USC 28, UCLA 7 (final)

[cincibuck]

Since we are on the topic of rubbing a defenseless rivals face in it....

The Game 1961
The first time Woody hung 50 on scUM

• OSU led 42-14 with :34 seconds in the game and the ball on their own 20.
• Woody, with all his starters still in the game, calls a bomb to Paul Warfield that went to the scUM 10 yard line.
• Woody calls 2 more pass plays and the second one scores with :05 seconds to go.
• Woody, being Woody, then goes for 2 and gets it to make it an even 50.

Newspaper accounts of the day made mention of a nearly half hour long series of on the field brawls between fans after the game. Older guys recollect any of that?

Regardless of the brawl part being true or not, can you imagine the field day the sports entertainment industry would have with that shit today?

The game was at Michigan and the Bucks were ranked 1 or 2 in the polls. Best of all was a play in the second half. Warfield, who had problems keeping his balance all season long, catches a pass out in the flat, just beyond the Michigan linebacker, and takes off. around the Michigan 40 the safety sets up, Warfield fakes left, then right and the safety falls over backward and Paul runs right over him and on for the touchdown. Funniest play I've ever seen.

I don't know about fans getting into fights, but I do know that the next day the faculty council voted NO on the Rose Bowl bid. that Monday evening I was among the huge throng of students to march, with TBDBITL, from 15th and High to Broad and High where the police chief, backed by his force and fire trucks, read the Riot Act. Until then I thought "Riot Act" was just one of my old man's favorite phrases -- who knew?

By the way, the Buckeye's helmets were gray (so were the pants) with a fat red stripe that year. White jerseys, red numbers, red and gray stripes that ran from the neck to the shoulder.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I was among the huge throng of students to march, with TBDBITL, from 15th and High to Broad and High where the police chief, backed by his force and fire trucks, read the Riot Act. Until then I thought "Riot Act" was just one of my old man's favorite phrases -- who knew?

 

[Zurp]

My thoughts (as if anyone cares):

1. I don't think Neuheisel (or whatever his name is) was wrong to call the time-out. By leaving time-outs on the board, you're admitting to your own team that you don't think they can win the game. As a coach, I'd imagine that you need to show confidence in your team at all times. Who knows? A snap can be fumbled and 2 or 3 more miracles later, it's a tie game. If the unspoken rule is to not call time-outs when the other team is in the victory formation, then the game is only 58 minutes long if the winning team has the ball at the end (since they can run the last 2 minutes out).

2. Pete Carroll chose to be classless. At first, he chose to do the right thing, and Neuheisel gave him time to re-decide. Shame on Neuheisel? Perhaps. But PC still chose to do the classless thing.

3. All's fair in a rivalry game, as long as it follows the normal rules of the game. If UCLA didn't want USC to score that last touchdown, they should have played better defense.

4. Did someone say that USC shouldn't have had their starters in the game? It's only a 2-touchdown lead. By keeping your starters in the game, you're lessening the chances of those 3+ miracles required for UCLA to come back.

5. These things sort themselves out. Sooner or later, USC will be "down" (even further than they are this year). Don't be surprised to see a lot of teams putting up 50+ points on them by keeping their starters in the game and converting 2-point conversions. It reminds me of a couple of 6-year-olds ("but he started it!"), but it's how a lot of adults behave.

 

[matcar]

I thought Pete over-reacted to the timeout. With 52 seconds, a fumbled snap, a quick TD, an onsides kick, and another TD would tie the game.

Now I know that's a million-to-one shot, but I don't blame Neuheisel for calling the timeout; if he doesn't ake a timeout he's admitting defeat early, something he doesn't want his team to do.

If you don't blame Rick for the timeout, then you can't blame PC for going for the score. If the game's in doubt, go for the throat. This hatred for PC is a bit overboard.

 

[Woody1968]

Don't forget in '07 when the Illinois players danced on the O midfield and almost started a riot after they had upset Ohio State. I like to think that Tressel wouldn't stoop to participating in these shenanigans but we can't be sure.

Also, Illinois is considered a rival.

 

[BuckeyeBill]

If you don't blame Rick for the timeout, then you can't blame PC for going for the score. If the game's in doubt, go for the throat. This hatred for PC is a bit overboard.

I don't blame Neuheisel for the TO, and I don't blame Carroll for the score. The last thing I want is to see even more political correctness enter my favorite sport. It's football. If you're offended by such tactics, find another sport.

I will say my personal opinion of Pete Carroll has changed a lot over the last year, and in particular over the last 2 weeks. I would have thought his behavior after the Stanford game and after the touchdown against UCLA would be beneath the coach of such a successful program. I guess not.

 

[Bucklion]

It's a rivalry game. All's fair in love, war...and those. The idea that you should stop scoring on a bitter rival really amazes me. In fact, it's much more of a pussy bitch move IMO to run up the score on the second leg of a home-and-home knowing damn well you won't see that team again for who knows how long. As it is, UCLA and USC will play again, same time, same channel, year after year...didn't like it? Hang 60 on them next year. If you can. Now, that doesn't mean that PC didn't act like a tool by jumping up and down with the outcome of the game already decided. I think he acted like a tool. But not for scoring. Hell, he was DONE scoring, then decided he wasn't when the opposing coach decided the game wasn't over yet. How can you get pissed about that in a rivalry game, really? I mean, really?

 

[Woody1968]

It's a rivalry game. All's fair in love, war...and those. The idea that you should stop scoring on a bitter rival really amazes me. In fact, it's much more of a pussy bitch move IMO to run up the score on the second leg of a home-and-home knowing damn well you won't see that team again for who knows how long. As it is, UCLA and USC will play again, same time, same channel, year after year...didn't like it? Hang 60 on them next year. If you can. Now, that doesn't mean that PC didn't act like a tool by jumping up and down with the outcome of the game already decided. I think he acted like a tool. But not for scoring. Hell, he was DONE scoring, then decided he wasn't when the opposing coach decided the game wasn't over yet. How can you get pissed about that in a rivalry game, really? I mean, really?

There is only ONE rivalry in college football, and it is not USC and UCLA. But this is the Pac-10, and they run up the score on each other every year, so it is no suprise.

 

[BB73]

If you don't blame Rick for the timeout, then you can't blame PC for going for the score. If the game's in doubt, go for the throat. This hatred for PC is a bit overboard.

Show me where I've indicated hatred of Pete Carroll since that game ended. I said he was a hypocrite, that he over-reacted to the timeout and celebrated too much after the TD - that's hardly an indication of hatred.

I didn't blame him for going for the score - I had a problem with him getting on Harbaugh for going for two and then celebrating big-time when USC hit the bomb on UCLA.

I believe that your hyperbole of my expression of a negative opinion about Pete's behavior is a bit overboard.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I went to the OSU - USC game with BB73. I can say for sure, he's got nothing but man love for Carroll.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Oh... wait.... that was Carol

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Oh... wait.... that was Carol

Damn, BB73, I had no idea. She's young enough to be your granddaughter, pervert.

 

[methomps]

...and Carroll just wanted to score 50 points against San Jose St., throwing a TD pass with 4 minutes left in a game that had been 49-3.

I don't think anyone would be making an issue about this but for what appears to be hipocrisy on Carroll's part--it's ok to run up the score when it's his team scoring a TD late in the 4th against San Jose St. to make it a 56-3 game or throwing a bomb against his team's rival in the final minute and then acting like his team just won the Super Bowl, but if Harbaugh goes for 50 (without the sideline hooting and hollering, mind you) against PC's team, Carroll gets all bent out of shape. It seems that he can rub his opponents' noses into the ground, but other teams can't do the same to him. That double standard is what I have a problem with.

I think if Carroll had wanted to score 50, he would've gone for 2 when it was 48 points. He didn't. He kicked the XP.

And he played the whole 4th quarter with his backups. So if you have a problem with double standards, then where is all the huff over the double standard on this board? Carroll let's his backup players run the offense, including passing, and scores a TD with 4 minutes left. You call that running up the score.

But Tressel has his starter throw twice into the endzone with a minute and change left, and the reaction on this board is completely different.

What about that double standard?

 

[Gatorubet]

I think if Carroll had wanted to score 50, he would've gone for 2 when it was 48 points. He didn't. He kicked the XP.

And he played the whole 4th quarter with his backups. So if you have a problem with double standards, then where is all the huff over the double standard on this board? Carroll let's his backup players run the offense, including passing, and scores a TD with 4 minutes left. You call that running up the score.

But Tressel has his starter throw twice into the endzone with a minute and change left, and the reaction on this board is completely different.

What about that double standard?

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Good god... It's not Pete Carroll's job to stop USC.

I agree with BB73 - if there's any hypocrisy on Carroll's part it's about complaining (to the extent he did) about Stanford going for two to get 50 while having no problem being on the plus side of an otherwise unnecessary score.

But, this is fucking football.... the whole object is to score. If you don't like being scored on, then man the fuck up and stop them.