Debate over finish of USC-UCLA game continues among high school coaches

Debate continues to rage among sports fans in Southern California about what transpired in the final minute of the USC-UCLA football game. Was it appropriate for UCLA Coach Rick Neuheisel to call a timeout with 54 seconds left after USC took a knee leading, 21-7? Did USC Coach Pete Carroll make the right call to let quarterback Matt Barkley throw a 48-yard touchdown pass on the next play? Was the taunting from players just part of a rivalry game?

Michael Josephson, who runs the Josephson Institute and created the “Character Counts” movement in high school sports competition, said, “I think this is sort of a sideshow. Whether it was good faith or bad depends on how you interpret the facts. On the other hand, both coaches need to control their players better. This tendency to believe you can fight and get angry when things don’t go your way, we’re trying to get rid of that in sports.”

We also asked some of the Southland’s high school football coaches for their thoughts. Here’s some of what they had to say:

Jeff Engilman, Arleta: “I think they were both wrong. It was evident the game was over, so why call a timeout? If USC is going to take a knee, they had the game won.”

Jim Benkert, Westlake Village Westlake: “You had a situation where both teams were trying to win a football game. Coach Neuheisel was doing what he was preaching to the end by calling a timeout to keep playing. USC said the same thing. ‘If it’s not over, we’re going to keep playing.’ I don’t see any coaching decision that was wrong.”

Jeremiah Ross, Encino Crespi: “I think both coaches were competing. I know why Neuheisel took a timeout. He doesn’t want to send a message, ‘We’re quitting.’ USC was saying, ‘You want to compete, let’s compete.’ ”

Lorenzo Hernandez, Garfield: “There was no need for a timeout. It gave me the same idea, ‘Oh, you want to keep playing.’ I don’t agree with the pass call. Maybe run the ball. I don’t agree with the taunting. It was undisciplined. They have to show class. Kids popping off sent a bad message.”

Troy Thomas, Anaheim Servite: “They are the two programs in Southern California that our guys look up to, and I was disappointed. I don’t think it was a good example for our young guys.”

Angelo Gasca, Venice: “If a team is winning and they take a knee, they’re signifying they’re done. If Neuheisel had accepted that, he wouldn’t have called a timeout. Carroll was definitely forced. Neuheisel was doing what was right for his program. He’s fighting to the end. The truth is, Carroll was going to end the game. Neuheisel called timeout and it probably ticked him off, ‘Fine, here you go.’ ”

Jim Rose, Birmingham: “I think if he didn’t call a timeout, you would never have seen the pass. It definitely built up the rivalry. What was a boring game is leading into next year. Neither was wrong or they were both wrong, depending on how you look at it.”

Dave White, Huntington Beach Edison: “I thought Jim Harbaugh was wrong going for two points. I thought Rick Neuheisel was wrong calling a timeout. And I thought Pete Carroll was wrong calling a bomb at the end.”

Bill Redell, Westlake Village Oaks Christian: “I think they both got a little carried away. I left in the third quarter. If I go next year, I’ll stay for the whole game.”

Mike Herrington, Newhall Hart: “Every coach should play to the very end. That’s what we’ve done through the years. And every coach should have a take-a-knee chart on their play sheet. The only thing USC made a mistake on is they shouldn’t have taken a knee. They should have run the ball to get a first down, and there wouldn’t have been a problem.”

Thadd MacNeal, Lakewood: “As a coach, you always try to find ways to stay in the game. But USC had every right to go for a touchdown after they called a timeout. Neither team was wrong in what they did.”

Scott Altenberg, Gardena Serra: “I liked the decision by Rick Neuheisel to keep the game going by calling a timeout. But I would have never passed after that. USC should have just run the ball and tried to get a first down. It was totally unnecessary to throw.”

Tom Leach, Temecula Chaparral: “Neither [coach] was wrong. Football is a man’s sport and no one should care if one coach decides to call a timeout or if another decides to throw a touchdown pass. The only ones complaining are the parents and fans.”

Jim Bonds, La Canada St. Francis: “You send the wrong message to the team that you’re conceding if you don’t take a timeout. You have to use everything at your disposal to keep the game going and that’s what [UCLA] did. But you also have to be prepared on defense, and UCLA wasn’t.”

Tim Lins, Moorpark: “UCLA’s timeout was unnecessary. There’s a school of thought that says you should battle to the end, but it’s just not worth it when the game is over.”

Raul Lara, Long Beach Poly: “If you call a timeout, you’re telling the other team that you’re still playing. The same thing happened to us against [Long Beach] Wilson. We were leading big and they called a timeout after we took a knee. We went for big pass on the next play, and we would have had a touchdown if our receiver hadn’t dropped it.”

Paul Knox, Dorsey: “If you take the timeout, you’re saying you still want to play. The game could have been over if you wanted it to be over.”

Ed Croson, West Hills Chaminade: “I think it’s more of a fan thing than a coaches thing. UCLA called the timeout. That’s the risk you take. I didn’t think it was a big deal. The unfortunate part of it is it created a potential situation where guys could have done something stupid.”

Steve Shevlin, El Segundo: “I think everything is OK up to when the benches emptied.”

Bruce Rollinson, Santa Ana Mater Dei: “I go with the theory you want to keep competing. You know you have to line up on defense, so defend it. I don’t know why people are making such a big deal of it. In high school football, I would have run the ball after the timeout.”

eric.sondheimer@latimes.com

austin.knoblauch@latimes.com