Do not run up the score in Connecticut,

[OrangeEmpire]

Scoring

HARTFORD, Conn. --Any Connecticut high school football coach who runs up the score in a game now runs the risk of being suspended.

The football committee of the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference, the state board that governs high school sports, has adopted a "score management" policy to keep teams from winning by more than 50 points.

The rout is considered an unsportsmanlike infraction and, beginning this fall, the head coach of the offending team will be disqualified from coaching the next game, said Tony Mosa, assistant executive director of the Cheshire-based CIAC.

Is this for the kids or stupid adults?

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Then why not simply call the game official when one team gets a 50 point lead? What is the coach supposed to do, tell his team to lay down and quit playing?

[OrangeEmpire]

What about the 2nd string who never gets to play?

They deserve a chance to play!

[GAVol]

Obviously thought up by someone who never played sports.

[hatvol96]

I read this yesterday. Without question, this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of in sports. I'm going to assume this comes from some ex-hippie baby boomer who is concerned about the self esteem of the beaten team. Why not just eliminate the scoreboard altogether? Barry Switzer said it best, "If you don't want the score run up on you, stop the other team occasionally." Pure and simple, this is what happens when the values of the culture of victims that liberalism has created are allowed to take hold.

[GAVol]

Plus, there's no doubt that being on the wrong end of a 70-0 score . . . and then showing up to practice the next week . . . is a character building experience.

[CSpindizzy]

Warm and fuzzy feel good psychology. When people's incomes exceed a certain level, take the money away from them. When campaigns collect too many millions, take ti away.......good grief. Let's limit people on exceeding......

[OldVol]

Well, we have to be fair.

Why not something this dumb? We have Welfare for the mid-majors who got their feelings hurt because they can't get a BCS win with 10 wins over West Texas State Barber College.

Now, I'm not for running up excessive scores, but to legislate against it.

It just goes to show you how far the liberal mentality can reach. We're now supposed to teach compassionate winning?

When I was in HS, my team played a school we had no business playing. I'm not even sure why they were on our schedule.
I seen to remember a cancellation. Anyway, by half we had them 49 to nothing.

Third stringers played throughout the last half. We even punted on 2nd down a few times to keep from running it up more.

It ended up 70 to 0 and the other guys didn't even cross midfield. I was embarrassed for them.

[OldVol]

double post, sorry

[hatvol96]

Originally Posted by (OldVol @ May 26, 2006 11:35 AM)

Well, we have to be fair.

Why not something this dumb? We have Welfare for the mid-majors who got their feelings hurt because they can't get a BCS win with 10 wins over West Texas State Barber College.

Now, I'm not for running up excessive scores, but to legislate against it.

It just goes to show you how far the liberal mentality can reach. We're now supposed to teach compassionate winning?

When I was in HS, my team played a school we had no business playing. I'm not even sure why they were on our schedule.
I seen to remember a cancellation. Anyway, by half we had them 49 to nothing.

Third stringers played throughout the last half. We even punted on 2nd down a few times to keep from running it up more.

It ended up 70 to 0 and the other guys didn't even cross midfield. I was embarrassed for them.

The key question is what's more embarassing, a team beating you 84-0 or a team beating you 49-0 and punting on first down for the last 20 minutes of the game? Having been a pretty good high school athlete, I can certainly say I'd be much more embarassed by the latter than the former.

[OldVol]

Originally Posted by (hatvol96 @ May 26, 2006 11:48 AM)

The key question is what's more embarassing, a team beating you 84-0 or a team beating you 49-0 and punting on first down for the last 20 minutes of the game? Having been a pretty good high school athlete, I can certainly say I'd be much more embarassed by the latter than the former.

Yeah, it was a bad night all around. Everyone felt badly for the poor players on the other team. To make matters worse, it was at their place.

There's no easy way to humiliate your opponent.

[hatvol96]

Originally Posted by (OldVol @ May 26, 2006 12:54 PM)

Yeah, it was a bad night all around. Everyone felt badly for the poor players on the other team. To make matters worse, it was at their place.

There's no easy way to humiliate your opponent.

I was a pretty fair high school baseball player, passed up playing at some places like LMU to go to school at UT. Central High of Knoxville was in the middle of their great run with the Heltons, Chris Freeman, Bubba Trammel, Jeff Shelton, etc. when I played. I was on both sides of the "10 after 5" rule. I never minded it when I was winning, but I always hated the rule when I was on the short end. It always seemed wrong to cut a game short, regardless of the score. The game has a prescribed length. It should be played out.

[OldVol]

Originally Posted by (hatvol96 @ May 26, 2006 12:00 PM)

I was a pretty fair high school baseball player, passed up playing at some places like LMU to go to school at UT. Central High of Knoxville was in the middle of their great run with the Heltons, Chris Freeman, Bubba Trammel, Jeff Shelton, etc. when I played. I was on both sides of the "10 after 5" rule. I never minded it when I was winning, but I always hated the rule when I was on the short end. It always seemed wrong to cut a game short, regardless of the score. The game has a prescribed length. It should be played out.

I agree.

It's a game. It's supposed to be fun.

What's the hurry?