High School Views: New rule for Connecticut football is piling on
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
By Colin Dunlap
Just when you thought high school sports couldn't be saddled with any more rules to make sure little Jimmy doesn't get his teenaged feelings hurt, the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference came up with a rule last week that if a football team wins by more than 50 points, their coach will be suspended for the next game.
The CIAC is the governing body of high school sports in that state, akin to our PIAA. The CIAC calls its move -- buckle your politically correct terminology seatbelts now -- a "score management policy."
I'll refer to the rule as something a littler more succinct -- um, "lunacy" will do. Or how about "idiocy" or maybe even "crybabyness."
The rule seems to stem from one guy, New London coach Jack Cochran, whose teams won four games this past year by 50 or more points. To be forthcoming, I've never met Cochran, spoke to him on the phone or so much as heard his name before this rule came to pass. But, it doesn't take a genius to arrive at the following conclusion -- people in Connecticut probably don't like the guy because he wins.
The adage that "everyone loves a winner" is far from the truth in the machismo- and testosterone-fueled world of high school football. For as revered as a coach is in his hometown when he wins, there is always an opponent griping when that coach beats them. And the griping is heightened when that coach puts a whoopin' on their squad.
Just ask Upper St. Clair coach Jim Render.
Sure, he can be a little gruff and standoffish, but you know the real reason some other coaches dislike him? The real reason is that when Upper St. Clair rolls into town, your team is more than likely is going to lose that night. That is the overriding factor as to why some people dislike Render.
I'd venture to say the same thing about Cochran.
But to delve into this a little deeper, let us go over a scenario.
Say, for example, you are the coach of Team X and you are up, 45-0, over Team Z. It is mid-fourth quarter and Team Z fumbles on its own 2-yard line. Team X recovers and its third-team offense runs onto the field.
Now, if they are to punch it in, if those kids who work hard all week in practice score a touchdown, the offshoot of that is that their coach gets suspended. What are they supposed to do, fall on the ball four times?
Or, better yet, should Team X's quarterback simply take the snap, waltz over to a Team Z player and say, "here you go, pal, it is all yours" and hand him the football.
To have a rule like this undermines the integrity of the sport more than a good old fashioned blowout ever would or could.
My reaction to this rule Connecticut instituted is somewhere between astonishment and hilarity -- I don't know whether to laugh at the people responsible for making the rule, or be upset because of the utter lunacy that people who would make a decision such as that are actually in power in high school athletics.
Perhaps this solution would be better:
If you don't like getting beat, get better.
