PDA

View Full Version : Should a football coach be suspended for running up the score?


Stinger
05-25-2006, 08:24 AM
Should a football coach be suspended for running up the score, which is now the case in Connecticut?


http://www.courant.com/sports/highschool/hc-hsrule0525.artmay25,0,5153514.story?coll=hc-headlines-home (http://www.courant.com/sports/highschool/hc-hsrule0525.artmay25,0,5153514.story?coll=hc-headlines-home) </FONT>

Rule Tackles Blowouts In High School Football



By SHAWN COURCHESNE
Courant Staff Writer

May 25 2006

Expect New London High School football coach Jack Cochran to operate next season as he always has, and if that means his team wins by 50 points or more, so be it. And expect Cochran to be suspended for doing so.

In what some are referring to as the "Cochran rule," the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference football committee passed a score management policy to be instituted next season. The rule says if a team wins by 50 or more points, the coach is suspended for the next game.

Although many have accused Cochran of running up scores, he doesn't see it that way. And he doesn't like this rule. On that point, he has company.

"It won't change anything with how I prepare for a game," Cochran said. "Where it's going to run into problems is when you've got your second team in or you've got your freshmen in; what do you tell them? One coach is saying he's just going to have his guys take a knee. I would never do that. I would never tell a kid to run out of bounds instead of scoring.

"I will probably have to take a suspension next year. If it comes down to letting a freshman or a [junior varsity] player score at the varsity level or me being suspended, I'm not going to stop that kid from doing that. I cherish the sport too much and believe in it too much to tell some kid he can't play the game the right way."

The rule, passed in April, says if a team wins by 50 points or more it will be called an unsportsmanlike act. Under the CIAC's disqualification rule, the coach will be suspended for the next game. The football committee is made up of coaches and school administrators, all formerly involved in coaching.

"Our football committee has been discussing this topic for two or three years and they've been studying policies," said CIAC Assistant Executive Director Tony Mosa. "It certainly didn't just come about after last year. We certainly have been having a lot of criticism regarding what appeared to be a high number of high scores."

Mosa said 12 games last season had a differential of more than 55 points.

"That's really not an exorbitant number, but 12 is too many," Mosa said.

Of the 659 games reported to the CIAC last year, there were 27 in which teams won by at least 50 points. Cochran's New London team won four games by 55 or more, including a 90-0 victory over Griswold.

"The CIAC is sending the wrong message," Cochran said. "It's protectionism of those that can't compete. Do you tell people at work that everyone has to make the same amount of money and they can't succeed? This is about teaching kids to work hard and that success will come. For a lot of guys out there, when they get beat handily it makes them stronger and they go back and work harder."

Some states use a system that calls for a running clock when a team has reached a certain advantage. Although Connecticut has no rule that allows a running clock, many coaches employ the practice in blowouts.

"I had a season where I had seven games where the clock was run in the second half. It works," Cochran said. "The problem with that is sometimes opponents won't do it. The Griswold coach [Glenn LaBossiere] wouldn't do it with me last year. But I've very rarely had a coach that didn't want to do that."

Mosa said the running clock system was something the football committee saw as prohibitive to giving second- and third-string players the chance to play.

"You do that and the game is over before anybody can even get in," Mosa said.

The rule applies only to the final score. A team could be leading 55-0 and back off defensively so that its opponent could score a touchdown that prevents a coach's suspension.

Tim Panteleakos, coach of the Tourtellotte (Thompson)/Ellis Tech (Danielson) co-op team, sees putting in a rule to thwart running up the score as a double-edged sword.

Panteleakos, who has coached the co-op team since its inception in 2000, was charged last season with breach of peace after having words with Cochran as they were leaving the field at halftime of a game in New London. Panteleakos said he was angered when Cochran used a timeout late in the half so his team could score more points. New London won, 60-0.

"I think it's a very progressive rule," Panteleakos said. "You really have to adhere to scoring management. It's not something that when you come in as a young coach that you're really aware of because you just want your kids to succeed."

But Panteleakos sees problems with the rule, too.

"We had a small school like Putnam on our schedule last year, and they're experiencing some problems with numbers and that sort of thing," Panteleakos said. "Putnam didn't have enough kids to go to a second string. So now you've got a few kids on that field from Putnam that are getting their butts whipped week in and week out and they're angry young men. Now me, as the head coach on the other side, I'm reluctant to put some of my second and third string in against a kid on the other side who is going to take the head off of any kid he sees. So I have to leave my first string in there, and they're going to keep playing the game."

Asked whether he thought the CIAC was instituting the rule because of the actions of one coach, Panteleakos said, "I think at the moment they are."

Mosa denied that, saying the rule was "not directed at one particular school or individual."

Cochran took umbrage with Hyde-New Haven coach John Acquavita referring to the rule in a published report as the "Jack Rule."

"He's pointing blame, and I don't think that's fair of him," Cochran said. "He's got a lot of lopsided scores. They're a hell of a football program. But it's easy to blame someone else when you don't like something new."

Northwest Catholic-West Hartford coach Mike Tyler said he was surprised by the decision to implement the rule and says many coaches have the same feeling.

"I'm still trying to absorb the whole thing," Tyler said. "When I was told about it, I just thought there wasn't much discussion about this."

Like many in the state, Tyler sees the rule as leading to troublesome situations.

"Regarding telling kids to just fall on balls and don't pick it up, you've got kids that are in there that don't get to get in often, and it's their chance to shine a little bit," Tyler said. "How do you tell that kid not to pick it up and run? I don't know if I could tell a kid that, but if I was going to get suspended in the next game it would be different."

Cochran sees the rule as another hindrance in helping kids in the state to move on with their football careers at higher levels.

"You look at all the other states, we're one of the weakest when it comes to football," Cochran said. "It's simply because of the restrictions put on us for coaching time. Until that changes, it's a disservice to every kid that plays football in this state. At the end of the day, they're competing against kids from Pennsylvania and New Jersey and Florida to move on and it's not a level playing field. This is just another restriction that's going to hinder football in this state." Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant (http://www.courant.com/)

Stinger
05-25-2006, 08:26 AM
I'm and idiot ment to make this a poll. A simple Yes/No or Gaz option would have been the choices.

Brock
05-25-2006, 08:27 AM
Sounds like something that could be fixed with good scheduling.

Bob Dole
05-25-2006, 08:29 AM
"I think it's a very progressive rule..."

Ah. Playing the "progressive" card.

InChiefsHell
05-25-2006, 08:33 AM
What a crock.

You can't legislate decent behavior. If you are going to make a team play a whole game, then they can score all they want. Not ethical, but whatever. Suspending a coach because his team wins by a huge margin is crap.

Last season, my kid's team had a situation like this. We were kicking the snot out of the other team, up by 4 or 5 td's by the 4th quarter. The coach had been trying to back off with the starters, run the ball up the middle etc. STILL, we were scoring. So he decided to let anyone run the ball. My son who plays center got the carry, pounded it up the middle, broke away and went in for a 20 yard touchdown. That was not our fault. We TRIED to make it better but the other team just sucked that bad...

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 08:40 AM
I'd rather see them institute some kind of "10-run" rule. Cause, if you're down 50 and it's after halftime...it's time pack up and go home. Loser.

Skip Towne
05-25-2006, 08:48 AM
I'd rather see them institute some kind of "10-run" rule. Cause, if you're down 50 and it's after halftime...it's time pack up and go home. Loser.
Yep. Eight man football in Kansas has a 40 point rule or something like that.

Sully
05-25-2006, 08:48 AM
At the High School and above-levels, this is stupid. I can see its use below that.
Add a running clock, a mercy-rule, whatever, but you can't make a team take a knee for a half. At that point, why keep playing?

Bob Dole
05-25-2006, 08:59 AM
Why bother to keep score at all? It's just not right that there are any losers. Every kid on both teams is a winner!!

Trophies and cookies for everyone!!!

Predarat
05-25-2006, 09:00 AM
If they do this they sould also suspend the other coach for sucking so bad. Thats also bad sportsmanship. I agree that if its that bad and they want the other team to stop scoring they should just call the game. What a horrible rule!

JBucc
05-25-2006, 09:00 AM
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Take it like a man you stupid losers. Or just forfeit.

Bob Dole
05-25-2006, 09:06 AM
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Take it like a man you stupid losers. Or just forfeit.

They shouldn't have to forfeit. Doing so would require them to admit that they suck, and that's just not acceptable.

Maybe they could make the points dynamic somehow. You know, to keep the scores closer so even if a team loses, they never lose by more than 3.

Like if you're ahead by more than 6, subsequent TDs only count one point and you can't kick field goals.

Radar Chief
05-25-2006, 09:10 AM
Sounds like something that could be fixed with good scheduling.

No chit.
Schedule’em with better competition and this won’t be an issue.

MOhillbilly
05-25-2006, 09:24 AM
when SMU came off the death penality in 89(?) U of H hung like 90ish on them and caught hell.

Demonpenz
05-25-2006, 09:30 AM
I like the idea. Lord knows the real world stops beating up on you when you've had enough.

MOhillbilly
05-25-2006, 09:32 AM
I like the idea. Lord knows the real world stops beating up on you when you've had enough.

:)
evil little giggle.

DJJasonp
05-25-2006, 09:37 AM
The Pussification of America continues.......

Bring back the 80's and Gordon Gecko....GREED IS GOOD! :)

When did it becomes such an evil thing to be good?

crispystl420
05-25-2006, 09:39 AM
If they do this they sould also suspend the other coach for sucking so bad. Thats also bad sportsmanship. I agree that if its that bad and they want the other team to stop scoring they should just call the game. What a horrible rule!You said it

crispystl420
05-25-2006, 09:43 AM
Rules like this and the pussification of america scare me I mean do you think if kids were raised like this in the thirties we could have ever won the war. I don't think todays youth could fight a war like that and I'm not picking on our youth because I'm only 24. ...just an observation ... what do you guys think??

Predarat
05-25-2006, 09:44 AM
What about the principle they are trying to teach, 100% 100% of the time. Gotta teach those kids that killer instinct. No, I dont really like running the score up just for the sake of it. But if the kids are on the field they should be giving 100%.

Fish
05-25-2006, 09:44 AM
This is such a crock of shit..... Trying to force equality into a sporting event is a complete waste of futility. If it were Peewee football staring 7 and 8 yr olds learning the game, I can see that not putting that much emphasis on the score could be helpful in teaching kids to play for more than just winning. But HS football, trying to protect these poor kids from ever having to lose at anything in life is a sham and unfair to the kids.

What are they trying to teach these kids? If you suck, the other person has to equally suck so nobody gets their feelings hurt? Yeah... that's really the way it is in life...... what ever happened to working harder to get better, instead of putting all the emphasis on leveling the field so everybody can be the same and everyone is happy? Heaven forbid our children ever have to go through the cruel, hurtful, and unfair process of losing at sports.... nobody should have to endure that... it would damage their increasingly fragile emotional state....

DJJasonp
05-25-2006, 09:45 AM
Rules like this and the pussification of america scare me I mean do you think if kids were raised like this in the thirties we could have ever won the war. I don't think todays youth could fight a war like that and I'm not picking on our youth because I'm only 24. ...just an observation ... what do you guys think??


Amen brotha!

I dont want this to head to DC forum....so I'll just agree....

crispystl420
05-25-2006, 09:45 AM
This is such a crock of shit..... Trying to force equality into a sporting event is a complete waste of futility. If it were Peewee football staring 7 and 8 yr olds learning the game, I can see that not putting that much emphasis on the score could be helpful in teaching kids to play for more than just winning. But HS football, trying to protect these poor kids from ever having to lose at anything in life is a sham and unfair to the kids.

What are they trying to teach these kids? If you suck, the other person has to equally suck so nobody gets their feelings hurt? Yeah... that's really the way it is in life...... what ever happened to working harder to get better, instead of putting all the emphasis on leveling the field so everybody can be the same and everyone is happy? Heaven forbid our children ever have to go through the cruel, hurtful, and unfair process of losing at sports.... nobody should have to endure that... it would damage their increasingly fragile emotional state....
No shit getting your ass kicked at anything is a hell of a motivator.

Dartgod
05-25-2006, 09:53 AM
I don't think its a bad rule. One part of the article mentioned that the coach (Cochran) used a timeout before halftime so he could score again in a blowout. What's the point of that? He should be suspended.

Fish
05-25-2006, 09:55 AM
No shit getting your ass kicked at anything is a hell of a motivator.

Not just that, but teaching them that if you're not good at something, the better person should be responsible for performing at a much lower level for the sake of equality or else the better performer will be punished is just wrong.

King_Chief_Fan
05-25-2006, 09:59 AM
how fricken stupid is that

while we are at it........when someone is failing in the class room lets penalize the smart guys for spreading the curve too much.

Poor spelling -- don't worry about it, we can make it out
Poor math -- don't worry about it, close is all that matters

I am sick of the poor attempts at leveling the playing field.

No wonder other nations kick our ass in education

Mr. Laz
05-25-2006, 10:02 AM
suspension - no

mercy rule - yes

ChiefsfaninPA
05-25-2006, 10:10 AM
including a 90-0 victory over Griswold.



That is crucial. At that point the losing team should've been allowed to recruit people from the stands to help them at least get a score.

crispystl420
05-25-2006, 10:32 AM
Not just that, but teaching them that if you're not good at something, the better person should be responsible for performing at a much lower level for the sake of equality or else the better performer will be punished is just wrong.
Right so everyone lower to the lowest level of every aspect in life dont strive for any accomplishes because we dont wont anyone to feel like a loser. No one perform higher than the weakest link because you might hurt their feelings.
what a bunch of bullshut thats not progressive it's regressive

BIG_DADDY
05-25-2006, 10:36 AM
More PC madness.

mdstu
05-25-2006, 10:38 AM
Don't forget that you are judging this guy from his own words. We all know that there are lots of guys out there coaching children that have no business doing so. I don't agree with rules that punish you for winning. And in the end everyone doesn't win.

But that doesn't mean this guy isn't one of those assholes that love to run up scores and wave his dick in the air.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:38 AM
You know, I do think the lowest common denominator point is a very good one. Promote competition and try to bring the bad teams up to the level of the good ones, rather than penalize the good ones for being too good.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:39 AM
But that doesn't mean this guy isn't one of those assholes that love to run up scores and wave his dick in the air.Yeah, there is that.

mdstu
05-25-2006, 10:43 AM
I still don't agree with these rules though.

chiefqueen
05-25-2006, 11:01 AM
when SMU came off the death penality in 89(?) U of H hung like 90ish on them and caught hell.

That same season Lou Holtz had Rocket Ismail(sp?) fall down on the 5 because he didn't want ND to beat the spread.

chiefqueen
05-25-2006, 11:05 AM
Why bother to keep score at all? It's just not right that there are any losers. Every kid on both teams is a winner!!

Trophies and cookies for everyone!!!

..........And by not teaching kids how to lose graciously one opens oneself to possible dire consequences when they face rejection later in life.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 11:06 AM
And by not teaching kids how to lose graciously one opens oneself to possible dire consequences when they face rejection later in life.You know, I wonder if that's my problem.

(seriously)

Reaper16
05-25-2006, 11:19 AM
Pitt State thinks so:

http://www.digitalburg.com/artman/uploads/scoreboard.jpg

chiefqueen
05-25-2006, 11:23 AM
So, when will MLB take Connecticut's lead and dictate that every 15th game must be forfieted to the Royals.

pikesome
05-25-2006, 11:47 AM
I like the idea. Lord knows the real world stops beating up on you when you've had enough.

I don't think the real world got the memo in my neck of the woods.

Rain Man
05-25-2006, 12:47 PM
I'll admit that it used to tick me off when the 49ers would run up the score on teams, but I sure wouldn't want it stopped. This rule is stupid.


The rule applies only to the final score. A team could be leading 55-0 and back off defensively so that its opponent could score a touchdown that prevents a coach's suspension.

And here's how you get it revoked. When you get up by 50 points, put your kickoff team on the field, tell them to immediately run to the sidelines and let the other team return it for a touchdown, and then bring out your offense and pound the ball down the other team's throat to get the touchdown back. That will be far more humiliating to them than just beating them fair and square. After a few games like that, the rule will be rescinded.

(I would envision this as a kid beating up another kid, then saying, "Okay, I'm going to stand here for a minute and I won't fight back. Now get up and hit me," absorbing the hit, and then continuing the beating. It's far more humiliating than being beat up the normal way.)


"We had a small school like Putnam on our schedule last year, and they're experiencing some problems with numbers and that sort of thing," Panteleakos said. "Putnam didn't have enough kids to go to a second string. So now you've got a few kids on that field from Putnam that are getting their butts whipped week in and week out and they're angry young men. Now me, as the head coach on the other side, I'm reluctant to put some of my second and third string in against a kid on the other side who is going to take the head off of any kid he sees. So I have to leave my first string in there, and they're going to keep playing the game."



Oh, come on. If you're beating them by fifty points, your second-stringers can probably take care of themselves.

Logical
05-25-2006, 02:30 PM
Should a football coach be suspended for running up the score, which is now the case in Connecticut?

High School and above definitely not. I can possibly see it in age groups younger than that.

Simplex3
05-25-2006, 02:52 PM
I don't think its a bad rule. One part of the article mentioned that the coach (Cochran) used a timeout before halftime so he could score again in a blowout. What's the point of that? He should be suspended.
So you're of the mindset that he shouldn't afford his second and third string kids the same quality of opportunity when they do get on the field?

All you're doing is discriminating against a different group of kids.

Dartgod
05-25-2006, 02:58 PM
So you're of the mindset that he shouldn't afford his second and third string kids the same quality of opportunity when they do get on the field?

All you're doing is discriminating against a different group of kids.http://pages.prodigy.net/ramingus/Hooked.jpg

Sorry, I was trying to stir up controversy and it back fired on me. I think its a dumb rule too.

tk13
05-25-2006, 03:03 PM
I agree, once it hit 49-0 I'd just let them run back kickoffs. Get the ball back, go score, run back kickoff, etc.

I saw Jay Cutler's high school team kinda run it up once. They were up 90-0, had their backup backups in... the other team mounted a drive very late in the game in the 4th quarter against those junior varsity players... then when the other team got down inside the 10, all the defensive subs came off and the coach put all the starters back on the field, got the goal line stand and kept the other team off the scoreboard. They were going for the state record for fewest points allowed in a season... I think they allowed like 17 points all season. The opposing fans were definitely furious.

Simplex3
05-25-2006, 03:04 PM
http://pages.prodigy.net/ramingus/Hooked.jpg

Sorry, I was trying to stir up controversy and it back fired on me. I think its a dumb rule too.
ROFL

I couldn't believe that was coming from you, but it didn't look sarchastic.

Simplex3
05-25-2006, 03:06 PM
I agree, once it hit 49-0 I'd just let them run back kickoffs. Get the ball back, go score, run back kickoff, etc.

I saw Jay Cutler's high school team kinda run it up once. They were up 90-0, had their backup backups in... the other team mounted a drive very late in the game in the 4th quarter against those junior varsity... then when the other team got down inside the 10, all the defensive subs came off and the coach put all the starters back on the field, got the goal line stand and kept the other team off the scoreboard. They were going for the state record for fewest points allowed in a season... I think they allowed like 17 points all season. The opposing fans were definitely furious.
I'd be pissed that we sucked so bad we couldn't score. Then I'd find a way to help make my team better and take it out of their ass in a couple of years by pounding them.

buddha
05-25-2006, 03:07 PM
If they do this they sould also suspend the other coach for sucking so bad. Thats also bad sportsmanship. I agree that if its that bad and they want the other team to stop scoring they should just call the game. What a horrible rule!

I like Predarat's idea...suspend the coach that can't stop the rout from happening in the first place.

Are you supposed to tell your 2nd and 3rd teamers to stop trying...to just fall on the ball three times and punt?

Political correctness strikes again.

Dartgod
05-25-2006, 03:08 PM
ROFL

I couldn't believe that was coming from you, but it didn't look sarchastic.
Yeah, I didn't want it to. Everyone was being all agreeable and shit so I figured I'd take the opposing stance and stir shit up. I expected a bunch of negative rep and people calling me and idiot, but no one took the bait.

Well, until you came along...and your post was pretty civil.

Oh well...

Lzen
05-25-2006, 03:13 PM
This rule sucks. WTF are we now? France?

Simplex3
05-25-2006, 03:14 PM
Yeah, I didn't want it to. Everyone was being all agreeable and shit so I figured I'd take the opposing stance and stir shit up. I expected a bunch of negative rep and people calling me and idiot, but no one took the bait.

Well, until you came along...and your post was pretty civil.

Oh well...
There's a first time for everything.

PunkinDrublic
05-25-2006, 04:28 PM
They don't need to institute a rule about it. I mean its pretty classless if your up by 50 or something ridiculous and still deliberately trying to score as often as possible. Very rarely do coaches run up the score so they really don't need to make a rule.

Calcountry
05-25-2006, 04:36 PM
Why bother to keep score at all? It's just not right that there are any losers. Every kid on both teams is a winner!!

Trophies and cookies for everyone!!!This is precisely why we shouldn't let those evil oil companies keep all their profits. We should force them to "take a knee".

Calcountry
05-25-2006, 04:41 PM
Next thing ya know, NCAA "its in the game", will make it to where I can't run up the score on teams like Eastern Michigan.

Earthling
05-25-2006, 04:42 PM
So one team could deliberately let the other team win by more than 50 pts. and in doing so get the opposing coach suspended..?? Sounds good to me.

Rain Man
05-25-2006, 05:09 PM
So one team could deliberately let the other team win by more than 50 pts. and in doing so get the opposing coach suspended..?? Sounds good to me.

That'd be a fun strategy headed into the playoffs.

Rain Man
05-25-2006, 05:12 PM
A better rule would be one that says if you're up by 50, you can't play any of the people who started the game on offense or defense (assuming that the rosters are big enough to do so).

Nzoner
05-25-2006, 05:32 PM
Why bother to keep score at all? It's just not right that there are any losers. Every kid on both teams is a winner!!

Trophies and cookies for everyone!!!

It's just not fair we can't have it like this in the small business world too.

Logical
05-25-2006, 05:33 PM
They don't need to institute a rule about it. I mean its pretty classless if your up by 50 or something ridiculous and still deliberately trying to score as often as possible. Very rarely do coaches run up the score so they really don't need to make a rule.

I don't know sometimes it just cannot be helped. We had a dominant team in HS scored about 400 and only gave up like 65 and 43 of them were in two games. In a couple of games we were using our third team and we just did not stop scoring. IIRC it ended at like 73-0 with the third team scoring 21, the second team scoring like 17 and the first team had 35 some time in the 2nd quarter. Should our coach have been suspended for running up the score?

|Zach|
05-25-2006, 05:46 PM
Our highschool team tried our best not to run it up...sometimes you could only do so much...just putting the ball on the ground and subbing in the young guys.

Logical
05-25-2006, 06:00 PM
Our highschool team tried our best not to run it up...sometimes you could only do so much...just putting the ball on the ground and subbing in the young guys.
Exactly we had a running team, after the first team left the field we never threw a pass, were the 2nd and third string not supposed to jump on fumbles, just kneel down on every play? If we had done that and we only won say 42 to 0 would it have been less humiliating for the other team and their fans to watch the other teams 2nd and 3rd string kneel down on every play?

Calcountry
05-25-2006, 07:16 PM
Hasn't any of these coaches ever played a video game. Just run the clock until one second is left on the playclock, then instruct your kids to take a knee as soon as the first down mark is achieved. You can do it even faster if you tell them to take a knee just in front of it if it is first down.

Do that all the way down the field, then when inside the ten, just kneel out until 4rth down, then line up in the punt formation and tell the punter to blast it as far out the back end of the endzone as possible. If that isn't more humiliating than letting a team score, how about this. After every score, just onside kick, even when you are up by 30 or more p oints. Then say, hey, I was trying to give you good field position if we didn't recover. Then proceed to have your defense push their shits back another 30 yards after it. Which is more humiliating?

BucEyedPea
05-25-2006, 08:17 PM
Should a football coach be suspended for running up the score?

Absolutely not.

ct
06-01-2006, 03:55 PM
football threads get a bump

rad
06-01-2006, 04:55 PM
football threads get a bump
Ditto