Put me in the "unwarranted and ridiculous reaction from Gundy' camp. Carlson's column was a bit edgier than waht I normally read about college sports, but it was not way out of line. In fact, a better coach than Gundy might've used it to motivate the player in question. But Gundy's tirade--carrying on about "a kid running home crying to his mother" --actually reinforced what Carlson said. After all, if Reid wasn't tough enough to not be bothered by her column, than she had a point all along.
To me, this incident says a lot about the rampant egos amongst sport coaches, especially football coaches. They tend to think the media attention they get makes them important. Sorry Gundy, but you're a mediocre coach with a mediocre team. Ripping the press won't hide it, and if your QB needs you to protect him then he really IS a sissy.

I feel it was completely warranted. In this day and age there are enough Michael Vick's in sports to write about if you want to write a negative article. No need to ridicule a good kid. I think from Gundy's standpoint this was pure brilliance. Some had accused him of not having the respect of the team after the loss to Troy. Well, what better way then to defend your team's captain in that manner. Part of the problem here is outsiders also don't realize how pro-OU this rag is. The Gaylord's own the paper and the University of Oklahoma. They always look for a way to take shots at OSU and their athletic programs. Its about time one of our coaches puts those "journalists" in their place. I thought jouranlism was based more so on fact. Carleson is an author/novelist, not a journalist.

First of all Chris is wrong and likely has no idea what is really going on in Stillwater. Coach Gundy motivates and challenges his players every day. What this particular blow up concerned was a supposedly reputable news paper consistently and purposely publishing misinformation concerning Oklahoma State University athletes. Jenni Carlson gave up on fact checking long ago when it became apparent that no one in Stillwater or associated with the athletic program at OSU was going to feed her the trash that she was hoping to write. For the last year most of what she has written has been fictional and solely the product of her imagination. The sad part is the professionalism of the news paper editors that allow and encourage such constant slander.
If you would like to know the entire story behind this eruption then you should do some background research on the Daily Oklahoman articles written about OSU football in the past two years. This should give you some perspective.

And to Chris... Go back to watching your beloved sooners, keep dreaming about someday becoming a manager at your local McDonald's, and stay out other people's business unless you really know whats going on.

Interesting question, Stewart, and very provocative.

Having read the article and watched Gundy's reaction, I would think of the latter as warranted, albeit clearly a nonscripted tirade that could have been better.

Here's my take. The kid was benched, and the coaches indicated that it was based on performance. The reporter did not take that at face value and created a speculative script which could easily be taken by the kid and his family as personal insult. The coach responds (however emotionally) by defending the kid and suggesting an alternative focus (performance) in lieu of the ill advised suggestion that the kid had the wrong attitude.

I don't see anything wrong with that, really. As a former poster noted, it was in some ways inspired coaching which may help the Cowboys gain some needed self esteem at this point in their season.

What is, perhaps, more interesting to me is that some writers think they have carte blanche to script their own scenarios in spite of stated reasons for coach decisions
and then expect the coaches to not react in kind. Had the article mentioned performance, play, or centered on things other than personal shortcomings, then the tirade would have been unwarranted. But the article did not, sadly, and I think if you open the door to use of personal attack you must accept it in return when those you belittle defend themselves and their team. While I agree with you about Clarett (and many others currently escaping scrutiny for personal behavior in big name programs) but think the focus should be on play, performance, and conduct rather than such tricky concepts as "attitude." I see no parallel to Clarett here.

Freddie Akers, the former Texas coach, once said "I can't control everything that happens, but I can control how I react."

Gundy could have reacted better, but I don't think he reacted in an "unwarranted" fashion.

Just a view from a disinterested fan.

At the press conference, Gundy said that about three-quarters of the column was false. What 25% was not false? Can someone (a journalist please) ask Coach Gundy about that this week?

Mr. Mandel,

Your first mistake in this is, " I also know Carlson personally and have always regarded her as a commendable journalist..."

Commendable? Really? I bet you couldn't find 5 people in Oklahoma that think she is. Hell, she's not even good at what she does, or is supposed to do.

osubcmonty - I'm in Pennsylvania, and I could give a crap about OSU or OU. So, given your online name, I'd trust my own judgement to be more objective in this matter than yours.
And far be it from me to kick someone when they're down, but where was all this motivation Gundy's putting out against Troy?
It's all well and good to support your team, but accusations of falshood must be backed up with their own facts.

Chris
p.s. - When a falsehood is in print, that's libel, not slander. And statements of opinion--like Carlson's and this blog--have a great deal of legal protection from charges of libel.

To me, it looks like Gundy is overreacting. I saw the video first and then read the column, so my expectations of Carlson's column reflected that. I have to say, I finished reading the column online and looked for the rest of it to load, only to find that that actually was the end.

Good coaches are calm and not incredibly emotive - they pick their moments so that their emotions are impactful. Maybe there was a lot going on among players and coaches behind the scenes that called for a blow up.

I hope that was the case because Gundy otherwise hurt his QB's cause, especially if Reid is as immature as we are to believe

The OSU issue once more brings to the front the falling standards of journalism and the attempt to sensationalize news rather than reporting facts. I feel that sportswriters tend to become egoistic once they have a few dedicated readers and so think they can get away with whatever they write. But the plain (though unacceptable to these writers) truth is that they are replaceable and people just don't care about who writes the news as long as they get it on their favorite sports. I hope that writers understand this and act accordingly. But I feel that Mike Gundy could have called the journalist and had a one-on-one conversation rather than making a big issue out of this.

Mr. Mandel -

Your bias is showing. Jenny Carlson was way out of bounds.

It's sad that you can't see that.

Ed in Los Angeles.

wait - so when USF upsets Auburn, it's "OMG - THE BIG EAST IS GREAT; when Miami upsets # 20 Texas A&M, we start looking into how good that Texas A&M team really is?

Also, Miami get's off to a bad start against a #10 team and the traditionally top team is down, thus the ACC is down. However, Louisville loses to Kentucky and SYRACUSE!!!!.....and that has no reflection on the Big East.

You have such a consistent approach to your writings...no bias at all.

wait - so when USF upsets Auburn, it's "OMG - THE BIG EAST IS GREAT"; when Miami upsets # 20 Texas A&M, we start looking into how good that Texas A&M team really is?

Also, Miami get's off to a bad start against a #10 team and the traditionally top team of the ACC is down, thus the ACC is down. However, Louisville loses to Kentucky and SYRACUSE!!!!.....and that has no reflection on the Big East.

You have such a consistent, mathematical approach to your unbiased writings.

wait - so when USF upsets Auburn, it's "OMG - THE BIG EAST IS GREAT"; when Miami upsets # 20 Texas A&M, we start looking into how good that Texas A&M team really is?

Also, Miami get's off to a bad start against a #10 team and the traditionally top team of the ACC is down, thus the ACC is down. However, Louisville loses to Kentucky and SYRACUSE!!!!.....and that has no reflection on the Big East.

You have such a consistent, mathematical approach to your unbiased writings.

I agree that Coach Carlson's reaction was over the top,his athlete is a target for his position who the media has a right and duty to critique. but the Column written was mean, calling a College student "coddled" with a close relationship with his mom, does that mean he can't do his job? I think that if he was playing well the coaches would've let him play regardless of who feeds him his dinner. Coach Carlson had a right to be angry, just as the Columnist had a right to say what she said, both could've used a little less drama and a little more thought in what they said/wrote.

I agree that Coach Carlson's reaction was over the top,his athlete is a target for his position who the media has a right and duty to critique. but the Column written was mean, calling a College student "coddled" with a close relationship with his mom, does that mean he can't do his job? I think that if he was playing well the coaches would've let him play regardless of who feeds him his dinner. Coach Carlson had a right to be angry, just as the Columnist had a right to say what she said, both could've used a little less drama and a little more thought in what they said/wrote.

Isn't it about time to abandon the "this team beat that team, which is perplexing because that team lost to this other team" line of reasoning? (i.e. UCLA beat Washington but lost to Utah, Iowa lost to Iowa State which lost to Toledo) It seems like people run themselves around in circles and get nowhere whenever that comes up. Don't you think that things can happen in any given game that are unique to that particular game, and that you can't necessarily draw conclusions about every other team on both team's schedule based on the outcome of that one day?

Interesting comments so far. It seems that those who are defending Gundy, for whatever reason (be it conspiracy theories about the Daily Oklahoman's coverage, blind faith in Gundy's tactics or general distrust of the media), are more likely to believe Gundy's explanation of Reid's demotion (that he had a bad week of practice) than that described by Carlson (that a bad attitude and unwillingness to play through a minor injury led to his benching).

I have no connection to the Cowboys' program and therefore couldn't tell you which is the truth, but if you can possibly detach yourself from the situation, ask yourself this: Who would be more likely to knowingly put out "misinformation:" a football coach, or a journalist?

As we know, football coaches do this all the time, be it to deceive an opponent, land a recruit or mask some internal issue within their program. And there are no ramifications for it whatsoever. A journalist, however, would be risking his/her job and entire credibility if they got caught "making up a story," as a couple posters have suggested Carlson did.

That doesn't mean she's immune from Gundy's criticism if she got her facts wrong, or if he genuinely believes the column was unfair to Reid. But you have to pretty blindly loyal to your coach/team to assume they're the victim of some media conspiracy theory. Trust me, whatever your favorite team, its coach deliberately deceives you (as is his right) far more often than the people who cover the team.

I think part of went sent Gundy over the edge is that the Oklahoma media and the Daily Oklahoman in particular is a paid subsidy of the University of Oklahoma Athletic Department. The Oklahoma media does little beyond cheerlead for OU and look for dirt on OSU. This goes back years and since Gundy is a career OSU guy, he is more aware of it than anyone. Being an OSU person in Oklahoma is like being a Republican in this country if the New York Times were the only newspaper or being a Democrat is Foxnews the only news network. It not even that bad, it is worse. It is one of the reasons why OU runs such an out of control program complete with free cars for athletes, they really have no fear of the local media ever saying anything. Can't happen wouldn't happen. Looked at in that light, you can understand why Gundy would get a little bit angry over a hit piece written about one of his players. If perhaps the Oklahoman would ever take a critical look at any player in Crimson and Cream, that is the ones who haven't been kicked off the team and been designated as fall guys for a corrupt university and football program, Gundy might not be so angry about this.

Stewart, your bias to side with the "journalist" (I'm using that word loosely here) is evident. Regardless of how you feel personally about Ms. Carlson, the fact is she is a hack of a reporter, who manufactures her stories, and has long ago given up any factual or evidenced writing when it comes to OSU. I noticed you mentioned she was the first to score an interview with Nelson Peterson. How convenient, a writer at the Oklahoman, wholly owned by the Gaylord family, whose name is written on the OU football stadium, and the OU school of "journalism," is the first one to write about him, and is lauded by you for it. The fact of the matter is that the Oklahoman has long held a biased stance for OU and against OSU. Additionally, it is clear with every piece that they put out, from the smallest blurb, to the above-the-fold, full page color picture stories full of libelous crap out of thin air, that there is no objectivity at the Oklahoman. Ms. Carlson was absolutely wrong, and Mike Gundy should be commended for sticking up for his player and sending a message to the Oklahoman that he won't stand for unwarranted bias.

Stewart,

Interesting. You first pose a question to us after portraying Gundy as one with a future in Hollywood and defending your colleague as "commendable" and then respond to answers from more than one fan of other teams by asking us to think about our responses from the perspective of probabilities of the relative credibilities of journalists vs coaches. Wow.

That is another question, and I would not presume to offer an opinion on the comparative credibility of "journalists" vs "coaches." Sorry.

All I can tell you is that I read the article as you asked, watched the video of Gundy's response as you asked, and think Gundy's response was "warranted" though an emotional response that could have been better.

For you to suggest that journalists, because of their position, are more "credible" is simply pathetic.

You have little credibility with those who carefully watch your weekly rankings, comments on team strength, and then the games.

You have little credibility from those who are fans of teams within conferences that you weekly play against each other with your calls on "conference strength." From your original article on Les Mile's credible comments on strength of schedule in SEC vs PAC 10 (which resulted in most USC fans agreeing with Miles) to the confusing "SEC is Strong vs SEC is questionable" headlines this week (for the same article), it is just speculation. We take it as such, but offer our own opinions. That keeps you rolling, right?

You ask "who is more credible?"

I humbly respond "the team that wins it on the field."

Enjoy your AP Poll, creating a celebrity of a "journalist" in Oklahoma clearly desperate to similarly create controversy, and then defending all based on your position.

It is performance that matters . . . and I think most of we "biased" fans of many teams look forward to the happy event of two teams in January meeting on the field despite the handicapping of "credible" journalists.

Just my take.

PS: Do you have some sort of "Celibrity Crush" on Ms Carlson now that you (and, unfortunately, Gundy) have made her a "celebrity?"

Carlson is nothing more than a hired gun that has been hired to tear apart the Cowboy Nation, and cause them to fight among themselves by digging up or "creating" problems within its programs. The newspaper she works for is owned by OU's biggest donor, and does anything to protect OU while keeping OSU at bay. The DOK also does the same with its chosen HS programs in the OKC area while ignoring better atheletes and performances in outlying areas that may compete in the same league.

This kind of trash from the DOK has been around for more than 20 years.

What you have seen from Gundy has been building within the program and even within HS ranks in Oklahoma for well over 20 years!!!! Those outside the state have not seen the whole piture to what has been going on.

Did anyone not see how the Daily Oklahoma protected an OU player that nearly murdered his "friend" during a drunk tirade, and helped get him back on the team, and a medical redshirt for being a drunk? Then they attack a good kid's character??? Then they are trying to convict a kid stealing when caught that was being provided gas (keys and code) at a local gas station in Norman to play football at OU. They tried to wash the whole Bomar payments under the rug while our Texas A&M brothers brought the illegal payments to light.

GUNDY GOT IT RIGHT!!!!!!!! Why do you think their was applause in the room!!!!

Stew, there is no media conspiracy in Oklahoma with regard to the Oklahoman and its coverage of OSU. It couldn't be further from a conspiracy, because it is all as plain as day. The Gaylord family owns the Oklahoman, the biggest newspaper in the state of Oklahoma. The Gaylord family is the single largest donor to the University of Oklahoma, has their name on the football stadium, and has their name on the "journalism" school. They have held a bias against OSU ever since it was Oklahoma A&M. Because of this, the Oklahoman does not write mean-spirited stories about the Sooners, does not do investigative reporting on the out of control OU professional football team, and takes every oppurtunity to belittle anything regarding OSU. And it isn't limited to the sports pages. On any given page in that fishwrap, you can find a pot-shot against OSU. I've had the good fortune to live places other than Oklahoma, and am very lucky that I get to read real newspapers, with writers who check facts, and show respect to all of the universities they cover.

Put me in the camp of those who'd love to see people using the words "then" and "than" correctly.

"...THEN she had a point all along."

"...what better way THAN to defend your team..."

Sakes - I think you are being a bit hard on Stew. The USF defeat of Auburn looked significant at the time. You are viewing it in the context of a subsequent loss to Miss St. The Miami situation is much different as the loss to OK was bad any way you size it up. Texas A&M had shown signs of not being legitimate before Miami, and Miami offered us a lot more evidence.
I would agree that Stew overreacts at times but that is the job of a journalist in a sense. He is trying to be entertaining and provocative as well as informative. If he has a weakness it is in trying to say he saw signs of results in retrospect when, if he did, he certainly never said so (see his comments on Michigan after App St and Oregon).
I do think Stew blew it in not reporting that we learned it is going to be a difficult job sorting out the PAC 10 this year. Just when you think you have figured it out something strange happens. And I also don't think that we have learned that OSU is the best of the Big Ten. We have learned that the other 10 have big problems, but we don't know that OSU doesn't yet. Their effort to schedule challenging competition leaves a bit to be desired. If I were an OSU fan I would be reluctant to get my hopes too high.

I read Carlson's column and watched the Gundy tirade. Though his reaction to the column was unnecessary, the piece itself could have been written with much more tact. Carlson, unlike Gundy, is in more of a position to be the bigger person and apologize for her mistake.

Sasquach:

If Stewart is lacks credibility to the Nth degree as you indicate, why would you waste your time coming to this web site to read his articles?

Boy SaQuatch, take yourself a bit too seriously lately? If you don't like Mandel's work, nobody is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read it. So why don't you take your pompus a$$ elsewhere? You'll be missed a lot less than Stewart would be.

derosa13:

Because I think Stewart has potential, and allows us to converse in an open forum. Plus, he does 'fess up to his mistakes. I like that.

I will, however, call him out when he blows it, as on this one.

Sort of like Gundy's attempt to defend Reid from an obvious personal attack.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think any speculative prognistication of team or conference strength has any credibility until teams meet. So, I'm not picking on Stew on that . . . just responding to the argument that "hey . . . . she's a journalist and therefore more credible."

The question I responded to concerned "credibility." I have no answer to that, but think to suggest that a journalist is more "credible" than a coach . . . particularly THAT journalist who resorts to personal attack on person an family . . is pretty lame.

I read and participate in several blogs mentored by those whom I think are incredible.

I'll keep reading this one as well.

Oklahoma State went from a coach like Les Miles to this moron? Mike Gundy is a clown. I'm an outsider from Los Angeles and wondering why OSU fans seem to be jumping all over OU? What do they have to do with this? My understanding is this newspaper must be able to sell newspapers to more than just OU fans to be making all this money they speak of. Listen and listen carefully cowboy faithful,this story is about your quarterback. OSU fans seem to be whimpering about in-state schools just like Reid was about losing his starting job. Stay on subject and quit whining!

OSU QB situation? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

C'mon Stewart....quit blindly defending the journalist. I read your columns and I also read the Daily Oklahoman every day. Carlson is a subpar beat reporter at best. If a reporter is reporting the facts and gets rebuffed this way, I would even defend the journalist. What Carlson did was put her own personal spin on some things she saw and put it in print. Carlson is a sooner homer (for the record so am I, but I consider myself objective) and beats up OSU all of the time.
You obviously do not have a grip on what the scene is in Oklahoma. Do me a favor Stewart. Call and talk to some of the people in the Oklahoma media and ask their opinions. Sports Animal Radio would be a good place to start.

Carlson printed opinions and got called on them. She deserved it 100%. Let's just call it journalistic responsibility. Take your lumps for screwing up and move on.

Well, Stew, if you think Jenni Carlson is such a great journalist, could you work on finding her a job that requires her to move out of Oklahoma? We're tired of her "journalism". You don't make fun of a guy's relationship with his mother, for ANY reason. Leave that statement out and it MIGHT have floated.

As a former resident of Oklahoma and an OU alumni, I can honestly say that if there is a bias towards OU at the Oklahoman, I never noticed it...probably because there are so many other flaws with that paper that distract me from the alleged bias.

I've not ever been a fan of Jenni Carlson (which disappointed me as I was excited to see a female journalist covering sports in Oklahoma) as she is a terrible journalist. And by that I mean she is a terrible writer! That being said, I highly doubt if she would be so stupid and unethical as to blatantly make up a story. That could LITERALLY cost her not only her current job but any future ones. So I'm guessing she did have some sort of source that she believed was reliable (I'll let you all debate how good her judgment is).

However, I also thought it was good that Gundy stood up for his player, but I did think his performance was rather melodramatic.

On a different note, this whole free cars for OU athletes issue that was mentioned? I dated a football and a basketball player while at OU (in the Stoops/Sampson era) and they all drove hunks of junk...guess I wasn't dating guys with big enough names to score those free cars...

The bottom line is she got personal in her attack. Why did she have to get personal? Carlson crossed the line when she did that.
I remember getting hurt in a football game and my dad running on to the sidelines where he helped the doctor set my shoulder. It sure was comforting to have my dad there, so would this mean spirited person start in on me being coddled? His mom brought him dinner oh my gosh big deal! GEEZ how low do you have to hit.

Wow, lots of mad OSU fans. Re: this "bias" in the Oklahoma newspapers: is it because the newspapers say nicer things about OU than OSU? And could this be because OU is always really good, while OSU is always kinda lame? Just a thought (never been to Oklahoma in my life...not planning on going anytime soon hehe...).

That's kind of a good point by Jason (in my humble opinion), mind you.

Had a similar case at Iowa a few years back. The starting QB was struggling mightily. The fans were getting impatient, and a couple of columns were written that weren't all that different than Ms. Carlson's. Kirk Ferentz handled the matter in a FAR classier manner than Gundy, who comes off like someone who needs to be medicated. Ferentz spent the first 10 minutes of one of his weekly press conference firmly, but politely, telling members of the media he didn't appreciate them going after his players and that any negativity be directed at the guy who is paid to lead them every week - him. Ferentz never raised his voice. He didn't have to, but he certainly got his point across.

Had a similar case at Iowa a few years back. The starting QB was struggling mightily. The fans were getting impatient, and a couple of columns were written that weren't all that different than Ms. Carlson's. Kirk Ferentz handled the matter in a FAR classier manner than Gundy, who comes off like someone who needs to be medicated. Ferentz spent the first 10 minutes of one of his weekly press conference firmly, but politely, telling members of the media he didn't appreciate them going after his players and that any negativity be directed at the guy who is paid to lead them every week - him. Ferentz never raised his voice. He didn't have to, but he certainly got his point across.

The coach's main point is Carlson used a lot of unsubstantiated rumors, including attributing comments to the coaching staff, in writing an ill-conceived column about the change at QB. I agree with the coach's assessment, and I understand why he would be personally upset at the writer, since she basically used him as a "source" for her speculation.

He then tried to embarrass her in the same way, using irrelevant aspects of Carlson's personal life to create a story about her lack of empathy. In this regard, the "two wrongs don't make a right" maxim comes to mind. The coach diluted his otherwise powerful message by being guilty of the same behavior he was trying to admonish.

If this is a representative sample of he work, I'd say she's a hack that doesn't deserve the publicity this sends her way. She also doesn't deserve the personal attack of her professional judgment. There are much more professional ways to make the point about the errors of her work, and the coach should have used those methods instead.

One interesting point of note is that Jenni did not "witness" the chicken being fed to the QB by mom incident as Jenni was not at the TROY game.

When you start a column out with with "As rumor has it" and use wording to qualify your statements as possibly true but maybe not, then the coach should be angry.

Throw in the fact the Headline SCREAMED attitude problem, the article had a photo the size reserved for MAJOR war outbreaks, and it was published the day before OSU's first conference game, and one may think that the DO was trying to cause dissension in the OSU program.

Memo to Jenni Carlson........if you've never worn a jock, you got nothing to stay. Go cover some soccer or figure skating

Memo to Jenni Carlson........if you've never worn a jock, you got nothing to say. Go cover some soccer or figure skating

Having lived in Oklahoma (once and never again!), I experience both article and tirade as indicative of the distorted, inverted athletic culture of that state. So in no small way they're both overreaching and just wack. After reading the "column," however, I have to say its disappointing (and, indeed Gundy, a little nauseating) that any decently sized newpaper could publish this tripe. The real violation was Carlson unnecessarily bringing Reid's mother into football analysis. Even if Reid is fair game (which he is for credible, performance-related critique), neither Reid's mother nor her fried chicken should be employed as starting points for an adventure in conjecture. A mother's relationship to her son should be valued and left alone--not exploited for cheap shots.

Carlson's article sucked, no doubt about it. Her work always sucks, so that's not surprising. Besides being a terrible writer, her work consistently lacks any insight.

In this case, it looks like she relied on the classic fallback of any hack journalist and news outlet - unnamed sources. I wonder if Carlson or her editors thought to question the motivation behind whomever told her about these rumors in Stillwater. I also don't see any attempt in here to let Gundy or Reid respond. Being an editorial/column, Carlson obviously has a lot of rope here. But if you're going to call some kid a chump on the front page of the sports section in the state's largest paper, you should at least try to get some kind of reaction from him or the program.

Gundy's tirade was an example bad judgment as well. Obviously, he should defend his kid - that goes without saying. He opened the door for this, though, by backing Reid and then abruptly switching to starting Robinson without providing much explanation for what had changed.

The biggest problem here is that Gundy's tirade detracts from his message: the article was unfair and a case of poor reporting. Now, everyone is talking about what a spectacle Gundy created, rather than debating the merits of the article or journalists' license to criticize college athletes. I can't imagine that Bobby Reid, who Gundy was supposed to be defending, will feel too great about all the attention this will generate and the questions he will be asked. A more measured, thoughtful response wouldn't have drawn the headlines, but it would have been more effective.

How is the QB's relationship with his mother noteworthy news?

Mr. Mandel if you really believe in giving the college athelete leeway, then this article should really be a slap in your face.

Bringing this up was very far out-of-bounds on her part.

Don't worry Sebastian.....we don't want you back

The journalist didn't put her credibility on the line in her article becuase she used the word "rumor". Thats like a free pass for a writer to say whatever they want becuase they don't have to have anything to back it up. She could say the sky is green and the grass is blue, call it a rumor and it doesn't matter whether it is true or not. Therefore, the coaches integrity vs. a journalists integrity does not apply to this situation.

Matt from VA

Reading these comments, I have to wonder how much of the negative reaction to Carlson comes the fact that she is a woman.

Regardless of the actual content of the article, some of the comments, including such remarks as "if you've never worn a jock, you've got nothing to say" show clear gender bias. I strongly question whether the reaction, from Gundy or from average fans would be as vehement if she was a older man.

As a former college basketball player, I cannot tolerate anyone taking personal shots at a college athlete, especially a sports writer. There is nothing harder than being a college athlete, and there is nothing easier than being a sports writer. So how on earth does the latter get off questioning the toughness of the former?? I would love to see Ms. Carlson go through just one day of conditioning at 5:30 in the morning. If Reid was scared of competition, he would've quit football and become a sports journalism major. I mean you must be really tough to write opinions and conjectures about sports. Coach Gundy had to respond to her in that way just to maintain his players' trust more than anything. If he didn't, they all should've transferred.

I knew this would happen sooner or later. The reaction is not because the writer is a woman. It happened because she was WRONG. Let's not bring gender into this. When you start a column with "rumor", you are opening yourself up.
Carlson is a bad journalist....leave it at that.

I knew this would happen sooner or later. The reaction is not because the writer is a woman. It happened because she was WRONG. Let's not bring gender into this. When you start a column with "rumor", you are opening yourself up.
Carlson is a bad journalist....leave it at that.

Sakes, you comment about USF beating Auburn and comparing it to Miami-Texas A&M. USF went into Jordan -Hare Stadium and put on a good showing....the score doesn't come anywhere close to the outcome. It never should of went to OT. Miami's game was in Miami...no hostile environment. Was it an impressive win? Yes, but not when you look at what they did a few years ago. Miami has fallen hard and the OU game proved it.

Im tired of people saying when a team gets upset that it was because the team was overranked. When can an upset just be an upset. In a sense, yes the Aggies weren't deserving of being ranked 20th overall, was it the reason Miami won was that Texas A&M was that great, probably but let's be real. Good teams still lose and to discredit it as mediocre teams pretending to be good team is foolish. At the end of the day, any team can win and sometimes bad teams play better then expected(Syracuse).

That all said...Friday Night, everyone's tv better be glued to ESPN and see a great team finally get recognize when they beat WVU. USF is the real deal and Saturday's game only stronger defined that. Although it was UNC...everyone was saying, oh they will let the ranking go to their head, the Auburn win was the fluke, they'll be looking forward to West Virgina, etc. Grothe came out strong, scored on the 1st 2 drives and took care of business and secured the Bulls first win in Tampa against a non-conference BCS team.

In closing, Friday came come soon enough.

AMEN MR. CLAYTON

First, you need to know that the Daily Oklahoman has long been known as the "Daily Disappointment." Jenni Carlson merely continues this tradition, although I don't know her personally. For example, she ripped Tiger Woods for alleged lack of personality just as he was winning the PGA at Southern Hills, although I doubt she knows him personally.
Because the Oklahoman is such a second-rate rag, I read it as little as possible, even though I'm a resident. That's probably the best solution for the poor persecuted OSU fans.
As far as Gundy's rant goes, I think he had every right, although calm restraint would look classier. A competent journalist would criticize based on performance, not rumor, and would not make snide personal attacks involving family.
I guess it's no surprise that journalists defend each other with all the self-righteousness that they can muster, but many of us in the public view this with cynicism. For example, look at Texas A&M; when Fran was hired, the media anointed him as the second coming, and now that they have turned out to be wrong, they have turned on him like a pack of hyenas.

If you count up in my family, we have double-digit degrees from OSU, I have been a proud fan for about 50 of my years. And I must say that you people who are blindly defending Gundy and attacking Carlson and the Oklahoman are full of it! Gundy was being a good coach - only in the sense that he was creating a diversion so that he could avoid answering any questions about his incompetent defense. Attacking a journalist for doing her job is no less cowardly than the imagined slight.

Wait, a blog without an argument on which conference is the best? I can't believe it. Let me fix this temporary problem. "The _________(simply fill in your favorite team's conference) is the best. All others stink!!" LOL That's better. ROTFLOL

Dan,

Congratulations on all those degrees.

"Imagined Slight?" Did you read the article by the "journalist" who "did her job?"

If it were me, or my mother, I don't think either of us would call it a "slight" much less "imagined."

It's in print . . . and available online . . please read it.

That's not a journalist doing "her job."

That's something else.

Be proud of all those degrees, but gotta tell ya . . .

Personal attacks like that don't qualify as "journalism."

Ms. Carlson should have published it in this blog for free, and not in that paper for pay.

Best Regards,

SasQuatch in Seattle (who really does not give a damn other than fairness to players)

G.L.

I agree!

ROFL . . good post

Mandel's a dipship. He's jealous because Gundy has integrity and compassion and he's just a media tool protecting his own.

boo hoo hoo...god...osu fans sure are whining a bit here...if your so into the OU DOK corruption here...then make a call to the one who owns you..i mean boone daddy pickens and have him buy OSU there very own newspaper..there...problem solved...seriously

Stewie,
You're off base. Jenni did to an amateur athlete what the weaker LA and NY sportswriters do to professional athletes. She created a story that didn’t exist and that is based almost entirely on her opinions and interpretations of selected actions rather than on research, facts and quotes. Moreover, her story is destructive rather than constructive. Knowledgeable fans know that if a more skilled athlete is benched in favor of a less skilled athlete, either the coaching staff is at fault or the player in question has some ‘off-the-field issues’. Jenni’s speculation with respect to these ‘off-the-field issues’ lacks sufficient supporting facts to convince me she is on the right track. Even if she is on the right track, a skilled writer would have presented the information in a more favorable light using a "show me rather than tell me" approach.

I find it objectionable that she and the editorial staff were paid to personally attack and belittle a 21 year old.

Your defense of her actions is almost as objectionable. Comparing your article on Penn State's quarterback to this one is foolish. You didn't speak disparagingly of Morelli's character. You simply stated your opinion that at this time he is not skilled enough to run that type of offense. If only Jenni had been so kind, clearly identified her opinions and isolated them to something as trivial as amateur athletics.

Mike

the funny thing is...she wrote an article..it created a little controversy..which made people wanna go to the site and check it out...which will end up making the paper more money from a few here and there...man...life is funny that way..but the "kid" is 21 years old...i seriously think he could have dealt with it...most good quarterbacks are wired that way...maybe it would help if gundy was fiery like that with the non-existent defense

A plague on both houses. The article was rather silly on the whole: however, it should surprise no one that the culture of college football produces the alternately fetishized and overanalyzed athlete. The university depends on selling their high-profile players as icons (posters, calendars, websites, etc.), and most of these so-called "kids" have lived willfully in a more intense limelight than the rest of us will ever know. So, reading their body language, their "attitude," their rapport with others, etc. is one of the hardly surprising outcomes. This is simply one of the more artless versions of something you see in the sports sections of lower profile newspapers everyday.

Of course, Gundy's "whoever wrote this must not have kids" line only reinscribes what the article is arguing: i.e. if you had children you would know what it feels like to want to protect them when they are "attacked." I'm actually surprised Gundy would stoop to engage in such a stupid public dialogue, as it certainly makes it seem like his quarterback needs others to come to his aid. Moreover, a few posters here perhaps unwittingly get to the heart of the issue when they call Ms. Carlson out for being a woman daring to intervene--however clumsily--in the hypermasculine world of college football. As many have said before me, seems there might have been a better way to handle this.

For Juice813 - I am one of those still wondering whether USF has become a very good team or just a good team capable of producing some very good results occasionally. I was impressed with the USF/Auburn result until Miss St did even better. I believe that USF is a better team than Miss St, but perhaps you see what I mean. Victories over Elon and NC are not quality results.
Here's hoping USF takes a step that will establish themselves as a team ready to compete for the title. But a loss to WV does not mean that USF is a phony. It will suggest a bit more improvement is necessary before they can challenge for the Big East title.
Note: I agree with Everettm1 that the lady's gender should never have been mentioned as part of the problem. Since when did wearing a jock become a qualification for writing about sports? Mentioning that was far worse than anything she did or the coach.

ive lived in oklahoma most of my life and I find it interesting that everyone from oklahoma, regardless of team affiliation, cant stand that journalist whos name cannot be said. what concerns me is that her columns are leaking out of oklahoma and being exposed to unsuspecting victims.

It's hard to imagine anyone reading that article and thinking "yeah, that's an appropriate commentary about a kid playing college football." Ms. Carlson should feel free to analyze Reid's on-field play and should feel free to keep her unwarranted and foolish comments about Reid's off-field relationships to herself. Stewart, you're a hell of an analyst, in my opinion, but I have to respectfully agree with those who have said your personal and professional connection to Carlson in this case have clearly blown your objectivity.

im a diehard OU fan and have written a few posts here that maybe i take back a little..really..i could care less what they write about OSU..you know..thats how rivalries go..but seriously...as long as ive read the daily oklahoman and really dont think it is as much OU biased as some may say...carlson really has written some rediculous and careless pieces in her time..some venture off into topics that have nothing to do with the original topic at hand...OU and OSU alike...she writes a real heap of journalism garbage about both...and to be honest with ya and go with a completely random hunch..this kind of attack will probobly send him transferring later..just my opinion tho..which is cool since im not writing for a state newspaper and all

Mr. Mandel,

You are a prime example of why this was so warranted. You didnt even check the FACTS yourself before publishing this.

First, Mike Gundy didnt read the article until AFTER the game and AFTER he met with his team.

The thing that makes me want to puke is Jenni Carlson's writing style.

The readers of Carlson's article who know the "real" details of the athletes eating after a game, would immediately question any other part of her article. This would include, of course, the coaching staff, the players, all their families and friends, and any random fans....who show up to surround the players as they come out of the locker room after each game. As they stop to sign a little boys jersey, or some adult's souvenir football, or a program from the game...they are balancing a boxed meal and a gatorade. If it's following a loss, chances are the "chicken" or whatever is in the box, doesn't have much taste. Following a victory, the meal could be pretty sparse and probably still taste great. I have on more than one occasion, held both the box and the gatorade for my son while he talked to someone who wants another picture, or one more signature, or just had something they wanted to say to him regarding the game. I am also quite sure I could have been seen HANDING him a piece of chicken from the box! OH my gosh!!! He is 21 (and even married) and I never once, (BEFORE the article), gave it a second thought....OTHER THAN to look around and feel SO SAD WHEN I SAW A PLAYER WHO MIGHT HAVE NO ONE standing by his side for whatever reason!! It was just a MEAN, MEAN, MEAN article on every level, and she should be ashamed and appologize to all involved, as should the editor who approved it for print.

Just to be clear: I'm an OU alum, and a Tulsan. The Daily Oklahoman is possibly the worst newspaper in the whole country (news, sports, politics, etc.). Yes the Gaylords are huge OU donors. Here's the reality from what I've seen:
Gundy = embarrassing clown.
Reid = Talented loser.
OSU program = going nowhere fast.
The takes of OSU fans on the blog are typical. You get lots of excuses with little behind them in almost any situation. The criticism is probably true, given that when a game is on the line, Reid can't do anything of value (see the OU vs OSU game last year when Reid was benched in prime time...even Gundy knows that he can't handle the limelight). Carlson is pretty much a joke in OK, but so are Reid and Gundy. The story is so insignificant that it's laughable that it's attracting so much attention anyway.

I live in Chicago now but I am from Oklahoma. That paper is pathetic (I grew up reading it through high school). The paper is no where near as biased against OSU as some here would have you believe. Its poorly written but as far as the "negativity" towards OSU - most of that comes from the fact that they're not very good. In my lifetime (I'm 28) OU has been much better in football and better overall in basketball also.

Now to Gundy: yes it was a terrible article and probably a bit out of bounds but his little rant was pathetic for a head coach of college students.

I'm sick of all the attitude these head coaches have. Who the hell do they think they are? Among those in society who command the most respect, head football coach is not at the top of the list.

I would like to point a few things out to the people who have commented so far. Bobbi Reid is a grown man. He isn't a child. He is getting a free education in exchange for playing quarterback at a large university. Media scrutiny is part of the deal in this situation and Reid knows (or ought to know) that. All the accusations about media bias in The Oklahoman towards the University of Oklahoma are unfounded and ridiculous. While all the OSU fans are looking at this through their Orange covered glasses I would encourage them to glance at their own university's financial records and see how much money the Gaylord family has donated to their school. You make idiots out of yourselves when you don't check your own facts. In fact, the Gaylords have given huge amounts of money to causes all over the state of Oklahoma. I would also encourage these same people who are outraged at Carlson's "attack" on a grown man to examine their own comments towards her. What is the most negative thing Carlson said about Reid? She insinuated that he might be a little soft. Some of you have said far nastier and hurtful things about her. Don't forget that she is also a person with a mother and a father and while you are criticizing her for attacking Reid perhaps you might be able to find a mirror to look at your own reflection. I would also point out that Gundy essentially said that Reid's mother came crying to him about the article. That does seem to paint a picture of an overprotective mother coddling her child as Carlson's column portrayed her. Also I think almost all of the commenters missed Mr. Mandel's point about credibility here. What he is saying is that the very nature of a coach's relationship with the media means that they aren't always 100% truthful with reporters. They will say things to mask discord within their program that aren't necessarily true because it is their job to do so. A reporter on the other hand puts their entire career on the line if they knowingly say something that isn't true. Think about it this way. Do you think Ms. Carlson would risk her job, house, and car just to get in a jab at OSU? Now, let's check the other side. Do you think Coach Gundy might tell reporters that a player had a bad practice rather than admit that he hasn't been as tough as they had hoped because he doesn't want to damage the player? Keep in mind that he risks absolutely nothing by telling this little white lie. Everyone understands that it is his job to protect his players. I would also like to say one last thing to Jenni Carlson's detractors. I have met Jenni Carlson and read her work and I can say with absolute certainty that, with the possible exception of Mr. Mandel (the only other professional sportswriter involved in this discussion) she knows more about sports than anyone involved in this discussion including myself.

I watched the blow up at the news conference. And I've read the article.

I agree completely with what Gundy did. The kids comment may have been a little far, but she basically tried to destroy a kid just to write something. And if this happened at either school I follow, I'd hope the coach would do the same thing there.

The worst part about this is the kid cant defend himself. If he comes out and says something against the media he'ld be roasted. I've seen 3 national writers blindly support this hack, what would the response be if Reid defended himself (even politely).

This the same Northwestern team DUKE beat ? How about waiting a few more weeks before jumping on the bandwagon again this year ? I like the coach and team. Please stay off of Clemson also the acc is a weak league this year which will play out soon now. V. Tech and GA. Tech both going nowhere this year unless it is in the acc league pretty bad this year.

OU fan here. I never read the Daily Oklahoman that much so can't comment on the "bias" (though circumstantial evidence would support such).

What I can say is that Carlson's column is all CONJECTURE. From a person who doesn't know what it is like to be a player or a coach or a mother in a major college football program.

When did journalists covering sports (especially amateur sports) stop describing what happened in the GAMES? Now there is all this editorializing, "ranking" (every writer has their own top 10 list for something now). When I go to read a newspaper or internet article or watch a TV news show, I want to see what happened in the GAME. Instead, I have to hear Mark May tell me why Podunc U's offensive line couldn't protect Johnny the QB; or some internet writer (who may or may not just be a blogger in all actuality) is going to tell me that he knows exactly which conference is best; or some newspaper reporter thinks she knows the real reason why the former star QB is no longer that.

But I don't care. I want to know what happened in the GAME. And you never get that. Or if you do, then you get it in nice little compact bulleted Cliff notes and nice little tabulated statistical readouts. All that is crap. Describe the game to me, be a WRITER and tell me what happened in a manner that makes me feel as if I was there watching it with you and the rest of the 80,000 fans.

And by the way, "scoring" a choice scoop interview does not a good journalist make. Are you kidding? If that were the case then we would have to consider Barbra Wawa the greatest journalist ever. Nope, a good journalist just writes really well, with a little bit but not too much insight.

And one more thing. I'm not an OSU fan, but count me now as a Mike Gundy fan. And for those of you comparing him to Les Miles and coming up with "clown", Les would have done the same thing except he would have been so hoarse he would have been spitting blood from his macerated larynx.

Stewart,

You printed falsehoods about yourself some months ago when you "implied" that you were some MicroSoft millionaire and essentially only a journalist to pass the time (perhaps you said it tongue in cheek, you never responded though, when I called you on it). You did so, presumably, for no professional gain, but instead for some sillier personal reason. In other words, you printed a falsehood when the stakes were laughably low. To suggest, in these days of Mary Mapes, Dan Rather, Jason Blair, and Stephen Glass, that journalists are pure is not just naïve, but foolhardy.

Don

Stewart,

You printed falsehoods about yourself some months ago when you "implied" that you were some MicroSoft millionaire and essentially only a journalist to pass the time (perhaps you said it tongue in cheek, you never responded though, when I called you on it). You did so, presumably, for no professional gain, but instead for some sillier personal reason. In other words, you printed a falsehood when the stakes were laughably low. To suggest, in these days of Mary Mapes, Dan Rather, Jason Blair, and Stephen Glass, that journalists are pure is not just naïve, but foolhardy.

Don

Went to UT / Rice game this weekend. Knew it would be a blowout but also knew the Rice band the "Mob" would more than make up for it. They did not disappoint. Arguably the best band for entertainment value in college football today!
UT Fan.

Stewart & Everyone -

It doesn't matter what I think. It doesn't matter what you think. All that matters is that Oklahoma State's football players see their coach going to bat for THEM.

Someone took a shot at one of them and he came to their aid. He knew what he was going to "look" like. He knew the fallout potential. He knew that there would be ignorant people from across the nation that have LIMITED to NO KNOWLEDGE about the Oklahoma State football team or the crap that the Daily Oklahoman CONSTANTLY and CONSISTANTLY pulls.

The only perspective that matters is of that Oklahoma State football team.

By the way. Gundy's actions were justified... and I respect him more and more every week.

From my perspective, Carlson did a few things in her article that are inexcusable for a journalist.

First, she wrote an article based primarily on internet message board rumors and hearsay. Second, she used those same rumors to call into question the character of a college athlete. Third, she took cheap and unwarranted shots at the athlete's relationship with his mother, giving no thought to the circumstances of this alleged post-game chicken meal.

This is poor journalism, pure speculation, and it goes far beyond the line of simple critique of a player's performance. When you call into question the character or toughness of a college athlete, you better have a little more evidence than internet rumor and personal speculation over how serious an injury may or may not have been.

Gundy overreacted, sure, but he is still right. His job as a college football coach goes beyond winning games. As a former SEC player, I learned first-hand how important the player-coach relationship is. A coach is also a father figure, and Gundy saw fit to defend one of his own when opinion was written as if it were fact. He is standing up for his players, but he is also standing up for what he believes in. Kids like Reid, "who do everything right" as Gundy puts it, shouldn't be used as fodder for any journalist's attempt to be edgy and provocative. Carlson wrote an article with no real evidence to support her stance, and she got called out for it. She should be ashamed of herself. Why didn't she have the courage to ask Reid about these rumors, or the chicken incident, personally? My guess is his responses would have left her with no story to write. Whatever happened to reporting facts?

Wells was less than dominate? I can aggree with the first game of the season, then again how much do you blame the line? But from the second game on, Well's ran for over 100 yards. Come on Mandel, you can't expect a running back to block and run for himself. I agree the SEC is good this year, but its not like LSU and Florida has paid outstanding teams. Tennessee should not be ranked and V. Tech probably is only a 20-25 ranked team or worse. The only schools with grit they played are in there own conference. Stop swinging from their jock-straps and smell their dingle-berries.

Why would anyone care about what a nerd or woman writes about football? When something comes from someone that's exercise is picking up a pen or typing, I don't pay attention to what they write.

I am on the journalist's side on this one. Although she speculates a little too much, Gundy did overreact. His speech was just a typical alpha-male attempt to protect one of his cubs. Didn't Reid have attitude issues before this season anyways? I remember reading an article about how he didn't handle getting benched too well in a game last season; I forget which game.

For Chuckalugk - "Why would anyone care what a nerd or woman says about football?" Good point. You sound like a person of experience.

I side with Gundy, and kudos to him for sticking up for his player like that. No student athlete deserves that kind of criticism from the local paper.

Whoever thinks that the Daily Oklahoman is a Paid subsidy of the University of Oklahoma is, for lack of a better term, STUPID. Many of the Gaylords graduated from the University of Oklahoma, but they made their own money. The Daily Oklahoman isn't and can't be owned by a PUBLIC university because that university is NOT FOR PROFIT. Last time I checked we are a society based on free speech. If the Oklahoman was owned in whole or in part by the University of Oklahoma, then it would be a state sponsored media outlet. This isn't Iran, or Venezuela. Media outlets are businesses much like SI much like the rag in the small town where I grew up. Some of the people posting (*cough* *cough* *JOHN*) need to get their facts straight or think a little harder before you make yourself look like an idiot that is ignorant of the basics of Capitalism and Free Speech. If you want to read some OSU centric sports news ... read the TULSA world. That's all I have to say ... (it makes me want to puke).

PS. I think neither party is in the wrong ... As much as I hate Carlson's writing she's still a journalist. As stupid as I think Mike Gundy's tirade was .... he has every right to defend a player that doesn't do stupid things off the field.

Stewart, come on man. Don't lower yourself by defending someone who writes: "Or does he want to be coddled, babied, perhaps even fed chicken?" That's a very low blow and certainly classless "journalism." I don't know about the bias aspect, but the article was not well written and it was certainly mean, so I'm strongly skeptical about your defense of Carlson.

If I were a family member of Reid and Carlson were a man, I would have punched him in the face for that kind of underhanded attack.

1) I haven't read Carlson's column because the link isn't working on my computer, but from what I gather, people seem to be confusing an editorial column she wrote (in which she is free to write her opinion, with or without supporting facts) to an actual news story (which is meant to give only facts). So, yeah, her column (which again I haven't read) may have been stupid, but it was always just her opinion and conjecture.

2) On a seperate note from the column, I find that most of the people who rip journalists and newspapers for being biased and awful are those who find themselves or something they support being criticized. However, MOST of the time this happens I find that the newspaper was merely stating facts, and those facts showed the person to be an idiot. When a moron comes off as a moron, they're going to be pissed, but that doesn't mean their not a moron.

3) This does not mean that there aren't plenty of biased journalists and bad stories out there. I myself have been the victim of bad journalism, but that was because of a misquote, and when I called that paper and informed them of it, they were extremely apologetic and printed a correction the very next day. In editorials especially people freak out more than anything else over what someone writes. You might think that the opinion they put forth is mean or badly written or lacking supporting facts, and those are all reasons to discount it, but that doesn't mean they can't put it out there.

4) The criticism being piled on Mandel here is ridiculous. He said first of all, that he doesn't condone ripping college athletes, in fact he's called out people for doing it on numerous occasions (Herbstreit's comments on Steve Breaston last year come to mind). He also prefaced his defense of the column by saying that he's deferential toward the journalist given how coach's tend to lie (see: Nick Saban, Charlie Weis) and because he's a journalist.

To sum up:
Stop flipping out and grow some thicker skin.

Heidi-
Nebraska came within a dropped pass of having lost to Ball State at home. I wouldn't consider them much of a challenge either. Please stop pretending the non SEC title contenders have played a daunting OOC schedule not to mention you would be hard pressed to find a team that has had more significant victories up to this point than LSU. 3 of 4 of LSU's opponents are 3-1 and 2 of them are legitimately top 25 teams.

First off, I'm a Sooner fan, and I can't stand Jenni Carlson. I've been reading her stuff for quite a while, and everyone in Oklahoma knows that she is the worst writer on the Oklahoman staff, especially towards OSU. As much as I hate to say it, the Oklahoman is OU bias, and they like to attack OSU on every little thing and blow it out of proportion. As for Gundy, I couldn't be more happy for how he went off on Carlson. I'm glad he was man enough to do it, and I wish more coaches would stand up for their players like that with the media. Now a days everyone is so image conscious, that they won't speak their mind. My hat goes off to Gundy, and I hope coaches take notice and aren't afraid to do the same if they feel they need to.

All right -- I'm shutting down this one. Naively, I thought we could have an intelligent, reasoned debate about the Gundy outburst, and my primary reason for opening it to the floor was because, as I stated, I felt I myself brought a "bias" to the situation in that A) I know the writer and B) My professional instinct is to side with the journalist. Due to some unexplained brain lapse, it didn't occur to me at the time that the majority of people who would respond to an article involving Oklahoma State would be Oklahoma State fans -- who bring waaaaaay bigger a bias into the equation than I ever could. After all, that's the very definition of a fan: That you're "biased" FOR your team and "biased" against everybody else (including anyone who dares to write anything negatively about one of your coaches and players). And unfortunately, in this situation, that meant slamming the columnist in question with personal attacks about 10 times more virulent than anything she wrote about Bobby Reid.

To the non-partisan amongst you who offered a less emotional response -- either for or against Gundy -- thank you. I might as well go ahead and give my final take on the situation. As I said before, if Carlson's sources are accurate, I by no means believe the column was unfair to Reid. Such scrutiny comes with the position he plays. The chicken lead? Questionable. And the column itself was too heavily steeped in rumor and innuendo. Gundy had a right to be ticked.

That said, Gundy is paid a lot of money to represent his team and university in a professional manner. As this clip gets inevitably played over and over around the country this week, that is not the image most will come away with. He comes off as a somewhat maniacal, overly dramatic "clown" (as several posters described him) who, took the media's attention away from a major victory and chose to make it about himself and a reporter instead. I can think of any number of ways he could have handled the situation better -- calling Carlson, talking to her after the press conference, or voicing his objection to the group, then moving on to other topics rather than making his big, obviously staged premature exit. Personally, if I were an Oklahoma State fan, I'd be a little worried right now. Coaches who get worked up over every little perceived slight (see Ron Zook, Glen Mason) tend not to have the overall composure necessary to run a highly successful program.

By the way, the best post of all was the guy who accused me of pulling a Stephen Glass by insinuating in a Mailbag several weeks back that I was a Microsoft millionaire. It's called sarcasm, buddy. Please tell me you were using some as well.