[Harry Rex Vonner]

Maybe I didn't do a good job of conveying my point. HRV appears to be against "nanny states", i.e., taking it easy on teams when the lead is out if hand. Using that same logic, the players on the winning team who only play in blowouts are not good enough to play, but "deserve a chance to play and score a few points". To me, when talking about nanny states, these two situations are the same.

Hard work was expected when I played. If you didn't work hard, you weren't part of the team. It didn't entitle you to playing time, a chance to score, or anything else, regardless of the situation. And I know the response will be " we are talking about 2nd and 3rd stringers playing hard, blah blah blah." It's just a different side of the argument, and my opinion.

Fair enough. The remedy would be for the school with the weak team to refrain from scheduling games that will cause humiliation to their players. A school isn't required to play any other school even if both are part of the same seeded district.

This solution avoids the embarrassment. Running clocks are, and should be, just as hurtful for the weak team as is a bigger blowout. In either case, the weaker team couldn't compete.