I read it. I'll just say it was pretty brutal.Not even giving them the satisfaction of a click. CWM isn't perfect by any means, but he's closer to "what's right with cfb" than what's wrong with it. Smh.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I read it. I'll just say it was pretty brutal.Not even giving them the satisfaction of a click. CWM isn't perfect by any means, but he's closer to "what's right with cfb" than what's wrong with it. Smh.
CWM took aim at the messenger with no acknowledgement of the message. He passionately chose loyalty to his friend(not a bad thing). But he didn't stop there, he attacked a straw man enemy with no reckoning with a tragedy that at the least was the result of poor medical procedures.I did not infer that from his remarks and can't see how a reasonable person could.
Muschamp wasn't being ugly nor insensitive about the death of this young man he was saying he knows the coach involved and this wasn't intentional in his opinion. Too many people want to add fire to something where there is no fire because that's what we have become, a culture of judgmental people looking for something to protest. In reality most of the people pointing the finger really don't care one way or the other it's just the thrill of the chase.Yep.
All that AJC column amounts too is a sportswriter's take on Muschamp's outspoken defense of his friend following an ESPN report based on anonymous sources who may be gutless but were still apparently credible enough to prompt Maryland to suspend its football coach while it investigates.
But neither the AJC columnist, Muschamp or ESPN really knows for certain what the hell happened up there and neither do I.
And the column is merely an opinion piece, and opinions are like a-holes --
Muschamp's opinion is that the use of anonymous sources is bad journalism. I disagree, but I respect Muschamp's view. And I don't blame him for coming to defense of his friend. I applaud that part of it, even if it turns out the friend didn't deserve Muschamp standing up for him.
I think our bigger problem is that too many folks can't seem to discern between opinion, public relations and straight news reporting anymore, and that includes some of those in the news media.
I agree with the last sentence. Otherwise, I stand by my previous statement.CWM took aim at the messenger with no acknowledgement of the message. He passionately chose loyalty to his friend(not a bad thing). But he didn't stop there, he attacked a straw man enemy with no reckoning with a tragedy that at the least was the result of poor medical procedures.
On a side note any school that doesn't evaluate their own medical procedures in light of this event are stupid.
I think the angst comes from the knowledge most of us have that what we are trying to build here is still very fragile. Disruption is unwelcome. Negative attention is disturbing. The real irksome part is that Muschamp is being painted with a very uncomplimentary brush that does not take into account how he actually runs his program.
Like religion?But has he taken on an issue or a situation as aggravated and emotionally-charged as this one?
Unfortunately sports isn't immune from this stuff anymore.Less than 3 weeks left until we are back at WB and this is what we want to talk about?
As relates to football, which to some people is a religion.Like religion?
Less than 3 weeks left until we are back at WB and this is what we want to talk about?
Be careful with that statement. Personal incredulity is the same garbage modern day feminist try to attack any discussion on feminism.
I wonder if the Founding Fathers had any idea that 'Free Speech' would serve Big Media interests ($$$) many times more than the average citizen? I'll answer my own question: NO!
I happen to think he gave a bad answer because he's in no position to question anonymous sources or say they have no credibility. Quite often, whistle-blowers need anonymity to expose problems as we all know how these folks are treated by fans when their names go public. I also get the point that we have a culture in college sports of closing ranks and defending our own. That is indeed "part of the problem" in situations where criminal behavior goes unreported for years.
That said, it was an awkward answer to a question in a press conference that he wasn't prepared to answer. It's not even his program and he has no direct role in what's happened at Maryland whatsoever. So, to suggest he's part of the problem is unfair and over-the-top. He's basically just being a character witness for a friend and colleague.
But the AJC is a big-city paper that loves to offer a "hot take" to generate clicks. Typically, UGA is on the receiving end of their smear campaigns. I guess it was USC's turn this time.
As Spurrier arrived here he was up front and straight forward when asked about the confederate flag. Dabo spoke and said basically less than nothing, and then when the decision was made to take the flag down you would have thought it was his ideaAs relates to football, which to some people is a religion.
Muschamp wasn't being ugly nor insensitive about the death of this young man he was saying he knows the coach involved and this wasn't intentional in his opinion. Too many people want to add fire to something where there is no fire because that's what we have become, a culture of judgmental people looking for something to protest. In reality most of the people pointing the finger really don't care one way or the other it's just the thrill of the chase.
I wonder if the Founding Fathers had any idea that 'Free Speech' would serve Big Media interests ($$$) many times more than the average citizen? I'll answer my own question: NO!
AJC is nothing but a mouthpiece for Georgia.
Too funny.... if Dabo Swinney or Kirby Smart knew and worked with Durkin on a staff ( and smart did) .. and said what Muschamp said, this board would've exploded with negative post about each person and would've sang the praise of AJC , if they would've wrote an opinion piece in the paper
Agreed. Often, the best answer is to simply say "You know, we're in the middle of fall practice, just a couple of weeks before our first game and that's what I'm focused on right now." He can also add something about knowing Durkin a long time and believing him to be a good man, but not being prepared to answer questions about a pending investigation at another school.Just keep your mouth closed. Problem solved.
.
You always say things like this, but you really over generalize. I absolutely would not have praised the AJC, nor would many other SC fans.
Muschamp may or may not have verbalized a thought that was best kept unsaid. That can be debated, and to be honest, I can see both sides of it. Personally, I think he should have kept the thought to himself.
Having said that, journalists absolutely love to become bullies when someone attacks their own in any way. The punishment rarely "fits the crime" when it comes to attacking a journalist. So now Muschamp is the problem with college football because he gave his opinion on something that he had nothing to do with? That is ridiculous. Journalists are going to bully Mushchamp now and are going to stretch out a response or take for weeks that should lasted for one news cycle at best.
We saw it happen with Spurrier over Ron Morris. We see it happen anytime anyone questions the media in any fashion.
I guarantee you that if a coach said "I don't believe Johnny Reporter knows what he is talking about when he discussed the run pass option in that article," you would think that said coach had kidnapped someone over the following week by the bullying media. If you think I am wrong, you are naive.
I am a fan of the media in general. They bring light to many situations that would never make it into public without them. The situation at Ohio State and at Maryland are examples. But I am not a fan of the media at all when someone questions anything about one of their own. 100% of the time, they go over board in using the important power that they hold.
A rather queer editorial by this AJC hack.
Agreed. Often, the best answer is to simply say "You know, we're in the middle of fall practice, just a couple of weeks before our first game and that's what I'm focused on right now." He can also add something about knowing Durkin a long time and believing him to be a good man, but not being prepared to answer questions about a pending investigation at another school.
Speaking off the cuff about very complex issues at another program is rarely the est response.
Edit: often because the guy who asks the question has been working on that subject all day long while the coach was busy with practice or something else and likely came to the press conference expecting to answer questions about his team. Textbook "gotcha" question, but a trap that should be avoided.
Man.. This ain't good. You can (correctly) say the media is making a bigger deal about this than is needed, but man.. This is going to be great negative recruiting material for us.
I agree with all of this except the part about Durkin having medical procedures in place. It is not his job and is, quite frankly, not proper for him to be a part of that. Once in the hands of the trainers, they are the responsibly party, and it's not like they are coaches that Durkin can hire and fire. Trainers are employed by the AD, not the coach.I agree with you that CWM does things right and i would feel very comfortable sending my child into his care. BUT when you take a stance that implies your profession is beyond criticism it becomes problematic.
At the least Durkin has inadequate medical procedures in place that resulted in a young man's death and that HAS TO BE CRITIQUED AND FIXED. At the worst there was horrorific negligence and a "toxic culture" that cannot be fixed from the inside.
To deem someone beyond questioning was a bad look for CWM and he backed away from it. I know he said It out of loyalty but nobody is beyond examination when some tragedy like this happens.
From what I understand he was misdiagnosed as having a heat stroke at the time, they didn't bother taking his temperature or attempting to do a quick cool down. Not sure they could have saved him had all those steps been taken, but the fact that they weren't is going to be a major deal of who's to blame.I agree with all of this except the part about Durkin having medical procedures in place. It is not his job and is, quite frankly, not proper for him to be a part of that. Once in the hands of the trainers, they are the responsibly party, and it's not like they are coaches that Durkin can hire and fire. Trainers are employed by the AD, not the coach.
I live here and read it every day. You need to look at their coverage of the Jan Kemp affair before you make a statement like that. The AJC has come down hard on them and GT over the years. They are winning big now and winning makes negative coverage much harder.Georgia Football propaganda is what the AJC is - always has been. Pitiful that they would turn on one of their own.
wait, it's UGA just before season starts. They do a good job keeping themselves in the news with all the arrest.That couldn't possibly be further from the truth. They routinely run negative stories on UGA to generate clicks. It's pervasive. Since Athens is so close to the Atlanta market, UGA gets the same harsh, critical, big-city coverage you normally only see with pro sports. Even when there is no controversy, they'll find a way to create one.
you ever look at the arrest records?" Typically, UGA is on the receiving end of their smear campaigns?" Are you kidding me! When is the last time AJC printed anything bad about UGA sports? We recruit the Atlanta and Charlotte metro areas hard. Of course they are going to take every opportunity to exploit anything that could possibly be negatively misconstrued re: USC, but I don't think UGA has ever printed anything positive about us. They hated Spurrier with passion because he made UGA football his whipping boy, and rubbed it in their face. What he did to them was animal cruelty, so they don't ever say anything positive about us.