Running up the score. Is it really that bad?
Posted By: codeRed
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 02:43 amRedzoner mentioned below a time Lavell ran up the score on UTEP and I've also read on here many times below how horrible it is for someone to run up the score. In some cases I agree. For example if Nebraska in some bad scheduling farce is playing Snow College, I don't think them running up the score would be too cool. But, I really don't understand what the evil is for any D1 school to do so to the other. As a Utah fan, I've been on the wrong end and it truly does suck. But fact is, regardless of what the press tells you, it does get you attention. Face it, if Utah, by some miracle of miracles, goes into Ann Arbor and blows Michigan away (Mac would obviously have to be out ill for Utah to run up the score on anybody) and then runs up the score, the Utes would probably be the top story on every national sports program. Furthermore, if Michigan wins and blow us out of the water, well that's expected, but even so, they will garner extra attention if they beat us badly.
I just don't see the harm. I'm not advocating people purposfully try to embarass a program, but I don't think it's a bad thing. In fact, just once I would like Mac to play agressively when were up by 14 instead of sitting on it for 3.5 quarters and then cus the players when we lose or almost lose the game.
Just a thought
Go Utes!
Unwritten rule + payback is a beeatch...
Posted By: Ma'ake
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 05:42 amIMO, Not RUTS has descended as an unwritten rule in the coaching ranks, as a sign of respect for an opponent who, for whatever reason, just doesn't have the horses to run with you *that* day.
If you get pasted by another team with a lopsided score, (often due to additional scores being added after the outcome has been decided), you don't look good, at all, and these types of scores can be career threatening.
It is sort of like a gentlemen's agreement among coaches to not willfully participate in getting another coach fired.
Common sense also suggests that RUTS is a dangerous game, to the extent that the "what goes around comes around" factor is at play. The W-L result is bad enough...
RUTS is kind of like a conquering army coming through a town, and having killed half the men, they decide to take out the defeated pets, too. Hamsters, parakeets, goldfish, all smashed on the street. What is the point of all that? (OK, I'm not the King of Analogy. LOL)
On the payback issue...reality or myth?
Posted By: OhioBlue
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 08:07 amTo be quite frank, I've heard that payback, karma, what goes around, etc. argument before and I struggle to think of times that I have seen such a cycle evidenced.
So my honest question is if someone could provide some good examples, and aso convincingly argue that RUTS in a prior matchup really had much to do with the outcome of the example in question.
I remain skeptical, for now.
___________________________________________________
Pigs don't fly so much as plummet.
To quote Aretha Franklin: a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T
Posted By: SportUTE
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 09:11 amHow did you zoobs feel after Hawaii laid 72 on you guys on National TV? Well, it's the same way that Tulsa felt 13 weeks prior.
I personally would love to have the Utes lay a 72 to say, 6 or 13 against the zoo a good 5-6 years in a row and see how they like it. Especially with Crouton as coach and his penchant to RUTS last year in games they weren't hanging in there with the skin of their teeth.
Understood, but my question remains. . .
Posted By: OhioBlue
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 11:33 amdo all those one-sided beatings, as painful as they may be, really make a significant difference in the outcome of later games? Enough so as to be considered a major factor, such that would dissuade future teams from RUTSing for fear of payback?
I just don't see it. I'm not defending RUTS so much as I am honestly questioning the payback myth.
I think it only amounts to some extra satisfaction when the win does come--which is nice, but doesn't necessarily mean that the motivation to avenge a prior beating was as significant a factor as, say, talent, coaching, smarter play, etc.
That's all. As a Y fan, yes it hurt to watch the famed 72 happen on the Death Turf. As a fan, I want BYU to win that much more this year, and put up 90 if possible.But if it happens, will it be because the team and fans were ticked off about last year? In part, yes, but I think only a very small part.
If the motivation for revenge won football games, there'd be a lot more parity in D-1, and no established super powers.
Just my .02___________________________________________________
Pigs don't fly so much as plummet.
I wasn't passing judgement on running up the score
Posted By: Redzoner
Date: Saturday 3 August 2002, at 12:21 pmWhile running up the score is, without question, poor sportsmanship, I didn't mean to give the impression it's a bad thing. Sports is Darwinism - survival of the fittest. I just wanted to point out that winning, and winning big, is not a ticket into the BCS.
That being said, in the UTEP game I referred to, Lavell took his second team off the field, putting the first team back on in order to get the late score. I think any reasonable person would raise an eyebrow or two at that.
Thoughts on RUTSing
Posted By: Mr Crimson
Date: Sunday 4 August 2002, at 12:39 amThere is a difference between beating the crap out of someone and RUTSing them. A few years ago we beat Idaho St I believe 66-0 or something like that where it was 48-0 at the half I think and we hardly threw a pass in the second half.
RUTSing is where you score needless points late in a game that is decided. For example my first year at the U, BYU beat us like 70 to negative 6 in Zoobieland. They didn't ruts us because they called the dogs off so early. But the year Detmer won the heisman, they called a time out with a 10 point lead and about a minute to go on a 4th down to run a play and get one more touchdown. That was RUTSing.
RUTSing ala Crouton against the early bad teams last year is classless. Simply giving a bad team a cheap glass of wine and bending them over the front hood of your car is not the same as that.
I think its all about calling off the dogs when the game is no longer in doubt.
Last modified .