Typical Harvard

Some things never change. Leading by 17 point with seconds left on the clock, rather than take a knee to end the game, Harvard goes for the touchdown.
Even the announcers on Fox College Sports remarked that it was bush.
Stay classy Harvard.

dwakelin
Some things never change. Leading by 17 point with seconds left on the clock, rather than take a knee to end the game, Harvard goes for the touchdown.
Even the announcers on Fox College Sports remarked that it was bush.
Stay classy Harvard.

With the score Harvard 17-Cornell 7, Cornell called a timeout with 1:09 left, with Harvard facing a third-and-6 from the Cornell 17. The thinking, I presume, was "if we hold them on third down, and they kick a field goal, we're 13 points down with a few seconds left, and at least a desperation chance of scoring twice and tying, or even winning, the game".

After the Yale game, in his e-mail to the Cornell Football Association, Coach Archer mentioned a couple of moments in the game that gave him hope the program is headed in the right direction. One of them was: "...with under two minutes to play, in a game we had no chance to win anymore, we called a timeout facing a fourth-and-four. With our final chance for the offense to get on the board, we tried to get them to play as though the score was tied. Quarterback James Few dropped back and found running back Luke Hagy, who had slipped out of the backfield, wide open for a touchdown. It was an otherwise meaningless late game score, but continued what we've been preaching - to play until the final whistle. They executed the plan exactly as we drew it up, and the offense sprinted to Hagy after the score."

If coach is going to preach playing until the final whistle, and your team calls a timeout late in the fourth quarter to preserve a desperation chance to win the game, you can't be upset when the other team plays until the final whistle as well. I saw no sign that Harvard's late touchdown bothered either the Cornell players or the Cornell coaches. Just the announcers (who conveniently ignored the Cornell timeout). And you.

You couldn't be more wrong. Two snaps with no time outs you take a knee. Cornell took their last timeout which is the right thing to do.
Has nothing to do with running up the score once out of time outs

I hate Harvard as much as the next guy, but... Who cares?

I mean, I recall quite a few blowout hockey wins, where the faithful where still screaming "We want more" after the Nth goal.

If you don't want Harvard to score. Play better. And if you think winning 17-7 or 24-7 doesn't matter, then why are you bitching about it anyway?

kaelistus
I hate Harvard as much as the next guy, but... Who cares?

I mean, I recall quite a few blowout hockey wins, where the faithful where still screaming "We want more" after the Nth goal.

If you don't want Harvard to score. Play better. And if you think winning 17-7 or 24-7 doesn't matter, then why are you bitching about it anyway?

There's a heck of a lot of difference between the crowd chanting "We want more" and the coach playing like they want to rub the other guys face in it. That said, the situation that was described here isn't that big of a deal. Harvard probably should have taken a knee if they could run the clock out but it's a difference of one play.

Ehh.. Even if it was, I have never understood people getting offended by someone running up the score. Play better if you don't want it to happen.

kaelistus
Ehh.. Even if it was, I have never understood people getting offended by someone running up the score. Play better if you don't want it to happen.

When you get to heaven you can ask Ned about that. The story I've heard concerned Cornell lacrosse.