Oklahoma State coach Gundy blasts Oklahoman columnist

sorry for getting the thread off track.

 

it was on track before that foray?

 

Ain't gonna read through 39 pages, but Randy Galloway of the FortWorthStartelly had a great commentary on this issue weaved together with the Coach Franscapade. He suggested to Carlson that she never, ever write about someone's momma no matter how factual her column is.

http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/columnists/randy_galloway//story/256473.html

 

From that column:

Based on voices, however, from inside the Oklahoma State football compound (no, not fans), there was not one thing in that column about a benched quarterback that was not true. The facts were right.

 

I made that same point about a week ago.
I'm telling you, the facts were correct.

 

I expect every one of you who bashed Carlson for "ripping" a college kid to do the same to SI for this...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0710/cfb.most.disappointing.players/content.1.html

 

The SI list is criticizing their on-field performance, not their character, as the Ok. State column did when it essentially called him a pussy.

 

Whether the facts were correct or not doesn't mean you run that column --- not that rumors and rumblings and rumblings and rumors should count as "facts" anyway. Not everything you know about the inside of a football program and it's players is for public consumption. Most is. Not all. But there is a balance. There has to be. Unless of course you want to piss off the program, fan base, the readership and the entire state, then by all means have at it and write columns like this one.

 

I agree that there are sportswriters who were, or still are, good athletes.

However, stereotypes exist for a reason. There's a reason we all know what someone is referring to when they call someone a "valley girl" or "frat boy" or "femiNazi."

I've encountered some sportswriters who were always picked last for the team and seem to be taking it out on those they cover. They approach their job as if they're getting revenge on every BMOC by ripping them in print. It's just poor self esteem on display. Is it possible to be critical of a subject without being vindictive? Of course. And that's the job. But it's easy to tell when it's coming from a vindictive place.

 

Should we not cover news lest it piss readers off? People in Boston don't wanna hear one firefighter was drunk and another was doing blow when they died in a fire six weeks ago, so should we not cover this story? C'mon, get a grip. Disconnect or not, our job is not to be carrying everyone's water.

 

wicked --
I was going to jump on that one myself.
That this is 40 pages long is solely due to the non-journos who have gravitated to it.

 

I didn't realize toughness was a part of your character.
I think of things more like morality, kindness to others, etc., not tolerance for pain.