo.
Actually, this isn't terribly destructive. A team THAT good doesn't really need a coach that badly during the game.
The team on the field can make most of the decisions, and there are generally auxiliary coaches who can take care of the things that they can't.
It's only a matter of time before some team stages a blowout, their coach is suspended, and they proceed to do the very same thing without him.
The team on the field can make most of the decisions, and there are generally auxiliary coaches who can take care of the things that they can't.
It's only a matter of time before some team stages a blowout, their coach is suspended, and they proceed to do the very same thing without him.
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
and that would not get more then one play. you do not do what the coach says he will pull you. not because you are going to run the score up but because he is in charge.
but i agree if he puts in the 2nd or 3rd string in they should be able to play as hard as they can.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter