Meyer continues douchey behavior
Yesterday Urban Meyer confronted an Orlando Sentinel reporter, threatening to ban him and the paper for good from practices because he "messed" with his players, further saying, "if that was my son you and I would be going at it right now." The Sentinel reporter's crime? He had the audacity to quote a Gator receiver after practice who contrasted John Brantley with Tebow by saying Brantley was a "real" quarterback.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-florida-angrymeyer&p…
Apparently his brief hiatus hasn't changed his attitude any.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:18 AM ^
Urban Meyer: "If that was my son you and I would be going at it right now."
Sentinel Reporter: "So is that how the Doctor advised you deal with job related stress?"
I could have searched for Urban Meyer instead of just looking back a few pages. I wish guys posting would post better headlines though.
I may have read this the wrong way (probably did). It seems like his player while not exactly misquoted did not intend to say ,"finally a real QB". I believe he meant it to show the difference between the two styles. The reporter then runs with the story as controversey. While i'm not a fan of Meyer he made his point to that reporter and stuck up for his player. Pretty commendable I think.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:07 AM ^
Where does it say the story that ran was an attempt to stir up controversy or that it even had a negative tilt to it? I don't see that anywhere in the Rivals article. It only mentions the quote, which nobody should take issue with, imo.
Here's a link to the original article:
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_college_uf/2010/03/florida-gato…
I don't have a problem with it.
I wonder whether Urban is aware that the University of Florida is a public institution, which is subject to the First Amendment, making it much more complicated to selectively exclude particular members of the media based on the content of their writing.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:27 AM ^
1st Amendment and football doesn't apply south of the Mason-Dixon
Just asked my Con Law prof, he said so
March 25th, 2010 at 10:33 AM ^
The good ol' Mason-Dixon has a long and glorious history of warping/disorting/negating so many laws and regulations. It also gets a little weird down there with the institution clause, because football at so many public schools IS a religion.
The first amendment only says that state and federal governments cannot restrict the freedom of speech and the press. The amendment does not require public institutions to provide information or access. The White House can ban Fox News from its press room if it wants, the University of Michigan can tell Dave Birkett, et al, to take a hike.
There are statutory requirements for public institutions to provide certain information (the Freedom of Information Act being the most prominent), but I know of no requirements that Universities provide equal access based on content. That's why Michigan could be "The Fort" for so many years, and why bloggers getting access was such a big deal.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:52 PM ^
when you are already allowing access to other reporters. The concept is that, by regulating access, you are indirectly regulating content. Here is an example from my favorite city, Toledo, Ohio that deals with my favorite bumbling politician, Carty Finkbeiner (you know, the guy who proposed to move the deaf people near the airport because they don't care about the engine noise, who adamantly defended a campaign of ticketing people for parking on their own gravel driveways on their own property, and who was caught on video calling a little boy "fatso"). This is as good as Supreme Court precedent:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070117/NEWS02/7…
I don't want to turn a post about a douchey coach into a douchey legal argument, so let's just agree that this could be complicated. I never said categorically that it was illegal what Meyer did -- only that it raised some serious questions. As with any situation, I'm sure there's a lot we don't know that could affect the analysis.
Holy crap - not only would the Freep gone total ape sh!t but there would have been lawsuits and hearings and blah blah blah. It's amazing what winning allows you to get away with. We were pissed that they took our players quotes out of context in regards to countable hours - as far as I can tell they didn't take his words out of context at all. Sure they printed it because he said Tebow wasn't a "real quarterback" but they didn't do anything like what the freep did and Meyer is threating to kick them out of the practice forever!
Although, honestly, I kinda wish we had that going on - sometimes it's better to keep the doors closed than allow of bunch of people in that intend to do you harm simply because you're a nice guy with an open door policy...
March 25th, 2010 at 10:09 AM ^
I like that he's defending his player actually, but what I don't like is the quote "if that was my son you and I would be going at it right now." Who's he trying to impress? All of those players should be like a son to him. No need to be a tough guy.
EDIT: I read the quote, and it actually appears as if the reporter didn't mean to cause the big stir. In that case, Urban is a borderline douche nozzle.
I don't think he's trying to impress anyone. What he's saying is that "What you did is so disrespectful that you're lucky his father isn't here to kick your ass."
I did not take it as a physical challenge.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:56 PM ^
I mean he did what any coach would. But for some reason I thought he said "you're lucky it's not my kid, otherwise..."
I just don't like the "hypothetical threat". In my view, that player may as well be his kid. Don't act like you'll do anything, other than the very scolding he was giving him. He was borderline aggressive when he was walking away, then about-facing back toward that journalist.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:22 AM ^
He's liable to have another big one.
March 25th, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
This is the big one.
March 25th, 2010 at 12:16 PM ^
Redd said. Literally and figuratively.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^
Hold on - I agree with all of the posters who say that they like Urban standing up for his players, even over something minor. But, I also agree with the posters that say that Urban is a Grade A douche. The two are not mutually exclusive. Urban is a grade A douche, who in this instance may have done something less than totally douche-like.
March 25th, 2010 at 11:06 AM ^
The Tebow love is a powerful force, even when he is gone.
March 25th, 2010 at 11:16 AM ^
I will fight him lucha libre!
March 25th, 2010 at 11:52 AM ^
i wish rr would be this forceful with some of the members in the detroit media....
March 25th, 2010 at 12:14 PM ^
I'm with you los. I want to see him get mad, angry, pissed. I expressed the same sentiment on the doppelganger thread of this topic, and, after being accused of slamming RichRod, was told that I am the reason "there is a Freep."
Unbelievable.
I don't think it would help. He'd possibly get even more bad press.
March 25th, 2010 at 11:52 AM ^
for Meyer to act like that. If you don't like it, call in the reporter and talk about it behind closed doors. What's so wrong with the story the guy wrote? He didn't use the quote out-of-context. He just included it. I am sorry but Tim Tebow is no saint. And for Urban to act that way, it makes me think neither is he.
The reporter didn't call in Meyer/Thompson behind closed doors and say "Is this what you really meant?"
Reporters put all their harsh words in writing; look at the Free Press.
But somehow the coach has to do everything behind closed doors?
Yeah, it would be great if everyone's anger was that measured. But not everyone can be Gandhi. It may not have been a perfect reaction, but it's not classless, either.
March 25th, 2010 at 12:32 PM ^
First, the reporter has the right to interview a player, and to use a quote he gets from him. Meyer is a state employee and really cannot control the press in this way. Attempting to intimidate the reporter (check the video if you can) is weak, and could get him in some trouble.
Second, UF football has a long-standing beef w. the Sentinel, accdg to my father-in-law, a UF grad.
Third, both Meyer AND the reporter could have downplayed this--Meyer really didn't need to get pissed off. If asked, he could have said: Thompson didn't mean it that way, or (gasp) brought Thompson up to say just that. End of non-controversy.
Fourth, IF the reporter was really trying to parlay the comment into a huge headline story unreasonably THEN that kind of sucks. But NOWHERE have we actually seen this alleged. The truth is that it probably was hard, sometimes, for receivers in that offense.
Therefore,
Fifth. This is something of a tempest in a teapot, with Meyer certainly not stirring in the milk and honey.
Sixth, keep those defibrilators handy. Meyer is going to need one. You gotta choose your spots better than that. My hunch is that the kid was upset, so Meyer got upset. Telling the kid not to worry and getting on w. things would have been more productive.
There's speculation that Meyer is struggling to recalibrate the offense. Will be interesting to see.
March 25th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
(young point wise anyway). I agree with everything here, those who applaud Meyer for standing up for his player should read the article--the reporter did nothing wrong.
They had the right idea, keep the doors closed. Keep the screens up around the practice facilities and keep the drama down to minimum. Granted it sucked as fans without the flow of info but dang, the crap we have had to deal with since RR came in and opened the doors has been horrible.
I miss hearing the words Fort Schembechler!