100 to 0 B-Ball game...

[jhc68]

This is part of what's wrong with high school athletics. Dumb coaches, dumber parents and private schools that revel in running up scores on hapless opponents. These are usually institutions that claim to emphasize a values-oriented school culture.

Then, after the fact, the winners apologize for the full-court press. What a crock. A team doesn't win a hundred point shut out by accident; if you have that intention, why weep crocodile tears when it makes national headlines?

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=903780

[Marlow]

Re: 100 to 0 B-Ball game...

Dumb coaches, dumber parents and private schools that revel in running up scores on hapless opponents.

Don't even START to say this is a private school-only problem! :evil:
There are several public schools here who must think they are eligible for BCS 'style points' also.

[guru]

I would take it as a bigger insult if a superior opponent played at less than 100% in order to have "mercy" on me or my team.

But that's me.

[jhc68]

Marlow, you are right except that not so many public schools (in California, anyway) get the opportunity to trash weaker opposition on a regular basis on by such dramatic margins.

Here, a common occurance is to have a relatively small private school placed in a league with small enrollment public schools. The small public schools (usually one HS per district) are limited to athletes who live within the district boundaries. The private schools have no district limits and enroll a high percentage of kids who commute fairly long distances, passing lots of public schools on their daily drive.

When those private schools decide to emphasize a certain sport (most often football or basketball, sometimes volleyball or other sports where entire club teams can enroll together at one campus) they end up competing on very uneven terms with their league rivals.

For instance, the HS where I taught for decades used to be a home-grown, small school football power due to great coaching and local tradition. For the past decade or so, at least one small private school has placed in the same league. One was finally booted up to a league with higher enrollment figures but even big school leagues do everything possible to avoid having these ringers placed in their divisions.

In our league the old private powerhouse was replaced immediately by a new one: A place where kids families literally move across the whole country just so their sons can play football. These folks also have tons of money to pay for state of the art facilities and lots and lots of coaches. They routinely outscore opponents by 50 and 60 point margins. They also go ballistic proclaiming that no undue influence causes families to move nearby or have their kids live with local families 3 hours away from their real family homes.

The sweetest victory in our public school's long football tradition was 6 years ago when our team with only 25 kids on the roster upset the private school (they had almost as any coaches as we had players) at their place. The private school coach fired his defensive coordinator early in the 3rd quarter (sent him off the field, honest!) Since then the rich kids have run up big scores on us!

The flaw is not specific to private schools, but because of flaws in placing teams in competitive leagues the issues are more apparent with private schools. Are things a lot different in FLA?

[Marlow]

The small public schools (usually one HS per district) are limited to athletes who live within the district boundaries. The private schools have no district limits and enroll a high percentage of kids who commute fairly long distances, passing lots of public schools on their daily drive.

Make no mistake, private schools have a HUGE advantage when playing like-sized public schools. Our Middle School track athletes train alongside the varsity, so by the time they are in 9th grade, they are far ahead of their public school counterparts. Plus, our students come from families with the money and resources to get their kids specialized training during the off-season. The parents are also highly achievement-oriented, which 'nurtures' their children to push hard for the expected success. I'm only questioning the characterization that private schools like or try to bully their public school counterparts. I am biased, but if I saw it, I'd recognize it, and I rarely see it.

[guru]

Coach fired.

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=904726


Seems to me the coach of the team that got pasted is the one who needs to be fired.

What a way to run a railroad. :roll:

[Marlow]

Coach fired.

So he didn't get fired for the win; he was canned for not apologizing. The fact that the losing team had 'learning disability' kids on it was a factor. There are no winners here - the winning team played the game correctly, but after it was 20-0, the coach should have stopped the blood-letting, even though 'not trying' is bad sportsmanship also in my book (as guru said). Calling the game at half would have been best, but people would have had a problem even with a 30-win. Should have never been scheduled. Luckily in soccer here there's a 8-0 mercy rule (at half), so we'd get our 8 goals, work on our possession skills to keep it at 8-0, and then pack up at half.

[dj]

I have yet to see any mention of what I would consider the most pertinent bit of information: how long did the winning team's starters stay in the game?

This should have been the perfect opportunity to play the far end of the bench. The starters/best players weren't getting anything useful out of a game like this, but the bench players might have.

Once the scrubs were in the game, they should be told to play hard, at least for some period of time.

After the point at which the scrubs have achieved what they can learn from the game, I would think you back off a full-court press. But I don't see a problem with taking 3-point shots. One has to presume there's a greater chance of missing than with 2-pointers.

[Marlow]

how long did the winning team's starters stay in the game?

On the radio this morning, they said the winning team only had 8 girls and they all played a lot. One damning fact - they were still raining 3s in the second half; up 59-0 at the half.

[dj]

how long did the winning team's starters stay in the game?

On the radio this morning, they said the winning team only had 8 girls and they all played a lot. One damning fact - they were still raining 3s in the second half; up 59-0 at the half.

Yup, I just found Covenant's roster: only eight girls on it. Hard to go deep on the bench. But I've seen they have a very good point guard, who was the one stealing the ball at midcourt and getting lay-ups.

Why was the best player still in for the second half?!

[Marlow]

Why was the best player still in for the second half?!

Should she be benched for being good? On the other hand, she didn't have to make steals, shoot 3s or drive for easy buckets. They could have played a 4 Corners style and scored no more.

[lonewolf]

I saw a squib in the morning paper the winning coach was fired, still unapologetic, although his school did issue an apology,.

[sprintblox]

The school that didn't score a point in that game had 20 girls. Not 20 girls on the roster, 20 girls in the WHOLE SCHOOL. That game simply never should have happened. At least it won't happen again, because the small school just pulled themselves out of that league.

[donley2]

Why was the best player still in for the second half?!

Should she be benched for being good?

Yes. Absolutely. After halftime you should play your worst five players. If they have to play out of position, all the better. Another article

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 81526.html

I find the score by quarter 35, 24, 29, 12 of note. It was 25-0 after 3 minutes when the full court press was stopped. I am guessing the 3rd quarter score of 29 points is quite likely what got some peoples attention. I saw the losing team interviewed on TV. They clearly are not concerned about playing "truly" competitive basketball.