Oklahoma State coach Gundy blasts Oklahoman columnist

[Birdscribe]

Mark Whicker with his usual excellent take on things... and too many others with their less-than-intelligent take.

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/bonds-strong-steroids-1131860-whicker-media

I hope you're not saying that people who disagree with you are unintelligent. I can't think of a more unintelligent thing to say.

No, although it was phrased wrong and should have been phrased better on my part.

What I am saying is in his usual, rational, intelligent way, Whicker is patiently explaining that this was a childish, immature way of handling things and nobody was listening.

But frankly Ira, some of those letters weren't very intelligent. That, I won't apologize for.

 

[ADifferentOkie]

If you don't want to Pish people off, you're in the wrong business

As a journalist, do you purposely try to Pish people off?

No. But it comes with the job.

But too many people think that IS the job.

Sometimes it is the job. What if you're a cops and courts reporter? You Pish people off everyday.
I know we're not, but the point is, if you're a journalist and you're doing your job correctly, you're going to Pish people off sometimes. You have to be willing to do that as part of the job.
If you're not willing to do that, go into P.R.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

For the love of god, pick another one!

 

[FreddiePatek]

I didn't have anything to add. Just wanted to make the 1,000th post on this thread.

Carry on.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

I didn't have anything to add. Just wanted to make the 1,000th post on this thread.

Carry on.

Stop being so short with everyone.

 

[BertoltBrecht]

If the over/under is at 50, I'll take the under, but I like to live on the edge, so:

Do you think Gundy and others could make light of this situation now?

Like could a reporter ask, right after a game, if he has "read any good columns lately?"

 

[ADifferentOkie]

Following the game last week (one week after the blowup), it was the 21st birthday of the new QB who replaced Reid. Gundy mentioned it in the postgame and he was asked, "Is he a man yet?"
Gundy laughed and said, "He's far from being a man."

 

[chilidog75]

No way in hell Chilidog works in this profession. He's far too protective of the athletes. He's gotta be an SID or a student still.

Yes, because this profession is all about ATTACKING college athletes. Like I said, we all have to Pish people off from time to time --- writing about the starting tackle breaking into a liquor store, the backup corner cheating on a test, whatever --- that is part of the job. But thinking it was wrong to humiliate a college player by calling him a pussy in a statewide newspaper is a LONG WAY from being "too protective of athletes."

 

[wickedwritah]

But thinking it was wrong to humiliate a college player by calling him a pussy in a statewide newspaper is a LONG WAY from being "too protective of athletes."

Why do you care if he was called a pussy?

She's a columnist, and she's been given the privilege by her editors to opine on sports, mostly as she sees fit.

I have read far worse hatchet-jobs on college kids, most coming from the same fanboy losers who now say that poor Bobby Reid was mistreated.

 

[Tom Petty]

But thinking it was wrong to humiliate a college player by calling him a pussy in a statewide newspaper is a LONG WAY from being "too protective of athletes."

Why do you care if he was called a pussy?

She's a columnist, and she's been given the privilege by her editors to opine on sports, mostly as she sees fit.

I have read far worse hatchet-jobs on college kids, most coming from the same fanboy losers who now say that poor Bobby Reid was mistreated.

i think chilidog feeds the pussy chicken.

 

[Joel_Goodsen]

Once again the point is being missed completely by many of the so-called defenders of Carlson/journalism.....

This kid may very well be a whimp, he may very well be a momma's boy and it is clearly our job as columnists and even beat reporters to point this out -- that this is the reason he was benched.....

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And unfortunately, Carlson did absolutely none of that, her column was horseship crap that barely rose above the level of writing in a college newspaper and because she relied so heavily on "rumblings, rumors and speculation" it came off as a lazy effort and it deserved the "two-cannons blazing" treatment it received from both the coach and people like Whitlock.

The facts MAY have been correct, but you'd never know by reading that crap because none of the "facts" were in the column, just a poorly crafted bunch of drivel that came off more like a personal vendetta than a well-crafted column.

And then credibility comes into play after the fact when we come to find out Carlson didn't even "observe" -- another word she used several times -- the chicken incident which she builds her premise on (yet in reading the lede, you sure get the impression she was there and saw it all.)

The written word is very powerful, it means something and when it is poorly used, it can cause far more harm than good. The issue isn't whether we should rip athletes or coaches -- we should -- the issue is how it is done and in this case it was a horse ship effort and the kind of crap that undermines all of our credibility.

 

[Tom Petty]

Once again the point is being missed completely by many of the so-called defenders of Carlson/journalism.....

This kid may very well be a whimp, he may very well be a momma's boy and it is clearly our job as columnists and even beat reporters to point this out -- that this is the reason he was benched.....

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And unfortunately, Carlson did absolutely none of that, her column was horseship crap that barely rose above the level of writing in a college newspaper and because she relied so heavily on "rumblings, rumors and speculation" it came off as a lazy effort and it deserved the "two-cannons blazing" treatment it received from both the coach and people like Whitlock.

The facts MAY have been correct, but you'd never know by reading that crap because none of the "facts" were in the column, just a poorly crafted bunch of drivel that came off more like a personal vendetta than a well-crafted column.

And then credibility comes into play after the fact when we come to find out Carlson didn't even "observe" -- another word she used several times -- the chicken incident which she builds her premise on (yet in reading the lede, you sure get the impression she was there and saw it all.)

The written word is very powerful, it means something and when it is poorly used, it can cause far more harm than good. The issue isn't whether we should rip athletes or coaches -- we should -- the issue is how it is done and in this case it was a horse ship effort and the kind of crap that undermines all of our credibility.

joel - who gives a flying fork what the idiot coach or whitlock think about this issue? serious question; not poking you in the ribs.