• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

High school football coach suspended after blowing out another team..

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: BigJ

The majority of HS football leagues are grouped based on school population.

Not really, they're based on geographic area. I used to play against those two schools, they were in the same league with my high school which was made up of teams surrounding Bridgeport Connecticut. Central, Bassick, Harding and Bullard Havens Tech were all doormat schools in football. They had great basketball teams and lousy football teams, in football they were routinely pummeled by much smaller schools, including mine. We were a Class S (small school) football powerhouse and could beat Central or Bassick by 50 points if we left our first and second string at home and started the third stringers. That was the way it was. The 3rd stringers looked forward to those games because that was when they got to play. They worked their butts off all year and never got into close games against our big rivals. The games against weak teams was their only chance. You simply can't get your third stringers into a game and tell them to take a knee because the other team sucks too bad.

The coach of Central did everything he could to be fair, suspending him makes a mockery of what is supposed to be a competitive sport.

You said you were Class S, right? Which you said is small school football. That's my point.

It's a given they're going to initially divide the schools into area (do you really want to be travelling 200 miles to play another small school?) but after that, who you play is usually based on school size/population.


We were class S, Central and Bassick were both Class L. The league we were in was the non defunct MBIAC. The Metropolitan Bridgeport Interschoolastic Athletic Conference. It was made up of Class S, Class M and Class L and Class LL schools and was formed SOLELY on the basis of geopgrahy, YOUR POINT WAS 100% WRONG.

In Connecticut leagues are not formed by size of the student body, they're formed by location so that teams don't have to drive 3 hours after school to play games. All teams play all other league teams equally, straight up regardless of size. Some teams are great in one sport and crappy in others. Central, Bassick and Harding are useless in football, they suck year after year after year, although Central has made some recent improvements. They're great basketball schools and Harding is one of the elite programs in the state and is often ranked as one of the best teams in the country. They easily win games by 50-80 points even without their starters playing heavy minutes. It all evens out. Some schools dominate in football, some dominate in basketball and some in baseball or soccer or swimming. When I played against those schools the two best football teams in the league were a Class S (us) and a Class L (our arch rival). None of the class LL teams could compete with us, we blew them out easily and size had nothing to do with it.

And that's just in Connecticut. On Long Island, all public schools are divided first into counties, then based on size. So in LI, my point is 100% CORRECT. I'm pretty sure upstate NY is the same way.

Too bad we're talking about Connecticut, huh? Your point is 100% INCORRECT, so grow the hell up.

Maybe you should take your own advice? My point was:

Originally posted by: BigJ

The majority of HS football leagues are grouped based on school population.

It doesn't apply to CT. Big whoop. It applies mostly everywhere else.

Hell, even if we go back to CT, you said you were a Class S, so you were grouped as a Class S with other small schools. Yes, you played other teams. Your class was still a small schools class.
 
Originally posted by: KLin
My old high school blew out another team a couple weeks ago 75-0. I don't think the coach was suspended for it.
Too bad he didn't cover the point spread, though.

 
if that rule was a RULE, they would call the game when his team was ahead by 50+ points. just stop the game and make the losing team go home.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: KLin
My old high school blew out another team a couple weeks ago 75-0. I don't think the coach was suspended for it.
Too bad he didn't cover the point spread, though.

Cost me a couple of grand 🙁
 
w0w
amazing
they made a rule that you can't win by more that 50 points?

where is Darwin when you need him?

somebody order a few barrels of chlorine for the gene pool, STAT!
 
Originally posted by: FoBoT
w0w
amazing
they made a rule that you can't win by more that 50 points?

where is Darwin when you need him?

somebody order a few barrels of chlorine for the gene pool, STAT!
You should be made to watch an endless series of 50-0 FREAKING HIGH SCHOOL blow-outs until you smarten up, or somebody defines the word "sportsmanship' to you.

 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: chuckywang
So you want him to tell his players to quit scoring?

Running up the score in a blowout IS considered bad sportsmanship. He could teach his kids something about that maybe.

No it's not. Taking advantage of weakness is considered bad sportsmanship. If the opposition can't defend the run and all you do is run, then that is bad. If on the other hand, you mix it up and throw a little, run a little (like you would normally), then that should be OK.

If the 3rd stringers can't help but score, then there is nothing to do on either side. If the league doesn't want 50+ scores, then they should implement a mercy rule at 41 points.
 
A 50-0 high school football game has to be one of the saddest, ugliest, dreariest, most pointless exercises in mindlessly mismatched humiliation -- akin to dwarf tossing but without the inherent beauty and finesse of that pursuit.

Pussification, indeed. Is no concerned with our social IQ? Allowing a 50-0 blowout of a freaking high school football game to continue lowers the social IQ of everyone involved. :|
 
I read most of the posts, but not all, so forgive me if I repeat anything.

I'll start by saying that I agree with the intent of the rule - to keep some level of sportsmanship in the game - but I'm not sure a set 50 pt limit is the answer, however it does sound like there is some formal review before a punishment is handed down - I would think by the actions of the winning coach that no punishment will be issued - he did what you are supposed to do when you have a mismatch like that. I think his players probably learned quite a bit about sportsmanship through their coaches actions in this game - they could have EASILY won this game 120 to nothing.

The real problem here is the structure of the leagues in that state - teams, particularly in football, need to be grouped on size, not geography - ideally you get both, but you can't have teams from small schools, particularly when they have a crappy program like the losing team does, playing big-time high school football schools, that have kids working on their football skills from elementary school on, have spring practices, off-season programs, etc, etc. Don't put two teams on the field when one of them has no business being there.
 
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: chuckywang
So you want him to tell his players to quit scoring?

Running up the score in a blowout IS considered bad sportsmanship. He could teach his kids something about that maybe.

No it's not. Taking advantage of weakness is considered bad sportsmanship. If the opposition can't defend the run and all you do is run, then that is bad. If on the other hand, you mix it up and throw a little, run a little (like you would normally), then that should be OK.

If the 3rd stringers can't help but score, then there is nothing to do on either side. If the league doesn't want 50+ scores, then they should implement a mercy rule at 41 points.
You have a weasel lawyer's view of sportmanship there, sport.

"Well, I saw that she couldn't defend my right hook, so I mixed in a few broadsides with my nail-embedded club . . . you know . . . for sportmanship's sake. :disgust:

 
Originally posted by: moshquerade
the pussification continues. . .
Apparently, you don't even begin to understand the defintion of a real man. Real men do not continue to pound on the obviously helpless, nor do they condone teaching or allowing their teenaged sons to do so.

50-0 is no longer a game, by any civilized defintion thereof. You have only to watch one to know. Guess you haven't. :|

 
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: mugs
Running up the score in a blowout IS considered bad sportsmanship. He could teach his kids something about that maybe.

No it's not. Taking advantage of weakness is considered bad sportsmanship. If the opposition can't defend the run and all you do is run, then that is bad. If on the other hand, you mix it up and throw a little, run a little (like you would normally), then that should be OK.

If the 3rd stringers can't help but score, then there is nothing to do on either side. If the league doesn't want 50+ scores, then they should implement a mercy rule at 41 points.

Taking advantage of weakness is good coaching. If the other team can't defend against the run, you'd be stupid not to exploit that. Continuing to do so when the game is in the bag is bad sportsmanship.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Apparently, you don't even begin to understand the defintion of a real man. Real men do not continue to pound on the obviously helpless, nor do they condone teaching or allowing their teenaged sons to do so.

50-0 is no longer a game, by any civilized defintion thereof. You have only to watch one to know. Guess you haven't. :|

What do you think the coach should have done in this situation?

-Tom
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: moshquerade
the pussification continues. . .
Apparently, you don't even begin to understand the defintion of a real man. Real men do not continue to pound on the obviously helpless, nor do they condone teaching or allowing their teenaged sons to do so.

50-0 is no longer a game, by any civilized defintion thereof. You have only to watch one to know. Guess you haven't. :|
awww poor baby. mommy and daddy still bail you out when you get into trouble?
some of us face life head on and take what it throws at us without crying that someone make it all better.

real men, bah. real men would work harder and gather up more determination and guts so they don't get their ass whooped that badly next time. that's a real man.

i've played sports Mr. Perknose, and i wouldnt want the opposing team to baby us cause we sucked! in fact, i'd be insulted if they intentionally struck out because their score against us had gotten "too high".

 
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: BigJ
Football is a different beast. One missed tackle can make the difference between a loss and 6 points. It's not like other sports because you can rack up the score very quickly based on a single event.
One play isn't just 6 points. You are underplaying your own side, BigJ. One play could be up to a 16 point swing in football. And 16 points will win many football games.

Yeah because it's soo common that a team that will end up going for a TD + 2 point conversion ends up on the one yard line of the opposing team's endzone only to have that result in a turnover, a 99-yard return, and, for some reason a successful 2 point conversion.
 
Originally posted by: Syringer
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: BigJ
Football is a different beast. One missed tackle can make the difference between a loss and 6 points. It's not like other sports because you can rack up the score very quickly based on a single event.
One play isn't just 6 points. You are underplaying your own side, BigJ. One play could be up to a 16 point swing in football. And 16 points will win many football games.

Yeah because it's soo common that a team that will end up going for a TD + 2 point conversion ends up on the one yard line of the opposing team's endzone only to have that result in a turnover, a 99-yard return, and, for some reason a successful 2 point conversion.

Actually, now you're the one just being ridiculous. It can be up to 16 points. He wasn't saying that it happens often.

If a team is driving, winds up fumbling in the red zone, and then the opposing team recovers and scores, that's a 14 point swing right there. 6 for the would've been TD (+ PAT), 6 for the TD scored, and 1 for the PAT.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
You have a weasel lawyer's view of sportmanship there, sport.

"Well, I saw that she couldn't defend my right hook, so I mixed in a few broadsides with my nail-embedded club . . . you know . . . for sportmanship's sake. :disgust:

They are playing football after all.

As a coach, if I already have the game in the bag, the next best thing for me to do is to practice with 2nd and 3rd stringers to try and improve my team in a real game situation. That is all I'm saying they should have done.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: mugs
Running up the score in a blowout IS considered bad sportsmanship. He could teach his kids something about that maybe.

No it's not. Taking advantage of weakness is considered bad sportsmanship. If the opposition can't defend the run and all you do is run, then that is bad. If on the other hand, you mix it up and throw a little, run a little (like you would normally), then that should be OK.

If the 3rd stringers can't help but score, then there is nothing to do on either side. If the league doesn't want 50+ scores, then they should implement a mercy rule at 41 points.

Taking advantage of weakness is good coaching. If the other team can't defend against the run, you'd be stupid not to exploit that. Continuing to do so when the game is in the bag is bad sportsmanship.


I agree.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: moshquerade
the pussification continues. . .
Apparently, you don't even begin to understand the defintion of a real man. Real men do not continue to pound on the obviously helpless, nor do they condone teaching or allowing their teenaged sons to do so.

50-0 is no longer a game, by any civilized defintion thereof. You have only to watch one to know. Guess you haven't. :|

Oh come on, I've been on both a Team that did the blowing out as well as on a Team that got blown out.

As someone above pointed out was on Long Island where the Teams are matched by population size of the school. That doesn't stop blow outs.
 
Back
Top