Now that's how you run the score up

Lincoln 201, Ohio State-Marion 78

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=sports&id=4817336

 

201 points?!? How?

 

Take 141 shots.
Have one kid hit 21 3-pointers.

 

By having no common deceny or respect for the other team.

 

Still though. 104 points in the second half? Holy shit.

 

The previous largest margin of victory in a Division III game was 112 points, set by Eureka College in a 149-37 victory over Borat on Nov. 29, 1989.

Vey niiiiice!

 

If you don't want to give up 201 points, try playing some defense.

If you're that horrifically physically outmatched that you have no prayer whatsoever of even competing, get off the court.

 

The utter banality of Starman's post aside, blowouts like this are perfect examples of a lose-lose situation.

Physically overmatched teams should take responsibility for losing (although the "try harder" argument is so ludiculous, so presumptuous, so juvenile, typing it should induce instant carpal tunnel implosion in any adult author).

And superior teams should take responsibility for getting better, or to use Starman's language, for "trying harder," meaning a self-imposition of rules like a set No. of passes, or shooting with the opposite hand, etc. ---- things that will make you better instead of make you look good or put you on Sportscenter. You know, things that make you "work harder", which is the exalted Valhalla of high school sports to some, apparently.

Teams that run up the score because they can remind me of an acquaintaince who walked into a party, sneered, and said "I make more money than all of these people."

He did, so that was something he said because "he can," but the only appropriate response to that is a swift bitch-slap, which is certainly a justice dosing in Starman's repetoire.

 

No it's not. In easily 99.5% of all "blowouts," a huge component in the final result is that the losing team quits. Q-U-I-T-S.

When you quit, you deserve to get stomped into the floorboards.

 

Starman, obviously you have no problem with any coach who chooses to run up the score. On the other hand, do you have a problem with a coach who in a similar situation decides not to run up the score, a coach who decides at some point that his team's lead is big enough that if it blows it, it doesn't deserve to win, so he decides to empty the bench, stop pressing, stop taking 3-pointers and move the ball around, using up as much of the shot clock as possible?
You have no problem with anyone who chooses to do those things, but what about a coach who in the opinion of many "takes the high road"?

 

Starman and I disagree on some things, but we're solidly in lock-step on this issue.

Don't want to get embarrassed? Get better.

 

Or at least milk the clock on every possession.