Color me stupid, but since when is 78-49 a “blowout”? Yes, a score of 78 is a solid performance in basketball, but not like running up the score just to be cruel. 49 certainly sucks, but it’s hardly an incredible failure.
Seriously. It’s not like a 77-2 football game between Alabama and Roast Beef Tech.
Yes. I’m a Kentucky fan, was joking, hence Christian Laettner.
What kind of complaint is this? Players play to score points. Why should they ever let up while the clock is still ticking? And what does it matter to you as a spectator? A loss is a loss and a win is a win. And don’t you want to see players putting out their best effort at every moment they are on the court?
Did you lose a bunch of money betting on the point spread or something?
Perhaps some posters would prefer a mercy rule in Division I Men’s Basketball, similar to the ones they have in pee wee leagues?
If scholar athletes (ok, just plain athletes…) at this level are that sensitive to being outscored by superior competition, perhaps they should give back their scholarships, quit school, and join a rec league. They’re clearly not mature enough to be denying a much more qualified student the opportunity to pay for their education.
I disagree - this is probably the one chance the far end of the bench will have to actually play in an NCAA tournament game, and I wouldn’t be surprised if two of the three left out were walk-ons (the scholarship limit is 13, and all scholarships in Division 1 men’s basketball are counted as full scholarships against the limit). Maybe you only have them play the last minute or two, but you should get them onto the court.
I absolutely agree. Up 15 with 1:30 to play? Put in Tom Smith and John Q. Ballplayer for a few possessions. They’ll never forget it.
I call it “story for your grandkids” time.
I’d certainly call a 29 point victory in basketball a blowout. I’m not sure why you wouldn’t.
Apparently, Louisville only suited up 12 for the game - one of the players on ESPN’s roster was declared ineligible by the NCAA earlier in the year, and one report says that the other two were “in the stands” sitting next to him.
Then again, that report also says that there is a limit on how many players can suit up for a tournament game, but NCA&T suited up 14 (which I believe is the limit, if for no other reason than there are only 14 lines per team in an official NCAA basketball scorebook).
It’s a blowout, but it’s not “running up the score,” necessarily.
Yeah, there are NBA games where teams lose by more than 29 points. The San Antonio Spurs, who have a 53-17 record, lost a game a couple of weeks ago by 30 points. The Miami Heat, who are working on a 24 game winning streak, have had a few losses this season of 20+ points.
So 29 points is not “running up the score” by any means. It’s just a bad loss.
A college team at that level does not have a “base defense.” Teams have multiple defensive sets, from man-to-man, to diamond and one, to 2-3 zone, to 1-3-1 zone, etc, to full court press, to half court trap, etc. Players on such teams have been playing for a number of years, and have experience playing all sorts of defensive sets. Thinking that easing off on the full court press against an outmanned opponent is going to hurt their proficiency is a remarkable claim that lacks any evidence whatsoever.
Why you and others insist on glorifying poor sports who run up the score is a mystery to me, but one that I’m not going to worry about anymore.
I think. This wouldn’t make much sense when you consider that a school’s women’s basketball team is allowed to have 15 players on scholarship…
(Bolding mine.)
Not true. There are plenty of college teams who have a specific defensive style; namely, Syracuse plays a 2-3 zone every single year, and VCU and Louisville play full court press. Coaches like Ben Howland and Mike Montgomery have made their disdain for zone defense clear over the years, although they will use it on those rare occasions when their personnel requires it.
I’m agnostic on the thread subject. The 16 teams usually are just happy to be there and don’t want the opponent to ease up on them. If the Cardinals were up 50 I’d be in favor of dropping the press; it’s not like you can’t play halfcourt defense without it.
There are a lot of ways to be a poor sport, but none of them have to do with playing your best–which means doing your best to score within the rules of the game–regardless of the score.
If “running up the score” actually existed as a legitimate concept, they would adopt rules that automatically stopped the game clock as soon as a certain score was reached. Barring that, if the clock is running, then you have no business being on the court if you’re not trying to score.
Up by 15 inside of two minutes is definitely scrub time. Get those guys in there so they have something to tell their kids. Sometimes they even get a bit of fame- remember Jamie “Shoes” Hoffman at Michigan State? Back in high school there was a kid who never got to play except for scrub time. When the clock wound down with the game decided, the crowd would chant “Gene-O Gene-O” to get him in the game. So he’d come in with about 2 minutes left- and still foul out.
Agreed, it isn’t running up the score, and even that isn’t a bad thing. How can a coach put the end-of-the-bench guys into a game, a rare treat for them, and then ask them *not *to play their best?
If the other team wanted to win, or made the score closer, they should have played better. No sympathy here.
This is pretty damn lame.
It’s a freaking sport - this isn’t first grade feel good hour.
There is nothing wrong with a team or person playing 100% even when winning.
It may have been in the Louisville game in question, but this is not always true, especially in the tournament when there is no game tomorrow if you lose. Remember the miracle minute?
