11/21/24
September 24, 2007
Oklahoma State Coach Mike Gundy: Leave My Quarterback Alone!: At a press conference after his team defeated Texas Tech Saturday, Oklahoma State head football coach Mike Gundy launched into a three-minute tirade against a Daily Oklahoman columnist over an article that called benched quarterback Bobby Reid a momma's boy who plays scared. "That article had to have been written by a person who doesn't have a child," Gundy said. "Here's all that kid did: He goes to class; he's respectful to the media; he's respectful to the public; and he's a good kid. He's not a professional athlete, and he doesn't deserve to be kicked when he's down."
I agree with holden, the column makes some valid (if true, I don't follow Oklahoma State football) points, but the lines at the beginning and end about his mom feeding him chicken just come across as petty. Without them, the column would have been fine, but as it was, Gundy was right to call The Daily Oklahoman out on it.
posted by bender at 02:34 PM on September 24, 2007
I agree with holden, the column makes some valid (if true, I don't follow Oklahoma State football) points, but the lines at the beginning and end about his mom feeding him chicken just come across as petty. I completely disagree. As a former sportswriter, I didn't find the column mean-spirited or particularly pointed at all. Where exactly did Carlson rip Reid? She said he was nervous during every game (not that uncommon), laughing at the end of a loss to a lesser team (bad form), said he doesn't play hurt (not a guy likely to rally or inspire the troops) and lets his mother feed him chicken in a public parking lot (just plain creepy). Nothing very secretive there -- but plenty to make fans and coaches think maybe this isn't the guy to be running the offense in Big 12 games. Also, fuck this "protecting the kids" act, Coach Gundy. Your newly crowned back-up is a fully grown, 21-year-old man -- perhaps he should be expected to take some criticism, especially of the milquetoast variety. And what's with the R. Lee Ermey act, Coach? Do you think the screaming and yelling will bully other reporters into not reporting what they see and hear? Did you contact Carlson one-on-one -- like a man -- to discuss the column, or did you just try to embarrass her in a public forum? And what exactly was inaccurate? I didn't hear you clear any of that up. I hope Carlson takes you up on your offer, Coach. Let's see a column about what a man it takes to stand up there, where you know the reporter can't respond, and berate her. An article like that embarrassing you to be involved in athletics? I think a lot of Cowboy fans might say the same thing about an 18-point loss to Troy. I also find the comments on the Sporting News web site pretty hilarious. These same douchebags who will line up on game day to boo the shit out of anyone who drops a pass are ripping a reporter for doing her job. Oh, and now he wonder if he could have handled himself a little better. You think? But, as a matter of good journalism and general good ethical practice, sports commentary (as distinguished by sports reporting, which would be more factual) should steer clear of name-calling, personal attacks or reporting on personal details unrelated to on-the-field performance. By that standard, Michael Vick's dog show or a QB getting a DUI shouldn't be fair game for sportswriters because that's "off-the-field" stuff.
posted by wfrazerjr at 03:40 PM on September 24, 2007
College athletes at big-time schools are, for better or worse, public figures and should therefore have moderately thick skin. where do you draw the line? Couldn't someone also argue that some kids playing in the little league world series are, for better or worse, public figures and therefore should be able to be subjected to articles attacking their play? What if Jenni's next article is about how some 12 year old shortstop choked and wilted under the pressure of the big game? OK/Not OK? And if not, what is the arbitrary age limit or circumstance when it is OK?
posted by bdaddy at 04:05 PM on September 24, 2007
Couldn't someone also argue that some kids playing in the little league world series are, for better or worse, public figures and therefore should be able to be subjected to articles attacking their play? Yes, they could, and those people arguing that would be called idiots, and they either a) would not be sportwriters, or, in the event they were sportswriters, b) would be fired by their papers for turning in something ripping a 12-year-old. This is a grown man, not a baby. All college athletes are grown men and women. What if Jenni's next article is about how some 12 year old shortstop choked and wilted under the pressure of the big game? See b).
posted by wfrazerjr at 04:54 PM on September 24, 2007
I think the reporter and Gundy were both out line however most college coaches I've met are protective of their player (especially good kids) due to the fact they make promises to their parents to look after them through the process of leaving home for the first time. Sometimes emotion gets the best of a bad situation. I don't follow Oklahoma football at all and not sure if the comments made by the reported are accurate or not however grumblings and rumors (as stated in report) are something I would not bank a published report on.
posted by brickman at 04:58 PM on September 24, 2007
bdaddy said: where do you draw the line? Couldn't someone also argue that some kids playing in the little league world series are, for better or worse, public figures and therefore should be able to be subjected to articles attacking their play? I think there's a sliding scale on these things. College athletes get more privacy than pro athletes. High school kids and below, more privacy than college. And so on. I think a story focusing on one LLWS players' shortcomings would be in very poor taste. But obviously there is reporting on the LLWS, and there can be a fine line between reporting and commentary. wfrazerjr said: By that standard, Michael Vick's dog show or a QB getting a DUI shouldn't be fair game for sportswriters because that's "off-the-field" stuff. I should step back and qualify my prior comment, which said that "sports reporting . . . should steer clear of . . . reporting on personal details unrelated to on-the-field performance." What I meant (and even this is maybe too blanket of a statement to make) is that if it relates to a personal off-the-field matter that is not a story independent of the sports context, reporters should tread carefully. The criminal cases are another matter altogether. The Vick story obviously fits at the highest level of public figure and would be a story if he was a CEO of a big company (which his salary and endorsements put him in the same boat as); it would most likely be at least a local story even if he was just a blue collar worker. I would say the same thing even for a college athlete -- if you are any sort of public figure (actually, even if you are Joe Q. Public), you ought to expect reporting on whatever crimes you commit. There are also other off-the-field matters that are fair game as they are closely related to what happens (or doesn't happen) on the field -- matters such as disciplinary issues, academic performance, non-sports injuries, etc. that might play into whether a particular athlete is eligible or can otherwise participate. I understand that the mental make-up of the QB in question is the focus of the story at issue. And his relationship with his mother feeds into that. I just think that reporting it is an invasion of his privacy at some level (even if he was being fed by his mother in public) and in poor taste. Unethical from a journalistic perspective? -- I don't think so. Illegal in any way? -- obviously not. Something I would have greenlighted as an editor? -- probably not.
posted by holden at 05:15 PM on September 24, 2007
This is something that I don't think I will try to give an opinion on based on logic. Instead I think this calls for a "gut response". I don't think there is anything wrong with Gundy protecting the back of his athlete. He didn't like the article, was upset with the reporter, and spoke his mind without calling her out by name or using any profanity laced tirades. He made his point clearly and succinctly albeit loudly and emotionally. In my own opinion I don't think college athletes are fair game for that type of criticism unless they are doing things detrimental to the college or engaging in activities that are illegal. Maybe this kid dreams of being in the NFL or maybe he plays football well enough to get a good college education and hope for a better life. Calling him out because he may or may not be scared is wrong. Moreover, it serves no purpose. Is it newsworthy? Does it give greater insight into the game? Or does it generate good press? and lets his mother feed him chicken in a public parking lot (just plain creepy) Why? Granted, I don't know the details on this so I may be way out of line. But I kiss my own college age son, in public, right on the mush in front of God and everybody. Sometimes when we eat, I put some of my own food in his mouth with my hand to try. He is a strapping man in the military and I am proud of him and I don't feel that my behavior is creepy so why would this mother who probably loves her son be considered any more so? Do we all have to be so hard? Nah, I'm with the coach. Good on him for sticking up for a kid he thinks is good and for not letting a journalist be irresponsible in their reporting. And I don't care if my opinion is completely out of the popular mainstream on this.
posted by THX-1138 at 07:27 PM on September 24, 2007
So it's okay for the reporter to rip the kid, but not okay for the coach to stand up for him? From what I can see, both are doing their jobs. You don't necessarily have to choose one or the other. I think it's a little much to question the character of a 20-year old (his play by all means - but the rest is pretty speculative), but I don't see a great deal of otherworldly behaviour, here.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:24 PM on September 24, 2007
Gundy is a poor coach that is in hot water for loosing to Troy by 18 pts. He is lashing out to protect this kid - ok. But, if the facts are true and they were reported accurately, what is the problem. He was seen laughing on the sidelines with the conditioning coach. He was seen doing the things that were reported and didn't play through what seems to be nicks and dings. He is always taking himself out when things start to go badly for the Pokes. I don't believe in calling them names, but if the shoe fits....
posted by Mickster at 10:37 PM on September 24, 2007
A take on Carlson from the University of Oklahoma's student media. The Umbrella is a humor section. So, sports humor in this case...
posted by igottheblues at 12:03 AM on September 25, 2007
College athletes at big-time schools are, for better or worse, public figures and should therefore have moderately thick skin. These are not professional athletes no matter what school they're playing at. These kids are amature athletes that do not deserve to be treated with such disrespect for what they do outside of the field of play. I can understand criticizing an athlete for not performing to their upmost potential during game day but to criticize a kid for having "sweaty palms" or because of what his mother feeds him has nothing to do with the sport and should not even be a factor. It's a shame to see what people consider to be journalism. By that standard, Michael Vick's dog show or a QB getting a DUI shouldn't be fair game for sportswriters because that's "off-the-field" stuff IMO, you're missing the point. An athlete getting a DUI or what Vick has done is newsworthy since it's an illegal act but what an athlete is eating, wearing or watching on their own time has nothing to do with anything or anyone and doesn't need to be put in print but we all know it is.
posted by BornIcon at 05:40 AM on September 25, 2007
These are not professional athletes no matter what school they're playing at. These kids are amature athletes that do not deserve to be treated with such disrespect for what they do outside of the field of play. Only by the strictest interpretation of some made-up standard. They're involved in a multi-billion dollar business that's watched on national TV by millions. It's not quite the hammer toss, is it?
posted by yerfatma at 05:45 AM on September 25, 2007
I find it interesting that they typical sportswriter, who has no experience playing the sport they are writing about, rip a kid for things they would be crapping their pants if they were in his situation. I agree, if this was a professional athlete, then the athlete should be held more accountable. It is just sad that the only talent these sportswriters have is to be glib, or cruel.
posted by Knuckles at 06:01 AM on September 25, 2007
They're involved in a multi-billion dollar business that's watched on national TV by millions. Business? I thought these kids were in college, no? And if they're "involved in a multi-billion dollar business", what's the cut for these kids? Oh yeah, I forgot, they don't get paid now do they? Again, amature athletes. It is just sad that the only talent these sportswriters have is to be glib, or cruel. I agree. Apparently, a negative story is what sells these days.
posted by BornIcon at 06:06 AM on September 25, 2007
Business? I thought these kids were in college, no? And if they're "involved in a multi-billion dollar business", what's the cut for these kids? Oh yeah, I forgot, they don't get paid now do they? That's being willfully obtuse: they do get paid with the potential of five free years of college. To which you might understandably reply that most of the kids we notice aren't really there for school. Which suggests this isn't the high-concept, noble experiment you're trying to pretend you believe it is. As an aside, if you're gonna put it in bold twice in a row, spellcheck.
posted by yerfatma at 07:40 AM on September 25, 2007
I find it interesting that they typical sportswriter, who has no experience playing the sport they are writing about, rip a kid for things they would be crapping their pants if they were in his situation. It's a game, dude. You don't have to play a sport to develop an interesting and provocative take on it, which is what Jenni Carlson is paid to do. I was on the fence about Carlson's first column, but her followup pushed me off it. Coach Gundy isn't backing up his claim that "three-fourths" of her column was inaccurate. And Reid isn't a kid, so Gundy's comparison to a child running home crying to his mother was off-base -- not to mention extremely embarrassing to Reid. Gundy's heart is probably in the right place -- amateur athletes in college football take too much heat. But he picked a popular whipping boy to make his point, and now that he won't stand behind his words, I think it was a cheap shot.
posted by rcade at 08:24 AM on September 25, 2007
A female sports columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, Carol Slezak, throws another log on the fire with this question: "Would Gundy have berated a male writer the way he berated Carlson?"
posted by rcade at 08:30 AM on September 25, 2007
most of the kids we notice aren't really there for school. quoted by yerfatma That is wrong, is it not? If that is the case, then most college athletes end up playing professional sports. How many players from each division one football team end up playing in the bigs?
posted by hawkguy at 08:53 AM on September 25, 2007
Maybe Gundy overreacted, but overall, I support the overall theme of his rant. His point was the newspaper was ripping a good kid, one who does what he's supposed to do, goes to classes, is respectful, etc. His only flaw may be he's just not cut out to start at this time. It's a tough situation. Just because a young person plays a major sport at a big university doesn't mean they're destined to enter the pros. Quite the contrary. Most aren't even close to that level; never were, never will be. That's where I think some reporters need to use better judgment when writing their stories. Just because D-1 college football generates a lot of money doesn't diminish the fact the majority of these young guys are college kids who should be applauded for balancing football and school, and who hopefully will come out of their respective universities with degrees.
posted by dyams at 09:10 AM on September 25, 2007
I don't think there was that much wrong with the column other than it was poorly written. For example, using his previous quote about his gameday emotions in this context. I'm guessing that quote was made in a relaxed atmosphere such as a media day event, and it was more of light-hearted off-the-cuff comment. Using it directly against him undercuts credibility. Probably would have better served to just say something along the lines of, "He has said in the past he has trouble controlling gameday nerves..." or something. Interesting point made by Slezak. I bet he never called out a male writer for not having any kids.
posted by SummersEve at 10:06 AM on September 25, 2007
That's being willfully obtuse: they do get paid with the potential of five free years of college. So do holders of academic scholarships, but no one writes about their familial relationships unless it's after a mass shooting. To which you might understandably reply that most of the kids we notice aren't really there for school. How many OSU kids have gone to the pros in the last five years? I'll wager less than 5%. That means that regardless of what the student-athlete might think when he gets there, the reality for the vast majority of them is that their education is the only useful thing they'll get out of their 4-5 years there. Plus a few glorious memories to reminisce over, maybe, but I got some of those at college too and I didn't play football. It sure would suck to remember college as the time when you were ridiculed by a local columnist.
posted by drumdance at 11:02 AM on September 25, 2007
I love what coach Gundy did. Not only for the fact that he went off on a reporter protecting one of his kids,(yes at 21 you STILL are a kid) but that he went off for a prolonged period of time. If I'm one of the other kids on that team and see my coach sticking up for one of his players like that, I'd want to go to war for him. I'm all for freedom of the press, but if you're gonna give it, you'd better be damn ready to receive it too. That reporter got everything she deserved.
posted by MGDADDYO at 11:14 AM on September 25, 2007
no one writes about their familial relationships unless it's after a mass shooting We're not very interested in academics though, are we? It's not like they have PhD dissertations on ESPN. Kids get academic scholarships with the understanding they're there to improve the school's academic appearance. Kids get sport scholarships because they're there to improve the school's athletic appearance. Only one shows up on TV. That is wrong, is it not? If that is the case, then most college athletes end up playing professional sports. Poorly phrased by me: I meant the college athletes that get the most publicity and the ones we tend to talk about. It was also overly cynical on my part. Plenty of those kids are still interested in a degree.
posted by yerfatma at 11:24 AM on September 25, 2007
A female sports columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, Carol Slezak, throws another log on the fire with this question: "Would Gundy have berated a male writer the way he berated Carlson?" It's a bit of a strawman, but not necessarily without an iota of merit.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:45 AM on September 25, 2007
"Would Gundy have berated a male writer the way he berated Carlson?" I would hope not. I would rather he take the S.O.B out behind the stadium and put his lights out. It appears that MS Carlson might just be hiding behind her gender, as well as her status as a member of the media, to avoid that sort of response. I know two things for certain. The first is that if anyone wrote anything like that about my kid, there would be retribution. The second thing is that my kid is fully capable of defending himself, and more than willing to do so, either in writing or behind the stadium. Perhaps someone ought to go through MS Carlson's entire career, as well as her personal life, and write a scathing attack about every poor grade in college, every less than stellar article, every error in fact, etc., etc. In other words, I'm sure she is anything but perfect, and the words "Judge not, lest ye be judged", are still true.
posted by Howard_T at 12:00 PM on September 25, 2007
I really don't see where she is "hiding behind her gender." In fact, I don't know many adults that would solve anything by going "out behind the stadium." Really? People still do that? Adults do that? Most people I know stopped doing that in, mmm, about 8th grade. Perhaps someone ought to go through MS Carlson's entire career... Except for the minor detail that in 20 minutes no one will gave a poo about Ms. Carlson.
posted by SummersEve at 12:23 PM on September 25, 2007
I would hope not. I would rather he take the S.O.B out behind the stadium and put his lights out. It appears that MS Carlson might just be hiding behind her gender, as well as her status as a member of the media, to avoid that sort of response. Can you name an occasion on which a div I college football coach reacted to some harsh things being said about one of his players by a male reporter, with a colossally stupid response such as "tak[ing] the S.O.B out behind the stadium and put[ting] his lights out"? I know two things for certain. The first is that if anyone wrote anything like that about my kid, there would be retribution. Retribution meaning you'd commit assault, in response to some harsh words? I hope this is hyped-up hyperbole talking. I'm not going to argue with your own self-assessment, but add to your list of things known for certain the fact that you'd go to jail for it. You're an adult; you're supposed to understand that you don't get to take a swing at someone just because they say something you don't like. If what they said is defamatory, the law provides you with other remedies -- but no, you don't get to just take a poke at them.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:23 PM on September 25, 2007
It appears that MS Carlson might just be hiding behind her gender, as well as her status as a member of the media, to avoid that sort of response. Nice use of "MS," Archie Bunker. Carlson isn't hiding at all. Read her rebuttal.
posted by rcade at 12:27 PM on September 25, 2007
There's something to be said for not being a malcontent, but you can almost see Reid shrugging his shoulders as he says those words. Does he have the fire in his belly? Or does he want to be coddled, babied, perhaps even fed chicken? Quoted from the article by Jenni Carlson That's just a cheap shot. I don't care if it's true, it's still a cheap and nasty comment made by a writer who is trying to provoke a reaction. Well, she got one. And the fact that it is a college athlete, not a pro, makes it that much worse. The coach had every right to respond. Was he accurate saying 3/4's of the article was incorrect? I don't know. But he had every right to be as upset as he was, even if every word of the article was accurate. Maybe he could have kept his rant short and sweet by channeling Devils Coach Jim Schoenfeld: "Have another doughnut...." Cheap shot? Absolutely. But maybe she should see how it feels.
posted by cjets at 12:41 PM on September 25, 2007
Okay, this is the first time I've seen the Gundy tirade. (I haven't been under a rock or in a cave or anything, just busy). In the posted stuff here, I think that the most effective rebuttal of her column was the comedy piece that igottheblues linked to. It was better than the hissy shit-fit thrown by Gundy. The shit he was saying was ridiculous and having a shit fit just made a lot more people read the original column too. Because its only college, I don't think its going to be made into a Coors light commericial eventually, which is unfortunate.
posted by chris2sy at 01:05 PM on September 25, 2007
As a Coach, I once had a parent tell me they were gonna wait for me in the parking lot after a game and kick my ass but for some reason it never "went down" like that. Its the medias job to tell stories to get reader response(through either interest or shock factor) and a coach has to defend their players. I dont really think anyone involved here is right or wrong. I chalk it up to a slow sports news day.
posted by Debo270 at 01:08 PM on September 25, 2007
The technique of asking questions, so that you don't actually have to state any facts and can just use speculation is used pretty heavily in the article. Most of the questions are nasty, and I think outside of good taste for a student-athlete. However, Gundy handled it all wrong because now the focus is on his behavior instead of the crappy article. If he was angry with it, he had a platform to clarify the inaccuracies and just call it mean-spirited (which it was). Once you let emotion take over, no one is really listening to your message anymore.
posted by bperk at 01:20 PM on September 25, 2007
The first is that if anyone wrote anything like that about my kid, there would be retribution. The second thing is that my kid is fully capable of defending himself, and more than willing to do so, either in writing or behind the stadium. If your "kid" is 21 and this sort of mild criticism would really affect him, I'd suggest you've done a pretty terrible job of raising him.
posted by wfrazerjr at 01:21 PM on September 25, 2007
Because its only college, I don't think its going to be made into a Coors light commericial eventually, which is unfortunate. Wait, you don't honestly think those things are actually put together from old clips, do you? Really? People still do that? Adults do that? No, because of the fear of guns. Regardless of the relevance of it here, I feel like we're worse off for it.
posted by yerfatma at 01:36 PM on September 25, 2007
Really? People still do that? Adults do that? No, because of the fear of guns. Regardless of the relevance of it here, I feel like we're worse off for it. I stopped doing it to set a proper example for my kid (that and the whole not wanting to go to jail thing)
posted by cjets at 01:44 PM on September 25, 2007
Also f%&k this.........These same douchebags.......... Ex- sportwriter, Gee, I wonder why?
posted by brickman at 02:12 PM on September 25, 2007
I hate to chime in here, but I have been in OK for most of my life and it's true that Ms Carlson writes under the umbrella of humor (as stated by the earlier posting). She is and has been a good reporter - fair and unbiased. The problem starts with Coach Gundy. He has played this quarterback roulette for the entire time that Bobby Reid has come to campus. He was heralded as the next "Great QB" for the state of OK. Then came Zac Robinson - the next in line. Gundy has made a mockery of the whole situation by rotating them in and out - usually playing both QB's in every game. He took Reid out last year against OU (or Reid was supposedly dinged up and didn't want to go back in) and Robinson nearly led the Pokes to an epic upset. Fell a bit short. But, they both played about half the game. I can go along with the fact that the article might have been a bit ridiculous, but the guy at 21 is as old as many pro athletes. What has turned this into a circus atmosphere is the Coach himself. He annoints his "New Starter" almost weekly. I believe this is more of a issue of poor coaching. He has a right to stand up for his players, he should do that as any GOOD coach would do. But, the only reason he is making such a fuss is that he (Coach Gundy) is routinely ripped in the paper so badly for loosing to Troy by 18 pts. Plus his inability to lead them to a good season. Troy State is the same division as Appalachian State (yeah, the ones that defeated Michigan). There were lofty expectations this year for them to compete for the Big 12 South (with a cupcake schedule - non conference) and they lost to Georgia (the only good team in their non-conference) in a good game early, that turned in to a laugher. Then they got it handed to them by Troy State. He is reacting more out of anger to the season than a simple story by a female writer. As for Bobby Reid, I am deeply sorry this young MAN has been ridiculed and poked fun at. It is very sad that it happened. The media is cruel at times. But, the asst. coaches and players are the ones leaking out the "faulty" material he claims is untrue. If a player says he can't go back in and the game is on the line, you don't put him back in. Also, if you or your coach pulls you out of an embarrasing game and you are seen laughing on the sideline of a blowout loss to what is a Div. II school, and you have no serious injury - that is what starts this type of story. NOT that it's right, just how the big business of College Football works. I might add that they just expanded and renovated the entire facilities and if you get a chance to see the stadium renovations, and other facilities - you would understand why people are tired of seeing the two-headed QB system during EACH game that Gundy employs. Stick with your guy during the year, not just when a bad story shows up.
posted by Mickster at 02:13 PM on September 25, 2007
Great insight. Thanks.
posted by yerfatma at 02:39 PM on September 25, 2007
Mickster, a glance at the Troy University 2007 Football Media Guide would reveal that Troy has been playing in the Division 1 Bowl Championship Subdivision for 5 years. Their schedule has included games with schools from the ACC, Big 12, and SEC. They have been to 2 bowl games in 3 years as a member of the Sun Belt Conference. They may not be of national championship caliber, but they are hardly a D-2 or D-1AA school. Perhaps you'd best check your facts before you post. As for my recent tirade, I apologise to all who took the word retribution to mean physical. Were I a writer who had just been publicly called "garbage", I think I might have been ready to go out behind the stadium with my accuser. That's the way I grew up back in the dark ages. Fights on the playground were not the "approved" method for settling disputes between classmates, but if it was one-on-one with no sticks or rocks, generally the faculty turned its back, for a little while anyway. My suggestion of what Coach Gundy ought to do to a male writer was more rhetorical than practical. When I say my kid stands ready to defend himself, I believe I said he could do it physically or in print. I'm sure he would rather use his excellent writing skills, but at his size, the alternative is not unattractive. For those who feel I've done a poor job of raising him, I submit that I have not tried to shield him from adversity, but rather I have tried to have him face it and do what is necessary to right a situation. By the way, in his 18 years, he has yet to raise a fist in anger.
posted by Howard_T at 03:29 PM on September 25, 2007
Hey Howard_T, sorry about the wrong classification of the Troy University program. Actually I understand that they are quite a good team in fact. I didn't know their classification, and that is my error. But, the media was howling on him for loosing a game that they were favored in by about as much as they lost it by. Not a big deal. Troy deserves the credit. But, in the broadcast, Bobby was seen on the sidelines (I watched the game) and he was laughing and joking with the conditioning coach as was reported. That part was true. That is hardly a reason to blast the kid though. I believe this is about much bigger issues. The OSU alumni has put millions of dollars into the program and facilities. I just don't believe that they thought Les Miles would leave as quickly as he did. And, I don't believe Gundy is the right guy. He has played musical QB's all year and it has cost him as evident by this week's events. He can be a very decent guy, but he was as wrong as the reporter. By the way, this was a part of a show on ESPN today. In the weekly press conference, Ms Carlson politely asked him which things were inaccurate so that she could make corrections - and he wouldn't reply. To bash her publicly was as bad as what she did. He should have politely took her to the side and had words with her. I think he is doing this for show and because his job is on the line. He is and has been on the hotseat this year. That is what I believe caused him to snap. But, please don't thing I condone what she said either. I believe the media will use any and all means to sell papers. You ahould know as well as I do that they won't show our soldiers building schools and roads, but one incident that horrifies the public will be on the air for weeks. It is sad that people are very interested in the "awe" aspect of media reporting than on any good accomplishments. Bobby Reid is a good QB and deserves better.
posted by Mickster at 04:05 PM on September 25, 2007
Some coaches at the college level obviously look at their athletes as being "college kids" in spite of the fact that more than a few of them are married and have kids of their own. I don't necessarily have an issue with that, in fact in some cases it can be a good thing. The reporter may have been making some valid points, but honestly, the references to momma, feeding chicken, and the rest were unprofessional to say the least. Was it enough to warrant the tirade? Perhaps, because it went beyond the playing field. Did it warrant the public outburst? Why not, since the reporter put it out in the public forum to begin with.
posted by irunfromclones at 04:06 PM on September 25, 2007
After I watched that interview I couldn't help but to stand up and clap for Coach Gundy because of the way he stood up for one of his players. With all the national attention that he has gained with this emotional outburst I'm sure that all those recruits out there saw this and are now thinking hey i want to play for this guy! Also with all this talk about he's not a kid well look he is a kid, he's one of Coach Gundy's kids. When you coach an ameteur sport all of your players are also your kids. We are talking about a team that is 2-2 right now with a demoralizing defeat to Troy just two weeks ago, maybe not only was Coach Gundy sticking up for one of his "kids" he also was trying to pick up the intensity of his football team going into the thick of their Big 12 conference games.
posted by jrizzo14 at 05:39 PM on September 25, 2007
Troy's a good team that has the potential to become a monster. Unlike a lot of Sun Belt teams, such as my alma mater North Texas, Troy's always a threat to win out of conference road games.
posted by rcade at 05:50 PM on September 25, 2007
I asked my son (age 24) what his reaction would have been to the newspaper article. "If she was good looking I'd ask her out and let her decide if I was a man or not based on whatever happen and not on other persons rumors or grumbling" God, I love that kid.
posted by brickman at 06:06 PM on September 25, 2007
After I watched that interview I couldn't help but to stand up and clap feel embarrassed for Coach Gundy because of the way he stood up for basically confirmed one of his players is not man enough to handle criticism. With all the national attention ridicule he has gained with this emotional ridiculous outburst, I'm sure that all those recruits out there saw this and are now thinking hey i want to play for this guy Hey, this guy's emotionally unstable and probably unfit to lead a cakewalk, much less a large group of young men! Also, with all this talk about he's not a kid well look he is a kid 21. When you coach an amateur sport college football, all of your players are also your kids pretty much grown men and semipro athletes who receive compensation and special perks for what they do. We are talking about a team that is 2-2 right now with a demoralizing defeat to Troy just two weeks ago, maybe not only was Coach Gundy sticking up for one of his "kids" he also was trying to pick up the intensity of his football team going into the thick of their Big 12 conference games deflect attention from an 18-point loss to a huge underdog.
posted by wfrazerjr at 06:25 PM on September 25, 2007
I couldn't agree less more.
posted by rcade at 07:51 PM on September 25, 2007
I love you guys. Manually.
posted by yerfatma at 08:00 PM on September 25, 2007
Oklahoma State was favored by ten points in the Troy game. Under that line in college football (where double digit spreads are much more common than in the NFL), I wouldn't classify Troy as a huge underdog. It obviously doesn't take away from the point that it was an embarrassing loss, but I think that was but one factor leading to the coach's outburst.
posted by holden at 08:09 PM on September 25, 2007
I caught part of a Fox Sports Radio interview with Jim Toban this morning on the way to work. In it, Mr. Toban said that much of MS Carlson's column was based on rumor, unsubstantiated gossip, and unnamed sources. This does not sound like "fact" to me. According to Toban, MS Carlson was not even in Troy for the game. About the only thing that can be demonstrated as fact was Reid laughing on the sideline with the strength and conditioning coach. If anyone should merit criticism for this, it is the coach, not the player. I hope that Coach Gundy took due notice of this. Toban's opinion of MS Carlson, with whose work he is apparently familiar, is that she is an excellent writer of feature pieces, but very poor (I think I heard the word "disaster") as a columnist. According to Toban, she excels at the "feel good" story such as a young cancer survivor returning to play athletics, but is not able to fill the role as a regular columnist. Please note that this is one opinion of MS Carlson's work, and may or may not be accurate, or even well-founded.
posted by Howard_T at 08:44 AM on September 26, 2007
First off, I have no idea who Jim Toban is, and neither does Google, at least not in relation to this situation, so I have no idea of his relevance to this discussion or his knowledge of Carlson's work. However, it sounds like this guy has no idea how columnists work. Rumour and unnamed sources are part of the columnist's trade, generally fed to them by players and coaches who are upset with someone but can't come right out and say it. Hell, I've been fed stuff by coaches and then told by the same coach he'd deny it if the info was attributed to him. It can be done in an attempt to motivate a player, to try to get the player to leave a team or an organization or for any ulterior motive. In addition, the columnist hears all sorts of other stuff on the sidelines, from other media and team sources. He or she has to sort through all of that and figure out what seems likely to be true and what isn't. I'm betting Carlson heard from numerous sources about the minor injuries, the possible transfers when times were a little tough. She filed the info and when Gundy benched Reid -- which would seem to back up that info -- she ran it. Let me make one more thing clear -- a coach sticking up for his players is fine by me. A coach using a press conference where he should be talking about his team's victory to instead throw an embarrassing hissy fit and berate a writer about a column is not sticking up for a player -- it's self-indulgence at the expense of his team. If Gundy really wanted the situation fixed, he would have gone to the paper's offices, expressed his displeasure in person with the writer and/or the editor, and told them he wouldn't be speaking with the for the remainder of the season.
posted by wfrazerjr at 10:25 AM on September 26, 2007
College athletes at big-time schools are, for better or worse, public figures and should therefore have moderately thick skin. If they or their coaches think they should be immune from criticism, they might want to think about not participating in collegiate athletics at that level. But, as a matter of good journalism and general good ethical practice, sports commentary (as distinguished by sports reporting, which would be more factual) should steer clear of name-calling, personal attacks or reporting on personal details unrelated to on-the-field performance. "Looks like he's playing scared" -- okay in my book. "Is playing scared because he's a mama's boy" -- not okay in my book. That said, the article in question doesn't refer to him as a momma's boy, contrary to the implication in the FPP. Even with that in mind, I do think some of the reporting about his mom feeding him is a cheap shot and probably unnecessary for the reporter in making her point (I realize it fits in with the "he's soft" theme, I just think the point could be well made without going there).