Some of you will remember that Connecticut instituted a rule that says if a team wins by more than a certain number of points (50 maybe?) , the head coach will be suspended for one game. Here's the original thread:

 

http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?t=96654&highlight=connecticut

 

It happened last week. A 3rd string SOPH running back scored on a long run to put them over the limit. The head coach appealed and said he did everything he could to limit the score and the opposing coach supported his contention . The state waived the one-game suspension.

It is funny your brought this back up, cshs81. I was just thinking about this yesterday and wondering if anyone had to serve a suspension yet.

Classy move by the opposing coach to support the winning coach's claim. :thumb:

This is the stupidist (if thats even a word) thing I have ever heard...A 3rd sting running back scores on a long run to go over 50 points and you cant tell me that the caoch didnt try to stop....They should suspend the other coach for being that bad.

This is the stupidist (if thats even a word) thing I have ever heard...A 3rd sting running back scores on a long run to go over 50 points and you cant tell me that the caoch didnt try to stop....They should suspend the other coach for being that bad.

I am not sure I follow your reasoning. The view was that the coach wasn't trying to run up the score and thus waived the ruling. What is the problem?

 

The ruling is aimed at the coaches that are intentionally out there trying to run the score up. This coach was obviously not one of them and ended up with no punishment.

This is the stupidist (if thats even a word) thing I have ever heard...A 3rd sting running back scores on a long run to go over 50 points and you cant tell me that the caoch didnt try to stop....They should suspend the other coach for being that bad.

I understand your point, but sometimes teams/coaches simply can not help the talent (or lack of talent) they have. If I remember correctly, this rule is an automatic suspension from the Connecticut governing body... The losing coach did not turn him in; he was in support of the appeal.

I am not sure I follow your reasoning. The view was that the coach wasn't trying to run up the score and thus waived the ruling. What is the problem?

 

The ruling is aimed at the coaches that are intentionally out there trying to run the score up. This coach was obviously not one of them and ended up with no punishment.

I am on the coaches side....My last statement was said tongue-in-cheek. There is no way in my mind this coach was intentionally running up the score...he had in a 3rd string running back.

Add another sorry tale to this silly rule.

 

A team was up 52-0 in the 3rd and the winning team had their backups in and limited their play calling to inside handoffs. At one point, the coach told his backup qb to take a knee - in the 3rd qtr. He then thought that would be MORE humiliating to the other coach and team and went back to handoffs. His team ended up winning 60-0 and the coach was suspended for one game.

 

I can't imagine this silly rule to last long.

Too bad they don't have this rule in West Virginia....might have stopped the ridiculous new rushing record and all the details listed on other thread!!

Maybe WV might ought to implement this rule after the way Maetwan's head coach ran up the score against Birch a couple of weeks ago. Other than that I think that is a ridiculous rule.:fire:

Sorry TomLandry...didn't see your post but I totally concur.

I was telling some of my friends who live in West Virginia about Kentucky's 45 point rule. They said West Virginia was considering some type of rule in line with our 45 point rule.

I could see this rule, if you still have your starters in. However, you mean to tell me if your freshmen are scoring on the other team's starters, then you could get suspended? What do you tell the kids, "Okay, you get to play, but you can't score..." Maybe this rule is okay for freshmen games or even JV games, but not varsity.

STUPID STUPID STUPID rule.

I would love to know the background of the creator of this rule.

Heck, let's just not keep score so everyone feels all warm and fuzzy. Then we can have a group huddle of both teams at midfield after the game and have cupcakes and hot cocoa. Then we'll all go over to the gym and have a sleep over and tell really scary stories.:jump: :jump: :jump: :jump:

I have been on both sides of a lopsided game. The rule in Conn. is stupid. I do like the Ky rule of running the clock at 45 pt spread. Some AD's need to be a little more careful about scheduling these types of games and coaches more eager to pull on the reigns