The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

Teams want practice. Reserves want to play.

The Spurrier school likes to run up the score (includes the Stoops brothers). Old school coaches don't.

You need to look at the game to factor MOV. If you have a Spurrier school coach passing at the end of the game against the 2nd string of a beaten opponent (or Saban passing at the end of a close game to stretch his margin over Georgia Southern), you discount it. If a team is up 49-7 at halftime and wins 56-31 coasting in, that's a huge win.

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

I like it!

It's like a knock out!

Also, fix overtime!!

(11-09-2014 11:16 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

Teams want practice. Reserves want to play.

IF you're up 30, I think your reserves are playing. If you're up 50, either your fourth string is playing, or your second string is outclassing their first string, or they've surrendered and are getting their second string some practice.

Quote:The Spurrier school likes to run up the score (includes the Stoops brothers). Old school coaches don't.

You need to look at the game to factor MOV. If you have a Spurrier school coach passing at the end of the game against the 2nd string of a beaten opponent (or Saban passing at the end of a close game to stretch his margin over Georgia Southern), you discount it. If a team is up 49-7 at halftime and wins 56-31 coasting in, that's a huge win.

That game is a 40+ point win measuring Team A against Team B, but in the books it only goes in as a 25 point win. ACtaully, measuring Team A against B, it's something like an 80 point difference over a full game. Because there's really nothing to play for in the second half, you get a distorted picture. With a 50-Point Rule, Team A wants to get that one more score to hit 50. And TEam B is playing for pride, playing to not get mercy-ruled.

Strategy and long-term coaching starts to come in when you're up 31-7 at halftime. At that point, you could push it and you might get to a 50 point lead before the end of the game, or you could let up and get your reserves their practice and coast to a 20-30 point win.

This might also be a solution to a problem that's not a problem. If Marshall played Louisville this year, or Cincinnati or UCF or SDSU or Kansas or UConn or ECU or Indiana or Kentucky or Wake Forest, we never end up having this discussion one way or another.

(11-09-2014 11:16 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

Teams want practice. Reserves want to play.

The Spurrier school likes to run up the score (includes the Stoops brothers). Old school coaches don't.

You need to look at the game to factor MOV. If you have a Spurrier school coach passing at the end of the game against the 2nd string of a beaten opponent (or Saban passing at the end of a close game to stretch his margin over Georgia Southern), you discount it. If a team is up 49-7 at halftime and wins 56-31 coasting in, that's a huge win.

No

(11-09-2014 11:35 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  I like it!

It's like a knock out!

Also, fix overtime!!

It is like a ref stoppage in boxing. When I was a kid and played youth baseball, we had a 10-run mercy rule. I didn't hear anything about it being to spare our feelings--nothing was worse than a mercy-rule loss--we always heard it was so that the games would end before dark, (sometimes the games would get called for darkness with or without the mercy rule) or so that the noon game would end before the 3:00 or 4:00 game had to start on the same diamond.

This would add some intrigue and interest to non-competitive games. Sort of like betting against the spread. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, with the focus on player health etc now--do we want Alabama going full-tilt for 60 minutes against South Alabama chasing an elusive 50-point lead? OTOH, we always hear about the increased risk of injury when you DON'T go all-out.

(11-09-2014 12:02 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-09-2014 11:35 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  I like it!

It's like a knock out!

Also, fix overtime!!

It is like a ref stoppage in boxing. When I was a kid and played youth baseball, we had a 10-run mercy rule. I didn't hear anything about it being to spare our feelings--nothing was worse than a mercy-rule loss--we always heard it was so that the games would end before dark, (sometimes the games would get called for darkness with or without the mercy rule) or so that the noon game would end before the 3:00 or 4:00 game had to start on the same diamond.

This would add some intrigue and interest to non-competitive games. Sort of like betting against the spread. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, with the focus on player health etc now--do we want Alabama going full-tilt for 60 minutes against South Alabama chasing an elusive 50-point lead? OTOH, we always hear about the increased risk of injury when you DON'T go all-out.

Georgia Southern was giving Alabama fits back in 2011. Alabama, primarily a running team, passed for a TD in the final minute to stretch it to 45-21. It was 24-21 late in the 3rd. Alabama scored 2 TDs late (think both were final 5 minutes and think both were passing TDs). Saban typically isn't a run it up type of coach, but was clearly playing for the polls in that game.

So that's why you need to look at the individual game if you are on the CFP committee.

Not gonna happen, because TV timeout windows are based on the clock. So, unless that changes, ending games early won't happen.

If you want MOV to be a factor then just cap the amount of points you get like some high school leagues do. Just say the the most MOV you can get from any one game is 21 points (or whatever number you choose). Then, even though you may win by 30 or 40, you are capped at that 21 points with regards to MOV. No need to have some dumb mercy rule that would cheat players out of experience on the field and fans that bought tickets to the game.

(11-09-2014 01:32 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Not gonna happen, because TV timeout windows are based on the clock. So, unless that changes, ending games early won't happen.

That's a factor, but I don't think it's insurmountable. They work around it in sports with knockouts like boxing and MMA. They work around in baseball which doesn't have a clock at all. ESPN might be happy to switch Mothership coverage from a prime game that turns into a blowout to a "lesser" game that turns out to be a competitive and compelling.

(11-09-2014 01:48 PM)dtd_vandal Wrote:  If you want MOV to be a factor then just cap the amount of points you get like some high school leagues do. Just say the the most MOV you can get from any one game is 21 points (or whatever number you choose). Then, even though you may win by 30 or 40, you are capped at that 21 points with regards to MOV. No need to have some dumb mercy rule that would cheat players out of experience on the field and fans that bought tickets to the game.

I used to say "just cap the MOV", but I'm influenced my Marshall here--the criticism is that they aren't proving anything hammering their opponents by 20 or so. Meanwhile TCU is either in or just outside the playoff, and I don't believe that hammering TEch by 50 isn't a part of that. Would Marshall prove anything if they focused on winning by 50 rather than just winning by a safe margin? I don't know.

I called this "genius or stupid" because I don't know.

(11-09-2014 11:35 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The more I think about it this year, trying to follow and predict what the CFP committee will do, the more I think MOV should be a factor. Everyone agrees that a 20-point win is and should be worth more than a last-minute field goal or overtime win over the same opponent. But there's a sentiment against running up the score and making the other guy look bad, that bleeds over into saying that MOV shouldn't count because it encourages a team up by 30 to go for 50 and that's unsportsmanlike.

It is widely believed (and may be confirmed) that in some blowout games, the coaches/ADs quietly agree to speed up the game clock to get it over with. The idea is that the losing side agrees that they're losing and everyone wants to get it over with.

So why not apply a "mercy rule" that says if one team gets to a 50 point lead, the game is over? If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State. Instead of padding the first string skill position players' stats, or getting the fourth string more work, everybody just go home. (Of course if you WANT to pad your Heisman candidate's stats, or you want to get your fourth string's feet wet, then you do the traditional clock-eating things you do instead of playing pedal-to-the-metal to get to a 50 point lead).

I don't think mismatches are going away. Would a "Mercy Rule" (a misnomer, because in effect it's a "Show no mercy" rule) bring interest into blowouts--can the contender stretch the lead to 50 and bring down the curtain?

I like it!

It's like a knock out!

Also, fix overtime!!

Overtime is more in need of a fix than MOV.

I was thinking yesterday that maybe there should be no FG attempts in OT, or maybe a twist on the new NFL rule: If the team that goes first in an OT doesn't score, the team that goes second can end the game with a TD, but if they only get a FG, the first team gets another possession and can keep the game going with a TD (but not a FG).

If anyone is concerned that final scores can be misleading when you want to factor in MOV into some formula, there is another approach. Only consider the MOV at the end of the third quarter. You don't want to discourage coaches from going to their scrubs when a game is well in hand. Those kids worked their butts off in practice all week. Let them see the field on Saturday.

(11-09-2014 11:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  If State is leading Tech by 50, Tech just doesn't belong on the field with State.

The only state with D1 schools name "tech" and "state" are Texas, Georgia, and Louisiana. Just thought I'd throw that out there :)

(11-09-2014 03:04 PM)ken d Wrote:  If anyone is concerned that final scores can be misleading when you want to factor in MOV into some formula, there is another approach. Only consider the MOV at the end of the third quarter. You don't want to discourage coaches from going to their scrubs when a game is well in hand. Those kids worked their butts off in practice all week. Let them see the field on Saturday.

That's not a bad idea.