Comments on: Winning Ugly (and Controversially): USC 28 UCLA 7

By: Rick McMahan

Rick McMahan — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:53:09 +0000

Scott, I know you also know football well and it just appears that there is a difference of opinion here. Do I think that Pete Carroll was rubbing it in a bit? Yes. But I also know that this game was out of hand and Nueheisel really only had one thing to accomplish by calling a time out and that was to show his team that he still had faith in them. There was no way ucla was going to win this game. But Carroll had the same motivation with the Trojans who were coming off a brutal loss.

I still can’t equate what happened last night with what happened in the Stanford game because I believe they were two separate things but I respect your opinion.

Happy holidays Scott!

By: pkcourt

pkcourt — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:45:30 +0000

Scott oh so you are talking about FB, have you ever been in a rivalry game because I have. In those games anything goes so when Ucla gets the chance (maybe 2020) you can run up the score as much as possible. It would kind of be hard to run for a 1st down since Sc took a knee and was faced with 2nd & 12, and Ucla had everyone in the box. So pass is the way to go and sidelines weren’t going to be open, end zone baby. We should have done a on-sides kick, but that would had incited a riot.

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 22:49:00 +0000

Rick, if you know football well (and you obviously do), you understand the strategy at the end of a two-score game. The team leading tries to run out the clock. The team trailing tries to stop it.

So USC should have been running for a first down – one first down – and hte game is over. UCLA should have been using timeouts and trying to stop that first down. Yes it is legal to throw deep, but it is simply not the convention and is not considered sportsmanlike.

And regardless it was only afew weeks ago that Pete Carroll and many in the USC faithful were publicly and loudly offended that Stanford ran on the ball for a two-point conversion in the fourth quarter of what had become a blowout. Some, including myself, accused Carroll and those USC people of being hypocrits for running up scores for years and then being offended when it happened to them. And here we are and they commit the cardinal sin of poor sportsmanship in a blowout – throwing deep in the final two minutes of a blowout – and those same USC folks see no hypocracy.

By: Rick McMahan

Rick McMahan — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:06:45 +0000

That’s easy Scott, read the freaking article if you want justification.

By: scott

scott — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:17:31 +0000

Anyone still feels bad for the poor, downtrodden Trojans who got shown up against Stanford? Once again, Carroll shows his stripes. Go ahead and defend this one, USC fans.