I’m watching the second half of the NC/Georgetown game.
I am watching this game because I remember watching the first match in 82. I don’t remember who I was pulling for, but I do remember the pass.
I’ve got to be one of the only folks who appreciate pro ball more than college ball. I don’t think college ball players play harder, I don’t think the game is purer, and I don’t think that college students leaving early weakens the pro game. It may weaken the marketing of the pro game but that’s another story. In reading about what Fred Brown has been up to since “the pass” I realized one of the reasons I don’t like the college game. And lost a little bit of respect for John Thompson in the meantime. There are a whole set of resources that college coaches have and can withold long after a player has gone. For every Mark Montgomery there is a Charles Smith.
Freddie Brown experience is a typical of the Black experience ,expectation of the use or non use of power,Thompson’s alledged power evidently did not extend pass his son .Freddie’s power did not extend at all ,his son went to Georgetown.
I am surprised a JHU professor would judge college bball in general & this retired coach in particular based on one former player’s feedback to a reporter.
Fred Brown is one of Gtwn’s greatest players. He should address JT directly over his frustration. To diminish a man over how often or how well he helped others really requires more of an assessment than one reporter & one blog can manage. How many men HAS JT helped directly over the years? How many are better for playing for JT than they would have been otherwise? How many others did he affect indirectly? Is JT human? sure. Mistakes? Plenty.
To Freddie’s complaints, same answer. Sometimes, a friend is in trouble and you’re not in a position to help. Sometimes you are. Don’t diminish the achievements, the mentoring that DID happen, and the friendships, by requiring that they always work admirably. It was grace that permitted you to let go of “the pass.” Look for that same grace now.
Tim Naughton
I’m a different type of professor…
I’m not knocking Georgetown’s accomplishments at all. I was pulling for JT III to win. And my ideas about college ball have been more or less the same over the last 10 years or so. Further, your response is the normal one when these types of issues come to light.
“Why didn’t he go to JT II directly?”
“None of us know how many people JT II helped.”
But I’m not requiring that JT III be a saint. What I am suggesting is that we don’t recognize the full extent to which college coaches can withhold resources. And given the racial disparity (that has diminished over the past 25 years) there is a great deal of work that JT II COULD have done…but for some reason chose not to.
How many former Duke players are coaching? How many of Tom Izzo’s staff is out there coaching? There is a gap. Why? We’re not just talking about a situation in which “mistakes were made.”
The truth ,Tubby and Willingham were ran out of town ,once the recruiting is done and the lights go out,did J Wooden help Kareem who’s last coaching job (head)was on an Indian reservation,It took Zeke to go and offer Kareem a job.
The unfairness, if any, lies in the context. When a blog lamenting lost opportunities ties to an article abut a successful but disgruntled former player, the blog takes on more an aura of criticism than of thoughtful prose.
There is no doubt a coach can continue to help a former player, but exactly how depends on both men, and is different for every player. The anecdotal evidence on JT is that often he does help, and not only for his sons. (Note his campaign against the white-oriented SAT test.) But a career coach will see over a hundred players in his career. Even with his influence, there are only so many doors he can help open. I try to answer every call that I get for help. I am quite sure I miss a few. But for some, the better answer is “no,” because the help they want and the help they need are different.
To Freddie’s examples in the story, some players (regardless of color) do not demonstrate that they will be good coaches. Rather, they represent hangers-on. Some have falledn in love with the system, the adulation, and must be pushed out (of the dugout, or the gym), and learn to grow up. Consider an old and a new example, Orioles Jim Palmer and Sammy Sosa. Both were “done,” but did not know it.
TON
The problem with anecdotal evidence is that it is not systematic. What we have here is a situation in which a judgment has been made on Coach Thompson based on his coaching record, and on his obvious successes (Ewing, Mourning, Mutombo, Harrington, and Iverson in the pro arena). I’m sure each of these individuals could tell you exactly how Coach Thompson aided them. Further, I’m sure that they could get other players to chime in as well.
But when someone like Fred speaks it opens up the opportunity to add more data. Not necessarily unbiased data, but data coming from a different source of bias.
And this gives us the opportunity to talk about the ways that coaches in general make decisions about how their resources are shared. Sure not everyone is cut out for coaching. But given other examples the only reason we have to throw out Fred’s comments as sour grapes is because of a predisposition towards Coach Thompson.
As an aside the relationship between coaches and former players is very similar to the relationship between professors and former graduate students. There are indeed any number of reasons why a former graduate student might not get a letter from a professor…but let’s not go too far to remove the professor’s (continued) responsibility to work for students.