This example and the emergency plane landing are both perfect metaphors for what's been going on in the USA these days - there is just an ethical line that I prefer never to cross...

maybe they need some pancakes...

SUPRMAN said:

No. We're talking about their preseason ranking. They hadn't played any games!


USC and OU started at the top 2 spots before the season began. They were never beaten, so they never dropped out of those spots. Auburn climbed from the teens all the way to #3, but they couldn't break into the top 2. If they had started out there, they would've been in the title game.

Just a word on those of you comparing football and baseball blowouts to this, and the word is "WRONG!"

You cannot realistically stop scoring in football and baseball. In football, if you're way up and you've got class, you're going to run the ball into the line every play. But you're still gonna run hard - you've got to, or you'll get hurt. And when you run hard, sometimes you're gonna break the line and score. There's no way around that. Football players know it, and know that the only real transgression in a blowout is when the leading team throws the ball downfield (see: Steve Spurrier).

In baseball, you have to swing the bat, and no one - I repeat, NO ONE - expects a batter to purposefully swing and miss, or swing with less than full effort. Plus, what generally happens in a blowout baseball game is that the losing team goes deep into their pitching staff, and the guys on the mound at the end usually can't find the strike zone. So there are walks aplenty, meaning the bases are generally full and any hit is going to score a couple runs.

But in basketball, the OFFENSE has the decision on whether to shoot or not, and the OFFENSE can certainly decide to do nothing but pass, or shoot once every couple minutes.

As I already mathematically proved, the team in Dallas was firing shots at will, even when up by 70, 80 and 90 points.

TOTALLY classless.

Vendetta1 said:

Thats's how I feel about the situation. In sports, it's not cool to kill someone, but there's also the issue of being sportsmanlike and that issue goes both ways. Passing the ball around for a full minute while the other team is unable to steal it is as much of an insult as getting beat by 100 points is. There wasn't much this coach could have done to avoid insult to the other team. I believe the responsibility of this snafu rides on the shoulder of the people who scheduled the game. It's like Mike Tyson fighting Hecto Camacho. Who ever would schedule that fight is responsible for the broken skull and impaled ribcage that Camacho suffered.

reneGade20 said:

Come on, reneGade . . . they're 5 of 20 girls, and they have learning disabilities. They know they're getting beaten but still compete anyway. Their mediocrity may be highlighted from an athletic perspective, but their character is admirable.

The only reason they're getting attention is because it was drawn to them by what the winning team did.

SCNDLS said:

High schools play other high schools. That's the way the system is set up. The message the administrators would send to the girls by making other arrangements -- a Y league, or intramural leagues, as you suggest -- is not to even bother putting yourself out there at all.

If there's another classification in the high school system these girls can play in, then I'm with you. If there are other smaller schools out there to schedule, then I'm with you. But it's hard to imagine these girls winning a game against any high school team of any classification. They'd lose to the 2d-worst team in the state by 50. Besides, they'd likely have to go out of state to find similarly situated opponents, which costs a lot of money.

That said, they have every right to go out and represent their high school like any other high school kids anywhere else.

Your reasoning is considerate of the girls. It would put them, and thousands of high school teams like theirs, out of their misery, but deprive those kids of the opportunity to choose their own fate.

What's worse?

namepeace said:

If the accepted approach is to put these woefully unequipped players against teams that are much better and more experienced to the point where they haven't won a game in five years or cannot score a single basket in four quarters against virtually no defense then nobody should have anything to say when their asses get blown the hell out. Again, if these were boys I doubt anybody would be rushing to their defense or maligning the winning team and coach. I just don't see any value in them continuing to participate on that level if they do not know or cannot execute the basics of the game.
[Edited 1/27/09 10:58am]