Tim, are you honestly feigning surprise that a piece of amateur journalism is - *gasp* - amateurish? I know it sucks to be stuck up there in Pullman, but don't take your frustrations out on some teenager.

Tim, in defense of the author, Bennett's unhappiness was a topic for discussion on NCAA broadcasts because it was felt that he would jump at the chance to leave Pullman. But of course he's happy now that he got a raise. And yes, Tim, his name was thrown around in the OSU talks, so much so that he had to say twice that he was staying at WSU. So where, exactly, is the author off? I understand, you're bitter at the prospect of your coach leaving--hell, we're feeling that right now. But your outrage is misguided.

His name may have come up for the OSU job but the writer says he's still in the hunt. Not true. If he said he's not interested, I'd take his word for it. So far Tony hasn't been a liar. I never heard that he was unhappy in Pullman, this is the first I've read of it. I listened to the broadcasts to on the NCAA, not once did they say he was unhappy. Error two.
He may have wanted a raise and better charter flights -- he got those. He did not ever say he was unhappy and has said many times in public that he's happy. If he wasn't happy, he'd have left. He's had the opportunities to do so.
A better route for the writer -- and I know they don't teach this anymore -- is to use this new invention called a phone. You pick it up and punch in numbers to get another party. When you get the party you ask questions. If you can't get a hold of the said coach, you go through the SID deparment and/or his secretary. Even a no comment would be better than just guessing, shooting from the hip, quoting unnamed stories, and just pulling it out of one's a$$. Then again, you probably got scooped royally on Trent leaving so you're trying to make up for it.
Try the phone, it's easy.

You must be the author of this piece. Did you call one of the coaches you mentioned in the article? No. You're lazy. And your insults hide the fact that you can't back up your story.
If you post the quote directly from Tony Bennett where he said he was "unhappy" at WSU, I'll own up.
I don't care that the prose is average in this story, you'll get better. What bothers me most is the journalists (I use that term loosely) today don't do the work. That's all I ask.
Call Few, Fox, Bennett, actually TALK to them. Instead of insulting me, just do the work. Find a phone, a notebook and/or computer, talk to the coach, type or write down the quotes. Not hard to do. Might help if you were getting edited, too. That's obviously not happening.
As for replying to a student-run newspaper, hey, you're the people who put up the response section. I was looking for some news on Trent, thought I'd go to what could've been a pretty good source.
Guess I was wrong. I'll go back to my worthless waste of life now and bow down to you lazy, white wine sipping, docker boat shoes wearing elitists who think it's "cool" that daddy is paying your $2,000 a month studio apartment.

Tim, whatever your opinions may be, I will guarantee that Wyndam has not commented on his own article. It is heavily advised against by the Daily's editors.

But back to the situation at hand and not Tim's feigned outrage, I like the choices presented here but would also add Blaine Taylor to the list. I liked Keno Davis, but he may be on the move to Providence.

What angers WSU fans is that the article is factually incorrect. Tony Bennett (who is from the Midwest) turned down one of the top jobs in the Country at Indiana, and then rejected a great Marquette opportunity in his home state of Wisconsin. Despite the fact that Tony's wife is from Louisiana, he shunned LSU as well. Oklahoma State would pay up to $3M with incentives, but Tony said no thanks. He's also gone on record as saying that he won't accept another job within the pac-10 conference.
When a coach turns down $2M/year at Indiana, $1.5M at Marquette, $2M at LSU, and rejects a huge financial opportunity at OSU, what else needs to be said? WSU will pay Tony MAYBE $950K/year. If he was unhappy, he'd be gone by now. Why is that so tough to understand?

There's an internet rumor that internet rumors might be false ... or sometimes they might be true. I don't expect Tony to be at WSU forever, but he's there next year and neither Tony nor Mark Few are looking at the Stanford job right now.
I do think Stanford could land a great coach, it's an excellent job even with the slight rebuilding needed to be done.
I'd open the wallet for Kevin Stallings of Vanderbilt. He's good and worked at a similar school.

Can we get back to what the article is about? I like the choices presented in the article, and here. Another name I'd add is Steve Alford of New Mexico. And, maybe Bobby Knight?

Certainly a possibility. But I was none too pleased with his handling of the Marquette game.

Why doesn't Stanford pay? The school certainly doesn't lack for funds. That being said Blaine Taylor would be a tremendous choice IMHO and not break the bank

Fair enough (in regards to the last post).

I read an internet rumor a month ago that said Jim Harbaugh was "100 percent" leaving for a coordinator's position in the NFL. I didn't believe it and the rumor had no attribution to Jim Harbaugh himself.

An internet rumor said Tony Bennett's wife doesn't like it in Pullman. Really? I know many people in Pullman including acquaintences of the Bennetts. Mrs. Bennett does indeed like it in Pullman and is quite involved in campus ministry at WSU and has really enjoyed her time there. Why do I know this? Because my source is one person removed from her and my source is rock solid and not off the internet.

See how easy it is to just run with things? Now granted, sometimes these internet rumors hold water. But I didn't believe the Mrs. Bennett is unhappy in Pullman rumor or Jim Harbaugh is leaving rumors, they weren't researched or attributed.

There was another reason I really didn't believe the Harbaugh rumor: I went to Stanford's 2007 spring game. Yes, I sat through that, give me a medal. I walked on the field after the game, three feet away from Harbaugh. He was engaged with his players, you could sense his passion in building the program. I'm not a mind-reader, but I could tell he wasn't a one-and-done guy on The Farm. I'm not sure how long Harbaugh will be there, but I sensed a passion in wanting to build things at Stanford.

I have no idea if Jim's girlfriend (he's single, right?) likes Palo Alto or not. And if it's just running around on the internet, I won't believe it.

I hope this writer will actually call people. I'd bet you Tony Bennett's wife would even return a phone call and give him the correct answer. Might be worth a phone call. That's how this good writer could be even better: a little due diligence. It takes just a little more work, but it pays off in the long run. An editor should've made him make the proper phone calls.

It's best to make the calls. The best opinion columns are based on facts, not innuendo or internet rumors. You can always back up opinions better with facts. "Harbaugh is leaving," I read, "100 percent for sure," I read. Who says? Well, the internet says.

How do I substantiate it? By calling Mr. Harbaugh. If he says "no comment" you might be on to something. Even if you get a string of no comments, you must do the extra work or all we'll end up is just a blog/internet society with B.S. floating around.

Regarding Stanford, here's what I've read on the internet the last several years: Harbaugh leaving, Van Der Veer retiring and moving into athletic administation, Lanana staying until he retires, baseball coach Marques retiring five years ago.

Which one is right? Not one. The slippery slope of the internet.

Best to check things out.

To Leon's content:

This should have been the central topic of discussion surrounding the hiring of Bob Bowlsby.

While Stanford athletics was quite successful during the Ted Leland years in most sports, the university administration had been adamant about limiting the compensation of the university's football coach and men's basketball coach (see a related article in the Stanford alumni magazine a couple of years back). By "taking the high moral road", the administration refuses to pay the salary needed to retain the caliber of coach that can win national championships.

As a result, the football and men's basketball head coaching positions at Stanford are likely to be ones that promising coaches take in order to prove themselves worthy of a job somewhere else that will pay a minimum of $2 million per year not counting incentives. They will not be "lifer" positions, that coaches will hold on to as long as possible.

Coming from a school like Iowa, I kinda hoped Bob would be the kind of person to convince the administration that such a large salary is necessary to keep Stanford's football and men's basketball teams competitive at the top of Division I. While the Directors' Cups are nice, embarassing losses in football and basketball are byproducts of the administration's policy on limiing compensation, combined with the supposed increased restrictiveness of admissions standards on student-athletes. The big question that sprouted in my mind was whether Bob could sucessfully covince the administration to change the way it views athletics and its policies towards them.

So far, it seems like he has made little progress in that regard. Yet, many say that the wheels of change turn slowly, but they do turn.

Hey Tim, how about writing a column worthy of real discussion rather than this speculation crap.

WHY DID BOWLSBY SCREW THIS UP SO BADLY? Regardless of whether he actually wanted Trent back or not (the lack of a Plan B suggests strongly that he did), his bungling of the entire situation and his canned communication after the fact should leave the Stanford community really questioning this guy as our AD.

<href="http://www.ultimatecomplain.com/?cat=5">BOB KNIGHT!</a>
Haha why not! The man who loves red sweaters. Like it? Sign the petition to the AD at www.ultimatecomplain.com/?cat=5

I didn't like it til i read it

www.ultimatecomplain.com/?cat=5