Jump to content

Other than 6man ball should txhsfb have a mercy rule?


Recommended Posts

If they're bound and determined to do something, in lieu of a mercy rule, in blowouts of more than XX points, the UIL could contact the winning school and review how many subs played, and when.  After several repeated contacts, maybe further action.  Just a thought, because I don't like the mercy rule.  Would deprive third/forth string Soph & Jr of playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No to the mercy rule and no to calling off the dogs. I've never understood how so many folks can think dancing in the endzone is not unsportsmanlike but when a sub scores a touchdown in a blowout game then that is unsportsmanlike. Unsportsmanlike for playing hard? I don't get it.

I think the losing coach should be the one to call off the dogs. When his team gets too far behind on the scoreboard, he can throw in the towel. The game would end there and that score would go in the books as the final score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Englebert said:

No to the mercy rule and no to calling off the dogs. I've never understood how so many folks can think dancing in the endzone is not unsportsmanlike but when a sub scores a touchdown in a blowout game then that is unsportsmanlike. Unsportsmanlike for playing hard? I don't get it.

I think the losing coach should be the one to call off the dogs. When his team gets too far behind on the scoreboard, he can throw in the towel. The game would end there and that score would go in the books as the final score.

Are you suggesting the losing coach should teach his players how to quit?  Is there no value in kids learning how to continue fighting even when getting their tails handed to them with no hope of winning on the scoreboard?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

Are you suggesting the losing coach should teach his players how to quit?  Is there no value in kids learning how to continue fighting even when getting their tails handed to them with no hope of winning on the scoreboard?

No. The players are not quitting the game, the head coach calls his own mercy rule. A coach calling a game when his team gets too far behind doesn't teach his players to quit. When he calls mercy then that is on him. Coaches now are teaching their kids that if you out work your opponent and get "too good", then you have to lay down and play to the opponent's level.

A coach having the ability to call a game is the same exact thing as implementing a mercy rule. The only difference is instead of the UIL deciding ahead of time what the score margin will be, each coach has the ability to determine when they think a good time to call mercy will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, if a team don't like getting the stuffing's beat out of them, it is their responsibility to work harder and get better. Some teams have second string players that are good and continue to score. These kids have earned the right to play and score. A team needs to play their first string long enough to keep the players in shape, the second team needs to play and develop in order to gain the experience . That's how teams reload the next year.

I always thought the object of the offence was to score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,971
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    TankParrish83
    Newest Member
    TankParrish83
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Will probably be released by the Democrats come September.  Sound familiar?
    • Sure.  You reassign an employee and they leave voluntarily instead of being fired and being open to litigation.  The outcome is the same, but you are making my point.  The superintendent and AD and principal are all empowered to make personnel decisions.  Instead of accepting the decision made, you talk about lawyering up, no one else was reprimanded, railroad job.  I am old enough to remember when high school sports taught life lessons...accountability being chief among them.
    • I know absolutely nothing about the situation, but I do know head coaches of sports other than the AD have actual teaching assignments, and I know from my wife having worked in the sped department of multiple schools that it’s not uncommon at all for coaches to shirk those duties.  It could very well be that this was the case at BC.  Or not, I don’t know.  Just bringing this up to point out the fact that, although many coaches only want to worry about coaching, they generally have several other responsibilities at the school.  some of them neglect or ignore these duties entirely.  If he’s been written up for other issues before, it’s a dumb argument to say “he was punished for this and others were not”.  If he had a pile of write ups in his file and they did not then it makes sense that the punishments were different.  
    • He wasn’t fired, he was reassigned and people get reassigned all the time. If he was actually fired, then you would have a point, but he wasn’t fired. Based on the information presented here no way this would stand if they fired him and he lawyered up. 
    • I heard the assistant was going to get this job and assume it was referring to the old Vidor coach, Nate Smith.  I always thought he did more with less at Vidor and can't help but think he shares some responsibility in Vidor's recent success. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...