As a Holmes fan, I believe that the only obligation Highlands had was to get their non-starters in so they could get some game time. I'd never tell my reserves not to score.

I can tell you that is one of the reason why I am not a Coach Brossart fan! It has nothing to do with wins and loses but winning with class and it would have been a classy move to have the QB take a knee! BTW I think there was only seconds left in the game, if I remember correctly not minutes.

 

I was a player on that team last season. If I recall correctly there was about 2:30 left in the game and it was 3rd down on about the 15 yard line. Calling a "quick slant" was by no means "running it up." Beating a team 24-0 is not humiliating anyone. It is the offense's job to score and the defense's job to stop it.

I don't see what the big deal is about having the 2nd string QB of Highlands passing the ball when the bluebirds are up. He needs reps and that is the perfect time to get them. The subs for the Bluebirds are going to play as hard as the starters. And that is the way it should be. If Holmes loses 100-7, big deal. They need to get over it and try to improve. Coach Lickert knew what he was getting into when he went to Holmes. If some of you people think that is too harsh, that's your opinion. I guarantee you that Travis Alford will hit somebody as hard as he can whether he is in a tight game or if he is up 60. Some of these Holmes Bulldogs that took this whipping on the football field will probably be dunking on the Bluebirds come basketball season.

 

 

Some of us in the stands were talking about that issue. Willie was probably trying to call Dale on his cell to tell him to take it easy on the Bulldogs.

 

A friend of mine who is a friend of Coach Lickert told me that Steve was not at all upset with Dale, which from what I know of Steve doesn't surprise me in the least. He's a pretty no nonsense "its our job to stop them" kind of guy and I'm sure will use the game to show his Dogs how far they have to go and what they need to do to improve. I was talking to a Covington City administrator about Steve and the administrator loves what Steve is doing and the message he is pushing hard to the kids. Steve's got the bye week this week to get his team healed up, straighten things up and get his kids refocused. I don't know who they play next week, but I think you'll see a vastly improved team with a lot fewer fumbles from the squad that took the field last Friday. Keep working hard Dogs. You have the talent; just keep working on the discipline, team work and execution.

I was a player on that team last season. If I recall correctly there was about 2:30 left in the game and it was 3rd down on about the 15 yard line. Calling a "quick slant" was by no means "running it up." Beating a team 24-0 is not humiliating anyone. It is the offense's job to score and the defense's job to stop it.

 

 

Colonel4life you should have paid more attention. Listen to the broadcast. There was 90 seconds left in the game, and 1st down on the Holmes 9 yard line, with starters in the game (up 17-0). If all was so wonderful, then why did Guildugli apologize on the sidelines after the game?

Edited September 16, 200818 yr by Theoldguy

Would it be better to just end the game if a certain point spread is reached by a team?

Would it be better to just end the game if a certain point spread is reached by a team?

I have wondered about this as well. It seems that the whole purpose of the "running clock" is to speed the game along as fast as possible, since the outcome of the game has reached the point of no return, so to speak. Why not save everyone the trouble and just end the game right then? If people have problems with a team scoring after the running clock has be instituted, then why not just end the game when the score differential reaches a certain threshold?

 

It seems to me that you should either have no "running clock" or "game shortening" rule and just play the whole game under typical game circumstances (no matter what the score is or how ugly it is) or set up a rule where the game automatically ends once the score differential reaches a certain point...

I have wondered about this as well. It seems that the whole purpose of the "running clock" is to speed the game along as fast as possible, since the outcome of the game has reached the point of no return, so to speak. Why not save everyone the trouble and just end the game right then? If people have problems with a team scoring after the running clock has be instituted, then why not just end the game when the score differential reaches a certain threshold?

 

It seems to me that you should either have no "running clock" or "game shortening" rule and just play the whole game under typical game circumstances (no matter what the score is or how ugly it is) or set up a rule where the game automatically ends once the score differential reaches a certain point...

 

So would this be like a 10-run rule in baseball? So if we are up by 10 touchdowns, then we win???????

:laugh::laugh::laugh:New rule;If your team is up 6 touchdowns or more,no screen passes allowed

I can tell you that is one of the reason why I am not a Coach Brossart fan! It has nothing to do with wins and loses but winning with class and it would have been a classy move to have the QB take a knee! BTW I think there was only seconds left in the game, if I remember correctly not minutes.

 

Not true; several minutes.

 

Did you realize the pass was thrown by the backup QB?

 

Did you realize he may have had to start the next week?

 

Okay with 70? Not with 24?? Hmmmmm........

Not true; several minutes.

 

Did you realize the pass was thrown by the backup QB?

 

Did you realize he may have had to start the next week?

 

Okay with 70? Not with 24?? Hmmmmm........

 

For the record it was 1:45 left and it was the starter that threw the pass. 17-0 at the time and it was first down after Holmes had gone for it on 4th down essentially giving up.

 

Maybe the coach lost track of time but the above is the real story.

 

The number of points scored is not always indicative of a coach running up the score.

For the record it was 1:45 left and it was the starter that threw the pass. 17-0 at the time and it was first down after Holmes had gone for it on 4th down essentially giving up.

 

Maybe the coach lost track of time but the above is the real story.

 

The number of points scored is not always indicative of a coach running up the score.

 

Isler did not play QB in that game!!

 

We will have to agree to disagree, but GOING FOR IT is not "giving up." That is an oxymoron.

Isler did not play QB in that game!!

 

We will have to agree to disagree, but GOING FOR IT is not "giving up." That is an oxymoron.

 

Right, the starter who started was still in the game.

Right, the starter who started was still in the game.

 

This is silly, but if he did not start the previous games, but was starting because the other QB was injured, that would make him the backup.

This is silly, but if he did not start the previous games, but was starting because the other QB was injured, that would make him the backup.

 

We're getting off the subject but now you're arguing semantics.

We're getting off the subject but now you're arguing semantics.

 

I agree, but it is important to note that a backup QB completing his first TD pass of the season is different than the starter for the previous 6 or so games completing a TD pass.