Blowout games can be a problem for both sides. I see positive & negatives the mercy rule. Having been on both sides of excessive scores, I have a few points:
* I like giving less used players playing time or for teaching players new positions - they need game experience against different opponents.
* Coaches should be reasonable & cooperate with each other - coaches & refs can agree at halftime to cut the 2nd half time to 30 minutes or less if the score gets out of hand.
* Both coaches monitor your players closer to be sure sportsmanship doesn't get out of hand. No one want to have a player hurt or red carded when frustration builds for the losing team.
* Getting beat by a far superior team was a good lesson for my team (reviewing the tape afterwards allowed my team to be educated how to play a particular system or formation). It's also helpful to show my team how another team more intense, plays less selfish, communicates better, etc...
* Have you ever taken off players and played short-handed? Makes your team work that much harder and makes for a better game.
* On Short-handed games were the opposition has less then 10 players, I am very unhappy with coaches that will still play with a full squad and look for the blowout. I have always played games with an even number of players as the opposition (except when players were sent off). Sportsmanship starts with the coach & the players see that.
* I believe playing one blowout against good competition (esp. in a scrimmage) can be a good thing for learning. But repeated beatings throughout the season - the mercy rule would be very good to have.
