A Trojan Fan’s Perspective: Choke On It, Jim Harbaugh
First, for sake of full disclosure, I readily admit I am a USC Trojan fan.
Big time.
Second, I am not too proud to take absolute delight in the suffering of a newly despised program via the hands of another besides my beloved Trojans.
Of course, that “newly despised” program is the Stanford Cardinal led by their chief villain and head coach, Jim Harbaugh.
And the program that handed Harbaugh and the Cardinal that defeat is none other than their hated rival, the California Golden Bears.
You know, those same Cal Bears that the Trojans thumped 30-3 in Berkeley some weeks ago.
Now, many would say that my delight in the defeat of the Cardinal is motivated by Stanford’s destruction of USC 55-21, two weeks ago at the coliseum.
True, but of course, as any good Trojan fan will tell you, it goes deeper than that.
The real source of my hostile attitude toward the Cardinal can be summed up in one play.
That play is, of course, the infamous two point attempt Harbaugh called for when leading the Trojans by three touchdowns late in the game.
The Trojans stuffed it but that is besides the point.
After the game, at the midfield handshake, Pete Carroll questioned Harbaugh as to his motivation for the play, although it wasn’t necessary to do so.
Everyone knew Harbaugh was trying to show up the Trojans, including coach Carroll.
In the week that followed the game, Jim Harbaugh was hailed by the national media as the “hot coach.” leading the “hot program” to the promised land.
Except that the Cal Bears had something (I say gleefully) to say about it.
And the “hot coach” made some bad decisions.
Like going for it on fourth down, with 3-1/2 minutes to go and all of his timeouts left, Harbaugh rolled the dice and came up snakeyes when Andrew Luck ran out of same and threw an harmless pass which fell incomplete.
So much for Stanford’s Rose Bowl aspirations.
Of course, many would say it is cheap to acquire such joy in the defeat of a program by someone other than the team you follow.
Guilty as charged.
However, while in my perfect world, the Trojans would have won two weeks ago, it wasn’t meant to be.
The Trojans got beat by a better team that day.
So now I will gladly get my “jollies” vicariously through the Cal Bears and I have only one thing to say:
Choke on it Jim Harbaugh.
Related posts
Excellent analysis of Dodgers roster for 2010: http://yallkiltit.wordpress.com/2010/03/06/dodgerblast-spring-training-roster-analysis/ 
I was with the UCLA Alumni Band; I sat in the 4th row of the box seats, a few rows ...
Joey, your right, but what were you thinking was going to happen? whats your point here? you called every UCLA ...
I was at that game as well. Where'd you sit? 
Murshed Zaheed aka Nestor is a government employee and if you google his name you will find it is many ...
Comment by pkcourt on 22 November 2009:
Yah it was what I thought it would be they shot their wade against us. The hiesman boy couldn’t pull it out this time, and Harbutt shook hands with head down and ran away. Jeff Tedford went to HS and JC love the kid. The only problem yesterday was that Zona couldn’t hold on in regulation, I thought the game was over when zona got the turnover at 31-24, but I guess they mess up.
Comment by Rick McMahan on 22 November 2009:
Hi Pk, good to read you. Personally, I thought Stanford would win although, as I guess you can tell, I am happy they didn’t.
As far as ‘Zona, goes, I think they PAC-10 this year is so good that all of the teams are feeding on each other.
BTW, I went to Conquest Chronicles but I didn’t see any of your writing…
Comment by Scott Bergen on 23 November 2009:
Kettle, this is Pot. You’re black.
Pete Carroll has run up scored for years and allowed his players to behave like undisciplined high school kids for years and all the SC fans just stood in lock-step with two fingers mechanically raised in the air. Now the one time another program gets a shot to put it to USC, all these USC folks are so appalled.
You don’t get to be a poor sport for a decade and then claim the moral high ground when someone does it back.
Comment by Rick McMahan on 23 November 2009:
Scott, thanks for checking out the piece and the comment, which I don’t agree with.
Pete Carroll allows his players to have fun but I have not seen this done disrespectfully. The fact that Pete does allow his players to enjoy themselves is part of who he is and why gets the players he does.
As far as running up the score, that is fine. Run up the score if you are good enough but don’t go for two points when the game is out of hand.
So “Pot,” your analogy is misplaced.
Thanks,
Kettle
Comment by Scott Bergen on 23 November 2009:
“As far as running up the score, that is fine. Run up the score if you are good enough but don’t go for two points when the game is out of hand.”
What? Going for 2 in a blowout IS running up the score. Unless you consider them different and instead would advocate a team leaving its starters in the throwing all day. If you think that’s ok but a 2-point conversion to get to an even 50 is dirty, you are missing the boat.
As for Carroll allowing the kids to behave poorly, perhaps only the most in-love of the USC fans don’t see what the rest of the sports world does. Carroll’s USC is widely known as classless and showy, not fun and lighthearted.
Comment by Rick McMahan on 23 November 2009:
Scott, if you can’t make the distinction between going for two after scoring a touchdown and kicking an extra point in regard to showing up an opponent, then I can’t help you. Pete Carroll doesn’t do that to his opponents and your justification of Harbaugh simply identifies you as a Trojan hater, nothing more.
As far as the national perception of USC, I wasn’t aware that you were made spokesman for the masses, but even if you are, it is a reflection more of jealousy than any real or perceived slight regarding how Trojan players conduct themselves.
Finally, as the title of the piece clearly indicated, as well as the article itself, my view is biased, based on my own opinion of Harbaugh. I don’t particularly dislike Stanford as a program because, to be honest, until this year, they were largely irrelevant. When Harbaugh leaves, and he surely will, my dislike of Stanford’s program will follow the piece of crap wherever he goes.
Comment by Scott Bergen on 23 November 2009:
Obviously there is a difference between going for 1 and 2 after a touchdown. That wasn’t my point. The point is, Carroll is reknown for running up scores on far weaker opponents and USC fans never batted an eye about sportsmanship. Now suddenly they are crying foul.
You said running up the score is fine, but going for two in this scenario is out of line. That makes no sense to me. If anything, they are the same. I would say running up the score is totally inapprpriate in collegiate athletics, in whatever form it takes.
What you seem to be most upset about is not the potential impropriety of the offense’s play, but rather than your boys were playing defense. That’s fine. We all have our biases, but claiming the moral authority on what is sportsmanlike and what is not rings a little hollow from a USC football fan.