The biggest college football story this past week was Oklahoma State University's head football coach Mike Gundy chewing out columnist Jenni Carlson for her column on OSU quarterback Bobby Reid.
As a journalist, I feel that I have a big advantage over my fellow workers because I have a minor in coaching, and have always had the itch to become one. That means that I always look at the issues both ways and know what not to ask a coach.
What she wrote about was just not smart, and for a vast majority of major journalists to support her, that just shines a bad light on the profession.
I think that journalists have the right to ridicule college athletes for poor play because they have all the perks in the world, so they can face some scrutiny. Bu tto attack a guy on the sidelines, a week removed from being benched, I don't see the point.
Before a piece like this can be written, a journalist must check and double check his or her facts. Carlson said that she heard from sources close to the team, but never said that she talked to any coach, and I am under the impression that this wasn't done. That makes these sources much less credible, and her "facts" not necessarily true.
If she wants to write a story similar to this (without attacking someone's manhood), she should have talked to Gundy herself, rather than going behind his back. It doesn't matter if he attacked her or not. The story in itself would have lost her all credibility with any coach and it would be much harder for her to get a story.
If anything, this big blow-up has made her famous and getting her face out across the country, something most journalists never get the chance to do.
This article also hurts the relationship between journalists and coaches. It already is a rocky one, and every poorly written article just separates the two even more. I'm sorry to say it, but we need coaches a lot more than they need us, so why can't we be better to them? I know when there is a negative story it needs to be written, but why dig something up from the grave if it doesn't need to be?
I know that Gundy's approach wasn't great, especially after a big win, but I can't really blame him because I would be mad too if the win was tarnished in that kind of way,
I have even heard some things where this wouldn't have happened if it were a man. So you are telling me that a man's credibility has never been tested? Um, ok, whatever makes you sleep at night.
If only most journalists would stop sticking up for each other and admit one's mistake, so we, as media, can learn from this and not make the same mistake.