T.J., I couldn't agree more ...

Like I said:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-ucla-usc-ethics2-2009dec02,0,4335785.story

Here's a link to the controversial time out/play/aftermath. Let's also not forget the Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty by the Bruins on the extra point and factor that into the debacle. Remember the "outburst" didn't happen until after that. Could THAT have precipitated the sideline behavior. I wasn't there - don''t know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT_T50MV2pI

Looking at that clip... which program appears more out of control and "unsportsmanlike"?

tdrohan,

I'll ask again What would you be writing if we followed your scenario of running the ball and it played out this way?

You wanted USC to run the ball. So on second down they run and UCLA calls their 2nd TO with :50 secs. You want them to run it again? Let's say they do. UCLA's final TO with :45 to go - 4th down. Punt or go for it on 4th down - your choice. Go for it - good field position, punt chance for a return.

However either one plays out - if UCLA should score... even with 10-15 seconds to go the score is now 21 - 14 with a pending onside kick. As a psuedo-newspaper guy, what would you be writing if Pete put USC in that position? Kriminy - what would "The Fired Radio Guy" be writing (that's my new nickname for TJ Simers - since he loves giving nicknames to others) And God forbid UCLA recover said onside kick. Score and you'd want to bring back Lendale White to throw Pete of the building next Halloween.

You write, "Why in the world would UCLA just let the clock run out w/ 3 TO's? Just not right to the players." So UCLA is allowed to keep playing (because it's fair to the players) but USC must stop trying? Isn't that just as disrespectful to the sport?

How would your article read after that? No emotions no homerism, just as a journalist - how would you write that up? Like I said I'm not emotionally tied to either team. Like 'em both and always cheer for a good game. Historically a bundle of great Amat players went to USC - but more on the Briun roster today. So I'm JUST looking at the football play. And it was the RIGHT - no - the ONLY strategy to absolutely secure victory.

I'm also as big on sportsmanship as anybody - so the antics afterward was deplorable (although Carroll "pointed" at Barkley - not the UCLA's player's) But even at that - who essentially stayed on he sidelines and who came out to midfield. You lambast USC and say nothing of the UCLA's players actions. They're student/athletes too. Inexcusable... by BOTH teams.

And really... if someone picks up the paper and sees 28-7.... are they really thinking someone "ran up the score"? Really?

The truth of the matter is, USC intentionally tried to embarass the Bruins.. There was clear intent.. USC can try to rationalize it all they want, but the intent was not to "protect a lead." No way.. Why in the world would UCLA just let the clock run out w/ 3 TO's? Just not right to the players.. As far as SC, the decision was soley based on rubbing it in and that poured out after the play. How cvan anyone argue that wasn't there intent after seeing the pitiful display out of the players after the score? Ok, so, USC runs up the score by throwing the bomb? Fine, its not very tasteful, but ya know what are ya gonna do... No. The events that transpired were the shameful display of a lack of respect and class by SC and that part is inexcusable. Let's remember both teams are student-athletes, they are kids.. A grown man like Carrol with the obvious advantage rubs their face in it and points specifically to those kids? Call it what you would like, but I think everyone can understand the truth to this matter.. Despicable.

USC 28
ucla 7
FINAL .

STOP crying bruin fans the game is football , you played & you LOST, PERIOD . The game is now over & so is the bruins season (more than likely).What if this & what if that , poor sportsmanship this , poor sportsmanship that .You got beat , not a pretty game for EITHER team , but USC STILL WON & ucla LOST.

MAN UP & UNDERSTAND YOU LOST ... AGAIN !
10 out of the last 11.

Fight On
TM

House - Ironic that an AMAT corner got beat in both games? Is it also Ironic is that AMAT corners were both playing in these HUGE games? I think not. The play was Bush!!! Both of them!!!

tdrohan,

You're psuedo-newspaper guy, so answer me this one. What would you be writing if we followed your scenario? I'll play along.

You wanted USC to run the ball. So on second down they run and UCLA calls their 2nd TO with :50 secs. You want them to run it again? Let's say they do. UCLA's final TO with :45 to go - 4th down. Punt or go for it on 4th down - your choice. Go for it - good field position, punt chance for a return.

However either one plays out - if UCLA should score... even with 10-15 seconds to go the score is now 21 - 14 with a pending onside kick. As a psuedo-newspaper guy, what would you be writing if Pete put USC in that position? Kriminy - what would "The Fired Radio Guy" be writing (that's my new nickname for TJ Simers - since he loves giving nicknames to others) And God forbid UCLA recover said onside kick. Score and you'd want to bring back Lendale White to throw Pete of the building next Halloween. How would your article read after that?

Once they're in time out mode - they HAVE to keep playing. This time I agree with COCharger fan. BUt as My Friend says - the aftermath was embarrassing for both schools.

I heard Coach Neuheisel yesterday on ESPN Radio and he basically said that both teams were just continuing to play football. He also said that the pass play by USC gave his team a chance to sack the QB or an interception which could have led to an opportunity for a comeback and that it was the Bruin's fault for not defending the pass and not USC's for throwing it. It's not like USC connected on every long pass play so there was no guarantee for success...so it was a risk. It is not like we are talking about running it in from the 1 yard line. This whole "controversy" is media driven garbage.

As a UCLA fan I have no problem what the trojans did as they wanted to end the game by taking a knee. Since Coach Rick decided to call time out then Coach Pete became irritated and decided to stick it to the bruins. Since this is a rivalry game players get very emotional and USC did overeact on the TD.
UCLA next year will remember what happened and the game should be closer as the game will be at the Rose Bowl and USC will lose some talented juniors.
As for basketball the trojans will have a better team than the bruins as UCLA hoops is in dire straits after losing to the Cal State teams.

In both plays...Amat and UCLA the losing team got beat....be honest. Ironically in both instances an Amat corner got beat....

That's not the issue anymore than Sheldon's weight is an issue for arm tackling.

The issue is and will always be:

1) Pete's insistence on hooping and hollering like a rookie coach. I'd expect that from a nut like Kippin rather than some one who coached under Bill Walsh.

2) Pete asks his players and fans to ignore the obvious and refute the obvious....it was bad form...the "celebration" that is.... just like it was bad form for Pete to leave Mark Sanchez' Press Conference...BTW Pete...anyone going to pay Leinart back those 10 Million he lost listening to Petey?

If Pete had called the play...which he denied apparently....and then scored and the players hoop and holler the classy thing to do is try and calm them down...and not play House Of Pain Coach and lead the JUMP JUMP BRIDGADE!!!

Done is done...next year will only be more fun....Joey isn't it a guilty pleasure when UCLA beats USC...like they did a coupe of years ago with Harwell and others...be honest!

I think the same thing when USC beats UCLA in basketball...until I saw this year's Howland Hand Me Downs...lol

No way USC can honeslty defend their decision. I'm with TJ. Anybody with a shred of honesty in them would admit the truth. Carrol has proven time and time again, he is not one of them. Run the ball, don't blatantly disrespect the other team and try and embarass them. Did USC play well enough for a 28-7 victory Saturday night? No. No, not at all. Carrol has consistently run up the score throughout the years. I've seen it any number of times. To do what he did Saturday though, in the manner in which he did it? Indefensible.

That just seals it - if TJ says so... it must be wrong! What may have happened is we all just found out that USC still owns Boardwalk and Park Place when it comes to this series. But I'm like Conq'76 in that I grew up a big fan of both schools (sorry Trojan man) Prothro, Vermeil, McKay, Robinson, John Wooden, Bob Boyd, Rod Dedeaux, etc. How could you not? So I'd like it to be a bit more even myself.

I'm going to repost what I wrote on the topic on the last thread. And I'll tie it to HS sports just for your critics benefit.

The biggest problem I see is the excessive sideline antics after the score - but they celebrate pretty heavily after many touchdowns. Granted, this may have been going overboard.

But let's talk about the play itself. UCLA's time out was with :54 seconds to go and USC has a 14 pt lead.They had two left. After 2nd down, after 3rd down, then USC has to either run another play or punt. UCLA ball with :45 seconds to go. Down 14. TD... onside kick,,, Hail Mary.... improbable - yes. But you can't say we haven't seen it happen - and if it does what kind of outrage then?

Np matter how you slice it - the game was not REALLY over and... you - play - to - win - the -game! (thank you Herman Edwards)

You play until the game is decided and, until the final seconds, two scores is not enough... UNLESS the losing team is playing along or out of options. Been in the situation too many times when you just have to take your whuppin' and head to the locker room. But also have been in the situation where you keep playing and scratch for every inch you can.. which UCLA was doing. So you keep playing. But if that's the choice - you have to keep playing. UCLA didn't - in which case yo're just prolonging the agony. If you;r going to play - play! Unfortunately I think our boy Sheldon Price just anticipated a knee/run and was beat badly. Lesson learned. Sometimes that's the best thing that comes out of these situations. He won't let that happen again.

Now since some are comparing that to Lakewood/Amat and my favorite pretty boy Thad McNeal's act - Amat was out of time outs with :35 seconds to go. Take a knee head to midfield and go shake hands. Regardless of the magnitude of the game. (Did anyone see him on fox circling the field with one flap down high fiving anyone he could immediately after the win over LB Poly? My Friend - I'm sure your brother won't forget that one. Payback's a b!+@#). Contrary, watching Hagerty after beating Notre Dame for a championship... happy - but head to midfield and shake Rooney's hand. That's coach with class does. That's what a classy guy like Dave White from Edison would(will?) do. But instead Thad goes over the top to go up 34-17 and by far out Pete Carrolls Pete Carroll. BIG difference.

As I've said before, Hagerty respected Roddy Layton and Diamond Ranch's efforts last year so much he took a knee THREE times inside the 10 to preserve a 17-6 victory. That became a big contention later as people "compared scores and tried to imply that Charter Oaks 23-7 win over DR somehow was a more "dominant" performance. But piling on the score didn't matter to Hag once the game is decided. BUT - the game MUST be decided. In this case, technically the USC/UCLA game wasn't.

What happened after the play was disgraceful... on both sides.