Running up the score?

[John Anthony]

Here are a few more:

Murray 57 Fulton City 0

Cooper 54 Scott 6

 

Yeah but a good varsity is going to account for 42-45 points. Then one in mop up isn't bad.

[InTheStands41240]

My thinking exactly!

 

Now Guru, you know the Bluebirds have never run up the score.

[theguru]

Now Guru, you know the Bluebirds have never run up the score.

 

I think the Birds learned a hard lesson or two on scoring a few years ago so Coach Mueller is extra careful these days.

[InTheStands41240]

I don't disagree with at all about 75 being too many points Guru. I think there is a point where you have to back off.

[tsyoung7]

75 is almost a bad statement if the freshman did not score 21!!!!! If they did, someone needs to change their schedule, this kind of game will not help any team get better...even the losing team!

[beverlybubba]

Depends on how you get the points. If you keep the first string in too long, you're running up the score. If you put in the backups fairly early on and they keep scoring, well, they came to play too. It's not fair to the backups to tell them to sit on the ball. Like tsyoung7 said though, gross mismatches aren't good for anyone.

[mcpapa]

My philosophy is pretty much that anything goes in the first half. If that means a running clock before halftime, so be it.

 

After that, call off the dogs.

[Ramfan Coach!]

A coach can keep the score respectable I think for the most part! LCA Could have won 50+ -0 last night. But put in subs early. Score 40+-20. Also Raceland could have won by 50+ last night. But 2nd and 3rd string players played parts of the 3rd qtr. And all of the fourth. Result 49-14. You cant tell yours kids don't go out and stand. Just use every player you have. And use them early.

[The Scribe]

Big scores dont always mean running up the score. I have seen 70 points scored in a game with the team doing everything but fall down and take a knee not to score.

[Mr.Network]

Can a final score of 33-20 be a case of "running up the score"? The winning coach was accused of that last night. Just by looking at the score, you probably wouldn't think so.

 

What if you found out that the winning team was running a hurry-up offense in the closing minutes, up 30-20, and even kicked a field goal with 5.5 seconds left in the game? You might say "yes".

 

What if the winning team won a total of three games in the previous two seasons? Would that change your opinion? Is it acceptable to tack on a meaningless score if your team has not been very successful lately?

[Guest Birdflu]

75 is too much when you enter the 60's you should completely back off.

 

Depends on what the other teams has.

[stick1]

Nevermind.

Edited September 5, 2010 by Ram
Rule 13

[jbwill2]

I think the Birds learned a hard lesson or two on scoring a few years ago so Coach Mueller is extra careful these days.

Please explain.

[jbwill2]

To address the issue in this thread, I guess it depends on your perspective. There are some folks who feel that the most disrespectful thing you can do to an opponent in football is intentionally let up against him during a game. Easing up on your opponent can be viewed as pitying your opponent, and a lot of people don't like to be pitied. I read in another BGP thread where someone mentioned that a team would intentionally fumble the ball when they got up by a huge margin. Imagine how embarrassing it must be to play against a team that is forced to intentionally fumble the ball in order to keep the score from becoming 100-0!

 

The issue of "running up the score" hits upon the notion of respect. I guess if you feel that the best way to respect your opponent is to go full throttle for four quarters, then "running up the score" is not bad. If you feel that intentionally limiting the scoring margin is the best way to respect your opponent, then "running up the score" is bad.

 

As for me, I'm not a big fan of teams winning by massive point margins. However, the coach of the winning team has an obligation to do everything he can (within the rules) to better his team and improve his team's future prospects. Therefore, if a coach feels that working on a passing game late in a blowout win is necessary to improve his team's chances of winning future games, then so be it.

Edited September 5, 2010 by jbwill2

[stick1]

I can tell you firsthand LC played all 58 kids the first game of the season. The feature tailback had 6 carries #2 back 4 carries and #3 back 3 carries. They were off the next week. They started subbing on defense the start of the 2nd quarter Fri night but kept the backs in longer because they had basically played 4 quarters in 3 weeks. An int was run back for a TD later in the game and a fumble the young kids forced gave LC the ball back on the 26 yd line. The fullback ran it right up the middle 1 play for the only offensive TD in 4th quarter. The starting tailback had 12 carries. #2 had 5 carries. If the goal these weeks was to run up the score they would be carrying the ball 25 times each.

LC was winning about 1 game a year for 4-5 years. Everybody wanted to play them. Part of the big plan when Coach Salmons came in was to lighten the schedule to get the passion back in the program and even more important the kids out of the hallways. We've gone from around 35 kids to around 58 kids. We've gone from 0-11 to 12-1 and now 2-0. The shedule was made on two year contracts when LC was 0-11. I'm pretty sure next year we already have Sheldon Clark, Russell, Prestonsburg and Raceland locked in to take the place of some of these games we aren't bound too.

I have mixed emotions. I don't like seeing any kid shown up but I also know how hard the kids have worked here to only play 4.5 quarters total the frist three weeks of the sesason. A good bit of them didn't even play that much. I know for a fact defense was subbing at the start of the 2nd quarter.