Prime Time Sports with Bob McCown: Monday, October 26, 2009 (5:00-7:00)

Host: Bob McCown
Co-Host: Stephen Brunt
Guests: Rogers Sportsnet baseball announcer, Jamie Campbell; Paul Waldie, Globe and Mail writer; Ken Holland, GM of the Detroit Red Wings; owner of the Ottawa Senators, Eugene Melnyk; Glenn Howard, World Cup of Curling champion.

Firstly, the torch relay matters. McCown and otherwise who suggest otherwise, are simply wrong. On a personal level, I was a young teenager in '88 when the Olympics were last in Calgary. I was riveted by the relay and had a map of Canada I kept while tracking where the Olympic flame was. My friends and I all envied the torch bearers and silently wished we were picked.

So Brunt gets selected to carry the Olympic flame, and in turn causes a bit of a controversy across the Country. Former Olympian Alison Korn it called it "unethical".

Former Globe Columnist William Houston ripped Brunt to shreds.
But considering the way Houston was let go by the same employer that selected Brunt as a torch bearer, he's hardly objective and you really sense the bitterness in his tone.

Back to Brunt. He stated that 70% of torch bearers are members of the public who are selected through various processes including lottery, and I'd assume merit. The remaining 30% are sponsor selections, and Brunt is listed in this 30%.

Here's my question to you all. Would you have a problem with Brunt carrying the torch if he were in the 70%, specifically chosen on merit? I'd argue that Brunt has had an impact on the landscape of sports like very few other journalists in this country. I find his articles constantly challenge the reader and the status quo. I have yet to read "Searching for Bobby Orr" or "Gretzky's Tears", but both are on my Christmas reading list. If I had to select a sports journalist to carry the torch, he'd be my pick.

What bothers me is Brunt is treating this like any other assignment. Instead of saying that it's an honor and a privilege, he's treating this like covering the freakin' Brier? I chalk this up to being thrown for a loop that the outcry is so huge. I personally believe that Brunt felt that in some small way, he deserved the honor. I also think he underestimated what the public reaction to this story has been. CTV certainly didn't help things by producing a press release with Brunt's name front and center. The way CTV handled this also was something he was miffed by.

Surprisingly, Brunt hasn't commented about this via his Globe Column, but I expect him to face this the way he has pined others to in his past articles. Honestly.

Here is the discussion, via Fadoo:

McCown & Brunt discuss Olympic Torch Relay


  1. According to William Houston, he was not let go by the Globe & Mail............he says he pursued the opportunity to leave the Globe, took a buyout and left on good terms.

  2. Doesn't make what was said untrue.

  3. I don't think I said that your opinion of his comments was untrue...........I said that according to him your theory regarding how he left the Globe was untrue

  4. "...considering the way Houston was let go by the same employer that selected Brunt as a torch bearer, he's hardly objective and you really sense the bitterness in his tone."

    He may have no problem with his former employer, the Globe and Mail, but it sure sounds like he's got an axe to grind with Brunt that goes well beyond the torch issue.