Africentric girls just won a game last week over a fellow Columbus City League opponent 113-3. Eastmoor girls beat a Columbus City League opponent 84-0 that same night. Africentric and Eastmoor got together a few days later, and Africentric won 90-19. The most lopsided games I ever saw in person were a 72-15 win and a 79-21 loss.Saw Tri-Village beat Hardin Houston the other night 101-36. Made me think about biggest blowouts you've seen this year or ever. I know in boy's basketball, TV beat Ansonia a few years ago by 90. It was 130-some to 40-some
Can you give me were I can look at the new rule so I can pass it on to the correct persons in the Columbus city schoolsThe blowout conversation is always interesting to me.
The OHSAA has made it legal (and actually encourages) for schools to schedule cross-level games, without a win-loss punishment for the "JV" team in the match-up. So for instance - last year teams like Hiland would send their JV team to play Newcomerstown's Varsity. Loudonville sent their JV team to play 4 different "Varsity" games. This counts as a Varsity game for the lesser opponent, but only a JV game for the better team. This keeps games closer and encourages top schools to go "schedule up". I am shocked that Africentric isn't doing this.
Unfortunately for Hiland - the IVC decided to vote and make it illegal for Hiland to do this in league games - which makes no sense to me. I am sure that Columbus City League opponents would be fine if Africentric wanted to do this though.
I watched (rather suffered through) a Hiland-Toronto girls sectional game once that I believe ended 104-4 or something in that neighborhood. The skill level gap was the problem. One team had an elite level of skill and the other had almost no skill - couldn't dribble, pass, shoot with form, box out, do fundamental defensive skills, etc. Coach Schlabach did everything you would want a coach to do in terms of playing everyone, pulling back the defense, letting the opponent shoot, not fast-breaking off of steals, etc. Fans across the state saw the score and were aghast that a coach would run up the score like that. I was there, and I'm saying that score represented tons of restraint because it could have been 250-0. Not kidding.I don't understand coaches who feel the need to score 100 points regularly... and yes it falls squarely on the coaches. You control/manage the score via coaching. I have however seen scores that neared or reached 100 points despite all efforts by the winning coach to slow the game down/not have the score run that high. I guess it's all in how the game is played. There is nothing to be gained from 100 pt games/victories with those margins though.
No one's saying tell the kids to not try.... but you can def manage the game to limit the score while still having the kids play hard.This goes back to the argument of whether or not the better team should keep trying. If you were a coach would you say "just hold the ball, we can't score too many points." Clear the bench, try some new plays, and coach for better execution of the plays being run but don't stop having the kids bust their butts trying. If a bench warmer gets in I expect them to give it their all. If that means they score then they score.
As a coach you're hurting kids a lot more by telling them not to try in an attempt to avoid running up the score.