Here’s an interesting sportsmanship question.

Ohio State was leading Kent State 28 to 0 with three seconds left before halftime.

They had the ball and could have simply taken a knee and gone into the locker room with a four touchdown lead.

Instead, they took a shot at the end zone.

It worked. Touchdown. 35 to 0 at halftime.

My first reaction was basically, come on. You’re already up 28 to 0. Take the knee.

There’s a long standing idea in sports that once you clearly have an opponent beaten, there comes a point where continuing to aggressively pile on points starts to look less like competition and more like running up the score.

But then I started thinking about the other side of it.

Three seconds left in the half is an actual football situation. Someday Ohio State could be down by four, five, or six points with three seconds left before halftime, or even at the end of a game, and desperately need that exact play to work.

How often do you get to practice that situation against a real defense, in a real stadium, with the clock actually showing three seconds? (Eh em, Michigan)

You can practice a Hail Mary a hundred times during the week, but practice is not the same as doing it in a game. The quarterback has to buy enough time. The receivers have to get downfield. The protection has to hold. Everyone has to understand the situation and know that this is the final play.

From that perspective, maybe the score almost should not matter. Coaches are supposed to prepare their players for situations they may face later in the season, and this was a rare opportunity to get a real game repetition that you cannot completely recreate on a practice field.

At the same time, there is still something that feels a little uncomfortable about doing it when you are already beating an overmatched team 28 to 0.

So where is the line?

Is taking that shot poor sportsmanship and unnecessarily running up the score? Or is it completely legitimate situational football, using a rare opportunity to practice something that could matter enormously later in the season?

I can honestly see the argument both ways.

What do you think?

6 minutes ago, Krsmqn said:

What do you think?

I think you are correct on why you take the shot at the end of the half, practice real game situation.

However, I also think Oregon should have taken a knee at the end of our game.

16 minutes ago, Krsmqn said:

Here’s an interesting sportsmanship question.

Ohio State was leading Kent State 28 to 0 with three seconds left before halftime.

They had the ball and could have simply taken a knee and gone into the locker room with a four touchdown lead.

Instead, they took a shot at the end zone.

It worked. Touchdown. 35 to 0 at halftime.

My first reaction was basically, come on. You’re already up 28 to 0. Take the knee.

There’s a long standing idea in sports that once you clearly have an opponent beaten, there comes a point where continuing to aggressively pile on points starts to look less like competition and more like running up the score.

But then I started thinking about the other side of it.

Three seconds left in the half is an actual football situation. Someday Ohio State could be down by four, five, or six points with three seconds left before halftime, or even at the end of a game, and desperately need that exact play to work.

How often do you get to practice that situation against a real defense, in a real stadium, with the clock actually showing three seconds? (Eh em, Michigan)

You can practice a Hail Mary a hundred times during the week, but practice is not the same as doing it in a game. The quarterback has to buy enough time. The receivers have to get downfield. The protection has to hold. Everyone has to understand the situation and know that this is the final play.

From that perspective, maybe the score almost should not matter. Coaches are supposed to prepare their players for situations they may face later in the season, and this was a rare opportunity to get a real game repetition that you cannot completely recreate on a practice field.

At the same time, there is still something that feels a little uncomfortable about doing it when you are already beating an overmatched team 28 to 0.

So where is the line?

Is taking that shot poor sportsmanship and unnecessarily running up the score? Or is it completely legitimate situational football, using a rare opportunity to practice something that could matter enormously later in the season?

I can honestly see the argument both ways.

What do you think?

I watched the tape of last night's game and felt like a sadist.

After the O disappeared in Austin, Ryan Day wants to do what Dan Lanning did last night. Pile on the points.

I have NO problem with Ohio State scoring any and every way the Bickeeys can.

The B1G Week 3 slate is sad. Want better OOC games? Go to a 24-team PO.

A friend also told me Oregon's beating of Portland State was bad sportsmanship.

But as I see it the Ducks had to deal with a real monkey on their backs. They needed to find the confidence that was almost completely destroyed in the prior week. They needed to prove they are able to operate as an effective team.

So, yeah, maybe taking a knee at the end would have taken away some of the criticism aimed at Dan and the team for a 4-quarter beatdown. But not by much.

Better to judge the coaches and the team with how they perform next week as a result.

Oregon has a lot of issues that were exposed in week one and two. Mostly energy, execution and discipline.

I have no problem with Oregon using the full 60 min to exercise those demons and get right. Dan was right using all the live game clock to build his team up and fix what's wrong.

Third team players are part of that continued effort. If PSU or any other CFB honk doesn't like it then it'sPSU job to stop it... FEBU!

Keep grinding Ducks. Fix the issues. You don't care when others say your the best, no reason to care about anything else they may say.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by Log Haulin

Man USC is getting away with redrum. Holding, PI... the B1G is desperate for SC to be viable