Sportsmanship!!

[Azkarin2]

There is a difference between changing how you play and running up the score. As said before, they could have switched styles of play, offensive sets, and especially lineups. I've played in games where the other team had no chance of winning. We played our normal game and pounded them for a half. Then in the second half we practiced other defenses, worked on offensive plays (working on picks, motion, etc), and most of all gave the other scrub kids on our team a chance to play meaningful time.

So while you shouldn't just pass the ball around for the entire time you can alter your game without humiliating another team and thats what should have happened. While 100-0 may be embarrassing to the other team I feel like the winning coach is more of a joke than the losing coach for coaching as he did.

[Tyche]

If you want to come out playing hard, fine. That's what they did. They put up ample amount of points in the first half (50-something - 0 i think?). Again, in sports people tone it down all the time when they have a commanding lead. It's not disrespectful or poor taste to stop pressing full court, throwing up three's, and pulling starters. It's actually good coaching. Every minute a starter stays in the game is a minute that they could get injured. It's why NFL teams don't play starters a lot of the times during the last weeks of the season when clinched. If the winning team came out starting their 3rd string and running down clock just to put themselves on that teams level, then I could understand your argument. They came out and played hard in the first half, they could have taken the second half much easier.

[Quixotic]

The team has a limited number of players, there were always going to be 2 starters on the court no matter what. He DID rotate through his players throughout the whole game and switched from full court press to playing defense after the first quarter till the end of the game. Although its not explicitly stated what he did to manage the clock, he made an effort to do so. I think your number 2 is a retarded idea personally because it goes back to what I said about playing keep-away from the other team. That would be more humiliating in my book. Also stated is that they only threw up 2 or 3 3pointers after the first half. Like I said before, the only way the team would've not blown them out is if their coach told them to miss shot intentionally, let the ball get stolen, and not go after rebounds. Would you want a coach to say something like that to their players?

No there is no reward for winning 100-0, but really now, would 80-10 or even 80-20 be any better? People are just looking at the end result and crying that he's unsportsmanlike, but fuck that. He DID have his players ease up, and he did rotate his bench. They blew the other team out while playing a defensive strategy 3/4s of the game; at that point its just the other team sucking up hardcore, and there's not much the coach can do at that point.

[Tristam]

People are only bitching about this cuz' 100-0 are nice round numbers. The fired coach two years ago even lost a game 82-6 and I'm willing to bet there wasn't nearly as much of a ruckus. The fault is with the district for not having a mercy rule when your disctict incorporates such small schools that are going to be prone to such lopsided results, i.e. stopping scoring after the difference gets too big. Any other way involves telling one team to simply lie down and play soft, as if that was better sportsmanship?

When I swam in high school, we swam some teams that just couldn't compete, so what we did was swim "exhibition" after a certain point, basically telling the refs to DQ us for bogus reasons. We swam our races just as hard, after all, a non-taper meet may as well be a workout, but the score didn't reflect the difference in competition.

[Tyche]

I didn't see the box score (if there is one), but parents (of covenant for that matter) reported the coaches cheering wildly to get to 100 and applying full court press and throwing up 3's even in the fourth quarter. The AD said they left first string players in almost the entire game. They had a guard who had 40+ points I know. The passing 10+ times came from a girls high school coach who said she requires her team to pass the ball 10+ times and not take a shot outside of 10ft when her team is up 30+.

[Tristam]

the link Quixotic provided contradicts alot of what was in the story.

[archibaldcrane]

If the coach's account is basically true, this is pretty much a non-story other than the pretty numbers, and he shouldn't have been fired. They only scored 12 points in the 4th quarter, and they were clearly capable of way more.

[Tyche]

I just read the coaches full letter, but it still leaves some unanswered questions. He said he'd never intentionally run up the score...that's obviously incorrect. That score was run up to 100 and stopped. 12 4th quarter points makes it glaringly obvious that they had a goal to reach. What did they do in the fourth quarter that they couldn't have done in the third quarter to prevent the score being run up? It was said he couldn't do anything other than what he did, but he obviously changed his style late in the 4th. And there was only 1 3pt field goal made in the 2nd half, but how many were shot? If you are rotating players, how does one of your players manage half of your points? I agree that they just did it to put up a pretty number, and that's why it got the attention. 80-10 and noone would know about it. I really would like to see the full box score.

[Olo401]

This school has a point-per-game average over the past FOUR YEARS of just over 4. They've had games where they've lost by over 60 points, and as far as I've researched they haven't ever scored more than 8 points in this time frame. They have not won a game either in over four years.

This isn't the fault of the other team at all. Neither is it completely the fault of the players at the academy, nor is the reason for their failure related to their reported ADD condition. This is the fault of the school they attend for failing to recognize that the coach of the team and athletic director were not doing their jobs properly. The AD had years of evidence that the coach wasn't doing a good job, and should have replaced him. Likewise, the school should have recognized this and if the AD wasn't willing to take necessary steps to get a proper basketball coach, he should have been fired.

[Deejay]

Calm down dude, the school consists of 20 people. They wouldn't win a game if they had Coack K.

[Serif]

This school has a point-per-game average over the past FOUR YEARS of just over 4. They've had games where they've lost by over 60 points, and as far as I've researched they haven't ever scored more than 8 points in this time frame. They have not won a game either in over four years.

This isn't the fault of the other team at all. Neither is it completely the fault of the players at the academy, nor is the reason for their failure related to their reported ADD condition. This is the fault of the school they attend for failing to recognize that the coach of the team and athletic director were not doing their jobs properly. The AD had years of evidence that the coach wasn't doing a good job, and should have replaced him. Likewise, the school should have recognized this and if the AD wasn't willing to take necessary steps to get a proper basketball coach, he should have been fired.

Haha it was not the coaches fault. It is the school/parents fault as a whole.

20 girls to choose from for a competitive high school basketball team? Give me a break...

I am willing to bet that there wasn't a girls high school basketball a while back and some parent's whose daughters wanted to play SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much bitched and bitched and bitched until one got put into place. Andddddddd this is where the ended up.

I could see a small amount in blaming the team's coach who scored 100 points but there is no validity in blaming the team's coach who has scored 0.

[Seraph]

I just read the coaches full letter, but it still leaves some unanswered questions. He said he'd never intentionally run up the score...that's obviously incorrect. That score was run up to 100 and stopped. 12 4th quarter points makes it glaringly obvious that they had a goal to reach. What did they do in the fourth quarter that they couldn't have done in the third quarter to prevent the score being run up? It was said he couldn't do anything other than what he did, but he obviously changed his style late in the 4th. And there was only 1 3pt field goal made in the 2nd half, but how many were shot? If you are rotating players, how does one of your players manage half of your points? I agree that they just did it to put up a pretty number, and that's why it got the attention. 80-10 and noone would know about it. I really would like to see the full box score.

You never touch on the possibility that the girls themselves were annoyed at having to play a team they very much outmatched, and decided to completely smash them for it. A coach does not have a direct impact on the points in a game, the players do.

Clearly, everyone in the arena at the time should be punished, because a game like this should never have happened. /eyeroll

[Tyche]

You never touch on the possibility that the girls themselves were annoyed at having to play a team they very much outmatched, and decided to completely smash them for it. A coach does not have a direct impact on the points in a game, the players do.

Clearly, everyone in the arena at the time should be punished, because a game like this should never have happened. /eyeroll

wut?

[Devolver]

A coach does not have a direct impact on the points in a game, the players do.

Thats right, players bench themselves

[Seraph]

Thats right, players bench themselves

Yeah, and coaches also take the shots and play on the court.

Obviously they have an influence, but they are not the ones directly playing. If a player punches someone on the other team in the face, that's the players choice, not the coaches. Getting back to the real issue, you bet coaches can rotate or bench players and what not, but ultimately the players actions are the result of the players choices. Ultimately the coach cannot forcefully stop the players from shooting the ball unless he forfeits the game.

My real point was that blaming the coach or the players for the shitty match-up is just plain stupid, and the overwhelming result of the match-up is a just a testament to how poorly the league is managed.

Let's put the winning team against a group from the WNBA, and then complain when the score is 1000-0. It's just so stupid.

[Tyche]

Yeah, and coaches also take the shots and play on the court.

Obviously they have an influence, but they are not the ones directly playing. If a player punches someone on the other team in the face, that's the players choice, not the coaches. Sure, coaches can rotate or bench players and what not, but ultimately the players actions are the result of the players choices. I've never played in a sport where the players themselves didn't have some impact on the plays. Even in football, when a coach would call a play, sometimes the players would put a spin on it as applicable. Depends on the circumstances.

My real point was that blaming the coach or the players for the shitty match-up is just plain stupid, and the overwhelming result of the match-up is a just a testament to how poorly the league is managed.

Let's put the winning team against a group from the WNBA, and then complain when the score is 1000-0. It's just so stupid.

What you are describing is what we in the biz call the "Dallas cowboy" syndrome. That's when a coach has a complete [cartman]lack a disciprine[/cartman]. If one of my players, as a coach, did something they were told not to do, there ass would be immediately out the rest of the game and possibly next game. What you are describing would be a text-book bad coach.

[Seraph]

What you are describing is what we in the biz call the "Dallas cowboy" syndrome. That's when a coach has a complete [cartman]lack a disciprine[/cartman]. If one of my players, as a coach, did something they were told not to do, there ass would be immediately out the rest of the game and possibly next game. What you are describing would be a text-book bad coach.

But you are getting away from the initial debate. Why is what this guy did an example of bad coaching? If there was no obvious threat to the players on either team, how is how he handled it a problem?

You seem very irked at the situation, and I'm asking how you would do it differently. If any combination of players is scoring points against the other team, how (and why) would you go about 'slowing things down' without it being obviously insulting to the other team? You can't just yell 'slow down, these guys suck' on the court.

In the end, how do you let the other team without it being totally obvious? Plus, how do you even keep the game fun at that point? The worse team is still going to lose, and the winning team has to now go through the motions to burn off the clock. That seems pretty pointless to me.


Edit: What annoys me is that the coach was asked to apologize for doing nothing wrong. I wouldn't 'fake apologize' for some bullshit reason either. Saying you are sorry because the other team is garbage is just horrible, and I can't even imagine how tey would try to spin it to make it sound sincere.

[Fairy-Killer]

The coach has the direct power to decide how the game comes out. I'm sure in a 2A school (which really isn't that many but I'm in an 1A school and we have a few extra) they could send out their 2nd team. I know that in high school it's really just about being sportsman-like, especially in smaller schools. Our coaches have always let up when we are killing a team.

Going to start with a little bit of rules/background. I play six man football. Everything scores the same; except, an extra point is reversed. FG is 2 and running/throwing is 1. Field is 80 x 40 yards. There is a mercy rule of 45 points, and it only kicks in after half-time. In six man games it is NOT uncommon to 45 a team. Yet, a lot of times it hits just over 45 at half time because the coaches do not allow it to get to the point of being ridiculous. I know there were many times that my team could have easily put 70+ points on the board before half. But, many coaches are actually very friendly and know each other on first name bases prior to being coaches for schools due to the size. It's all about sportsmanship. Glad the coach got what he deserved.

[Seraph]

[Stuff]

I guess when I grew up the magnitude of a loss didn't matter. If you lost by 1 point, or 100, it's still a loss. That's how I was taught to play. You played to win and to have fun.

I can understand playing second string or pulling starters to keep them from getting hurt, but when even your worst players are still kicking ass, what do you do? Just stop playing?

[aurik]

But you are getting away from the initial debate. Why is what this guy did an example of bad coaching? If there was no obvious threat to the players on either team, how is how he handled it a problem?

You seem very irked at the situation, and I'm asking how you would do it differently. If any combination of players is scoring points against the other team, how (and why) would you go about 'slowing things down' without it being obviously insulting to the other team? You can't just yell 'slow down, these guys suck' on the court.

In the end, how do you let the other team without it being totally obvious? Plus, how do you even keep the game fun at that point? The worse team is still going to lose, and the winning team has to now go through the motions to burn off the clock. That seems pretty pointless to me.

Read Tyche's post:

You call a time out and tell your players
1) no outside shots
2) no full press
3) 5-10 passes before a shot
etc

These players lose every game. They know they're terrible. They won't be offended if you use the game time to practice good habits rather than run up the score.