Coach fired for "shameless" win over rival team
 

It's got to be tough to be a high school couch! I guess this is more of the "what would Christ do" kind of stuff. I think if Christ had been there he would have provided everyone there with unlimited hot dogs and Cokes.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6229956.html

I believe he was fired for refusing to apologize.

I think you are right but I'm not sure if that was right. I mean, it may have been a nice gesture for the school to apologize or to call the game a forfit but don't they hire and pay a coach on the hopes that he will bring them a winning season. I would agree that school sports really should be more about teaching skills and teamwork and other good things but they don't give out trophies for that. I think it's kind of over the top to fire the guy; ususally they get fired for not winning. And they didn't seem to have a policy for a situation like this.

*Bold mine*

I wonder why these two teams even play each other. Perhaps a lack of other schools in the area? Perhaps this coach learned a lesson. I hope so. I think what he did was horrible.
Lookout can attest to some of the things a coach can do in these situations. Shooting with your opposite hand, min # of passes before shooting and so on. Seriously what was the coaches point here? The fact that the score ended EXACTLY 100-0 instead of 73 or 88 or some other indiscriminate number says a lot to me too.

I think that this coach lost a valuable opportunity to teach his team a life lesson. Perhaps those who fired him did.


Oh and Kudos to the Academy for never quitting!

I think he taught his team the most valuable lesson they could ever learn.

Once you go far enough in any direction, winning and losing can become simply indistinguishable?

Winning and losing is not important, is not the lesson. Life ain't fair and even more so if you're out of your league.

What would the losing team have learned if the winning team started "letting" them get points.

I dont think thats the point. Not showing any mercy at all or any compassion at all, or not showing even a little humility at all, taught the other team the wrong lesson.

At the college and pro level that is certainly true, but at this level the coach's job is to develop players first and win games second. IMO very few of these players has any chance to play the game beyond high school so the purpose in coaching them now should still be to develop skills - not just fundamental game skills, but life skills. While I don't support "letting" the other team score or even a quit shooting policy, a game like this is where you work on new things like putting your less skilled players up front and mandating a certain number of passes or a difficult type of shot. The coach blew it. I'd fire him just for being an ass.

It's sportsmanship. I played basketball from 4th grade to senior year. I remember games where the other team, usually from a small rural school (smaller than ours) and coach had everyone but the water girl in the game. It's just sportsmanship, which means class whether you win or lose.

Like lookout said, the fundamentals.

Don't get me wrong, we were also competitive and wanted to win and played hard...but in a situation like that we'd lay way back.

I heard the coach of the other team said his team had fun, and that's all that matters to them. Now there's sportsmanship.

I think both teams learned several important lessons and the coaches were right to let it play out. This is the real world folks, the sooner you get used to it...

I was on a softball team that never won a game all the years I played... and a ski team that dominated our region. I liked being part of both and would not have appreciated coaches interfering to make things "fair".

I know what you're saying, and partly agree, but this wasn't really about being "fair" so much as it was about extending a little grace and backing off. The team match up was "unfair' and yes, that's life and that's sports and it's reality.

Another important life lesson is grace when one is obviously the clear winner in the situation.

I play one on one soccer with Lil Lookout. I'm 28 years older than him so I'm bigger, stronger, and have a better understanding of the game. Should I beat him 10-0 every single time to teach him life isn't fair? What purpose would that serve? I don't try to make things fair but I also don't play full tilt with him. That's not good coaching(or parenting). As he progresses I play just a bit harder each time so that victory is within his grasp, but a struggle to achieve. I handicap myself, which makes me a better player while allowing him to be in the game. Sometimes he gets me, but not often.

I understand Jinx's point and I've argued along those same lines myself when griping about soccer coaching, but I think there is a difference here. Beating a team 50-0 is quite an achievement. Beating a team 90-0 is quite an achievement. Leading a team by 97 points and still using your strongest shooters to drill 3 pointers with no restriction is a waste of a learning opportunity for your own team.

I just think playing against a team that wasn't trying anymore because I suck so bad would be more embarrassing than losing by a huge margin... These are high school kids, not pee-wees.
Also there's no way of knowing if they did back off at all; put the 3rd string in, practiced harder 3pt shots etc...

I don't know, if the match up is unfair there's not much to be done about it after the game starts.