Big Ten: USC Deserved Penalty for Fake Punt Attempt
The Big Ten Conference has stated that the University of Southern California (USC) should have faced a penalty during a recent football game against Northwestern. The controversial incident occurred when reserve quarterback Sam Huard wore the same jersey number as the primary punter, Sam Johnson, leading to a successful fake punt attempt.
Details of the Incident
This incident took place in the second quarter of the game. With a critical fourth-and-6 situation, USC lined up in a punt formation. Huard, donning jersey number 80—also worn by Johnson—positioned himself as the punter. He received the long snap and completed a 10-yard pass to teammate Tanook Hines. This play contributed to USC eventually scoring a touchdown and achieving a 38-17 victory over Northwestern.
Game-Day Rosters and Regulations
- Huard and Johnson were both listed as No. 80 on USC’s game-day roster.
- However, Huard’s official online roster indicates he wears No. 7.
- USC jerseys lack player last names, complicating identification for officials.
Most college football teams often have multiple players sharing the same jersey number; typically, they play on different units, like offense or defense. In this situation, the Big Ten cited an NCAA rule regarding “Unfair Tactics,” stating that two players occupying the same position cannot have identical numbers during a game. If the foul had been recognized when Johnson entered the game, a Team Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty would have resulted in a 15-yard penalty for USC.
Reactions and Future Steps
Following the game, Northwestern coach David Braun accepted responsibility for the incident and voiced that USC had properly submitted Huard’s jersey number change. He acknowledged the oversight, saying it “100 percent falls on me.” Meanwhile, USC coach Lincoln Riley noted that the number change for Huard had been made weeks before the game and humorously remarked that the media should have been more attentive to this detail.
The Big Ten plans to continue its review of the situation, emphasizing the importance of adherence to NCAA rules. This incident raises questions about jersey identification and officiating in collegiate football.
