Latest Michigan Tunnelgate Rhetoric About MSU Is Hypocritical, Racist, Or Both
We knew when it happened that Michigan would milk Tunnelgate for every last drop of victimhood possible, but the latest is ridiculous even by their standards.
John U. Bacon, who has built a career kissing asses at U-M and peddling propaganda to its fanbase like a drug dealer does substance to addicts, took to Twitter over the weekend to publish perhaps the most melodramatic nothingburger of a thread I've ever seen.
In it Bacon shares eyewitness accounts from multiple Michigan Stadium event and sideline workers who were so aghast at the way MSU players and coaches conducted themselves during last month's rivalry game that they felt compelled to reach out to Bacon unsolicited in an effort to let the world know how truly despicable Michigan State is.
Here's just a small sampling of the pearl-clutching:
- "The MSU players and staff were by far the most hostile and undisciplined team I have ever been around."
- "There was an unprecedented amount of trash talk."
- "I have never seen anything like that. *Mel Tucker spent the entire game arguing with the officials. He looked very agitated and never accepted the official's explanation."
- "Constant complaining to the officials. During the second quarter the line judge comments to me that ‘this is not what I signed up for.’"
- “I will say it was the most toxic and hate filled sideline I have ever been a part of and it starts with the head coach. The staff and players follow his lead.”
There are a few things that are intellectually dishonest or just plain racist here. More like a million, specifically. Let's focus on just a few to get to the bottom of what's really going on.
If what these U-M staffers witnessed was so abominable, why didn't they reach out to someone other than John U. Bacon?
Perhaps it's because they knew a professional U-M sycophant would be sympathetic to their cause and, thus, publish their account without a hint of actual journalistic integrity — you know, like working other sources to independently verify what's being alleged is actually true, or was at least witnessed by one impartial, unrelated party?
If your response to the above question is, "How do you know those U-M staffers didn't share their stories with actual, legitimate journalists?" my answer is that I don't know that they didn't.
But I'll play along and assume, for argument's sake, that they did contact news outlets. Ask yourself why then no one else has reported their allegations. I can answer that: Because any reporter — sorry, that doesn't include lifelong Wolverine fans who have practically published fan fiction about U-M — would have too much decency and too many functioning synapses to believe that literal employees of Michigan too cowardly to put their names on their accounts, which are unable to be independently verified, actually constitute credible sourcing or responsible journalism.
Sidelines are often hostile in college football — especially in rivalry games.
Anyone who's ever been near a sideline at a big-time college football game knows that it's not exactly a family-friendly atmosphere. Yes, foul language is often used. Yes, emotions run high and things not fit for air are uttered. But I highly doubt State's players and coaches were actually audibly and enthusiastically calling for the deliberate injuring of any Michigan player. And if that really did transpire, it's unfortunate, to be sure. I would expect someone so aggrieved by hearing that kind of talk to be even more distraught by a grown man threatening to kill someone on a basketball court. Which brings me to another point...
Where has this grave concern for decency been?
Surely someone who's so troubled by mere allegations of such conduct that they would publish a borderline manifesto calling for harsh consequences would be even more apoplectic over demonstrable evidence of a football player attempting to choke out an opponent.
A serious reporter who was moved to break his sacred journalistic oath of impartiality due to the heinous sideline behavior he's learned of, albeit from incredibly dubious sources, would undoubtedly spend days, weeks, even months working to hold to account a grown man who struck another in an obvious act of violence.
Imagine how a protector of the truth like John U. Bacon, who went public with allegations against Michigan State's players and coaches based on information from anonymous admitted Wolverine partisans because he felt deep down in his heart of hearts that he had a consecrated duty to steer the narrative toward justice, would handle a decades-long reign of terror wherein a physician used his position at a large university and the protection afforded him by a legendary college football coach to sexually assault hundreds of people, only for several high-profile representatives of the university to engage in a campaign of blatant victim-shaming.
If John U. Bacon can write so many books about pretend returns to glory for Michigan football and bedtime stories about Bo Schembechler, I have to believe he's already written at least three about the Robert Anderson scandal at Michigan, right?
It's almost like the outrage over Tunnelgate from U-M fans and media (Who're we kidding, they're one and the same!) is feigned.
Complaining about a coach arguing with referees and how a team's behavior comes from the program?
You really want to go there?
There's some pretty heavy-handed dog-whistling going on here.
When you're calling out the behavior and conduct of one team while shamelessly ignoring similar instances on your own side, it's suspect. Factor in that the head coach you're complaining about is black and, well, it's just plain obvious.
It's bad enough we already have comments like this out there:
The amount of times I've heard the word "thug" from the Michigan contingent since Tunnelgate is beyond measure. And it doesn’t take a World War II code breaker to decipher the real meaning of “thug.” (Hint: It’s the new N-word.)
Do the math. It's not hard to figure out what's going on.