As to the issue of injuries, injuries are a risk in any game. That’s part of the uncertainty that you sign up for when you choose to play football. Yes, we try to minimize injuries whenever possible, but the guys are learning something about giving their very best both for their team and for the simple rightness of doing the best they can at whatever they put their hand to do. Risking injury is part of that. Do we really want to say, “it’s only worth trying your best if you think you can win.”? “If you’re not doing well enough, just give up?”

With your Buckeyes example, I understand the damage to the Wells’ injury caused. I guess my question would be, if Wells and his coaches were so certain that their win was in the bag, why didn’t they pull a star player like that and save him for the next game? That’s was their choice to be stupid, and they paid for it in the next game. Decision making is part of what can change everything in the NCAA, and poor decision making on that day was a boon for the Trojans.

Finally, what about the psychological value of such an immense loss to both the winning and the losing teams? What about a team that has struggled, as Tennessee has in the last few years. Who can say the value to the new, young players with their relatively inexperienced new head coach in having beaten Georgia and Memphis by large margins this year? Granted, neither of those margins was quite as large as the ones you are talking about, but Memphis was quite close, especially in the first half. Now that the Vols are headed towards ‘Ole Miss, a team that’s been playing quite well, those two big wins are a way of saying, “you CAN do this.” And even in the Memphis game, the Tigers rallied a little after the second half, playing better, scoring 21 more points and keeping the Vols to only 14 more points. Being crushed in the first half clearly inspired them to work harder in the second. How many times has a team gotten beaten up in one game, and the coaches have used it to rally them in the next?

Dropping a school into D-II or D-III does not resolve the issue of blowout games, and would not improve competition in the NCAA. There are still blowout games, even between two “powerhouse” teams. As an example, Cal (who was ranked #6 in the country) lost to Oregon by 39 points. Does that mean that they should be bumped into D-II? I don’t think so.

In fact, the 92-0 blowout referenced within this debate took place between a D-IAA and NAIA school. It’s not like Stephen F Austin is going to be threatening Florida, Texas, or Alabama for a shot at the national championship soon.

My point is that games can get out of hand. It has nothing to do with the talent levels or division worthiness of the schools involved. It just means that football games can reach a point where the lead is insurmountable.

At that point, it makes no sense to continue a game and put athletes at unnecessary risk for injury. The point of a game is to determine a winner. Once the game is CLEARLY decided, then I see no benefit from continuing the play.

Consider the 2008 Ohio State Buckeyes. During the third quarter of their game against Youngstown State, a game they would go on to win by a score of 43-0, their star running back, Chris “Beanie” Wells, injured his toe and ended up missing the game against USC the following weekend. Had the game been called because it was CLEARLY evident by that point that Youngstown State had NO chance of winning, Wells would not have been injured, and may have been able to make a difference against the Trojans.

Lastly, you talk about letting the “cupcake” teams retain their dignity… Where’s the dignity in having to walk back onto the field after already trailing by 50 points at halftime. What could possibly be dignifying about knowing that you are about to get your butts whooped AGAIN, for ANOTHER 30 minutes? There is no dignity in that. The dignity is allowing them to save face and not have to put a 92-0 loss in their record books.

In real life, there is no mercy rule. When you’re talking about immature high school teens, sure, a mercy rule is fine. They’re still learning about life. But college is the place where “kid” is beaten out of you and “man” hopefully replaces it. It doesn’t teach the boys on the losing team anything to not fail all the way. Failing is a good lesson. Being protected from “too much” failure when everyone in the stadium, everyone at home, knows how badly you are playing is nothing but humiliation. Worse humiliation than just failing.

When a runner falls or is injured or is just so bad that he falls drastically behind the rest of the pack, we do not suggest that the leaders slow up so the last runner won’t be so embarrassed. They run their hearts out, and the whole crowd urges on the man in last place, willing him to have the guts to finish out the whole race like a man. He finishes it, not because he has a hope of winning, and not because he wants to avoid embarrassment, but because it is right to do so. Let the so-called “cupcake” teams retain the dignity to play their hearts out to the very end because it is right to do so.