Ronny Thompson Discussion

[Bando]

excitableboy said:

bando said:

Well excuuuuuse me. I didn't realize there was a timetable for when differing opinions could be offered. Please send me the memo so I can be better informed next time, oh wise one.

If you'll read the post itself, it very clearly calls you out for being a wet blanket during the middle of the summer. Wierd how you only disputed the timetable part. (ohhh snap)

I guess I misunderstood, I thought you were calling me a wet blanket because I wasn't abiding by the timetable.

In any case, if it's war you want, it's war you'll get. Sic 'em, BlogWarBot!!!

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if Ball State wouldn't want out of this game. At best its a normal game and they get killed. At worst their fans start calling Thompson a racist and yell a bunch of crap at his brother who hasn't said anything about this issue and make their entire school look bad and prove Ronny's point.

[BubbleVisionBiff]

Jason Whitlock, now of Fox Sports, takes Ronny and Wilbon to task, implying that the Thompson family shopped the story. While I am trying to be objective, I find Wilbon's version more compelling, if only because he tried to lay out a timeline/sequence of events (like a reporter), where as Whitlock cites selected actions and attaches motives to them (like an op-ed columnist).

I also find it very weird that the Thompsons would go to Jason Whitlock before Mike Wilbon, especially since Whitlock had no media outlet until today.

msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7127682

And damn you, Bando, for finding a better Frink avatar.

[wildhoya]

"Last week [jason whitlock] spent six hours in a law office with Big John Thompson, John Thompson III, Ronny Thompson and a lawyer."

JTIII?

[HoyaSinceBirth]

I could see them goign to whitlock because he went to ball state and wanted to have him confirm the racist enviornment. not saying they did, but that could be a possible motivation.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

If JTIII is involved in this story its because as Ronny's brother he believes that he's telling the truth and is supporting him. That's about it.

[AustinHoya03]

bubblevisiontemp said:

I also find it very weird that the Thompsons would go to Jason Whitlock before Mike Wilbon, especially since Whitlock had no media outlet until today.

Agree with the first part of the sentence but FYI Whitlock is and has been a columnist for the Kansas City Star, which should probably be considered a media outlet.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

I don't know - there's a lot to be said for both sides. Maybe the Thompsons were telling journalists the story, does that make it false? Or does the story level some very serious allegations at a University for which such a meeting laying out the facts would be necessary? All that has been proved so far is that a sports writer with connections to Ball State viewed the story differently than a sports writer with connections to the Thompson family - shocking. The local media in Muncie printed the most slanted piece of all simply trashing Wilbon while making the same journalistic mistakes that they were accusing him of.

Finally, I was thinking about this story in terms of a whistle-blower issue. The first thing that happens with a whistle-blower is they get isolated in the office. That happened. Many times they are threatened. That happened. Often they leave their job under less than happy circumstances. That happened. Then the whole issue gets litigated and the first thing that the company (in this case the University) does is trash the whistle-blower. That's happening. Does this prove anything? No. Just that a whistle-blower case is no different in an athletic department than it is in a normal office. Like all whistle-blower cases, the operative facts are often obscured by a lot of office rumors, hurt feelings, and name-calling. I agree with the other posters who have said we need to wait to find out what really happened.

As for the basketball game, no brother = no mercy.

[BubbleVisionBiff]

austinhoya03 said:

bubblevisiontemp said:

I also find it very weird that the Thompsons would go to Jason Whitlock before Mike Wilbon, especially since Whitlock had no media outlet until today.

Agree with the first part of the sentence but FYI Whitlock is and has been a columnist for the Kansas City Star, which should probably be considered a media outlet.

Point taken. Meant that he had no online soapbox presence after his departures from the Worldwide leader and then AOL. A brief unscientific scan of the KC Star page cited reveals mostly KC Griefs articles, and not the commentary that has been part of his recent online efforts. I may be mistaken, but I don't think this piece is going to end up in the Star, just like his conversations with/about Ralph Wiley, Imus/Sharpton, etc. Those have been in online outlets, where he didn't have a presence until after Ronny's story broke.

So I still think it's weird that Thompsons would go to him before Wilbon to actually shop an article that would not likely appear in print, unless it was known that he was about to get a gig at Fox.

I agree with HSB on the most likely explanation--the BSU alumnus angle.

[hoya95]

During the Tournament, Phil Mushnick of the New York Post slammed Westwood One for letting Big John call the Georgetown games. He said that the executives there were too afraid to tell Thompson no because they believed he would claim racism if they did. I sent Mushnick an e-mail saying that he was overreacting generally (friend/family conflicts for color commentators are not exactly new) and that the racism claim was a cheap shot for which he had no evidence. Mushnick wrote me back to say in effect "believe me, I wouldn't have printed that unless I heard from multiple sources that Thompson has a history of doing this."
I've been a Georgetown fan my whole life, but I can't claim to know any of these people personally. I also know that the most racist stuff I've ever heard came from people screaming hateful nonsense about Georgetown basketball when I was a kid.
We obviously don't know exactly what happened in this case, and Wilbon's article made me think that Ronny's case was a lot stronger than I feared it would be. I hope he's 100% correct. But it just seems that when the atmosphere gets this poisoned, these situations don't go very well.

[BubbleVisionBiff]

hoya95 said:

During the Tournament, Phil Mushnick of the New York Post slammed Westwood One for letting Big John call the Georgetown games. He said that the executives there were too afraid to tell Thompson no because they believed he would claim racism if they did. I sent Mushnick an e-mail saying that he was overreacting generally (friend/family conflicts for color commentators are not exactly new) and that the racism claim was a cheap shot for which he had no evidence. Mushnick wrote me back to say in effect "believe me, I wouldn't have printed that unless I heard from multiple sources that Thompson has a history of doing this."
I've been a Georgetown fan my whole life, but I can't claim to know any of these people personally. I also know that the most racist stuff I've ever heard came from people screaming hateful nonsense about Georgetown basketball when I was a kid.
We obviously don't know exactly what happened in this case, and Wilbon's article made me think that Ronny's case was a lot stronger than I feared it would be. I hope he's 100% correct. But it just seems that when the atmosphere gets this poisoned, these situations don't go very well.

Very interesting, but I wonder, did Mushnick cite any of those sources?

In any case, how could there be a "history" of Pops threatening to cry "racism" if he didn't get to call III's games? III had only made us relevant again a year before this one. Not exactly a long record, even if it happened.

Then again, I take anything from the New York Post with several grains of salt.

[RDF]

hoya95 said:

During the Tournament, Phil Mushnick of the New York Post slammed Westwood One for letting Big John call the Georgetown games. He said that the executives there were too afraid to tell Thompson no because they believed he would claim racism if they did. I sent Mushnick an e-mail saying that he was overreacting generally (friend/family conflicts for color commentators are not exactly new) and that the racism claim was a cheap shot for which he had no evidence. Mushnick wrote me back to say in effect "believe me, I wouldn't have printed that unless I heard from multiple sources that Thompson has a history of doing this."
I've been a Georgetown fan my whole life, but I can't claim to know any of these people personally. I also know that the most racist stuff I've ever heard came from people screaming hateful nonsense about Georgetown basketball when I was a kid.
We obviously don't know exactly what happened in this case, and Wilbon's article made me think that Ronny's case was a lot stronger than I feared it would be. I hope he's 100% correct. But it just seems that when the atmosphere gets this poisoned, these situations don't go very well.

Did Mushnick also have a problem with Bill Walton calling his son's games in NCAA Tournament? Or Bob Griese calling the majority of Brian Griese's games at Michigan? If not--then maybe Big John would've had a case.

[hoya95]

My understanding of what Mushnick was telling me is that it went beyond calling the games. I don't know who his sources were, but they were claiming that if Big John didn't get what he wanted in general, he would loudly claim racism. I don't know what was said and to whom, and it may just be that Big John has always been an intimidating guy. But that is what initally made me very queasy about the Ronny Thompson story when I first heard about it. I hope that isn't the case.
While I would agree that you should treat the New York Post with serious skepticsm, Mushnick has been the one exception to that rule for me.

[SFHoya99]

I think that there is a perception that Pops will cry racism more than a history. Given how half the country feels about him, I wouldn't be surprised that if that isn't an assumption people make when working with him.

If Pops is so damn hard to work with -- if he's a walking lawsuit as implied -- how the heck does he have so many jobs? Yes, I know he has Nike ties, but AOL Time Warner is hardly going to be bullied into employing him.

Furthermore, from what I heard of Pops, he's just fine calling III's games. Walton was fine, except at the beginning where he was hysterical because he was overly critical of Luke.

[strummer8526]

I went to middle school with Phil Mushnick's daughter. He threatened to claim racism if she didn't get good grades. OK, that's not at all true, and I guess pretty irrelevant anyway. She was extremely attractive.

Anyway, I agree w/ SF. You can only get so far playing a race card. Big John has seemed to do pretty well for himself, and at some point, the business world is not going to accept race-based threats from an aging former coach.

[SaxaCD]

Mushnick's been saying this kind of stuff for years, since JT the elder roamed the Hoya sidelines. He's one of those guys who has no first hand knowledge of anything of the sort, but repeatedly uses the same old line (anybody who crosses JT gets accused of racism) that a lot of other reporters who didn't like JT's no-access policy parrot. I actually disagree wholeheartedly with your take on the Post. The Post for years has had the best sports pages in NY. Mushnick has always had axes to grind, first when he was with the Daily News, and currently with the Post. While I admit to agreeing with his rants against Cablevision and the Dolans, a lot of his other holier-than-thou stuff is pure crap, and always has been. He's one of the columnists I trust LEAST, because he always has an agenda, and tries to make his stories, and "heroes" and "villains" fit neatly into whatever it is that day. Mushnick hates Nike and the sneaker deals, and therefore he always painted Thompson as a race-baiter, because that strikes more chords than the fact that he's a "sneaker guy". Mushnick craves the public to be on his side, even if it's not for a legitimate reason.

hoya95 said:

My understanding of what Mushnick was telling me is that it went beyond calling the games. I don't know who his sources were, but they were claiming that if Big John didn't get what he wanted in general, he would loudly claim racism. I don't know what was said and to whom, and it may just be that Big John has always been an intimidating guy. But that is what initally made me very queasy about the Ronny Thompson story when I first heard about it. I hope that isn't the case.
While I would agree that you should treat the New York Post with serious skepticsm, Mushnick has been the one exception to that rule for me.

[FromTheBeginning]

Agree with SAXACD85 - Phil is one of the long term grudge holders from JT's glory days who could never understand how with his position as a reporter for the big city newspaper he could be denied access to anything.

[KHoyaNYC]

Mushnick is, well, Mushnick. He has some pretty good insights, but he also definitely leaves the impression that he has it out for certain people, and he is relentless in attacking those people. For example, do a search of how many times he has criticized Mike & The Mad Dog over the last twelve months. Admittedly some of his criticism is justified, but some of it is just the most nitpicky stuff ever, things that probably either were mere oversights by Mike & the Mad Dog or taken out of context, yet Mushnick kills these guys repeatedly no matter what.

That being said, I don't remember Mushnick being one of the biggest JTII haters back in the day but I was only in grade school then so I may just not remember.

[vamosalaplaya]

JT III being present while a reporter is pitched a story about a situation between his brother and Ball State, one that JT III had nothing to do with - one that paints Ball State in a very negative light - raises the stakes for this Ball State game next year and starts to get JT III and Georgetown directly involved in this mess. I was kind of hoping he would stay out of it, as it sounds like a dysfunctional situation with alot gray areas at best.

[mapei]

Agree whole-heartedly, vamo.