Talk:Running up the score

message: Alright, the opening paragraph(s) say that the worst offenders include Oklahoma, Florida, and Auburn. Oklahoma, I'll grant you, deserves mention, but Florida I thought left its running-up-the-score nonsense behind once Spurrier left. Auburn... I can't remember Auburn ever running up the score, although I'm not saying they never did--I just can't think up any examples. Bama seems to be a better SEC example--didn't they just lose a key guy to injuries well after a game was decided? (Against Florida, no?) The worst offender (besides MAYBE Oklahoma) is Texas Tech, but as they're already mentioned, I think we'd best leave them be. Any thoughts? Matt Yeager 06:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, feel free to be bold and change it yourself. Matt Yeager 23:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: Are all the college football examples really necessary to help readers get the point? Couldn't that section be spun off?
(Or is that sort of demonstrating the concept?) Daniel Case 17:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Running up the examples?

message: I really like how this page is shaping up. 204.8.38.73, you have my infinite gratitude. Matt Yeager 02:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Edits

message: I'm not convinced that there is less running up of the score on the west coast, seems POV. Nick Dillinger 04:13, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can check out ESPN.com to find the scores of several Pac-10 teams, and note the occurances of "running up the score" (all the games' scores and stats are archived, so you can see if late-game touchdowns were scored by starters or fourth-stringers). It looked to me like the Pac-10 and the Mountain West really don't run up the score much at all, while teams like, say, Texas decide to score 70 points against Colorado before pulling out their starters. Matt Yeager 22:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this, as it doesn't really make sense in light of (1) the Washington/Oregon example given further down the page, and (2) USC's total domination of the Pac-10 and other opponents (such as Arkansas) this year. (ESkog)(Talk) 16:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: West Coast

message: In the past few years (these are just the highlights):
* ISU at OU; OU wins 53-7; 24 points scored in the last 18:18 of the game (21 in the last 12:18, including the clicher--with just over a minute left, a 5-yard run to score a TD providing that vital 46-point margin). (One caveat--7 of OU's final points were on a kickoff return for a touchdown, which I'm certainly not going to hold against them.)
* OU 65, UT 13; Oklahoma scores four TD's in the second half--one 2 minutes in (no problem); one with 2 minutes left in the third quarter (iffy); one 7 seconds into the fourth quarter to make the margin 45 points (uhh...); and the beautiful clincher--the last one coming with 2:06 left in the game. Certainly, Stoops is a man opposed to running up the score (as this laugher of an article suggests).
* Another beauty, this time vs. Oklahoma State. With OU leading 38-9 and 9 minutes left in the game... the play is... a 66-yard pass from Jason White (the starter). Oh, and add on another touchdown three minutes later for a final score of 52-9.
* The infamous Texas A&M game, where Oklahoma decided in turn during the second half that 49-0, 56-0, and even 63-0 were not impressive enough margins of victory, before finally pulling out the starters (and adding a fumble return for a TD) to win 77-0.
* OU at TTU... because when you're leading by "just" 24, and you're on your own 23 yard line with 3:11 left, a 77-yard pass play from your starting quarterback is totally justified.
Fortunately, Stoops got paid back by KSU and LSU shortly following the TTU game... next season, anyone?
* Oklahoma 63, Houston 13--highlight: Adrian Peterson's run in for a score with less than 9 minutes left. Not so bad, but just one more mark against Stoops. We're not done yet!
* Oklahoma 31, Oregon 7. The score isn't so bad... but still, with a 17-point lead, and just 3:13 left on the clock, Adrian Peterson pulls off a 17-yard TD run. Another example, and a more telling one--see below.
* The game that REALLY started the running up the score firestorm-- OU 41, Kansas 10. With 35 seconds left in the game, up 35-10, OU's starting QB (Jason White) passes for a touchdown (XP blocked). See below for why it was really bad.
* OU 42, OSU 14 (2005). The only 2005 example--simply because OU wasn't good enough this year to run up the score on any even semi-decent team. (Oklahoma State did not qualify as a semi-decent squad this season. Not even close.) Anyways,  up by 21 with 6:41 left in the game, starting QB Bomar hurls a 55-yard TD pass. Nice.
That's a murderer's row, now isn't it?
Okay, so why were the Oregon and (even moreso) the Kansas games so bad? Because, as you might recall, during the 2004 season, Oklahoma was fending off a hot Auburn team (that, by the by, did NOT run up the score against opponents) in the polls. Bob Stoops ran up these scores to impress voters--it's worth noting that the most flagrant example of any running-up of the score occured in a game not broadcast on national television--most voters would see little other than the final score. Stoops realized this (the man's pretty sharp) and ran up the score accordingly, with less care for the integrity of the game than he had ever shown before.
And, by the by, as Stoops is included as the example of coaches that run up the score to impress voters, that's why it's so important. The Kansas game alone, actually, justifies his placement in the article. He's going back in. Matt Yeager 01:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed 100% Gravypan. Those who complain about RUTS and OU's alleged use of it are just looking for ways to conceal their own defensive ineptitude, such that now, it is OU's problem all of a sudden. What a joke. --rock8591 01:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bob Stoops

message: Just wanted to say this is a very well-written article. I'd suggest it for FA, but they'd probably muck it all up getting it to match FA guidelines. Nice work, people. -- Jake 20:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, ditto, and I found a lot of interesting information in you folks' exchanges on this talk page. I made a few recent edits about the Canadian hockey team and Epiphanny Prince. I also find it interesting that women's teams are now being held to the same competitive standards as men, even on a negative issue like this. (And yeah, Bob Stoops = score-monger supreme.)--Mike Selinker 08:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a sometime (though currently active) participant at WP:FAC, I can assure you this has a way to go (references? footnotes?). But it's getting pretty interesting. See below. Daniel Case 05:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great article 

message: Maybe it's time to illustrate this. Are there any images out there of a scoreboard showing a lopsided score that we could use? Daniel Case 05:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image?

message: Seems like John Heisman's 1916 222-0 victory as head coach of Georgia Tech over Cumberland University should be listed, as it's the best example of "running up the score" on any team in history, also the most one-sided game recorded. Zchris87v 13:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you'd think... they had a point, though--they wanted to prove how meaningless box scores are. We'll see. I don't want to just crap something out and put it on, though--it ought to be well-written. In fact, that might merit an article in and of itself. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 04:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an article: 1916 Cumberland vs. Georgia Tech football game. It should be mentioned in this article somewhere, IMO. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 18:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Heisman & Georgia Tech?

message: Source #1
1988: 60-0 over Louisiana Tech, 82-28 over Tulsa, 66-15 over Texas
1989: 69-0 over UNLV, 65-7 over Temple, 66-10 over Baylor, 95-21 over SMU, 55-10 over TCU, 64-0 over Rice
Source #2
1990: 84-21 over Eastern Washington
1991: 73-3 over Louisiana Tech
1991 also included Miami beating Houston 40-10. 1992 included a 61-7 win by Michigan over Houston.
Honorary mentions to the 1980 BYU Cougars and the 1998 Kansas State Wildcats. K-State though 4 games had put up 249 points and allowed 21 points. That was the year before the 66-0 victory over Missouri.
Oh yeah, Jerry Glanville ran up the score on Pardee's Oilers in response to the SMU/UH game.
--RobbieFal 17:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Jack Pardee/UH tradition on this matter 

message: A lot of the college football examples finish with slightly snide-sounding "but they got a taste of their own medicine in the end"-type comments that use words and phrases ("comeuppance", "paid the price for its crimes", "in Stoops's defense") that are pretty heavily non-neutral in their assumption that RUTS actually is a wrong thing to do.  A lot of them are also, I think, of questionable relevance or with only a tenuous logical connection to their example—does anyone seriously think that Michigan only beat Ohio State in 1969 because they were motivated by wanted revenge for the score the previous year, and not because, you know, it's the Ohio State-Michigan game?  (In other words, does anyone think the Michigan players would have played any less hard if the previous year had seen a close Ohio State win, or a Michigan win?)  Or there's the Florida example, in which Spurrier pointing out that most of his supposed "running up the score" comes after he's already put his third string in is immediately followed by "But the tables were turned on Spurrier in the Fiesta Bowl", which reads strongly to me like it's saying that Florida putting in its backups should just be disregarded as untrue and they still deserve to be "punished" for being that much better than so many of their opponents.  I'd say that, unless the counter-example being used is itself an example of RUTS or unless we have a quote from a coach or player saying, "Yeah, we really wanted this win in revenge for them RUTS against us last year," most of them need to go.
And if anyone wants to dig it up, I seem to remember Spurrier making a comment after the Gators beat Georgia in Athens (in 1995?) that they'd set their target at fifty points because they knew no one had ever scored that many against the Bulldogs at home.  Might be something to include.  Binabik80 17:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  College football examples 

message: The examples need some help.  Just because someone whines about it on a message board or a team scores 70+ points doesn't make it a RUTS.  Last weekend when Oklahoma hung 79 on Baylor, they did nothing but rush in the second half and they pulled their starters for the fourth quarter.  With 9 minutes left in the game, sitting at the UNT 22, they ran the ball straight up the gut on 4th + 12 to intentionally turn it over instead of kicking the field goal.  That's not running up the score.  Any example listed here needs to involve actually trying to score, not just scoring because your opponent can't stop your bench warmers.  It needs to be agreed upon by the media that it is a RUTS, not just people whining on message boards.  
RUTSing doesn't necessarily have to involve 70 points.  For example, in the 2000 UF-MissSU game, a Florida equipment manager was trampled in the celebration.  Spurrier promised him that they would get revenge by scoring a touchdown for him.  With under 2 minutes left in the game, UF threw a touchdown pass to make the game 52-0.
That is running up the score.  Scoring 70 points because the opposition can't stop your bench warmer tailback from running it up the gut isn't. --B 01:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: I have never heard of such a thing in soccer - amateur or otherwise, how is that supposed to work? Maybe something like that exists in the US, does anyone have a reference for that?
And btw. as mentioned in the article, it really is interesting that good sportsmanship is interpreted 180° differently in Europe than in the US in regards to "running up the score" 	
84.114.130.170 12:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't speak for the collegiate level, but here in Iowa, the Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union and Iowa High School Athletic Association both have rules which call for a contest to be halted if the margin is 10 or more goals after halftime (i.e., a game would be halted with 25 minutes left in the second half if the score became 10-0; a 13-0 game before halftime would continue until the half is ended). The rules may vary based on level and the organization. [[Briguy52748 (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Weird.  I can't imagine a mercy rule as a rule in amateur soccer here in England.  What I can imagine, because I've seen it on a number of occasions, is that a team is a lot up at half-time, and the two managers (in a youth game) or captains (in an adult game) get together and agree to shake hands on a win - usually reporting the game to the league as double the half-time score (so if you were winning 12-0, you'd report it as 24-0) and then the two teams would be pooled together and the two captains would pick players for the second half to set up reasonably equally talented sides.  That makes the second half fun for all concerned. Richard Gadsden (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  mercy rule in soccer? 

message: Recently, an editor has been adding in statements about the New England Patriots continuing to have their starting lineup play and perform fan-pleasing, big plays against weak opponents in the very latter stages of a one-sided game. I realize that the Patriots, their strategies, etc., have very emotional consequences for various fans, but to put such statements in an article without sourcing it against Wikipedia policy. It is another thing to say something to the effect of, "Many fans, coaches and sportswriters accused the Patriots of running up the score" if it were to come from a reliable sports article (e.g., a well-respected columnist in a newspaper such as the USA Today), but such a statement must be sourced to be included. If this editor can find a reliable article saying that the Patriots run up the score, then put it in and source it properly; otherwise,  the statement could be challenged and removed. Hope you can understand my point. [[Briguy52748 (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New England Patriots

message: I'm doing NPOV Tag cleanup.  This topic seems to have many editors who care about it a lot, and I'm not going to mess with it.  It seems to me upon reading here that the topic looks pretty good, and I'd hazard to say that the reasons for the POV tag have been addressed.  If you all feel the same, I'd suggest someone take it upon themselves to delete the tag. Jjdon (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag 

message: Removed the information about Bobby Bowden. This article is about running up the score, not about Mr. Bowden.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by FreddyPickle (talk • contribs) 04:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bobby Bowden  

message: As requested by a user, here is why I believe this page merits  and . It should be obvious that I am not knowledgeable about U.S. sports.
Originalresearch:
* The "Reasons for running up the score" section reads like someone sucked their pencil and jotted down a few thoughts.  It also duplicates the "Justifications for running up the score" section.
* Bob Stoops: the external links prove that his teams won games by a lot; this doesn't even prove they were ROTS games, never mind that this was to benefit in polls, still less that he is notorious for this. The paragraph also duplicates the  later "Oklahoma" section.
* Who decided which examples to include? Are they canonical/famous/notorious? Are they picked to illustrate a particular aspect of ROTS?  They seem currently to be just a random assortment of lopsided games.
* Originalresearch overlaps with . Most of the article has no refs; some of the refs are deadlinks; some link to pages that don't support the contentions made in the article.
Examplefarm:
* The games should be integrated with the preceding "Justifications for running up the score" section, where the examples can directly illustrate the relevant justification. Otherwise the list looks akin to List of 100 point games in NCAA college football.
* What's needed for each game is:
** why was the result considered ROTS 
** what reason was given or suggested for the team choosing to do so 
** did anyone deny that it was ROTS 
** were there consequences, e.g. disciplinary hearings, revenge/grudge rematches later, enduring notoriety for the coach, star player injured late on, ...?
** cited source, not just for the result, but for all the preceding 
*Individual games:
** Georgia Tech: the main 1916 Cumberland vs. Georgia Tech football game article (not very well cited) suggests the score was revenge for a previous baseball blowout.  That's the kind of illustrative detail that belongs in this article.
** Houston: they scored much more in the second half than the first in 1968.  Is this rare?
** Miami: 
*** was it considered extra unsporting to ROTS in the Notre Dame coach's last game? 
*** ""Nobody apologized to me when Oklahoma did it"--was this offered as a cause? Does this coach advocate ROTS generally?
*** "Miami was rewarded in the AP poll as it passed idle Iowa to reach No. 3"  was there a lot of complaint about this as being unfair? I guess in Iowa; what about more generally?
*** "Miami paid the price when Tennessee drilled them, 35-7, in the 1986 Sugar Bowl." Presumably this means "lots of neutrals gloated" rather than implying their ROTS caused God to smite them in the Sugar Bowl.
**Notre Dame: "The Eagles spent the entire year looking forward to playing Notre Dame again, and in 1993 ended up beating the Irish 41-39, which ended up costing the Irish a chance at a national championship."  does this often happen, i.e. where the victim of a ROTS gets revenge later?  I imagine that when it does happen, it generates good newscopy; but does it often happen?  It seems likely that one team will rout another only when it is so much better that it is unlikely to lose any rematch in the near future. Is it considered "revenge" if it happens 10 years later after 9 further narrower losses?  
**Ohio State: "players have commented that there was some sort of confusion on the extra point kick, and Hayes was just covering for his players." this needs explaining. Is going for 2 points instead of 1 really considered running up the score, given that it's harder to accomplish? That could be given more prominence,
**  Oklahoma: 'Oklahoma garnered enough "style points" to leapfrog the Texas Longhorns' - is "style points" a technical term or someone's cynical appellation for something?
** Penn State
*** "Penn State head coach Joe Paterno is known for doing everything he can to avoid running up the score" What does this mean?  How does one go above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty in avoiding ROTS? 
*** "I want to bury Pitt". why did he want to bury Pitt?
Other comments:
* Is "running up the score" only used pejoratively; i.e. if there is an instance where one team's continued crushing pressure is considered justified, would one say "they were justified in running up the score" or "that doesn't count as running up the score" ?
* "In amateur soccer, running up the score is usually limited by the presence of a mercy rule." This may be true in (parts of) the U.S.; elsewhere it's not.  Since the whole concept of ROTS is NAm, I guess the whole soccer section could be refactored into separate "Soccer in the U.S." and "ROTS outside NAm" sections; the latter explaining that/how/why ROTS does not exist elsewhere would also replace the Australian Rules Football section.
* Is it considered ROTS if the leading coach:
** replaces all the first-string players and brings on the lowliest players, who then play as hard as they can to try to impress the coach and demonstrate fitness to move up the team's pecking-order?
** calls a rarely-successful play which comes off and results in an unlikely score? I surmise it depends whether the score results from a fluke or from the fact that the opposition is so weak that the showboating move is less implausible than usual.
* If it is true that ROTS is practised for rankings (either mathematically generated or voted by a poll) then there are several consequences worth addressing:
** Are pollees truly willing to give extra points to high-margin wins even though these are widely considered unsporting? Is it just a conspiracy theory by disgruntled fans? Do any pollees deliberately vote down teams for ROTS?  Why are pollees prepared to encourage a practice most fans dislike?  Do they not realise they are encouraging it or do they not care?
** Do people who dislike ROTS suggest ways of changing the rankings to remove the incentive for ROTS (as opposed to relying on coaches etc to behave honourably by ignoring the incentive)?  
*** The article states the BCS calc was changed: has that had a noticeable impact? 
** How many people say "given that ROTS improve rankings, it is out-of-date to consider ROTS unacceptable, it's part of the modern game, just like the designated hitter rule".
* what is a fake punt and why is it so reprehensible?
The article is not well written and is confusing in places.  Please use more academic language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.4.249 (talk) 01:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested improvements 

message: I propose merging 100-0 Girls Basketball game into this article because it appears to be a one-time event that hasn't garnered much publicity beyond this week of the event, and this example would be better suited here.  See WP:NOTNEWS and WP:News articles.  RJaguar3 | u | t 08:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging [[100-0 Girls Basketball game]] into this article 

message: With no sources cited, the entire section "Reasons for running up the score" appears to merely be a synthesis of what editors guess to be the reasons for running up the score. All claims that remain uncited should be removed. →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: Why is there an AFL section (as opposed to one on Rugby League, Rugby Union - teams in the RWC have lost 0-145, lawn bowls, floorball etc or any of the other hundreds of sports out there)??? There is no tradition of teams running up the score being controversial or frowned upon. Teams in the AFL (the Australian Rules equivalent of say the NFL) were hitting 200 points for the first time in decades in 2011. I see no justification for having a section on Aussie Rules just because some team once scored 600 points. Either we need a section on every sport with some sort of following or this needs to be edited out. As I understand it, "running up the score" is really only controversial in a North American sense. Whilst teams in Australia might take their foot of the pedal it is more because the game is won and there is no point trying too hard. But the general feeling is to 1) structure competitions to avoid it and/or 2) the emphasis is on the other team to get better. Unless someone can come up with a reasonable explanation for it being included I propose it be cut. Tigerman2005 (talk) 00:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Australian Rules

message: Stolen bases and sacrifice bunts are essentially one-run strategies that increase the chance of scoring one run but reduce the chance of scoring others because of the outright surrender of an out (on a sacrifice) or the risk of an out on an attempt to steal a base. A team ahead by a large margin finds them unattractive because the difference between being up 16-3 as opposed to 15-3 in a late inning has little consequence. A team similarly behind in the late innings fails to use them because one run means little in such a game. 
Because statistics matter greatly to players who have contracts to negotiate, batters tend to take advantage of the weak second-line pitching in such games. Batters can be very selective on the pitches that they swing at, taking or fouling off pitches that might not be good for hits, and waiting for the 'batting-practice fastball' that can be hit far for padding batting average, home run, and RBI totals.
Of course, baserunners can try to steal bases when the opportunity arises if they seek to pad their glamorous stolen base totals. 
Running up the score is an accident in a game whose events are largely random. Pbrower2a (talk) 21:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baseball's 'Gentleman's Agreement' 

message: The entire section reads like it was a Notre Dame fan's dream, both in their justifications of Notre Dame's high scores and late fake punt, and in the fact that the ONLY section that claims that actual running up the score occurred is in the Miami section.  Adding the comment that Notre Dame won the title three years later is just icing on the homer cake.
I won't fix it, because I am a homer myself, and don't need an edit war.  But if some outsider could clean up both those sections, that would be better for the objectivity of this article.
CodeCarpenter (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miami and Notre Dame 

message: Actually this is a very common practice in my country, Argentina, in football (soccer) games. I don't think we have a name for this, but a team is poorly considered when they have already secured a result, but continue to score goals that won't give them any additional benefit. The "result" in question may be simply obtaining the three points awarded for a win, getting whatever score a team needs to qualify to the next stage of a competition, etc. When the needed score is secured, the coach might want to preserve some of his best players for future games, by replacing them, if possible, or by having them avoid active participation in the current game, not to risk being injured or getting a yellow or red card that could leave them out of the next game.
Also, even if there have been interruptions for substitutions, fouls, etc., justifying some extra time, the referee will normally end the game at the 90th minute, without adding additional time, if he thinks that an addition will not help the losing team to change the situation.
Only fans of the winning team may want them to keep scoring. But when the same team is losing another game, the same fans will wish the game to end as soon as possible.
Now, as I know this from being a football fan, rather than from having read it somewhere, I wouldn't like to change what seems to be the writer's opinion on the subject, by what might be taken to be my differing opinion about it. If someone considers that my contribution adds something relevant to the article, they are welcome to include it. Eduarodi (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, it's an American thing. After all, if it wasn't there wouldn't be an article about it. Everywhere else it's called "the object of the game"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Local Potentate (talk • contribs) 08:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The term and the concept is not common elsewhere in the world." 

message: The image here looks like a really bad phone photo. CitationsFreak (talk) 07:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs better image. 

message: Can stat padding be merged into this page? They are related enough that this could be a section in the Running up the score article. Stat padding article is short, poorly sourced, and imo does not warrant its own separate page.Puppies937 (talk) 20:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal