(So I have now written something long enough to appear on Dawg Sports. You have been warned.)
C&F appreciates EDSBS's assessment of blogfights.
Only one thing remains less compelling than a blogfight, and that’s a bumfight. Corrected: bumfights are far more compelling than blogfights, therefore ignore previous sentence.
But the latest blogfight has turned into all-out war. And in the process, C&F's honor has been besmirched. (Perhaps fairly, but besmirched nonetheless.)
The brief recap:
SMQ noted "the long shadow of charlatanism" following Rick Neuheisel to UCLA. Bruins Nation took umbrage at this criticism -- which, um, most of us would agree with -- of their greatest hero and bestest head coach everer. This brought on a sharp deconstruction of BN's hypocrisy when it comes to setting expectations for the greatest hero and bestest head coach everer and "the Doofus," Karl Dorrell.
That is where C&F left the story in The Thread [06.16.08].
BN fired back, advising us to "Bring Out the Tin Foil Hats":
It's all very polite, but he's calling us liars. He's attacking our motives and credibility. He's saying we don't write what we believe. Instead, we have some dark hidden agenda. ... In short, it is, at best, a lame conspiracy theory and, at worst, an ugly personal attack.
What comes in between the above quoted introduction and conclusion is an amusing mish-mash of snark, obfuscation and flawed analysis.
Y'know the one thing that really annoys me about BN? They never tell you what they really think.
Then the Mayor jumped in with a piece slightly longer than the Democratic presidential primary:
As usually is the case when a weblog posting fails to strike a high mark, the comments that followed took a similar tack, directing SMQ to "a ‘we never landed on the moon’ convention," referring to the singular Sunday Morning Quarterback as the plural "trigger happy mudslingers," and lumping the intercollegiate athletics blogosphere’s most universally respected football analyst in with the "people who are never right." Menelaus’s retort even alluded to the description of Bruins Nation as "a single-issue blog" . . . a description offered by someone other than Sunday Morning Quarterback. ...
Sunday Morning Quarterback did not outline a conspiracy theory and I would take issue with anyone who accused Nestor, Menelaus, and the rest of the Bruin faithful of such a thing. However, Menelaus’s recent diatribe against SMQ was over the top and unfair to an extent that did nothing to help me make the case that Bruins Nation is a forum for impassioned yet reasonable fans. If Menelaus’s response is representative of his approach to constructive criticism---and, to be clear, I do not believe it is---he should steer clear of tin foil hat analogies, which do him no favors after a posting like that one.
This, of course, drew a response from the BN crowd, who are nothing if not tireless, accusing the SBN crowd of "Circling the Wagons" around SMQ:
why do folks go so far out of their way to soft pedal this and defend SMQ? Kyle, for example, gives SMQ a wider berth than a motorcycle gang of angry sumo wrestlers, in saying that "SMQ [merely] had some questions about Nestor’s game-by-game analysis, wondering a bit about" BN's expectations.
Huh? SMQ was just "wondering" aloud, like some absent minded professor wandering across campus? The tone wasn't sarcastic and snarky? No, no, it was a hallmark of "evenness of tone" (evenly snarky?). Really?
Listen, I fully understand that I'm not one of the "gang." I get that some people worship SMQ and look down on UCLA and BN. But, to see outsiders circle the wagons around SMQ like this baffles me.
In the process of doing so, though, BN indirectly called out C&F, pulling in someone who had erred only in leaving a single comment on the SMQ thread, the totality of which was: