When to call off the Dawgs?

[bronco2828]

How many goals ahead are enough?

[HockeyHigh]

How many goals ahead are enough?

Odd that you'd bring this up, I saw an article on this exact subject in the paper this morning as a reaction to the 100-0 win in Texas from http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/229281/:

Courtesy of the Fargo Forum

Blowout prompts locals’ opinions
A high school coach in Texas was fired this week in the wake of his team winning a girls basketball game 100-0. The ax fell not because of the score, but because the coach failed to see anything wrong with beating another team 100-0.

A high school coach in Texas was fired this week in the wake of his team winning a girls basketball game 100-0. The ax fell not because of the score, but because the coach failed to see anything wrong with beating another team 100-0.

“Sometimes you have to use a little common sense,” Moorhead High School boys basketball coach Chuck Gulsvig said. “I’m not sure that happened in this case.”

The 100-doughnut blowout in Dallas ignited a national media uproar, most of which buried the since-fired coach as a clueless clod. That might be true. But it also should’ve spotlighted another, tougher-to-answer problem:

What’s the proper protocol when a high school game gets out of hand?

If a 100-point difference is unacceptable, then what is acceptable? Is 75 points OK? Or is it 50 points? Or 49?

While it’s easy to crucify a coach whose team wins by a big margin, it’s not so easy to decide what is right and what is wrong.

“In one case a 65-40 game is unmerciful, but in another case a 65-40 game is merciful,” said Dave Carlsrud of the North Dakota High School Activities Association. “When you’re talking about ethics and integrity, it’s difficult to legislate.”

A handful of people involved in North Dakota and Minnesota high school athletics who were asked Tuesday about proper etiquette in blowouts referred to the same, unofficial guideline: common sense.

Surprisingly, the topic rarely (if ever) comes up in college classes, clinics and other resources coaches use to learn their trade. Bodies like the NDHSAA and the Minnesota State High School League usually only get involved after the fact – a team will win by an eye-popping margin and the associations will investigate after getting a phone call from an unhappy coach.

“We’ve called coaches and athletic directors from the schools that won and asked them to come down to meet with us, to tell us what happened,” MSHSL executive director Dave Stead said. “Just to ask them, ‘What in the heck were you thinking about? What were you trying to accomplish?’ The answer is the same every time: ‘We just got caught up in the moment.’ Well, I think they need to pay more attention to what’s happening in the game and not get so caught up in the moment. It’s ridiculous to have those things happen.”

There have been a couple of local games recently that made headlines for their one-sided outcome.

Both were in hockey. The Moorhead boys team beat Monticello 27-0 in a playoff game in 2004 and Fargo South’s boys defeated Breckenridge-Wahpeton 25-0 in 2005. People who attended the games generally agreed the winning teams did not run up the score, but there was some chatter around town about sportsmanship.

“It’s tough,” said South girls basketball coach Craig Flaagan, whose team has had its share of big victories this season. “Do you tell your kids to not try? It’s hard to tell kids that. We have a 30-second shot clock in North Dakota, so you can’t sit on the ball for a long time. You have to shoot it. Do you tell them to miss on purpose? You can’t do that. I’ve been on both sides of these situations, and it isn’t easy.”

Flaagan’s team beat Valley City 101-27 earlier this month in a game that matched perhaps the best and worst Class A girls basketball teams in the state.

“We didn’t pour it on. We pressed the first three or four minutes and after that we played half-court defense. I played my bench in the second half,” Flaagan said. “It’s hard. Maybe we need a mercy rule, where if the margin reaches a certain point then the clock doesn’t stop. I wouldn’t mind seeing that rule.”

North Dakota has a mercy rule in football. Minnesota has similar rules in several sports including football, basketball and hockey. In Minnesota, if a basketball team is ahead by 35 points with 9 minutes to play the clock doesn’t stop except for timeouts.

Mercy rules, though, won’t stop basketball teams from pressing or football teams from throwing passes late in the game with big leads. Only common sense will prevent those things from happening.

At times, it’s a commodity in short supply.

I thought the Moorhead game was 25-0 and the South game was 27-0, and knowing the Forum, I am right.

Either way, it's pretty much ridiculous to run scores up like this, but teams that are playing at a level so much higher than they ought to be should be placed at a lower level of competition, such as Junior Gold.

[karl(east)]

I don't think you can slap a ceiling on a game and say "this is the limit."

As the lead grows and grows, the winning team should slowly start working in its backups, etc. This is good for everyone involved; the top lines get some well-earned rest and the lower lines get valuable ice time. I-Falls actually did a pretty good job of that in the Ely win. I believe PuckRanger said they brought up another line from JV for the 3rd period...which went on to score 3 goals.

You can't tell kids to stop shooting or playing hard or anything like that, though. That doesn't do anyone any good, and is probably more insulting than anything to the opposition. There are a couple ways you can nicely loosen up the strategy, like maybe going easy on the forecheck or instituting a passing rule, once you get up into running time area.

But there are some cases where I'd feel fine with running up the score to whatever...if East ever got into such a situation with Cloquet, I'd want them to keep on pouring it on. And I wouldn't expect anything less from them if the tables were reversed.

[thorhockey]

The days of "no one loses" and ending games in ties at the mite level are over - suck it up - learning to lose (and at times getting whooped) gets you further in life. Disappointments and failures happen and you are never too young to learn that - what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

[defense]

How many goals ahead are enough?

Everything said is very agreeable. I would definitely say that you cannot put a true limit on it. I would also say that in a deep routed rivalry, absolutely, take no prisoners. I have never liked "everyone wins" logic, what the heck is 1st place for???
But, in the case of Moorhead v Monticello, and Fargo South v Wahpeton-Breckenridge, common sense was not in the equation. There has to be more people who played or coached over the years on here than me.
A little thing called respect is needed. Most of us have been in a game that you knew could turn out this way. There are all kinds of stuff to do to not put up 30 points. Quit shooting for chrissakes. Anyone who has been on the top end of a blowout against a completely overmatched team should know this. Bring it on guys I know I am in the minority, but when you are going to win a game 27-0, obviously there is something that could've or should've been done.

[Mr.swampdonky]

I have seen coaches start playing their forwards to defence and vice verca.

[GreenisGood]

If you can't play with the big dogs, stay on the porch

Its not there fault the other team is bad

I am not saying go 1-2, 1-2
roll 4 lines

but kids love to score and get points... why not give everyone throughout the roster confidence and let them feel like they contribute to the win

Good teams beat bad teams, great teams put them away

my 2 cents...i coached for years...philosophy i have gained from all my coaches and peers.

[HardF1]

I don't think teams that are ahead by 6 or 7 goals should not try to score anymore. That is the point of playing the game, to get the most goals. I do believe that teams should take off their 1st line and or just roll 4 lines. If coaches know it is going to be a blow out they should call up some kids from J.V. to play.

Scoring more goals is fine just don't have your top guys out every other shift in the 3rd period.

[Hibbing01]

The problem is, you throw your JV team in there and other kids who don't get varsity experience or don't have any goals on the year, and what do you think they are going to do? They want to score!!! This might be the last time some of these kids ever play hockey. I would find it hard for a coach to tell your kids not to.

[Lucia4President]

I don't think teams that are ahead by 6 or 7 goals should not try to score anymore. That is the point of playing the game, to get the most goals. I do believe that teams should take off their 1st line and or just roll 4 lines. If coaches know it is going to be a blow out they should call up some kids from J.V. to play.

Scoring more goals is fine just don't have your top guys out every other shift in the 3rd period.

I agree. There is no need to have your top players out there when you are up 6 or more in the 3rd. Being up that much gives younger kids a great opportunity to get some varsity experience.

[can't skate a lick]

How about taking it out of the coaches hands? Have running time anytime the lead is 8 goals or more. They have it for the 3rd period only now.

I have also seen Roy Nytrom in Albert Lea do a good job of calling of the dogs over the years. I'm not sure how he does it, but it certainly is a class act. If you check the records I don't think you'll find many games they win by more than 10 goals. It doesn't seem obvious to me that they are taking it easy on the other team, but then I'm not a hockey expert, just a fan.

[Goldy Gopher]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=3577150

[halla]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=3577150

"We took it as training," Slovakia coach Miroslav Karafiat said after Saturday's game.

I could go down to the park and school a bunch of ten-year-olds. Hey it would be training.

[hornetsnest]

I don't think teams that are ahead by 6 or 7 goals should not try to score anymore. That is the point of playing the game, to get the most goals. I do believe that teams should take off their 1st line and or just roll 4 lines. If coaches know it is going to be a blow out they should call up some kids from J.V. to play.

Scoring more goals is fine just don't have your top guys out every other shift in the 3rd period.

I agree. There is no need to have your top players out there when you are up 6 or more in the 3rd. Being up that much gives younger kids a great opportunity to get some varsity experience.

These games are unfortunate but exist, running time in the third when up by 6 takes care of this to a certain degree, but I would hope coaches would use this time to give more ice time to their third and fourth lines for development, morale and maybe allow their first line an rest. Also not a bad time to insert a back-up goalie who may not be in a regular rotation of some sort.

The down side to this type of games is they often get ugly especially if the other team taken the beating senses the other team is pouring it on.
Sometimes even despite these attempts, the run-ups continue.

I have read posts regarding Hanowski breaking the scoring record and wonder what happens when LF is in games up 8-0 and Ben is still out there on a regular shift. Tough call.

[Bub]

I don't think teams that are ahead by 6 or 7 goals should not try to score anymore. That is the point of playing the game, to get the most goals. I do believe that teams should take off their 1st line and or just roll 4 lines. If coaches know it is going to be a blow out they should call up some kids from J.V. to play.

Scoring more goals is fine just don't have your top guys out every other shift in the 3rd period.

I agree. There is no need to have your top players out there when you are up 6 or more in the 3rd. Being up that much gives younger kids a great opportunity to get some varsity experience.

These games are unfortunate but exist, running time in the third when up by 6 takes care of this to a certain degree, but I would hope coaches would use this time to give more ice time to their third and fourth lines for development, morale and maybe allow their first line an rest. Also not a bad time to insert a back-up goalie who may not be in a regular rotation of some sort.

The down side to this type of games is they often get ugly especially if the other team taken the beating senses the other team is pouring it on.
Sometimes even despite these attempts, the run-ups continue.

I have read posts regarding Hanowski breaking the scoring record and wonder what happens when LF is in games up 8-0 and Ben is still out there on a regular shift. Tough call.

Other than Jefferson and Hermantown (3 each) almost all of the top ranked teams in both classes (LF included) have either one or zero wins by 8 or more goals.

[dangles23]

I think they should alter the rule a little bit, i think it should be running time once the rule is 8 goals in the 2nd and if it is 6 or more goals in the third, the losing team should have to reduce the deficit to 3 or 4 before stoppage time comes back into play.

[Fire and Ice]

The team that should have apologized is the one that lost by 25. Moorhead didn't schedule Monticello the HSL did.

My response to those that get trounced...GET BETTER or forfeit I think in hockey that goes down as a 5 goal loss with no travel and money lost. That might make the kids feel better or is it the parents?

[PuckRanger]

The team that should have apologized is the one that lost by 25. Moorhead didn't schedule Monticello the HSL did.

The MSHSL does not schedule games. The Moorhead and Monticello athletic departments both agreed on scheduling that game.

[TheBlizzard]

Hockey is probably one of the hardest sports to lay back when up by a lot; the whole game revolves around puck movement with one thing in mind; TO SCORE. I totally agree with the above statements to sit your first and even 2nd lines and go with the lower lines, but then again when those kids get in there they are going to try their hardest to score which was mentioned above.

Again this doesn't happen as often at the High School level but I suppose it could; if a team is up by a lot and they are playing tic tac toe up the ice and getting one timers there is nothing you can really get mad about no matter how much they are up by. Thats the name of the game.

[Fire and Ice]

It was a section quarterfinal game. So I would say Moorhead had nothing to do with it; the HSL did.

[karl(east)]

It was a section quarterfinal game. So I would say Moorhead had nothing to do with it; the HSL did.

The section coaches pretty much decide who plays who in the playoffs at the seeding meeting.

And I don't think you can really argue against them being put in the same section. Both have AA-sized enrollments. It's unfortunate it worked out the way it did, but there's really no one to cast any blame upon.

[HShockeywatcher]

My question is why the two teams play. Coaches should be big enough to know if their team is going to get crushed. Playing the games makes no sense for either team. They should be able to play other teams. If, however, the teams do play, tell the better team to stop trying (in my opinion) simply does not make sense.

I grew up on basketball. I've heard of the best of teams beating the worst of teams and still getting at least a basket a quarter. A shut out in basketball is very impressive. I don't know anything about the teams, but if you would've asked the winning team to do something else, they probably would've ended up getting scored on. I think it is ridiculous to have kids suit up for a game and tell them not to play.

Like Fire and Ice said, even if you are asking a team to do this, hockey is very difficult to do this in. You could simply start skating circles around the ice or something dumb, but that would be a waste of everyone's time. Just like in the game where the score was 100-0, if the winning team had taken it easy, it would have also been a waste of time.

I completely disagree with sending the message to our children that trying to play down to the other team's level or doing things differently for them because they are not as talented, or as smart or what have you, as you is the right thing to do.

My analogy here is if a guy who can run the 400m in 50s is in a heat with guys who can only run it is 60s, should he instead only run a 58s 400m, or should he still run his race? He should run his race no doubt.

[defense]

It was a section quarterfinal game. So I would say Moorhead had nothing to do with it; the HSL did.

The section coaches pretty much decide who plays who in the playoffs at the seeding meeting.

And I don't think you can really argue against them being put in the same section. Both have AA-sized enrollments. It's unfortunate it worked out the way it did, but there's really no one to cast any blame upon.

This is a VERY difficult thing no question. Lets go back to Moorhead v Monticello: Moorhead at the time was having one their best years EVER, undefeated I think, and figured they were headed to their first state championship(as did many, many hockey fans in the state). Monticello has never been good, was the worst in the section, got seeded that way and knew the consequence of being that team. Very tough to not let this one be a blowout. I do however think that knowing what we all knew at the time and proven through the game result something could've been done to stop the game from making the CNN news ticker. (yes it actually did). Remember RESPECT before we start to through Moorhead excuses. The ones of the day were "we had to keep the boys going", it actually would make the other feel worse to lay back." All the boys got a point( I have little problem with that solution). Obviously before the game was ever played this was the outcome, to both teams(even if they wouldn't show it). Common courtesy (something lacking in our society) would've been completely OK with Monticello, trust me....
I could be wrong but I think that in Little Falls' win over Greenway that Hano got like 4 or 5 goals, and not the first 4 or 5 (14-0 win for LF).... and that was something I elluded to in another thread. Great player, go for it all, but is it necassary to have him scoring the 7th or 8th or 10th goals???

[karl(east)]

It was a section quarterfinal game. So I would say Moorhead had nothing to do with it; the HSL did.

The section coaches pretty much decide who plays who in the playoffs at the seeding meeting.

And I don't think you can really argue against them being put in the same section. Both have AA-sized enrollments. It's unfortunate it worked out the way it did, but there's really no one to cast any blame upon.

This is a VERY difficult thing no question. Lets go back to Moorhead v Monticello: Moorhead at the time was having one their best years EVER, undefeated I think, and figured they were headed to their first state championship(as did many, many hockey fans in the state). Monticello has never been good, was the worst in the section, got seeded that way and knew the consequence of being that team. Very tough to not let this one be a blowout. I do however think that knowing what we all knew at the time and proven through the game result something could've been done to stop the game from making the CNN news ticker. (yes it actually did). Remember RESPECT before we start to through Moorhead excuses. The ones of the day were "we had to keep the boys going", it actually would make the other feel worse to lay back." All the boys got a point( I have little problem with that solution). Obviously before the game was ever played this was the outcome, to both teams(even if they wouldn't show it). Common courtesy (something lacking in our society) would've been completely OK with Monticello, trust me....
I could be wrong but I think that in Little Falls' win over Greenway that Hano got like 4 or 5 goals, and not the first 4 or 5 (14-0 win for LF).... and that was something I elluded to in another thread. Great player, go for it all, but is it necassary to have him scoring the 7th or 8th or 10th goals???

With the Hanowski scenario I'd almost always say no, he definitely shouldn't; other people should be playing. But because Hanowski's chasing the all-time state scoring record, that gets to be a shaky argument, and one that no one will probably end up being satisfied with.

HShockeywatcher has a good point about scheduling, too. No strong AA team (or A, for that matter) should be wasting their time playing the worst ones in the state...it doesn't really help anyone. The way a lot of these scenarios arise, though, seem to be
1. 8-vs-1 seed playoff games, which are unavoidable; and
2. in-conference games, like I-Falls/Ely. If this gets to be a consistent trend, one team should probably leave the conference if they have any respect for themselves/the other teams in their conference. But until that team makes the call, we're stuck with these blowouts.

If I were the coach of the winning team in this situation, I'd get creative. Move players to new positions, institute passing rules, try completely different styles of play...it'd probably be fun for my own players, not as obviously embarrassing for the opposition, and who knows, maybe I'd stumble on something useful for a future game.

[SPUDNUT]

[/quote]The MSHSL does not schedule games. The Moorhead and Monticello athletic departments both agreed on scheduling that game.[/quote]

Last I heard, the MSHSL was still dictating when Section and State Tournament games were to be held. That game was a Section Quarterfinal game.