Lose, Lose Situation
One could argue that there is nothing to be gained and only something to be lost the rest of the season. All the energy is gone following the Stanford loss and now all that is left is the idea of playing your crosstown rival. A victory means status quo in the rivalry and the general feeling of disappointment for the entire season (including a make bowl appearance in Decemeber).
But a loss to UCLA makes this a complete and utter embarassment. And many of you will hear about it from your Bruin friends for the next year.
Wolfie...don't forget that if USC loses to Arizona (not a gimme by any stretch) the week after they lose to UCLA...then UCLA and USC will both have a 7-5 record.
So in what way is it a lose, lose situation? What does USC lose by beating UCLA?
Not going to happen. I don't think fUCLA has the running game to exploit USC's defensive weakness. Also, the bRuins have to play ASU this week. Hopefully, ASU will give the bRuins a tough, physical game.
USC still has plenty to play for, including a shot at a 10-3 season. If USC cannot get up for the fUCLA game, then the Trojans deserve to lose.
Decemeber? Really, Scott?
Fight On!!
One could argue that you continue to be a Nabob of Negatism, a Soul Sucker of Positivity and generally a downer!
Fight on Trojans!
Scotty downer........these 2 games, and the bowl game, are critical to get back to winning and establishing something for next year. Let's see who steps up and wants to be a player.
Exactly the way they need to play! Mad,angry with something to prove and nothing to lose. Just as they did in the Rose Bowl 2004 against Michigan when they were left out of the BCS game.
There is no more worry now of playing not to lose a game or their shot at a national championship is gone. Another loss and no Rose Bowl.
Time to let it all hang out now. Why not? You have nothing to lose and everything to prove. I expect USC to blow Arizona and UCLA off the field, and I feel sorry for whoever they play in a bowl game.
One thing that has never made any sense to me is the concept of players not "being up for games" or losing interest in the rest of the season after a disappointing season.
That a player fortunate enough to earn the privilege of playing for any Division I school would not "be up" for a particular opponent or lose interest in the rest of the season after a loss is totally beyond my comprehension.
These kids spend their entire childhood working to get a shot to play for a premiere Division I school. They spend all year preparing and training for a mere 12 lousy games a season. If they are lucky, they may get to play in about 40 or so total games in their career. That's it.
For most of them, there won't be any NFL. This will likely be the highlight of their lives, the only time when people recognize them on the street or care who they are, let alone ask for their autographs.
It's not like this is major league baseball with 162 dreary meaningless games. Once a week (not even that with bye weeks) for 12 weeks, they get a chance to play.
Every game, EVERY game should be like gold to these kids. It's over before they know it. How could you possibly take a game off, not be up for a game, or mail it in for the rest of the season after a loss?
Unbelievable to me!
Fight on!
"Soul sucker of positivity."-- Gotta remember that one, and it does sum up Wolf and others like him. But could you imagine having to live out the rest of your life in Wolf's skin? Be thankful.
And college kids play hard every game unlike their professional counterparts. Yeah, they may not play hard when the game is lost 42-21 in the fourth quarter, but I have never thought college players did not give their all in a game.
The college game is not as pretty as the pros. The pros make it look easy because they are so very good. The college kids make the game look difficult, and this is the reality of football.
"You play to win the game!" Maybe all the energy is gone from fair weather fans and drama queen writers.
Sounds like Scott definately needs to schedule a visit with Dr Lou.