11/21/24
November 29, 2009
USC's Win Over UCLA Ends with Pile-On Touchdown: The USC Trojans defeated the UCLA Bruins 28-7 in their crosstown rivalry game Sunday night, which nearly led to a sideline-clearing brawl because of events in the final minute. Up by 14 points, head coach Pete Carroll called a long pass and the Trojans scored a 48-yard touchdown. Surprisingly, veteran LA Times sportswriter Bill Plaschke blames UCLA coach Rick Neuheisel, not Carroll, because UCLA called a timeout after USC took a knee. "In the end, while his players deserved better, Neuheisel got exactly what he deserved," he writes.
I disagree with Plaschke. If your opponent calls timeout when you're taking a knee, you go for the first down. You don't go for the throat and then celebrate so boisterously that your entire team follows suit and nearly sparks a massive brawl. This was a chump move by Carroll. He's lucky that the teams didn't fight.
posted by rcade at 11:31 AM on November 29, 2009
I agree with Plaschke. Neuheisel's time out was an open invitation for what happened next. Carroll had his team take the knee, without a time out that game ends with no incident. Were the celebrations afterwards over the top? Probably. But if Michigan is in the same situation against Ohio State (Yes, that is a very big if) I'd love nothing more than a long touchdown pass to cap off a victory.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:44 AM on November 29, 2009
I disagree with Plaschke. If your opponent calls timeout when you're taking a knee, you go for the first down.
They did get the first down. The fact that they called a play-action fake, and the defense bit on it, is not USC's fault.
The moment UCLA calls the timeout, they indicated to USC that they were going to keep playing, and indicated they thought the game was close enough to bother. If UCLA didn't think that, why did they bother calling the timeout?
At that point, USC can do whatever they want to secure their win. Adding 7 more points would probably help secure the win.
The only thing I see from the video is a bunch of stupid posturing by the UCLA players by walking on the field. It's a rivalry game, and celebrations/taunting from both sides probably occur every time they face. What makes this one so different that they felt the need to come out onto the field?
posted by grum@work at 12:23 PM on November 29, 2009
I see USC players jumping around on the field like Kris Kross before UCLA comes out.
posted by rcade at 12:46 PM on November 29, 2009
Along the lines of what Grum said, USC couldn't merely go for a first down - they had to put the ball out of reach and minimize the possibility of a fumble or interception. A short pass would risk a pick six, putting UCLA down by just one score. Thus they went deep.
And the posturing was done by UCLA when they called the timeout in the first place, which made the touchdown the decisive play in the game, thereby inviting a well deserved celebration by USC.
posted by MW12 at 01:24 PM on November 29, 2009
I see USC players jumping around on the field like Kris Kross before UCLA comes out.
And I see Carroll jumping around with them. As I've made clear before, I'm generally on the side of being able to stick it up your rivals, but given that Carroll had been all whiny "What's your deal? What's your deal?" to Harbaugh after the Stanford game, he was pretty much paying the slap in the face forward to UCLA.
All in all, a dick-waving contest between two 2009 PAC-10 eunuchs.
posted by etagloh at 02:09 PM on November 29, 2009
I'm generally on the side of being able to stick it up your rivals, but given that Carroll had been all whiny "What's your deal? What's your deal?" to Harbaugh after the Stanford game, he was pretty much paying the slap in the face forward to UCLA.
The comparison to the Stanford game is irrelevant. Carroll chose to take a knee before Neuheisel started in with the gamesmanship. Carroll wanted to end the game. Neuheisel got what he deserved.
And I'd say the same thing to Neuheisel that I would have said to Carroll after Stanford. You don't like the play? Stop it with your defense.
I see USC players jumping around on the field like Kris Kross before UCLA comes out.
What video are you watching. The SC players are, at worst, a few yards off their sidelines. The UCLA players came halfway across the field. Some of them 3/4 of the way across the field. They could have been penalized (I'm sure the refs just wanted to get the game over).
a dick-waving contest between two 2009 PAC-10 eunuchs.
Yeah, I know you qualified it by saying "2009" but this was really snarkish BS. This has been USC's most disappointing season in 9 years but they could still end up 10-3 with a bowl victory and victories over their two biggest rivals as well Ohio State in Columbus.
And, over the last seven seasons, they've been 6-1 in BCS games with two national championships. Eunuch, my ass.
posted by cjets at 03:12 PM on November 29, 2009
The comparison to the Stanford game is irrelevant.
The tone of your reply suggests it's very relevant. After a season that hasn't lived up to the high standards set over the decade, Carroll was ready to kick out for some small satisfaction over his cross-town rivals. No way USC does that outside being in a three-way tie for fourth place in the PAC-10. (I've admired Trojan teams in past years; this year, they've been buoyed up on past credit in the AP/USAT polls.)
posted by etagloh at 03:41 PM on November 29, 2009
USC is in fourth place in the PAC-10 and No. 20 in the polls. I think the dig is a fairly accurate description of how their season has gone.
posted by rcade at 03:43 PM on November 29, 2009
So #20 in the polls = Eunuch? Tough Crowd.
posted by cjets at 03:54 PM on November 29, 2009
If you want USC to be a program that takes pride in third- or fourth-place finishes in the PAC-10 as long as it beats some rivals, that's OK with me. But they're powerless this year to play a factor in the national championship. Hence the snark. It's a pretty big fall down when Carroll is whining about other teams running up the score and dancing a jig on the sidelines for piling on UCLA. Those of us who were tired of seeing USC on top ought to be able to enjoy this moment a little.
posted by rcade at 03:59 PM on November 29, 2009
What moment are you enjoying? They just beat their biggest rival. If they were 1-8, this would still be a big moment.
You want to enjoy their disappointing season? Enjoy it while you can.
posted by cjets at 04:17 PM on November 29, 2009
The tone of the comments in this thread pretty much mirrors the vibe you get from the video: "But THEY started it!" "But THEY called us a NAME!" "But THEY..." etc. Is this how grownups want to sound?
posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:28 PM on November 29, 2009
I think I have been pretty clear on what moment I'm enjoying, CJets. When Florida and Urban Meyer fall off their pedestal, I give you advance permission to bliss out.
posted by rcade at 04:34 PM on November 29, 2009
The tone of the comments in this thread pretty much mirrors the vibe you get from the video: "But THEY started it!" "But THEY called us a NAME!" "But THEY..." etc. Is this how grownups want to sound?
Does not !
Does too !
Does not !
Does too !
posted by tommybiden at 05:09 PM on November 29, 2009
When Florida and Urban Meyer fall off their pedestal, I give you advance permission to bliss out.
When and if they do, I could care less.
posted by cjets at 05:46 PM on November 29, 2009
The tone of your reply suggests it's very relevant. After a season that hasn't lived up to the high standards set over the decade, Carroll was ready to kick out for some small satisfaction over his cross-town rivals. No way USC does that outside being in a three-way tie for fourth place in the PAC-10.
My tone is also irrelevant. The direct provocation for Carroll's action was Neuheisel's timeout, not SC's season.
posted by cjets at 05:55 PM on November 29, 2009
A cacaphony of dicks? Double dicking? Dick-a-doodle-cocks?
Well, at least Carroll is happy for the extra national attention. Dick.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:57 PM on November 29, 2009
I think Neuheisel and Carroll both took the low road. A bleak end to a bleak game. Now I can harbor dreams that all those prized LA recruits trying to choose between UCLA and USC will go to Cal instead.
posted by sbacharach at 07:50 PM on November 29, 2009
I'll guess that Neuheisel's glad Carroll did this. He's been trying to talk up his program and bring them back to relevancy since he was hired. Adding some "bad blood" to the USC rivalry does just that. I'm sure he wanted to win, but he'll be happy when people talk about this game next year in the week leading up to it.
posted by Jeffwa at 08:27 AM on November 30, 2009
That's a good point, Jeffwa. Neuheisel probably needs the feud to help put his program on the map again.
posted by rcade at 09:53 AM on November 30, 2009
Game was Saturday night, not Sunday.
My take is that the play call was okay in light of what came before from Neuheisel; the posturing/reaction/taunting after the touchdown was not.
posted by holden at 12:10 PM on November 30, 2009
So #20 in the polls = Eunuch? Tough Crowd.
Well, yeah, but only because of the unbelievably high bar that Carroll's teams have set recently. For some teams, like my alma mater, Miami U, just to crack the top 25 is a once-in-a-millennium occurrence. For USC this decade, #20 is definitely "eunuch" status. It's all relative. Other than that, I have no dog in this fight, so I'll walk away.
posted by tahoemoj at 05:57 PM on November 30, 2009
Neuheisel's calling the timeout was dickish. But Carroll's play-calling, and the celebrations at the TD that followed was no less dickish. I'm sure it sets up a good grudge-match next year, but Carroll was whining when Stanford ran up the score on them.