We’ve entered new territory with the new and improved 50-point score management policy.
What to do about Norwich Free Academy coach Jemal Davis following his team’s 51-0 victory over Stamford?
According to The Day of New London’s Mike DiMauro here’s what went down: Stamford coach Bryan Hocter declined a running clock, NFA kept its starters in throughout a majority of the second half, starting tailback Marcus Outlow scored a touchdown to make it 49-0. NFA went over 50 points when a player blocked a punt for a safety with three minutes remaining.
These developments toe the ‘Score management’ policy’s guidelines in a way I haven’t seen since the policy’s inception in 2006.
But should Davis sit next week?
I say yes.
To wit:
- Stamford coach Bryan Hocter was not happy with the blocked punt, though he qualified his displeasure by saying he wasn’t sure it was intentional. Davis says his player made a mistake.
Iffy, especially since Hocter declined a running clock, but Davis went over the 50-point barrier. That’s strike one.
- Hocter wasn’t as diplomatic about NFA’s use of Outlow and the offensive line late into the game.
“I’m a little annoyed that No. 21 (Outlow) was in basically the whole entire game and so was most of the offensive line,” Hocter told DiMauro. “At this point in time, I’m not really OK with it. I thought it was a little classless on his part to do that. … Stuff like that comes back to bite you. You can’t embarrass a team. I thought he was trying to embarrass us. If he did, he did. We’ll go back and lick our wounds and try to get better.”
Later, Hocter reiterated his stance with our own Dave Ruden: “He is totally in the wrong. …I think he should be [suspended]. The guy’s got no class.”
OK, so opposing coach disapproves of the offending coach’s method, calls him ‘classless’: Strike two against Davis.
- Davis wasn’t exactly contrite when asked to explain himself.
“I don’t think we did anything inappropriate,” Davis told The Day. “It’s a product of the game and performance of our players. I can’t be upset at my kids. If I have to sit, that’s fine. Our job is to prepare them.”
His position is arguable, absolutely. But there were no apologies, nor any intent to keep the score down? That’s strike three.
So, CIAC Committee, whaddya got?
If ‘Score Management’ is truly the law of the land, Davis should be suspended. There’s a barrier, Davis crossed it, didn’t seem to care that he crossed it and Stamford coach Bryan Hocter agreed he didn’t care.
Davis can lecture about getting his kids ready for the playoffs until he’s pink, blue, green and red in the face. The policy strictly forbids his late-game actions.
I hate the policy. I believe Davis is well within his right to coach his team as he sees fit, and Hocter is within his right to be ticked about it. But the rules are the rules. This didn’t follow it. End of discussion.
So, what now CIAC Football Committee? If you don’t suspend Davis, the rule loses all credibility and should be scrapped ASAP. But, hey, 51 points, 50 points… what’s the difference? It wasn’t a gross violation, right? After all, Hocter refused a running clock.
And was it any different than Newtown scoring on a short pass with a minute left in its 47-21 victory over Oxford?
I’ll argue no, it’s all semantics at that stage of the game. If Davis is suspended, now it looks hypocritical and misguided.
We’ll see how this plays out come Monday.
Either way, this is how I believe the CIAC should proceed: Scrap the damn policy.
That is all.
What about the Greenwich Coach– didn’t they break the rule too? Their coach according to the paper — “didn’t take a knee but kicked the extra point because it is an embarrassment to the game” (to take a knee) shouldn’t he be suspended too?
Nope. 50 points is the threshold. 51 and over is violation.
I think everyone agrees the “50 point rule” is dumb…Maybe a 60 or 70 point rule?…Who knows…It ought to be sensible to any coach to try and call off the dogs when your team is way beyond getting beat, just for the sake of not humiliating the losing team any more…These are still just teen age kids with family and friends in the stands…
That said, it’s seems hard to penalize the NFA coach when you let Barlow & Greenwich slide with the same rule…Not sure about Barlow, but the Greenwich starters were out of the game in the second half when they were up 42-0 on Central at halftime..It actually gave the next years players valuable game experience…
Maybe that’s the real crime…Piling it on with your starters all the way to the end against an obviously beaten team…IMO, that’s just a poor & selfish decision by the winning coach…
This ridiculous rule should be struck down. Does this really prepare our kids for the real world after high school? What good does it do to tell them they’re not allowed to do anything to the best of their ability? “Sorry, you’ve sold more than any other salesman, so you’re not allowed to sell any more. Take a knee. Let someone else take your money.” Aww, but they’re just kids, we don’t want to hurt their feeeeeeelings. C’mon, grow up. Hoctor declined the running clock and said they would take their beating like men. Then whined about it later. Very sad.
Get rid of the 50 point rule. Life is tough too bad if you get beat by 50 points. If a coach puts in their second stringers how can you tell a kid not to score. If a coach doesn’t take out his starters when they are up 40 or 50 points then he is an idiot and the kids will learn that he is an idiot. It’s all supposed to teach the kids life lessons. The people in charge need to do a better job with the schedule, even up the amount of teams in the FCIAC to get rid of the bye week and get rid of the 50 point rule.
To summarize what I’ve written in past years 1) Coaches hate the running clock because it short-changes the backups who practice just as hard as the starters, and 2) Coach Davis’ sentiment of “our kids had worked hard to keep a zero on the board” is a common and understandable source of pride. Therefore, the *only* logical way to accomplish both 1 & 2 as well as assure good sportsmanship is to adopt “my” modified mercy rule: “Once the scoring difference gets to at least 50 points, or at the mutual consent of the coaches, the official scoring ends but the game continues in every other respect exactly as it would have otherwise.”
If in effect for Stamford-NFA, Coach Hocter, trailing 49-0, could have conceded. Had Coach Davis refused, a mandatory concession would have kicked in at 51-0. If Coach Hocter’s backups end up playing Coach Davis’ starters (remaining in for conditioning purposes, but risking injury), so be it. NFA has a right to higher aspirations, such as preparing kids for 48 minutes of football. Tough to run up the score when the score is frozen. Problem solved.
I have three thoughts – which may seem contradictory, but I don’t think they are.
1. Get rid of the rule. There are other better options to prevent 97-0 games.
2. Since the rule is still in place, the NFA coach needs to be suspended. I hate the rule, but he seems to have left his starters in way too long. Sounds like his starters could have even played THREE QUARTERS and then sat. Many local coaches are forced to play their JV’s through the whole second half. He didn’t do everything he could to keep the score under 50.
3. The Stamford coach needs to be quiet. If he refused a running clock, then in my opinion, he should not be calling for the other coach’s suspension. The running clock is actually a good rule. In this case, the Stamford coach did not do everything HE could do to help manage the score.
@cthsfbfan – Nope, that’s about right.
It seems to me the “score management” issue started with Cochran the elder at Bloomfie
It seems to me the “score management” issue was taken to the next level with the rule. The rule has incented, in my opinion more blowouts because a 34-0 win is almost a sign of weakness – because for some reason you weren’t able to accomplish the 49-0 score.
I am a regular attendee at NFA football games and have watched the improvement of the program over the past few years. I was unable to attend the Stamford game but am puzzled by the complaints voiced here for several reasons. First, this game was not a schedule mismatch. Stamford and NFA are both LL teams and Stamford plays in a conference that traditionally offers a high level of play. Second, this was apparently not perceived as a mismatch going in because your column previewed the game by saying “show the ECC what ‘s what”. Third, the 50 points were compiled gradually throughout the game as it was 28 to 0, at half and 35 to 0 at the end of the third quarter. Fourth, the facts given were incomplete. Some starters were out of the game in the fourthnquarter including the quarterback and NFA kept the ball on the ground for 45 plays rather than throwing bombs to their receivers who reportedly were leaving the cornerbacks in the dust. Fifth, the score went over 50 on a blown punt and Stamford’s coach declined a running clock. If there was some satisfaction in this win taken by NFA fans because of the lack of respect given to NFA, New London , Ledyard, Montville and other competitive teams out here from the FCIAC, it was well deserved based on many prior examples of questionable sportmanship. When some FCIAC boys and girls plays tennis team matches against kids from out here (who rarely can afford private lessons for years or USTA tournaments), they not only take pleasure in winning 6-0,6-0. They have contests as to how few points they allow their opponent to receive in the matches. The girl who was the number one seed two years ago in one division played several games against an ECC girl while eating Reese cups and drinking a Gatorade on the court in one hand. Some coaching there. Those stories get around too. Coach Davis probably could have turned down the dial a little sooner after cranking up his team to play a unknown team from the big bad FCIAC but he doesn’t deserve to be sanctioned here.
Glenn, I concur. I once attended a swim meet between FCIAC and ECC schools and saw a number one seed girl do the backstroke with a French poodle on her stomach. I wish they put up 70 on them.
I want to add that while I sympathize with the “just get rid of the rule altogether” crowd in theory, in practice, unless and until high school sports drop “sportsmanship” as an objective, we are all just deluding ourselves. The fact a large number of states have score limitation rules to begin with should be self-evident this is endemic to human nature, not simply the CIAC’s overreaction to a rogue coach who has since retired. Get rid of the rule and I guarantee we’ll be back to one side raising pitchforks and the other carrying torches. Rather, we need something more agreeable, which I’ve done my best to propose. I suggest honing such a rule is a better use of our group efforts.
If I remember correctly, when Kevin Jones was the coach at Stamford, he also had an issue with NFA….he had some “not nice” things to say in an interview. If there was some “bad blood” from a few years ago,why was this game scheduled in the first place?
Re: comments #11 and #12, I am an FCIAC guy, but if what you say is true, those 2 coaches don’t get it, either…..
bottom line? coach Davis has his kids ready and NFA is for real ! ….they can compete with ANY team in the state.
no rule will never manage class less coaches and there are plenty.
we have LL teams playing in the swc conf against s and m schools
to me this is a recipe for this kind of crap. com-on Masuk,Newtown,New
Milford man up and go visit Staples, Greenwich,and see how you run
it up against the fciac.
I had the pleasure of going to the New Fairfield vs, Weston football game friday night. Great atmosphere and a terrific setting for a game ….however, the lights at New Fairfield are horrible..it’s dark and they are too low.. a glare persists at all times. One other thing, the cloc operator let the clock run several seconds onevery play when the closckshould have been stopped. On one Weston touchdown the clock ran eight seconds after he crossed the goal lin. One of the parents from NF was so upsetr that he said he will talk to the powere that be. The game officials are supposed to keep the clock on the field but in this game once the scorboard lock ran out each quarter was over so the game officials had no control over clock management.
oh, and i think NFA showed the FCIAC “whats up” hahaha
I had the pleasure of going to the New Fairfield vs. Weston football game friday night. Great atmoshere and a terrific setting for a game…however, the lights at NF are horrible…it’s dark and they are too low…a glare persists at all times..One other thing, the clock operator let the clock run several seconds after each play which shortened the game considerably. This is unfair to those boys that are playing. On one Weston touchdown the clock ran for eight seconds after the official called it a touchdown. One NF parent was so infuriated that he said he will talk to the powers that be. The game officials are suppose to keep the clock on the field but in this case once the scoreboard clock ran out the quarter, or half was over. What GIVES?
They went over by a point because of a blocked-punt safety, with three minutes left? Were there other blocked punts in the game, that this should have been expected? It seems to me that last week, the coaches were all lovey-dovey, so nobody wanted to see a suspension. This week, the coaches are at each other throats, so everybody wants to see one. You can’t have it both ways. If you’ve got a 50 point rule, going over due to a touchdown is way worse (more avoidable) than due to a punt block for a safety.
i find it funny how the stamford coach is soooooo upset . when they beat nhs they were up 42-7 and scored on a 50yd SCREEN pass with under 4 minutes to play .
@DC – Guess so. Eeps. That was a horrible showing. FCIAC’s been pretty dreadful out of league. Their best (and only) win? Danbury 15-14 over Hamden. Ouch.
i wouldn’t use Danbury as representation of the fciac let nfa go
play Staples,Greenwich, Darien,NC OUCH
@dc SPB my thoughts exactly. Is this the same Hamden that nearly beat Prep? It is the same Danbury that is struggling to get wins in the FCIAC. As for citing examples of other bad coaching decisions in other sports, I guess it will only be fair if the tennis team plays blindfolded or with thier weaker hand. We all hate the rule but it happens even with the best intentions. It is impossible to know what someone attentions are but the NFA coach had a chance to clarify and he was less than humble. You never want to get someone hurt, but all the fans who think it was great and the coach was in the right – wonder if the football gods made a better decision by having one of the starters coming up injured at that point of the game – same good decision? Same great coaching decision? Get over yourself – NFA’s results are good and they will have a chance to prove how good they are in the states – beating Stamford this year does not prove anything.
HS Sports well done
@ dc great job beating a 2-4 stamford team whos only two wins are vs teams with a combined record of 1-11 . i mean ur best vs probaly the 14th best fciac team . well played my friend
I think comments by NFA coach speak for themselves. Letting starters stay in game when game is out of reach takes away from sportsmanship. He also risked injury to the starters if he left them in when score was out of hand. NFA coach doesn’t get it, he feel rules don’t apply to him. A rule is a rule. Interesting to get the officials take on NFA conduct. Black eye on ECC where Cochran rule was the reason it had to be made. Don’t agree with rule, but common sense and sportsmanship should reign in HS sports. Both were lacking in NFA this past weekend.
Agree with SPB if CIAC does nothing it will send wrong message. Let’s hope NFA AD does the right thing. Will send message and lesson to every coach and player in state. A rule is a rule. Payback to NFA will come in some form or other.
Albonizio from Greenwich should have taken a knee and won by 49 …that is smart common sense thing to do not anything else ….
for that alone he should be suspended !!
agree that the stamford game doesn’t mean much. NFA will prove the point much more clearly in the LL state championship game
What a waste of time! All because of a coach that used to run up the scores 10 years ago. Running clock stinks also. The kids practice all week to get short changed the amount of play time. Common sense is not so common. They need to improve competition with schedules and get rid of the 50 point rule.
NFA folks calm down. U beat SHS, traditionally not one of the better FCIAC teams. U know u won’t come calling for Staples, Greenwich, or NC on a bye week would u now? AND if I remember correctly wasn’t it a just a few years back NFA received an ass whipping by another FCIAC team called Trumbull in the state semi’s at west haven high?
@Brian amd your point is? This team is much better than the NFA team that lost a close one to Trumball. Bring on Staples….
DC,
My point is that NFA folks that jumped on this blog in the last 48 hours to cry foul about their coach being suspended make it sound like u are this LL juggernaut. All I’m saying is they beat Stamford high who traditionally is an average team and in my opinion NFA was supposes to win this game. Maybe not by 51 points but still.
To say u are ready to roll in LL playoffs or in the title game is just funny considering u have not been in the LL title game in how long?? Don’t judge the FCIAC becasue u beat Stamford. Be careful what u wish for in Staples…or Greenwich for that matter. Let’s hope it happens.
you have no shot vs staples ….. thats the truth
then again not many teams do
NFA’s last and ONLY trip to the title game was a thrashing at the hands of Southington in 1998 just to clarify, they had an okay showing in state semi vs. eventual state champ and Register no.1 West Haven in 2002 and then that poor showing vs. Trumbull. For a school of about 2,400 students it’s a less than stellar history
I think the issue is strong teams sense LL is wide open this year and maybe even the NHR media crown is up for grabs. NFA is definitely a strong contender and probably saw the Stamford game as a way to make a statement to the media that it deserved to be in the top-10, so it piled on the points. Clearly winning by 50 doesn’t add any CIAC points for the playoffs. And the kid blocking the kick is just a function of playing at his hyped-up peak, but is that wrong? No. Stamford is down this year and a bit lost right now, so was it “poor sportsmanship” taking advantage of a team like that? I have a hard time critizing NFA for playing its best. Being a CTHSFB fan, I was dissapointed in the overall outcome of the situation for both Stamford and NFA. I hate the 50 point rule and prefer the running clock or some other tactic at the choice of the Refs. If there is bad blood between the two coaches during the 4th quarter and one team’s players have given up, someone needs to take control and do the right thing. My view is the decision should be delegated to the Refs if the coaches aren’t taking the appropriate actions. In the 4th quarter, they could have called super-tight holding calls on NFA’s OL to kill drives when their starting RB was left in the game or call an off-sides penalty on the blocked kick – anything to avoid the embarassment of what happened and send a message to the coaches. Its just a shame we have this stupid 50 point rule. We all would be better served if the CIAC developed a game-management policy and trained the Refs on how to take control of a game in the 4th quarter where both coaches have clearly lost their senses and can’t do the right thing themselves.
i just want to point out that even thought stamford isn’t the greatest fciac team beating them 51-0 is still pretty impressive , i saw them vs nhs and they looked pretty good that night . i also don’t agree with the shs coach crying about the score especially when he was running screen passes to his STARTING wr up 42-7 with under 4 to play . this 50 point rule is the worse
A better rule would be something along the lines of the 15 run rule in softball. The game is over if the losing team does not score in its last at bat to bring this margin down. In football, you could institute a similar rule. As soon as a team reaches a 50 point margin, the losing team would get one more posession to score. If they don’t, game over. If the winning team regains posession on a fumble, interception, ect, game over at the moment of posession. Any runback for a score would not count as the game would end at the moment of posession. The current rule as it exists encourages a coach to let the other team sxcore easily, or play to not score themselves, which also makes a mockery of the game.
@39 I Agree it’s a mockery…It’s only decent sense to first win the game, but then lay off an opponent who is obviously not up to your team’s ability…Why pour it on?…Scoring by 50 or more to me just makes you a bully, and you’re not getting brownie/respect points for that, except maybe in your own mind…
That said, a 15 run rule in softball would translate to a 90 point rule in football, and thats if no extra points are scored…LOL…Hey I could live with a 90 point rule, but the coaches better have the 9th graders in by then…. Mandatory…