The reaction to Mike Gundy's postgame tirade toward a columnist has divided fans and media members. AP

MAILBAG Submit a question or an opinion to Stewart. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Regarding Mike Gundy's postgame rant, it seems that sportswriters have almost all condemned Gundy's overly emotional defense of his player and fail to grasp the distinction Gundy was trying to make between fair criticism of on-field performance and petty personal attacks. Your response was admittedly measured, but other national writers have gone as far as to suggest that Gundy be fined or fired. Meanwhile, almost all fans, players, and coaches support Gundy. Could it be that the actual bias in sports media is actually in favor of ... other sportswriters?
--Russ, Manhattan

Ding, ding, ding. I've tried futilely over the years to diffuse the wide-spread notion that mainstream journalists hold "biases" toward certain teams in the same way fans "hate" their rivals. I gave up on that lost cause long ago, other than to occasionally point out that if you truly believe a professional journalist would let his "inner-fan" hold more sway than the most basic tenant of his profession -- objectivity -- than you might as well assume your doctor is sharing your confidential medical information over drinks with his colleagues, and that your bank teller is secretly "borrowing" half that deposit you just made.

That said, writers are humans, and we like to be treated with the same level of dignity as any other humans. So yes, when Gundy steps out in front of a podium in a room full of people, points his finger at a specific writer and screams at her for several minutes with the kind of maniacal look on his face that suggests he's so angry he could hit somebody, is it any surprise to see fellow writers rallying behind the attacked journalist? Maybe that's how he dresses down his players in the locker room or on the sideline, but what person in any other walk of life voices their professional displeasure toward someone in that manner? Gundy's certainly entitled to disagree with her, and he's certainly entitled to defend his player, but I don't believe anyone -- from writer to football coach to stock trader to busboy -- deserves to be treated with such lack of basic human decency.

From the moment I first saw the Gundy clip, I knew immediately that such extreme-reaction columns as the ones you mentioned would soon be spewing forth across the country, regardless of whether or not Gundy had a valid point. It's the same "defense mechanism" that causes many writers to hold "grudges" against schools whose coaches or sports information staff have treated them like crap. It's human nature. And it's a much more likely cause of "bias" among writers than any team allegiance.

Hey Stewart, LSU's trick play on the field goal where the holder flipped the ball over his head to the kicker was amazing. But why didn't Steve Spurrier challenge that the holder had a knee on the ground? Once Flynn caught the snap, the play should have been whistled dead. In replays it is clear, and that was such a momentous play, taking seven points off the board would have been huge.
--Jason Townsley, Thousand Oaks, Calif.

I got a whole bunch of e-mails like this one -- which tells me that was a really nifty play. The "knee-was-down" rule you're speaking of (Article 3, section b in the NCAA Football Rules book) includes a specific exception for field goal attempts (otherwise, every field goal try be ruled dead as soon as the holder touches the ball) and is worded so that it doesn't matter whether the team actually goes through with the kick or not: "The ball remains alive when an offensive player has simulated a kick or is in position to kick the ball held for a place kick by a teammate. The ball may be kicked, passed or advanced by rule."

Well, you've done it again. This week is even worse -- in your article you discuss how stupid it was to rank Louisville ahead of Kentucky even though Kentucky beat them. Then why would you rank Georgia ahead of South Carolina? They have identical records, but South Carolina beat Georgia IN ATHENS and S.C. lost to your No. 1, LSU.
--Mike K., New York

No, no, no. Homey don't play that. The Louisville-Kentucky thing was an admitted mistake because those teams had played their game that week. Once you get more than a week or two removed from a result, especially a close one like Georgia-South Carolina, you can't reasonably expect that to be the sole basis behind each team's ranking. First of all, it becomes more and more logistically impossible the more games they play. In this case, the two were only a spot apart last week (South Carolina 15th, Georgia 16th), so what do you suggest I had done? Not rewarded Georgia at all for an impressive road win over a top 15 team, or moved South Carolina up the same amount of spots as Georgia despite having just suffered a blowout loss? I thought I was very fair to both in bumping Georgia up four spots for its victory while only moving South Carolina down two for losing on the road to a highly ranked team.

3 of 4