This story about the girls HS basketball team that won 100-0 has taken another sad turn:


Some background:
- Covenant School is a contender for the State Championship.
- Dallas Academy has not won a game in over four years.
- Dallas Academy only has a few dozen girls to choose from to even field a team.
- Dallas Academy is a "specialty school" that is known for working with slightly developmentally challenged students. These student would be able to function in a normal school but benefit from the way Dallas Academy is run.
- Covenant School stopped it's press and began resting their players 3:00 into the game

All the attention being placed on Dallas Academy is making the girls at Covenant into the evil villains. What were they supposed to do? Stop playing? Only play with four or three players on the court? Now they have fired the coach because his way of dealing with an over matched team might have hurt their feelings. It would have been even more disrespectful if they would have played three on five and still beat them. The people that run Dallas Academy's sports programs should be the ones to blame. Why are they scheduling their teams in such obvious mismatches? It is not like they are all of a sudden not a very good team, they don't field a competitive team. They should play other teams of similar skill.

I heard they never pulled first string out. They played their best players the entire game.

I played competitive sports growing up, including being on a traveling team. What they did you simply DO NOT DO. My teams were up against teams that couldn't compete, that shouldn't have been in the same league...but they were. We NEVER slaughtered them by that kind of margin.

And you never have to. You can easily rotate in your 'worst' players. If it's a varsity game you can pull up people from JV specifically for those games (and we did!). That way the coaches are also given an opportunity to see JV players interact and play in a varsity environment.

You put people into different positions. In basketball you can try out many things you'd like to do in a scrimmage match that aren't perfected for play.

You put new rules into effect for your players. It's not fucking hard. I had to play under those rules sometimes. Like 'pass three times before you are allowed to take a shot'.

I played for a Christian high school, a Catholic school. And that also couples in to what they did. What they did was disgraceful.

I absolutely played to win in sports, but not at 'any cost'. I would have walked off that court and refused to play.

And before anyone thinks I'm just talking shit and I wouldn't have walked off, I quit varsity softball (a sport I was good enough in that I could have had a scholarship had I stayed in ) over a coach who was a complete prick. He liked to humilate people and be abusive. Not to ME mind you, again I was really fucking good. But I couldn't sit by and watch him do that shit to anyone. And I had no support on quitting, no one walked off with me, my parents were very pissed, my previous coach was very pissed.

And I've never regretted it not for one second. There are some things that are just worth more.

So as to what that guy should have done? There's a lot of things he should have done differently. He didn't. Okay, well if he had seen that that's one thing. He not only didn't see it, but felt there was nothing wrong with it.

Kudos to the school for being concerned with more than the state finals banners.

_________________

Why in the hell would you deliberately handicap yourself in a competition by not playing your best from beginning to end? That's friggin' stupid, and the people running that school should be bitchslapped for deliberately trying to instill a "only do your best if you're losing" attitude in their students.

Honestly, the other school should be insulted in the school trying to forfeit and for people making such a big deal about this whole thing. "We're so good and you suck so bad that we don't count our trouncing you up one side and down the other as a real win. You showed up, so you should be declared the winner beings it took so much courage." Fuck that.

The losing team deserve props for sticking it out, but they don't deserve having everyone tell them that the other team shouldn't have played so well.

Ehh... You can tell the people who don't follow sports. Playing your first string in a blowout situation is ALWAYS considered bad form. No one does it. When they do, they get crap for it. Playing your first string in a blowout of that magnitude is dickishness on a level that few reach. He deserved to get fired.

Tarot, Covenant was playing all their players, they pulled their stars starting at 3:00 in the 1st.

If this is true, then this is the key issue, combined with the *public* disagreement with his school over the apology. He should have kept his complaints private.



That's not the same as letting the bench players play for the rest of the game. Actually, the article isn't clear on exactly how much the 1st stringers got to beat the living shit out of other kids.

I can't believe any coach in a high school situation would run up the score like that. That's an ass thing to do. We're talking about some 14-15 year old kids here. This isn't "win at any costs, and grind them into the ground" Honestly just thinking about it makes me feel a little ill. HS sports is *supposed* to be about good sportsmanship, teamwork, and discipline. There is no good sportsmanship in that kind of score.



This isn't the NFL. The answer to your question is, "to not be an asshole to the other team." They aren't playing for money, and they are just kids. This isn't really about the kids, anyway; it's about the coach not putting in the scrubs for the rest of the game, not asking the students to do a 6 pass before you shoot setup (or something similiar), not having the kids slow down and take their time so the score isn't run up, and finally (and maybe the most important?)-- disagreeing with his school publicly over the issue.

Have you watched much HS girls basketball? 100 points in four 8 minute quarters is insane. That bust your ass push it up the court, fuck your opponents who can't even dribble basketball. It is not necessary. Hell, I bet it was rather uncomfortable throughout the gym on the night of the game-- I know it would be at our school, whether we were on the winning or losing side of the game.

We used to do the "3 passes before you shoot" thing too.... except it was 6 passes. Besides not running up the score in lopsided games, it helped the team learn to be less selfish as individual players, and used the games as practice for more difficult games.

Even in the NFL they don't run up the score like that. You see a 35-7 lead at the half and you can bet your first string QB isn't in the game anymore. You're actually more likely to see people run up the score in College football, which has always been one of my biggest gripes about the poll system.

I would be interested to know, though, what players he finished out the game with. If he really did sit down his first string, I retract my comment. If they can't beat your bench, you at least made a reasonable effort.

Okay looking for information about HOW the game was played, since that's a huge issue of how both you and I are going to view this issue I think.

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/high_ ... fired.html


If true, I think we'd both agree what bullshit that is.


Source: http://www.abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=6734750&page=1


I'd recommend reading that article because it focuses MUCH more on the other team, and how THAT coach turned it into a learning experience. They knew they couldn't win, they knew they were being slaughtered and some of them didn't want to continue. Instead they decided to focus on playing pure defense, and work on defensive skills. Given they did that, it should have slowed scoring after half time...notice it didn't.

It makes the spectator reports that the other team continued to play aggressive offense and never let up credible.

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


That also jives with the quarter by quarter scoring, and when they let up...they stopped scoring. Again, demonstrating that they continued to intentionally hammer that team the entire game.

=================

Now the dispute of the game (same article)



Additionally, Dallas (Lott) didn't tape it...but is also 100% sure Covenant did, and suggests that the tapes could be looked at to resolve any dispute on what actually went on that game. Covenant has avoided answering any questions regarding the tapes.

So there are tapes, and that would resolve it. I'm also willing to bet you cash money that the school LOOKED at those tapes before any firing took place.

Again the additional factor in this is it's a Christian school. As such the issued statement on the termination focuses on the fact that they don't believe the actions were very Christian. They can compete, they can win, but pulling that shit?

Well you don't have to be Christian to see it's pretty douchebaggy.

_________________

BHAHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA....

*gasp*

....HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAAHAAAAHHA!!!

Sorry.

Seriously, "not very christian" is probably the funniest part of this entire story.

As for the rest...who gives a fuck? So a team beat another team and someone might feel bad about it. At the end of the day, does it really matter? The coach did his job. Did he need to blow them out THAT badly? No, but again, does it REALLY matter?

I fail to see the hilarity.

You're too deep in your oats to hear the funny from way out here.

yeah, girls usually score like 20-50 a game... just scoring 100points in a girls game is a feat within itself.

_________________

Not won a game in 4 years???

Who the hell by the end of the 2nd year didn;t look at this team, and have it reassigned somehow?

Just how fucking touchy, feely,liberal do we need to get around here?

I despise sports for a host of reasons, but not because people lose.

It may be common to replace the first string with lowr level players in a route situation. It might even be nice.

But god damn people, this is a sport designed to be played to be WON. If they didn't want to be trounced so bad they should have fucking bowed out when it became obvious they were gonna be smashed like that.

You can whine about their "Condition" all you want. they went into a game, an event designed for winners and losers. Whether they lost by two or by 1,000 they still lost.

Get those kids where they should be, and quit whining.

Almost as bad as hearing about Soccer games from some schools in California. If one team gets up by two, they pull players from the winning team until the other team starts scoring. I mean... WTF???

_________________
"People sometimes say that ideas cannot be stamped out by force. The Albigensian Crusade proves them wrong. Ideas can be stamped out by the elimination of everyone who holds the ideas." - Quote :"Middle Ages" by Morris Bishop.

But Gwiber, it's so "christian" to fire a coach for doing his job, possibly screwing with his financial stability and his family.

Fuck off, Bovinity. Don't turn this into a "I hate religion" bullshit thread.

Your comment doesn't even make sense, when if this is like most schools, the coach was certainly not making a living for doing that job. He was doing it because he liked it, and he got paid a petty stipend.

He was NOT doing his job, unless you narrowly define it as "winning games." At my school (and a public school, no less), if that is all you do, you won't keep your job by any means. Being a role-model for your students and showing them teamwork and discipline are what is important, not winning 100-0. Hell, we have a coach who right now is being investigated for giving the finger to another teacher in front of students. If they decide the story is true, that coach will most certainly be fired. (Funny side-comment-- I'm the teacher the coach apparently showed her displeasure to, allthough I didn't see it :p )

Showing your students how to live is more important than teaching them to beat the shit out of people just because you can.

Woah, woah, hey, tone it down, the christian-o-meter is getting low here!



And this is an example of NOT doing one's job. Poor example.

I agree. So what?



Excellent example, since my argument has been from the beginning that this coach also did not do his job. Please read my previous posts.

We may need to fire you from the thread for your non-christian behavior, that's what.



In your opinion, fed by limited information and assumptions, he did not do his job. But by using a stricter definition of his job, and not relying on assumptions to fill in the gaps, he did his job just fine.

How is encouraging your students to perform at their best at all times not being a good role model? How is managing to score 100 points against a team that was trying to stop you not showing discipline? Imo, the only bad role models in this case are the people complaining. They're teaching the students that if you lose, it's better to cry foul than to accept the fact that the other team was just better and to try harder.

I'll grant you that Covenant didn't take the opposing team's feelings into account, but so what? That is what your team is for, not your opponents.

In the end, the better team won. They won due to hard work and dedication and while observing the rules of the game. Why is that bad?

I don't get it. I'm not here based on whether or not my behavior is Christian or not-- unlike a coach at a Christian school, I might add.




Which assumption of mine are you challenging? I make the assumption that the school expects him to do more than just win games. The fact that he was fired supports that assumption. In fact, the fact that he was fired directly opposes your assumption of the coach's job as being only to win games.

I challenge you to find a high school anywhere in the US that does not wish their basketball coachs to have good sportsmanship. These are kids, not adults.



I would argue that deliberately running up the score to reach the magical 100 point mark knowing what this does to the opposing team (comprised of emotional immature teenagers) is not encouraging your students to perform at their best at all times. I would also argue that teaching them that it's ok to beat the living shit out of someone (not just win, but to drive someone into the ground) is also not encouraging them to perform at the best. On the contrary, it's teaching them to perform less than their best.



Real discipline would be having the discipline to know when to stop.



That's a false choice. You can teach students to try harder, AND cry foul when this kind of bullshit occurs. That's the neat thing about the world-- most situations are not a dicotomy. In fact, no one anywhere in the stories disputed that the winning team shouldn't have one. Reading the comments by the losing coach in one of Tarot's linked stories, I'd say you are grossly misrepresenting the situation.

In addition, you are ignoring that the school with the WINNING team is one of the parties involved who are complaining about the conduct.



We simply disagree here. Everyone involved in a sports competition has the capacity to be thoughtful of everyone else. You don't have to have a "fuck the opponent" attitude to have a winning team. What's more, in a high school situation, I believe you are teaching teenagers the wrong message when you choose to support such an attitude.




No one is saying that they didn't deserve to win or that their hard work and dedication were bad. I must have missed the posts where someone said otherwise.

weird-- when I said "one" I meant "won." I fail.

It's likely they can't get reassigned. My high school was pretty much division champs in everything and we were nationally known. We competed against some public schools, but most of the schools in our division league were other Catholic schools. And then you're also limited by distance. I think the furthest we drove out for a game was like an hour and a half. We had the nice chartered bus for that ride. Some of the other ones we had the shitty yellow school buses (Boys football always had the nice buses, a point of bitterness that probably exists in all schools heh).

But yeah there were teams that year after year just suuuuuuuuuuuucked. But there's really no where else for them to go. You're going to have some super shitty teams in any division. /shrug

As to the rest, I suspect that most of you who believe that winning and only winning is the point of team sports never played team competition sports at any serious level...because it's hammered into you that it is not the only point. Hammered into you by many many many laps, among other things.

I saw coaches cut players who were better players than those they kept, because it's about the team. And building a better team doesn't always mean the best player, if they're divisive. I was thrown off an All Stars team once, even though I scored the winning run which kept that team in the running...because the head coach told me to stop at 3rd...and I decided not to. Doesn't matter that I was right, and I knew I could make it. Winning is not the end all be all.

Don't get me wrong, it's really important and no one is out there to lose...but this team wasn't at any risk of losing. Instead the coach went for a number...100. He got it. And how he got it, was shameful.

They didn't do anything to be proud of. And any athlete here will tell you that they will value a loss where they and their team busted their fucking asses against a good opponent in a close game where EVERYONE gave their all...over a win where you utterly destroy someone like that.

It's about as meaningful as beating the shit out of a fat kid, and then acting like you're hot shit for doing it.

_________________

According to the coach on an interview in the local radio he said they stopped playing press defense in 3:00 into the first quarter and played a vanilla zone defense the rest of the game.

It happened here, I live in Dallas, I have been hearing about it since the game happened. I rely on local sources. Here is the scoring breakdown by quarter: 35, 24, 29, 12.

I contend that it is douchebaggy that the coach lost his job over this yet the douchebag that scheduled Covenant for Dallas Academy remains free of blame.

I do agree it is HOW the game was played. Did Covenant put forth an honest effort to win the game? Did they showboat, taunt, mock or otherwise gloat? Now, how would you feel if YOU were playing a softball game in which your team was so overmatched that the other team decided that it would only require one out to end their half inning and they would have their batters bat opposite handed and play the field with no gloves? You would probably still lose and feel worse because the team did not play their best, they were mocking you.

Now I have not heard of any taunting, show-boating or whatnot just a team that went out to play a basketball game and played how it knew how to vs an overmatched opponent. It would have been that much more of a douchebag effort if they would have put forth an effort that mocked the other team.

See, why are people just assuming the "acting like hot shit" part? You all just ASSUME that this team somehow just mocked/made fun of/taunted/etc the other team and are trying to make them out to be these evil people or something.

If winning isn't everything, you're not playing at a serious level.

That's addressed and it's addressed by a local news source to you. See my previous post.



Also addressed by a local news source to you (see previous post) and it bolsters the position that they did NOT pull back EXCEPT once they had scored 100 points in the 4th quarter. You see that 4th quarter score...where they scored only 12? Yeah, that's when they stopped.

So the scores match Lott's version of events, as well as the spectators, again ...local news coverage.



I don't think you know how the leagues are done. You might want to look that up. I touched on it in one of my previous posts...but I only glossed over it. Again, just glossing over it: Some schools in a league will be WAY OUTCLASSED. It happens. We had schools that *never* won against my high school. My high school was almost always the undefeated champion in football, and won most divisions in other sports. There were teams that just suuuuuuucked. My husband is also a catholic school kid. His school was one of our rivals. He's 11 years ahead of me, and the schools that sucked in his day? They sucked in my day too.

But there's no other league for 'em. I suspect the same is true here.



They had 100 points on the other team. Seriously get the fuck out 'did they try to win'...they were at no risk of losing. Clearly.



We're not talking about 'but they didn't do BAD BEHAVIOR X', that's absurd.

As far as hopping on one foot or anything else, I'm just going to go with...you never played team sports seriously. Either that or you're being completely disingenious. Or no offense, maybe you completely sucked at it (no shame there, some people do). I don't know, but most people I know who played sports all their life, they've faced a team like that. It just happens, whether it's little league or school. (Traveling teams you don't, it's closer to 'professional' in a lot of ways). Anyway it happens.

And you can minimize the destruction without being an asshole. I listed ways previously. You have people play different positions that they normally wouldn't get to play. You attempt plays you wouldn't normally use. You treat it like a scrimmage match, and use it as an opportunity to work on fundementals.

I played in GAMES where we were under rules, like you cannot shoot unless you have passed the ball three times to other players.

It's really not that difficult. It's not. It's not like you have to tell them 'okay go out there and play left handed' or anything ridiculous.



No the coach went after getting 100 points. He got it. Then he let up. The scores show that clearly, so it's not just what other people there are saying they saw. The school looked into it and found it pretty fucked up. As I said, I'm sure they also watched the tape.

The guy isn't being fired for any of that though. Whether or not he should be...that's up to the school. But he's not fired for that. No he's fired for publically posting the opposite of the school's apology and saying he didn't care, he didn't believe there was anything wrong with it. And closing with 'if this gets me fired I'll still have my integrity' or some shit like that, so clearly he knew it would be an issue.

THAT got him fired.

And he's not even a teacher at the school, so it's not like he lost his main job or anything. Just fyi in case ppl didn't know. I'm not saying it's a nothing thing, clearly people who do it (because I'm sure it pays almost nothing being both a christian school AND a girls team) do it for the love of it. But it wasn't this guy's career or anything.

_________________

I think of this like kicking someone while they're down. It's pretty universally seen as bad form. I'd be curious to see a definitive answer as to the conduct of the team, but the quarter scores are pretty telling. It does seem to indicate that he went after 100 and then let up. That's not trying to win, that's trying to humiliate the other team. He clearly had the ability to slow scoring before he did and he chose not to.

Like Tarot said, there's a dozen things that readily spring to mind that could have been done, and are done in most of the sporting world. You work on fundamentals, you get guys who rarely see playing time a lot of work, you rest your starters. This guy had a clear victory in the first quarter. Then he took the other 3 to rub it in.

Playing until you've hit 100 points and not letting up IS "acting like hot shit."

_________________

I played a bit of basketball in high school, not on a team or anything but we all played against the same people in various scrimmages. I never quite understood why it was considered bad form to continue playing your best. I can't really define something like not playing your best because you might hurt the other team's feelings as humility.

It's subjective. In my mind, it's MORE of an insult to switch in your horrible players to face my team. That's the equivalent of saying "You're bad, I don't need to use this to beat you".

It happens to be good form just because of convention. Nothing more. Perhaps because some teams cried over it and it became the norm.

That's what separates truly competitive personalities from whiners. To the competitive personality, it is considered an honor to continue to face your weaker opponent in full force. It allows for the continued opportunity of an incredibly strong challenge, and competitive players thrive on that regardless of the odds.

"Don't go easy on me" is not a common phrase in competition, sports and practice for no reason. It is required to improve, and to thicken one's skin in the face of defeat.

I know when I play against children I like to go full out and see if I can make them cry. It is an honor to face my weaker opponent full force. I really feel like they thrive on it.

Lets say you and I sit down to play a friendly game of Chess, Venen. Lets say I am a grandmaster and you are a novice, just learning the game. How should we play that situation?

When my grandfather taught me to play chess as a youngster, he would allow me to remove a set amount of pieces from his side of the board. This gave him a slight challenge and made me feel as though I had a chance (which I didn't). I doubt I would have kept playing chess if he had just obliterated me within minutes every time we sat down to play.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

_________________

Sorry, as a previous athlete, I am there to win. if my opponents can't compete, that is not my problem nor will you see me apologizing for beating the shit out of them if that was the end result. I wouldn't be gloating, but I would never apologize for my prowess or abilities in comparison to others. For instance, if I could run a 10-second 100m race and I knew everyone else on the track only ran a 12-second 100m, I'll be damed if I am going to sit in my blocks for 2 seconds to give them a chance. I am coming out of those blocks, I am going to run the entire race as I was trained to do, and if I beat them all by 20m, so be it. I've had guys beat me in races by that margin and not once did they ever apologize because they were too fast for me to beat, nor should they have.

Sure, you can play your best guys and then bring in the JV in the second half for mercy's sake, and maybe the coach should have done that if he was practicing good sportsmanship. but to fire the guy is just ridiculous! I would never apologize for my team playing the game as they were taught to play, for coaching them in a way that wins them games, or for the other team being such absolute crap that anything short of handing the opponent the ball so that they have a chance.

As a coach, or as an opponent, I am not on the court/field/et al. to give the opponent a chance. I am there to defeat them, regardless of the end score. If they want to whine about me/us running up the score then perhaps they should either 1) not compete against us anymore and simply forfeit or 2) get better players/coaches. Maybe that makes me a dick, but maybe that's why I was such a good athlete back in those days - I played to win by giving 100%, not to just be competitive and be a good sport.

I think that coach is going to win a big ass lawsuit if he decides to sue. His firing is absolutely baseless in a court of law as far as I am concerned.

Judge: "Jury, what is your verdict?"
Jury: "We, the jury, find the coach guilty of winning by not substituting his A-team with lesser players so the other team could stand a chance, or at least score one basket."

Seriously, this guy is going to get paid.

You know, this reminds me of when I played football in the Navy. One of the teams we played was sooooo bad that we had run the score up into the 40s and they had zero at half time. We were frustrated because we wanted them to give us a challenge but they simply couldn't compete against our guys. We felt bad for them so during the second half kick off, we simply laid down on the ground and let them score. We literally just all laid down and let them run by us. Every time we had a turnover on downs, we would simply punt the ball on 1st down so they had a chance to score. How is that fun for anyone?We didn't do any of this to rub it in, but there was nothing else we could really do except walk off the field and forfeit to them in order for them to stand a chance.

It frustrates both sides when the other team is not in the same league and all you are doing is playing your worst players to get them some game time. Nobody wants a non-competitive game, not on either side of the ball. It is even more degrading to that team when you are putting your absolute worst players out there and they still aren't able to score. Nobody wins in those situations and honestly I think it is just better that teams that suck that bad against teams that are just that awesome simply don't show up and waste people's time.

The basketball game in question here is a good example of how a team should just know they are way outclassed and simply forfeit before people's time is totally wasted and coaches get fired. I've had that happen in volleyball as well with a dominating team I was on. Teams would just not show up to play us because we had guys that played All-Navy and All-Services on our team. What do you do, just not play to your ability? Most athletes I know would never consider that an option. You play to your abilities. if your abilities are way better than those you are playing, that's just the way it goes.

I dont understand most of this. If your team sucks, you know you suck, you should be used to losing. This is how Id think if I played for each team...

If I was on the losing team, and the other team started letting us score and/or benching their starters for the game, Id want to walk off the court and not play. Talk about being mean. This team is bad enough it sounds like youd practically have to step out of the way and let them attempt a wide open lay up. They would have to know you were letting them, wheres the fun in that? Or playing against their back ups, and still struggling, or not even scoring, that would be fairly demoralizing. Id want to keep playing the game like any other game, if it ends up 100-0, so be it. By the second half I would of been so hyped to try to score just one point just to ruin their perfect game, that would of been a victory itself.

If I was on the winning team, and my coach benched me, or told us to let them score some points, I would of wanted to quit playing. Theres no fun in dumbing down your game just to make the other team feel better. As long as we play a straight up game and dont do anything illegal and end up winning 100-0, I cant feel bad about that. You cant exactly feel like the best in the world either, cause youd know your team is one of the best in the state, and the other team hasnt won in years. You really cant even brag about it. You would just know you played a really good game, and its something that probably went down in the history books, bout it.

Ive played some lopsided soccer games over the years. I played spring, fall, and winter (indoor) for like 12 years straight. Ive played outdoor games won/loss by 10+ goals, and Ive played indoor games with even worse margins. When you go in to a game, a lot of times you know what youre in for. Sometimes you know youre going to get trashed, sometimes you know youre going to do the trashing, and sometimes its a toss up. You cant be surprised when you get blown out by a team better than you, no matter how bad. You can only think, did we play as well as we can? If you did, then thats it. The worse losses are when its 3-2 and you know you screwed up, or a teammate, on either letting them score, or not getting a score. Those make you feel bad. 12-0? That stopped mattering around 5-0 or so, but you keep going anyways, cause youre playing, which is always better than not.

_________________
"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

After reading this and seeing Depx's avatar, I just want to proudly announce we beat down my friend's kid at Smash Bros 3v1 and he thought it was melee mode.

I think you missed the point. It's not about giving them a chance. They obviously didn't have that. It's about not humiliating them by running up the score unnecessarily. Imagine that 100m race is against a bunch of Special Olympics athletes. Are you really going to take off like a bat out of hell?

You can't sue for termination unless you can prove discrimination or breach of contract. If he was under contract, there were likely provisions protecting the school and giving them the ability to terminate at will. If he wasn't, then he was under At Will employment anyways.

_________________

It's probably worth pointing out that it's likely he would not have been fired if he had not sent the email directly contradicting his school. That was the trigger point, because that kept the controversy going.

After learning that the coach in fact didn't pull his starters, that he brought the press back in the 2nd half, AND that they didn't score another point after 100 with minutes to go, IT IS SHOCKING PEOPLE ARE DEFENDING THIS COACH.

Pure, unaldulterated douchebag that should not be in charge of mentoring young minds. End of story.

The e-mail contradicting the apology was the ONLY action by the coach that was commendable.

Running the score up was outrageous, but calling those girls dishonorable for doing what their coach told them to do was just as outrageous by the school. These are Varsity players, not middle school. How many of these girls are looking for college scholarships? How could anyone look at them and expect them to not do what the coach said? If you are someone who expected them to stand up to their coach, I have a single question for you: How much of the college recruiting process have you seen? You simply DO NOT challenge your coach if you want to get a scholarship. They hold all the cards.

This was a private school. I'd be willing to bet quite a bit that the basketball program was one of the main reasons these girls were there. So add on to the pressure of getting on "the list", a good recommendation from the coach, the pressure they were under because of parental expectations that the money they were paying to give their daughters a shot at a college bb career not be wasted.

Nah, whatever else this coach did wrong, standing up for his players was the right thing to do. I just hope that it may have saved a scholarship or two.

Hmm, I am 38 years old and grew up in the south where playing organized team sports is not only encouraged, it is expected. I started playing baseball at age 4 then added football when I reached 5th grade. I sucked at basketball when I played in Jr. High so I didn't continue it. I did play football into High School where we were our 4A (highest classification in the state) division champions nearly every year. I didn't play my senior year because I went to US Army Basic Training and missed summer two-a-days. (was a split-option, did basic after my Jr. year and AIT after I graduated).

Since my son is now old enough to play sports I have coached or been an assistant coach on his t-ball, basketball, and football teams.

I have been taught and teach that you owe your opponent to do your best. If you do not do your best you are not only cheating yourself then you are making the game cheap for your opposition.

You can not throw this "you didn't play organized sports" bullshit line to me because I have. Organized sports at all levels is not only a part of my life, it is a major part of my life.

I will stand by my statement that Dallas Academy should not have been playing Covenant AND to ask Covenant to drastically handicap their team so they don't embarrass the other team is more humiliating than getting beat 100-0. If you have heard any of the interviews with the girls from Dallas Academy you will hear the words of a competitor, they said they are proud of what they did (this is the losing team) they said that they did their best and got a good game from Covenant.

Working on fundamentals and playing your bench is not drastically handicapping your team. It's expected in these situations. I find it difficult to believe that you have a lifetime of sports experience and haven't seen this. It's common in every sport, anywhere you go. After a point when the game is basically over, you take the opportunity to do things you couldn't do in a competitive situation. No one was asking the girls to lay down or stand aside, but piling on so that you can humiliate the other team is shitty.

Not running up the score doesn't mean you aren't doing your best. Perhaps you didn't pay attention during basketball, but there are different ways to play the game. For example, not pressing when you are ahead by 50 points. Going back to the other side of the court isn't "slacking off." Another example-- playing a slow down style. Walk back up the court. Pass frequently and wait for the shot down low. Slow the game down. That's still playing your best.



So far, I haven't seen anything that shows the school calling the girls dishonorable; only the coach.

The school did not differentiate in their apology. If they had called only the coach's actions dishonorable I would probably have agreed with them. But they didn't:



The only person to say the girls behaved honorably was this coach you are so against:

Sports are competitive, true. Their is also a thing called sportsmanship, this means to treat players on the other team with respect and dignity.
Running the score up in a basketball game 100-0 is unacceptable. These are students, not professional athletes. Their coaches should be teaching them to both win and loose with sportsmanship. I'm glad this prick got fired.

I hate to weigh in on this one, as the sanctimony has reached defcon 1, but...

I find it odd to believe the coach since the score was 100 points even.

On the other hand, that school hasn't won a game in 4 years. Someone needs to move them to a different division or do something, because from now on, every time an opposing coach or players play that team, they will be wondering how much should we beat them by. And that's not fair to anyone. Hey, the score's 65-17, should we just sit down on the fucking floor? How do you balance playing them and patronizing/insulting them?

It's also partly a condemnation of our society and the emphasis we place on style and margin of victory. In the days of online recruiting, psycho parents and booster clubs at schools, those factors are at least as much to blame as anything else.

This whole story ended for me after reading the first article I saw where the coach from the losing school lauded his team for their effort and tenacity, despite the score.

Yeah. Honestly, how do you not win a game in 4 years and still get to be a coach? I guess this is where Fribur chimes in and tells us all how that coach is turning out future peace corps volunteers.

It's like in Meet the Parents. Someone, somewhere, must have board full of 13th place ribbons.

Reminds me of the old Maddox site:

In high school, I don't really care about the wins / losses. Again-- not professional sports. It's nice to be competitive, and they certainly should give their best effort, but there isn't really any reason to fire a coach because of a losing season, assuming he / she is doing their job.

Those of you that keep saying "just switch divisions" may not be aware that this is not an easy thing to do, and sometimes just isn't possible. I know our school has no choice for our divisions, for example-- it's ours, or don't play sports.

This quote bothers me more than the score in the game or the comments afterwards. Any smart basketball coach wouldn't play his starters from beginning to end in a game like this and I am not talking about the risk of injuys thing. He would maybe give them 1 quarter and after that just a few minutes here and there. One of the most valuable things that can happen during a season is the chance to rotate the other players in for long stretches of a game so you can work on thier skills. Only rotating the starters in so the backups can get work with them as well. Your goal is to have a deep bench for the playoffs.

I don't really know the details of the game and I don't care much. If his goal was to hit 100 points then he is just stupid and childlike. If he was putting his backups in and having them run specific plays both on offense and defense to work on their skills then he was smart. Either way this has been blow out of proportion.

I remember a baseball game my kid had in 6th grade. They were playing an elite club. For 3 innings (pitchers could only go 3 innings)it was a 1 run game. After we switched our 3rd best pitcher in the 4th they hit the crap out of the ball. Thier coach couldn't pull his starting roster out obviously but he told them to do something better. He told each player where he wanted them to hit he ball. This gave them something to work on that actualluy might matter later as they improved. He also put in a kid when we were up who was obviously developing into a pretty good left handed pitcher but needed mound time. This was awesome for our kids as well. To me this is good coaching . He knew our kids hit well and facing them would be good for his pitcher.

I'm sure Khan could bring up specific instances like that as well. IMO The goals of sports is for everyone to get in shape, to learn to play better and to learn what winning takes. Learning to lose with dignity is good as well.

It would be hard to score 100 points in a high school game even if the other team didn't have legs.

Something smells fishy, but I'm far too lazy and ignorant to investigate furhter.

Ok, I will chime in further now that I read the thread.

How can this not make you seriously sad? This is a reflection of what is wrong in so many aspects of life.

First, the score of 100-0 in and of itself is an insult. And if anyone doesn't think so, we have nothing to discuss. The fact that they stopped on 100 reflects what was going on.

There is an art to "turning it off" in sports, and anyone who actually knows what they're talking about "gets it". For example, when I play in racquetball leagues or tournies, I play to win. There are often mismatches. Once someone has a comfortable lead, the superior player backs off. You don't give up - you just take less aggressive shots and relax your kills. That's not to say you hit every shot into the floor to give points - that's insulting. I can tell when it happens, and if I pull withing a couple points, he turns it back on.

People who claim to not understand this either never played competitive sports or are just dicks.

Should someone in high school do this? Maybe not. If it's a 50-30 game, I would still play somewhat strong. After about a 20-0 lead, the coach should have called off the press and relaxed the hustle. The other team only got off SEVEN FREAKING SHOTS. Come on. Tell your players to relax defense, play zone, guard shots, and attack the rebounds. That's just common sense and is done all over America all the time by people who have a little class.

I think what really bothers me about this is that NOBODY on the Covenant side stopped and said "this is wrong." Are we really such a society of bullies and thugs that nobody stopped to think, "maybe we're going overboard." Furthermore, the fact that the coach tried to defend the actions is dispicable. Maybe this is why if I ever have kids they won't be sports stars, but I would have pulled my daughter from the game (god I hope I would have the courage).

Afterward, I'm sure the coach had conversations with administrators. Why not come out and say, "sometimes you play so hard to win, that you lose track of what you're doing. Although we didn't mean harm, we realize now that our actions were overboard. blah blah"

I'm rambling, but I am really saddened. Not so much by the coach, but by the fact some people think this is OK.

Poor analogy. For one, we're talking about a game between peers. And yet, even if we assume we can take a different analogy and use Olympic athletes against regular people, we're not talking about little kids that have not had a chance toughen their skin yet and enjoy the challenge.



I think I am going to end up learning a shit ton of moves from you, and I will 100 percent guarantee you that I will enjoy the challenge. Even after 100 losses, you will never find me whining about it.

Again, entirely different as a "youngster", because no one is expected to have developed a true competitive and determined spirit at that age.

Now, I will say to a certain extent if you lower your gameplay just a little bit, occasionally there is more potential to learn and adapt. This kind of thing can happen in a lot of games, so I readily admit that. To the extent of being capable of learning, it can serve to help to lower your game a bit.

But, that being said, it sounds to me like this bball game was more than simple practice and training. Everyone went on that court expecting a real game to happen.

The burden of whether this "poor form" convention is taken into account rests SOLELY on whether or not the secondary party gets butthurt from being defeated. Nothing more.



110 percent agree with this.



It's not slacking off, but it's also not doing your best. Your best is doing everything within your ability to score points. That is "the best you can do". You would not win games against tougher teams without doing those very same things, and therefore it is not the best you can do.

Bottom line is that it's an insult to any truly competitive player to "go easy" and "let up" on them.

The best you can do is to win. If you have a 50 point lead over your opponent, who is obviously not in your caliber of play, then proceeding to widen that lead is inappropriate and insulting.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Again, if you do less than what you're capable of doing, that is not your best. "Playing your best" is different than whether you've played hard enough to win the game or not. Best in terms of whether you won the game? Sure that's the best "outcome", but we're talking about what the players actually put into the game. It's not being played to the best of their ability, else they would have done what was necessary to beat more formidable teams, namely using their best players and scoring as high as they can.

You have yet to explain why it is inappropriate or insulting. "It's poor form", "it's convention", "we've decided it's wrong" is not an answer.

This is obviously from someone who's never played team sports competitively, so any explanation we have is lost on you.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

I can't believe our resident hippie is siding with the coach here.

You've got krby here with comments that echo the same ideas who has.

Not that it matters though, there are many competitive environments that have adopted the same norms. And again, I've played plenty of sports. Never on an official team, but enough to see that convention in action after my team or another team stomps the daylights out of the competition. That norm was enforced then, I asked why and was never given a reason. Apparently that part does not change off the court, either.

Venen, you would think your years in Riders would have given you a better appreciation of what it's like to constantly lose and be mocked for it.

That was uncalled for, Orme. Besides, Riders' score would be 100-1.

100 players. 1 boss.

tee hee

It's simple, really.

You're playing a game. While you're playing that game, you're in adversarial positions. But in and beyond the confines of the game, you should still have respect for the people you play against.

When a win by 1 point and a win by 100 produce the same results insofar as the game is concerned (an example where it wouldn't might be where score is used to determine ranking), running up the score serves no legitimate purpose. For this reason, it's perceived as a personal attack, beyond the confines of the game.