Was Grambling that hard up for opponents? I like women's college basketball but I don't approve of this kind of scheduling.

That is why division 2 and 3 teams visit the big teams and get humiliated. It supports a lot of other teams in their schools.

I only defend college football teams doing this--where it is not uncommon-- with obviously majorly outmatched season opponents if they go down their entire eligible roster for experience purposes. Leaving in their first string is unconscionable IMO. Looking at you Michigan and Ohio State (two of the worst offenders in recent decades)...

...played over 21 minutes of a 40 minute game.
11 of 12 players logged double digit minutes. The 12th played nine minutes.
There is a shot clock. The winning team isn't allowed to just stall.
Besides, if the other team quit trying after scoring a hundred, that might be a bigger insult than continuing the game normally.
To me, winning 100-15 without making any effort in the last third of the game is belittling to the opponent.
If all the players played at least 23% of the game, what would you have them do? Take random students out of the crowd to finish the game? Then what? "We beat you by 70 using players not good enough to get on this team?"
The target of our disgust should be the CBS athletic director who humiliated the team for a few bucks.

after the first half. Decent teams do not humiliate obviously inferior/inappropriate opponents. No, I don't expect them to stop trying and scoring, but they do not have to try to replicate the RATE of massive humiliation in the final minutes of the game.

I know. Good sportsmanship is dead or dying. But that was obscene.

And you've already shown you're willing to condemn without all the facts.
Your 2nd post is more of the same.
The UGA comparison is silly. College teams can dress 82 players. The SEC limits it to 60. But, this was not a SEC game, so the dress the maximum so as many players get the experience as possible.
82÷22=3.727. For b-ball, 5 play 12 dress. That's 2.4. A football coach can dig 50% deeper into the bench.
Then exactly how does a team playing all their reserves, in a game with timed possessions reduce the RATE of scoring. Miss on purpose? Why should the benchwarmers, playing significant minutes fir a change, willfully diminish their own games.
The opposing coach could have forfeited at half-time. That didn't happen. Why don't you question the sportsmanship of the defeated coach?

I respect the coach for the losing team for maintaining his/her dignity and teaching a sad but valuable lesson in sportsmanship to their team members. Why the hell would I question THAT? Why would I demand THEY default? Disgusting... Talk about adding insult to injury. About like kicking the poor crippled dog for not keeping up.