No need to humiliate the boys on the other team by beating them by 60 points. It also is a shame to not let your second and third string kids get a chance to play. They practice too, and then sit the bench most of the season. It shows class to keep the score reasonable, and also make ALL your team feel like part of the team.

 

I would put my starters in the first quarter and then let the second and third strings get a chance to play. If the other team got close

But I'm only taking my starters out if the other team does, that's where I'm different, I think.

 

That's usual reciprocal, at least from what I've seen. It's just a matter of who pulls that trigger first. It might not be 100% across the board (for whatever reasons), but I've not seen a lot of games in my years where one team is still rolling with the 1's across the board while the other team is clearing the bench.

My unwritten rule was to always pull the starters of the team comfortably ahead, and the other coach was allowed to run a few plays or one series against the subs. No trick plays after that, just basic stuff, but it doesn't mean you try to stop scoring and put up as many points possible.

That's usual reciprocal, at least from what I've seen. It's just a matter of who pulls that trigger first. It might not be 100% across the board (for whatever reasons), but I've not seen a lot of games in my years where one team is still rolling with the 1's across the board while the other team is clearing the bench.

Same here. Apparently that was the Dale Mueller way per post #4. There are other ways to wave a white flag than waiting for the team being beat down to sub out their starters first.

I apologize in advance for this mini rant...

 

It always bothers me when I read people complaining about running up the score in high school football, or high school sports in general.

 

If I were a coach, I would be trying to score as many points as possible on every single opponent my team faced. I would expect the same mentality from every coach I faced as well. I'm leaving my starters in AT LEAST until there is a running clock, and after that I'm putting my back ups in to run the same playbook, not some watered down junk to keep the score down. And honesty, if the opposing team leaves their starters in, so am I.

 

This feeds into the mentality touched on recently by Jeff Walz, that kids today are soft, and we are not only allowing it, but enabling it. During my four years, my high school team went 3-7, 3-7, 5-5 and 9-3. We took MANY a butt whooping at the hands of Danville, Louisville Holy Cross, and Bardstown just to name a few. Never once did I think "Man, they should take their starters out because they are beating us so bad. It was more like "Man, they are good. Good for them, I wish we were that good."

 

Losing like that is good for kids. It's an opportunity for improvement and growth, both on and off the field. They need to know their place on the totem pole and understand what it takes to be successful. Character is built when you get curb stomped by a better team, not by getting a trophy for just completing the season. We need to stop rewarding mediocrity and push our youth to do the same.

 

Rant over. Let's discuss.

 

I'm with you 1,000,000,000,000,000%. If I was coaching against you and you beat me by 80 points I'd buy you a steak dinner somewhere after your season was over. Obviously my season will end before yours. :lol2: :lol2:

No need to humiliate the boys on the other team by beating them by 60 points. It also is a shame to not let your second and third string kids get a chance to play. They practice too, and then sit the bench most of the season. It shows class to keep the score reasonable, and also make ALL your team feel like part of the team.

 

I would put my starters in the first quarter and then let the second and third strings get a chance to play. If the other team got close

 

If me running my offense is humiliating the other team, then so be it.

 

As far as 2nd and 3rd stringers playing, you should be able to work them into the game plan regardless of the score. They may not get significant minutes, but you can find find spots to play them.

 

There's also JV games for that.

I'm with you 1,000,000,000,000,000%. If I was coaching against you and you beat me by 80 points I'd buy you a steak dinner somewhere after your season was over. Obviously my season will end before yours. :lol2: :lol2:

 

Let's just team up and beat people by eleventy billion.

I would pull my starters if there was a running clock. But if the other team is blitzing my back ups I would bring the ones back in.

That's usual reciprocal, at least from what I've seen. It's just a matter of who pulls that trigger first. It might not be 100% across the board (for whatever reasons), but I've not seen a lot of games in my years where one team is still rolling with the 1's across the board while the other team is clearing the bench.

 

Sadly I wish this was true but I have seen many a team try to play for a "moral victory" against Belfry's 2's or even 3's.

 

In a way though I think it has helped Belfry... those are free reps for your young guys against Starting Varsity competition. In the case of this season by the end of the year the Belfry Freshmen were the ones actually extending the lead despite the opposing 1's being on the field.

If me running my offense is humiliating the other team, then so be it.

 

As far as 2nd and 3rd stringers playing, you should be able to work them into the game plan regardless of the score. They may not get significant minutes, but you can find find spots to play them.

 

There's also JV games for that.

 

JV games aren't exactly as the same level as even backup varsity games.

 

And, even if it is the purpose of JV games, then wouldn't players be better served playing 1 1/2 JV games a week instead of just 1?

 

Most schools who are in a position to consistently run the clock on someone might have a 9th grader who just simply needs to see the field to get a better feel for the game. Putting him in on special teams or in some sort of position rotation isn't the same as just putting him out there and letting him go for a quarter.

 

 

I wouldn't run the score up on most people, simply because that makes them look bad. If I have the superior athletes, there's really not much he can do on the other side. But, me beating him 80-7 doesn't do him any favors. Should he have stopped me from scoring? Yeah, obviously. But I would feel a little bad for costing a guy his job.

 

I don't think pulling your starters is "taking it easy" or contributing to the infamous "everybody gets a trophy" culture. But, I mean, that's just me. I don't understand who people are blaming in that argument, anyway.

I'd probably go a step further and just try to work in the bottom of the depth chart with some starters. Maybe a young, 3rd string WR and the starting QB, who just so happens to be a Jr. find a rhythm to build on throughout the season, in the event of an injury, and into next year. I've built many a Madden dynasty in this fashion.

But I'm only taking my starters out if the other team does, that's where I'm different, I think.

 

I honestly agree with everything you said, except this. Say you do put up a running clock in the first half, I am in agreement with still keeping starters in till half. However why does the other team have to pull their starters first in the second half. For that team getting pounded , they obviously aren't going to come all the way back to win with a running clock . Who cares if your second string ends up giving up 2 tds against the other teams 1st team to make it 42 to 14 instead of 42 to 0. It's not like in KY that rankings mean anything and you need to have huge wins by big scores to get a better seed.

 

For those teams who are getting pounded, that chance to play against a teams second string gives them a chance for some success like even getting a few first downs. It's not like the players are going to be happy, they still know they got destroyed. Plus honestly it helps your second string going against the other teams starters, because gives them live game action against better competition. So that helps develops your second team.

 

With that said if a team has their starters in and are blitzing the crap out of your second team on defense and running trick plays on offense. Then yes put your first string back in and shut that down quickly. I think it's easy to tell who is keeping their first team in against a second team to help make their first team improve vs. Someone who keeps their first team in to try to make a run on someone's backups.

 

That's why I can't agree with the whole keeping your starters in until the losing teams takes theirs out even if your up 42 points or something. Now once the 4th quarter comes the losing team also definitely should have backups in too, to allow others a chance to play.

 

As for still running your normal offense with your second string even if that involves passing, I agree with you. Your second team deserves to work on things too, rather than just running up the middle each play. So I basically just disagree with the one thing, the rest I completely agree.

with the 8 quarter rule you don't see a lot of Freshman dressing varsity anymore.

According to Coach Homer Smith, Bear Bryant said the best coaches start winning the next game after they had that game in hand. I take that to mean, whatever is best for your team is what you do. If a game is in hand, especially mid to late season, I like to protect bodies and get meaningful experience for our depth. I am not a big fan of scoring a bunch of points once a game is in hand. But, what is best for the guys I coach drives my decision making at that point in a game.

People complaining about teams running up the score has to be one of the things that bothers me most about high school sports. It's soft. But I will say, is it worth it to keep in your 1's and risk injury in a blowout? Even if the oppenent keeps their ones in? I'd just say keep my 1's in until the 4th no matter how big you're up and let your back ups play the 4th when there's no chance of coming back for the other team.