Letters to the Editor
-
Controversial Touchdown
I applaud how gracious USC was in defeat. However, after a few good minutes of constant replay of Young's knee hitting the turf before he threw the ball to Selvin Young and the commentators constant comments about the play, it amazed me that during much of the post-game analysis, this play was swept under the rug. Texas won by 3 points (assuming that Texas would have tried for a field goal and made it), 3 points Texas would not have had had someone from USC called a time out and allowed the umpires to review the "indisputable video evidence."
This boggles my mind because it seems that the media loves to stir the pot of controversy and with such a close loss, the knee on the ground debate seems like a worthy candidate of such discussion. What makes some things, some seemingly inane, worthy of discussion and others, some worthy of controversy, not?
-
Pete Carrol is really dumb
I don't want to take anything away from UT, Vince Young, or one of the greatest college football games ever, but Carrol cost his team the game by making two (possibly three) spectacular mistakes on the same play.
1) USC never should have gone for it on 4th and 2. Young didn't complete a pass over 15 yards in the entire game. In other words, even if USC punts the ball 20 yards, the odds are it would have taken Young at least two plays to cover that distance.
2) Reggie Bush wasn't on the field. No disprespect to the backup, but I've spent the last year hearing how Bush is the second coming of Sayers/Payton/Sanders/Brown/etc. How is the best player in college football standing on the sidelines at the decisive moment?
3) You could argue that a dive up the middle was also really stupid. Everyone knew it was coming. Why not let Matt Leinart play-fake and throw a short pass? It may not have worked, but if you aren't going to put the game in the hands of your best player, maybe you should at least put the game in the hands of your second-best player.
All of which goes to show: college coaches make their money in recruitment, not in game management.
-
Controversial Touchdown, but Texas Won It Fair and Square
Yes, that first quarter touchdown was, ahem, "controversial." In fact, it led to a lot of screaming and thrown objects in my Trojan house, and continues to contribute to the wafting cloud of frustration in which I am going through my day. But I've had a night's sleep and chance to calm down, and I am beginning to accept that it was a game both teams (and their fans) can be proud of.
Regardless of whether or not Texas would have only been able to kick a field goal had that play been rescinded, USC had plenty of chances to win it. And they capitalized on most of those chances; that's why I love them (that and the fact that I graduated from USC). Leinart was stellar. White was downright cosmic. Bush was stupid, but redeemed himself with that epic dive. I feel more sorry for the guy than angry with him (although I'm a little angry.)
But Texas won it, as decisivly as they could in a game so full of bizarre officiating and incompetent clockery. If we, as USC fans, continue to dwell on that one touchdown, then our 2006s are all but ruined. I'm gradually accepting that we still lit it up last night, and our team will be justly feared for the forseeable future.
-
Carroll made the right call
King,
I totally disagree with your assessment of the 4th down call at the end of the game. USC had to do everything to avoid giving Texas the ball back. Carroll knew his defense wasn't any good there and he tried to avoid putting the game in their hands. USC had at least a 50% chance (probably more) of making that conversion and that would have just about been the ballgame. Possession of the ball is way more important than the 20 or so yards thye would have probably gotten on a punt, unless of course it was blocked or run back a long way. There was over two minutes to go and Texas still had timeouts left. They had plenty of time to go the length of the field. I think there's just no question that going for it gave USC the best chance to win.
Carroll has to take blame for wasting his timeouts though. They should have just given texas those 2 points rather than burn the last one, the game was pretty much over when they did that.
Love your point on the non 3-peat attempt. USC had just as much to claim to the title 2 years ago as undefeated Auburn did last year
-
OK, King, if we're nitpicking the officials...
As in Vince Young should have had more time, let's REALLY nitpick them on the phantom Texas TD. As Genivieve above says, no TD would have translated (with missed extra point considered) a field goal (maybe) for Texas, either way a loss of three points to the Texas side seems fair all things considered, I'm not saying they would or wouldn't have scored a TD on that drive but then again I'm crediting them with the field goal anyhoo despite makeable field goals missed by the Texas kicker later in the game.
So, Texas is attacking the SC side with two minutes to play down 38-30, NOT 38-33 which, after the Orange Bowl triple OT thriller and memories of Ohio State beating Miami for the title in OT could have made this game even better.....
All in all I think the Big Ten crew did a HORRID job for both teams and in the end had an affect on the final score, something you hope and pray against.
BTW, I had no dog in this fight, Lehigh was once again denied a BCS berth in spite of victories over Harvard, Yale AND Colgate
-
Keith Jackson's performance
I've greatly admired Keith Jackson over the years and I thought he did the best job he could, but for a man his age, he had a tough assignment. The Rose Bowl, although it appeared well-lit on TV, really isn't. There were also a lot of plays that happened along crowded sidelines and in the corners far away from him.
Jackson also wasn't helped out much by officials who weren't on the ball when it came to making signals.
I don't think Keith Jackson embarrassed himself, but I think he knows that he needs to take it easy now with his artificial knees and failing eyesight. He's done great work for nearly 50 years.