170 - 35 (100-12 at half)...Starters start 2nd Half

[CMHCoachNRef]

High School Blog - Another coach defends decision in lopsided game - ESPN Dallas

Thoughts?

[Adam]

During the game, NMB.

As a fan of the game, I'm not sure, but it would depend on how long the starters played in the 2nd half.

[fiasco]

The more interesting thing to me, was the incident in the second half. Seems from the interview that both benches cleared completely as a result of a "hard foul."

Everyone who wasn't on the floor when the play happened was DQ'd. So the game continued with just 10 total players eligible.

Crazy crazy game.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Thoughts?

Thought #1) At least it didn't go into overtime.
Thought #2) Not really an officiating issue.
Thought #3) Were plumbers doing the game?
Thought #4) I wonder what this coach's peers are saying about this account on whatever coaching discussion board there might be.

[fiasco]

This coach is definitely getting a bad rap, IMO. He's getting criticized for keeping his starters in the game for such a long period of time, especially in the second half.

But, he played all 15 of his players in the 1st half.

Then, he brought out his starters to start the 3rd quarter. This is pretty much common practice from what I understand, even with a big lead. You have to keep your best playersr "fresh."

Then, with only a little over a minute gone in the 3rd quarter, the "scuffle" happened, and everyone except the starters who were on the floor were DQ'd. So he had no choice but to play them the entire second half.

How is that bad sportsmanship?

[CoachCER]

I usually go back to my starters in the second half with a big lead (under 25 points). Anything over that, and I see no need of putting them back on the court. If you are beating a team by 88 and have hit the century mark at half, then your own practice is significantly more competitive than what the other team is putting on the court against you.

I just can't defend the coach here for any reason.

[jdmara]

If you're up by that many points at halftime, you go into a passing "offense" where you only shoot layups. If you don't get a layup, then you don't shoot it. There is no call for this big of a margin. I thought my 100-34 game last night was poor sportsmanship

-Josh

[chseagle]

Let me guess throughout the game the team that won was running a full court press defense throughout the game, & the only way the opposing team could easily get the ball in would of been to run a 2-person OOB.

Having so many players DQ'd, from each team, shouldn't that of ended the game?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

High School Blog - Another coach defends decision in lopsided game - ESPN Dallas

Thoughts?

I resemble this thread: A game you never want to have

[bbcoach7]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

High School Blog - Another coach defends decision in lopsided game - ESPN Dallas

Thoughts?

I don't really have a problem with it. If you don't want to take a beat down like that, you have to get better, period. That's how I'd feel if I was the losing coach; we gotta get better. There's not much shame in getting run over by a high powered machine like that. It feels worse to lose a close game.

If you're a zone D team, you play zone D. If you're a M2M team, you play M2M. And if you're a pressing team, then you press! What you never ever do is ask your kids to ease up, or lower your standards for hustle and execution on the defensive side. You can do things on the offensive end- run shot clock down, make 5-6 passes before any shot, play kids out of position, etc. But no coach I ever been around would ask for or tollerate less than best effort on defense.

Regardless of score, the same 5 who started the game always start the 2nd half. Thats standard practice, though certainly not written in stone. Those 5 have earned their starting positions. If they don't start the 2nd half, the effect is that coach is punishing them for being too good. I want to keep my starters motivated, and I reward them for being the best players by starting them. In this Texas example, the starters apparently had to finish the game because the entire benches on both squads were ejected for leaving the bench after a hard foul, 1 minute into the 2nd half.

I haven't heard Lee HS complain in the media about it. Apparently they get it. If you want to be competetive, you have to play well. If you don't play well, you better get better.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

If you're a zone D team, you play zone D. If you're a M2M team, you play M2M. And if you're a pressing team, then you press! What you never ever do is ask your kids to ease up, or lower your standards for hustle and execution on the defensive side. .... But no coach I ever been around would ask for or tollerate less than best effort on defense.

I disagree. There are a lot of things you can do.

If you're a M2M team, you change to zone, so they can learn a new part of the game...and vice versa. If you're a pressing team, you fall back and play half court. It does you no good to tune your press on a team that can't challenge it. You put your team into a situation that will challenge them...at least more than doing what they're best at.

You match your guards up on their post players, you match your post players up on their guards. Make your guards learn to play against bigger opponents and make your post players learn how to defend on the perimeter. That will do them a lot more good for their personal skill development than letting them dominate a weaker opponent in their strongest positions.

[bbcoach7]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree. There are a lot of things you can do.

Or maybe I wasn't clear. Yes, I agree there are a lot of things you can do.

If you're a M2M team, you change to zone, so they can learn a new part of the game...and vice versa. If you're a pressing team, you fall back and play half court.

I essentially agree with you. I'm a defensive minded coach, and any coach who presses a lot is too. So I have multiple defenses. If I'm way up on the board, then I will work on my weakest defense by playing it a lot. But it isn't going to make a lot of difference because as any coach will tell you, you can run anything -offense and defense- against an over matched team and it will be effective. I agree about not pressing. There's no such thing as a pressing team that doesn't have a half court defense. You have to. Even this TX team will eventually meet a team in the playoffs that can beat its press.

It does you no good to tune your press on a team that can't challenge it. You put your team into a situation that will challenge them...at least more than doing what they're best at.

I essentially agree with you. Except that in this particular TX situation, and in that particular game, there's no such thing. When one team is that much better, you can't even the playing field; and if you really try, the humiliation is even greater. Best thing is to just get it over with.

You match your guards up on their post players, you match your post players up on their guards. Make your guards learn to play against bigger opponents and make your post players learn how to defend on the perimeter. That will do them a lot more good for their personal skill development than letting them dominate a weaker opponent in their strongest positions.

I've done exactly that, and against an overmatched opponent, it made little difference in the dominance. It's just embarassing to them. I know, I've been on the recieving end of such attempts at charity. This did work to keep the score down at Jr High level. But my posts in HS can put the ball on the floor and shoot from outside much better than when they were in Jr High. And my smalls work on post moves and post defense 2-3 times a week.

But, I agree with your premise.... there's always something a coach can do to make it more fair. For me the goal is to balance that with not appearing to be giving "charity." That's worse.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

Or maybe I wasn't clear. Yes, I agree there are a lot of things you can do.
...

But, I agree with your premise.... there's always something a coach can do to make it more fair. For me the goal is to balance that with not appearing to be giving "charity." That's worse.

Sounds like we're on the same page then.

[bbcoach7]

(since you're a coach too) as an example of you can run anything and it will work against an inferior opponent, the 1st two possessions last Friday night my team ran "Swing" (our M2M O) against a 2-3 zone. We got the lay up on the flex cut both times. I was hollering "13" (zone O for two guard front) and they couldn't hear me. So the PG just called out "Swing." Probably should have let them keep running it

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

I don't really have a problem with it. If you don't want to take a beat down like that, you have to get better, period. That's how I'd feel if I was the losing coach; we gotta get better. There's not much shame in getting run over by a high powered machine like that. It feels worse to lose a close game.

If you're a zone D team, you play zone D. If you're a M2M team, you play M2M. And if you're a pressing team, then you press! What you never ever do is ask your kids to ease up, or lower your standards for hustle and execution on the defensive side. You can do things on the offensive end- run shot clock down, make 5-6 passes before any shot, play kids out of position, etc. But no coach I ever been around would ask for or tollerate less than best effort on defense.

Regardless of score, the same 5 who started the game always start the 2nd half. Thats standard practice, though certainly not written in stone. Those 5 have earned their starting positions. If they don't start the 2nd half, the effect is that coach is punishing them for being too good. I want to keep my starters motivated, and I reward them for being the best players by starting them. In this Texas example, the starters apparently had to finish the game because the entire benches on both squads were ejected for leaving the bench after a hard foul, 1 minute into the 2nd half.

I haven't heard Lee HS complain in the media about it. Apparently they get it. If you want to be competetive, you have to play well. If you don't play well, you better get better.

I don't care if Lee HS complains about it. I could not disagree with you more. This is a NFHS basketball game. If this team (and coach) are so good, certainly they can come up with a way to play good aggressive man-to-man HALFCOURT defense. Some teams just AREN'T as talented. It has NOTHING to do with working harder, getting better or anything else. We discuss "Sportsmanship" BEFORE every game. If you think 100-12 at half and 170-35 while pressing the entire game meets the definition of "good sportsmanship" expected by the NFHS Rules Committee, I think you are sadly mistaken.

Starting the second half with your STARTERS with a 100-12 halftime lead -- NICE TOUCH!!! "Standard Practice" -- BULL!!! "Standard Practice" does NOT involve an 88 point half time lead. Classless, you can't convince me otherwise, you can't make excuses otherwise. This coach is nothing but BUSH LEAGUE PERIOD.

Generally, coaches have some level of intelligence. They have the ability to evaluate a situation and take good logical steps to gain the most out of a situation. This coach's actions make it appear as though coaches have NO ABILITY to adjust to situations that occur in a game. We ALWAYS start our best players. We ALWAYS press. We ALWAYS FAST BREAK. We ALWAYS start our starters to start the second half.

I am embarassed to be associated with the coaching profession. This was a disgrace.

I will say, I will be rooting for lots of other teams from the Lone Star State come tournament time.

Just my own personal opinion.