I guess there has been a mercy rule for a while now in HS football that says that anytime in the 2nd half when one teams leads by more than 34 points the game will have a running clock. But this year they have implemented an additional rule that if one teams leads by more than 44 points at the end of the 3rd quarter or anytime in the 4th quarter, the game will end at that point.
Last night the rule was first invoked and it happened in 2 separate games.
Just wondering what others think of this? I can understand the reasoning but I’d hope that they would allow the coaches to determine whether to invoke the rule and end the game.
I think Meh.
Any team that far up should be resting their starters and letting others play.
Is there a state ranking process that considers how much a team beats up on others? That causes coaches to run-up, rationally, more than anything.
Then again, it’s football, and it attracts egos that need satisfaction for the beat-downs they endured when the were younger.
Pro/rel might help competition, to pit top teams against each other instead of “big-town versus small-town neighbor,” cuz easier transportation.
I get the point, but isn’t that when you would play the kids who don’t get onto the field often?
I thought this was gonna be about facebook
HS football is the worst when it comes to power imbalance. Some HSs recruit while others don’t care that much about football. They play in the same Region because of school size. That’s it. Bench players on the powerhouse will still run over the weaker team, especially in a smaller school region.
Then the HS with the weaker football team will crush the football powerhouse in tennis or girl’s lacrosse.
The running clock and simply ending the game are appropriate, and should not be left to football coaches to decide. In football, this is a safety decision.
2 Likes
They should take it further and shorten the game to one quarter so I can go home sooner.
2 Likes
“Mercy” is for the people who have to sit through and watch, right? People give up their evenings to host, officiate, and attend, so if it’s a done deal, let’s just go home and not waste any more time on this.
Game’s over. How about we get some Swig, everyone?
3 Likes
One article I read about did talk about safety talking about how many hits kids take in the average game. But that seems weird that you only care about the number of hits when the score is so one sided? I would expect the number of hits and intensity would be more for the close games. So why not shorten them if you are worried about safety by reducing the number of hits.
I agree that in the blowouts the team way ahead should be putting in their 2nd, 3rd and 4th string guys to get some live game action. And at some point even the losing team should start resting the starters and giving the younger kids some playing time. Unfortunately, I agree with others who say coaches often don’t seem to have the sense to let others play.
There is a ranking system but I don’t believe margin of victory is part of it, though I’m not sure. But it seems that better teams have been scheduling better teams because they don’t get hurt in the rankings by losing to a good team and get more benefit from beating the good teams. I think it is mostly based on strength of schedule opponent’s record and opponent’s opponent’s record type thing.
I’m not sure how I feel about it. I’ll have to see how it works out.
Parents who care should not let their kids play. It’s that simple.
I’m definitely concerned about football risks in general. I’m also concerned about players getting hurt in a mismatch situation, whether from hits or from handling the weight of a pile.
It does all point to football really not being a sport for most people..
Most sports are not for most people
With everything we know about brain damage, why anyone would let their child play football is beyond me.
2 Likes
Better than letting it rot in front of a screen
Well, those aren’t the two choices, and given those choices, I still wouldn’t let my kids play contact sports.
How about football should not be a sport for most athletic boys/men.
Completely up to the choice of the individual
It might be a fun project for someone to calculate the net costs to society coming from sport-related brain injuries.
Is that net of the good that comes from participation in sports for lifelong health and leadership and the many other benefits that come to those who participate?
Maybe we should calculate the net costs to society for some other activities like maybe bike riding or motorcycle riding or even automobiles?
1 Like
But why bang-heads football? Seems like the only option for parents in some American sub-cultures, lest be outcast.
1 Like