WBCP's Talking Sports 2-14-14

A few weeks ago, I was invited and had the great pleasure of joining two distinguished gentlemen of the Champaign-Urbana community on their sports talk show.  Every Friday afternoon from 2-4pm, Joe Stovall, Sam Britten, and Michael Cox, discuss sports on the local radio channel.  Encouraged to invite me on by his intern, Peggie LaFrance who has read my blog and facebook discussions, Sam Britten called and asked me to join them to talk about the many "controversial" social issues that were prevalent in the news at that time.  Sam told me that they do not usually discuss these topics and felt with my academic and professional background I would be a great addition to their program.  I gladly accepted.  This was my first appearance on a radio show to discuss sports with the added bonus that it was being recorded for a later broadcast which would be a first for me as well.  WBML 1580AM radio is located in my hometown of Champaign, Illinois and made my first radio show/television appearance where it should be, my home!  It was a great pleasure and I hope that I get a chance to make many more appearances on the show!  Thanks Sam, Joe, Michael, and Peggi for making me feel right at home!  ENJOY!!     


The video below was posted by UPTV (Urbana Public Television). 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYkx_bIpFv0


Thanks for taking the time to watch!  My life's goal is to become the Oprah of Sport Talk shows and I believe this was my first step toward reaching that goal!!  Please leave a comment and let me know what you thought.  

“Don’t You Talk About Me”: Defending Richard Sherman (?)

I’ve spent the past few days reading facebook posts, blogs, watching video, and news article reactions/responses to Richard Sherman’s NFC Championship “rant”.  That night, I spent a few hours considering other’s reactions to his rant (positive and negative) being shared on Facebook.  My initial sentiments? They were all over the place but, for the most part, the following questions kept on surfacing…When did we stop expecting athletes to display good sportsmanship?  When did we start believing that arrogance wins over humility?  When did we start accepting “rants” as thoughtful expressions of emotion?  Why does his Stanford education or GPA preclude him from a momentary lapse in rhetorical oblivion?  How can people acknowledge that what he did was not ok but didn’t have a problem with it?  When did we decide that we cannot hold people accountable for their actions or that it is not ok to make mistakes?  Why should we even care about Richard Sherman?  For these questions, I was sad.  

So like many other people, I posted my initial reaction on my page:

Most importantly, I read Richard Sherman’s response posted on TheMMQB entitled “To Those Who Would Call Me a Thug or Worse …’.

When I watched Richard Sherman do all of this Sunday, it took me to a different place.  At the same time, I’m convinced that the rant should be attributed to more than the mere adrenaline rush that so many people are referencing. After all, when is the last time you told someone or heard someone say “Don’t you talk about me”? To me, there’s so much more complexity and nuance...I’ve been reflecting on all of this and I tried to round them up into seven main thoughts:

1.  Let’s be clear… Sherman’s actions before or after Sunday night’s game will never warrant the character assassination and racist vitriol that has consumed public debate over the past 48 hours.  Richard Sherman can be characterized as many things but a “thug”, “N-Word”, “setting the black race back”, “or Worse” are not simply false but they are flat out racist in every sphere of the social construct.  These statements against Sherman should be vigorously rejected by the masses and people should offer him their support against these hateful attacks. 

2.  Who is Richard Sherman?   Context matters.  History matters. We should care about Richard Sherman because he wants us to care.  This was not just a spur of the moment rant.  This is what Sherman does.  He speaks his mind and often argues for his adversaries to acknowledge the respect that he believes he deserves.  If we take that away from him, by saying this was an adrenaline rushed response, then we take away his right to demand the respect he deserves and those calls for respect that occurred prior to Sunday night.        

3. The notion of “silencing” Richard Sherman:  I would never support efforts to “silence” Richard Sherman.  I do support reminding Sherman that his intellect and talent has helped him to accomplish something few with his background have achieved but his behavior Sunday was not a good representation of his whole self.  He knows this, because he expressed it in his article and the apology that he offered the next day.  We too should know this as well and should not encourage this behavior as acceptable in any sphere of his life.  Sports do not afford a person the right to exhibit behavior that would be otherwise unacceptable in a broader context.  I realize many accept this to be fact, but we have to begin rejecting it or our own children will display these acts in our homes, schools, and communities.  If you would not accept this from your own children or teach your own children this behavior as acceptable, why would it be acceptable for Sherman?   

4.  For my Facebook folks:   I must address my Facebook responders who challenged me on his use of the N-Word.  Do I know with all certainty that he used the complete word, no.  What I know with all certainty is that I heard it when it crossed my ears and my eyes confirmed as I read his lips.  You see, I grew up around people who were hearing impaired.  So at a very young age I learned how to read lips and sign the alphabet so that we could communicate.  But I acknowledged that reading lips is an imperfect tool and conceded that others watching with me did not hear him say the N-word.  So we rewound the interview, 3 times, and they also agreed that he used the word.  Maybe he did not say the N-Word in its entirety, but I know for certain that he began to say it.  If I concede that he caught himself, it still saddens me that his broader call for respect was enveloped in a level of anger that would cause him to use that hateful word.  For this, I believe he owes Crabtree an apology.  Friendly competition and “trash-talking” is absolutely apart of the game, but this level of anger is just as hateful as the people who used it against him. 

 5. About Sherman as a representation for Black people: I am happy to say that I now have the capacity to view the representation of Black people in American culture on a spectrum.  Richard Sherman’s rant and people’s reaction to it does not fall in the same category of our discussions of reality television or made for television dramas.  We must begin to understand all things Black is not a monolithic expression of Black culture.  I no longer get upset about the representation of Black people on reality shows, movies, and television because I understand that these things are “scripted” perspectives of the individual writing up these scenarios.  But football is real life.  The emotion that came from Richard Sherman at that moment was real life and in real time.  So my reaction to it is just different.      

6.  Why I’m not here for the “adrenaline rush” narrative:  What do I expect Sherman to do with his adrenaline rushing at its maximum level because he just made the play that gave the Seattle Seahawks only its 2^nd Super Bowl appearance in history?  I expect him to do what he has done many times before, be a good sportsperson.  I expect him to do exactly what he did when he spoke to other reporters immediately following the end of the game.  For the sake of clarity, Erin Andrews did not run up to him immediately after the play.  There was still an extra kick of which a penalty was accessed because of the action that was the real reason for the rant.  This was not your average “end of the game adrenaline rush”.  We have to acknowledge that fact.  We also have to acknowledge that it is ok to expect him to display good sportsmanship and unfortunately he did not exhibit it at this moment.  Thus is was in fact, not ok! 

7.  …but I am here for a more critical and complex narrative:  Given that I try to be a consistent advocate for athletes, my concern for Sherman’s rant has nothing to do with his right or appropriateness during the post-game interview.  I have to understand that his “adrenaline rush” response was greater than a moment but a release from a young man who feels the weight of his background on his shoulders.  His expression to be recognized as “The Best” is a warranted expectation for a young Black man, who resisted deviant behaviors in his neighbor, earned a college degree from Standford University, and made the play that sent his team to the Super Bowl.  And because of these facts, we can also encourage him to remember we believe he deserves all that he has accomplished not because of his arrogance but because of his humility.      

Based on the responses of fans, social media, and popular media, it appears that people want us to judge Richard Sherman by his whole self and not use this singular incident as a moniker for his character.  I agree with anyone who feels this way.  So, I choose not to judge him at all.  I choose to consider Richard Sherman as his whole self which for me is a young man who has had to fight his entire life to earn the respect that every Black man (and every person) feels that he deserves.  These things do not give him a pass to handle his issues with Crabtree (or anyone else he feels disrespects him) in this way.  Why?  Because Black boys and men who make this same choice but are not in the position to taut his accomplishments will not find themselves playing in the Super Bowl.  We can’t have it both ways.  We just can’t!!    

Will this “rant” affect who I will root for in the 2014 Super Bowl game?  Not in the least!  I was a sport fan before I was a sport sociologist!  Don’t ever get THAT twisted.  As a sport fan I have always been attracted to “the story” over the “talent”.  I suspect that explains why I am a sport sociologist.  This will never change, thus the story will guide my 2014 Super Bowl pick just like everyone before and everyone after!  Play hard, Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos, play with heart!! 

Triumph over Tragedy: Raising my “Fist of Freedom”

I return from my blogging hiatus to pay homage to the reason I study sport.  I have had several requests to blog about the Adrian Peterson tragedy, but I chose to draw attention to a triumph instead.  As I approach the proverbial finish line as a member of #TeamPhD2014, I know that my race could not have been won had it not been for The Struggle that Must Be. (Harry Edwards, 1980)  

I raise my “Fist of Freedom” today in honor of

Dr. Harry Edwards

Tommie Smith

John Carlos

Peter Norman

ALL the athletes of the 1968 Mexico Olympics and the families who support(ed) them!

Today marks to 45^th Anniversary of the resulting action born from Dr. Harry Edward’s Olympic Project for Human Rights Movement.  Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood as #1 and #3 winners of the 200 meter yard dash at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics.  On October 16^th, 1968 Tommie Smith and John Carlos made the decision to show solidarity with Dr. Harry Edward’s fight for equal rights by using the Olympics international stage to make a Silent Gesture that still stands as a symbol of hope and progress.  

Tommie Smith writes in his autobiography (2007) Silent Gesture:

“That is what this book is about, not about how Tommie Smith raised his fist in the air on the victory stand.  So much led up to it, and so much has gone on since then, in his life and in this world.  I don’t want this to be the Jesse Owens story – Jesse was great, he ran a race, his mouth was so dry it was like cotton, he ran a race against Germany and he beat Nazism and Hitler.  I don’t want to hear that bull-crap.  I want to hear a humanistic point of view; I want to get Jesse to that race, because that’s just as important as Jesse running that race.  How did I get to that race, where did I go when it was over?

Edwards (1969) Revolt of the Black Athlete, Bass (2002) Not the Triumph but the Struggle and Hartmann (2003) Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete were all responsible for expanding my awareness of the complexity that was the 68 Olympic ‘stand’.  Like Tommie Smith shares in his autobiography, the theoretical implications of the Olympic protest movement remains relevant to equal justice for the black athletes today as it did before, during, and after 1968 in Mexico City.  My study and teachings of sport in society require that I engage with the lessons from Dr. Edwards, Smith and Carlos to examine the transformative nature that society imposes on the black athlete today.  This historical moment renews my feelings that a desire for black athlete protest must be in our ability to allow them to make their own choice.  Dr. Harry Edwards put out a call for a complete boycott of the Olympics; however Smith and Carlos made their own choice.  Just as LeBron James and the Miami Heat basketball players made their choice to show solidarity during the Trayvon Martin tragedy, we must chose to acknowledge and accept that their way may not be our way!  They will heed the call so long as we continue to send the message.             

I acknowledge my first leader, Dr. Sandra Kato!  She taught me the value of hard work and making unpopular decisions.  I will always remember to judge people for who they are 90% or the time and not 10%, because she taught me how to give people the benefit of the doubt.  She introduced me to a world that I did not even consider exploring.  I did not understand then as I do now the value of “social probation” not as a method of punishment but an opportunity for reflection and focus.  Most of all, she taught me that laughter truly is the best medicine!  Boy do we laugh!!      

I also acknowledge the leadership of Mr. Nathaniel C. Banks.  Even with my hard head and big mouth, he gave me a chance. Mr. Banks saw my potential and offered me the chance to do something great.  He rewarded my hard work with an opportunity to meet John Carlos at the 2008 National Conference on Race and Ethnicity (NCORE) in Orlando, Florida.  My most valued possession today is my 68 Olympic “Fist of Freedom” poster autographed by Mr. Carlos. I flew to Orlando and back home holding the poster tightly in my hand for fear that it might be wrinkled or worse, lost along the way.   My immaturity did not allow me to see the valuable lessons that Mr. Banks tried to teach me at the time but his “silent gestures” have been well received. Now that I am ready to listen! I was a leader in training and Mr. Banks took on a tough student and created a better teacher!      

Contrary to popular belief, Smith and Carlos were not stripped of their medals and were later honored in 2005 by San Jose State University where a statue was erected in their likeness on the medal stand.  They say, “Do not award me for that which I am supposed to do” but I know from personal experience how good it feels to receive warranted recognition for the road less traveled.  The statue at San Jose State University ensures that, at the least, the students who attend SJSU know the story of those who came before them.    

I do not know if my destiny is to change the whole world but I know that I can engage audiences as a professor, mentor, family member, and friend.  I will forward Dr. Edward’s charge that “WE must teach our children to DREAM with their eyes open” (http://www.johncarlos68.com).  This statement drives me to continue raising my “Fist of Freedom”. 

Happy 45^th Anniversary and Thank you for the past and your PRESENT!

Dr. Edwards, Tommie Smith, and John Carlos!   

THE BLACK HEAD COACH: CAPITALISM OR RACIAL INEQUALITY?

There is an old adage that “Those who can’t play, coach”.  Apparently, Black coach’s adage should be “Those who can’t Head Coach, assistant coach” or better yet “Those who Head Coach, can’t miss the playoffs or bowl games too many times or they gonna get fired! 

10 years ago the “Rooney Rule” and the “NCAA Racial and Gender Report Card” was established to address the discriminatory practices against Black head coaches and sport administrators.  In 2002, Johnnie Cochrane and Associates challenged the NFL to establish a rule that required teams to interview Black head coaches when a position became available.  Named the Fritz Pollard Alliance, Cochrane’s team forced the NFL to establish a committee, chaired by Dan Rooney to evaluate the claims set forth against them.  The result of the committee’s investigation established the Rooney Rule.  Similarly on the collegiate level, sport activist Richard Lapchick’s The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport (TIDES) supported by the Black Coaches Association and the NCAA began to study and report on the racial and gender representation of black coaches and administrators which can be found on the NCAA website.

If you want to read more about these reports and their findings, please visit these websites:

 

The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports (TIDES)

http://www.tidesport.org/         

 

American Constitution Society for Law and Policy

http://www.acslaw.org/files/Proxmire%20Issue%20Brief.pdf

When someone tells me that a Black head coach firing is not about race, it is clear to me that many people are still blinded by the belief that capitalism and racial inequity are mutually exclusive.  This year alone we saw the firing of Head Coaches Mike Brown, Avery Johnson, Lovie Smith, and Romeo Crennel (Damn…Coach Crennel watched one of his players commit suicide and they still canned the brotha…sheesh!).  When the total of Black head coaches in the NFL and NBA combined is 17 (12 of which have been hired within the past 2 years), losing 4 Black head coaches is about nothing less than race!  It’s the reason why people are critical of Black films, when you have minimal representation it does not matter that other racial groups are being represented in the same way.  In cases where one race is overrepresented and another is underrepresented it matters how they perform, period!  So, if race was not a consideration in the firing of these men, I am arguing that it should have been and in fact was!          

The fact that we are celebrating the first time two Black head coaches winning BCS title games (Davis Shaw, Stanford and Charlie Strong, Louisville) tells me that we still have a long way to go.  Why are winning Black coaches a reflection of the need to hire more Black head coaches?  Statistically, Black head coaches are more successful than their white counterparts.  The fact is, when Black head coaches are given the opportunity to coach, they are successful, period!  Consider this reported by The 2012 Racial Report Card:

“Eight out of the last 12 Super Bowl teams have had either an African-American head coach or general manager: coaches Tony Dungy (Colts), Lovie Smith (Bears), Mike Tomlin (Steelers, twice) and Jim Caldwell (Colts) and GMs Jerry Reese (Giants, twice) and Rod Graves (Cardinals).” 

Full disclosure, while I was disappointed to see Lovie Smith fired by the Bears, I was glad to see Coach Frazier be successful in Minnesota.  Coach Frazier is one of the most genuine people I met while employed with the Illinois Football Program.  I mentored his son who demonstrated a level of respect, determination, and genuine kindness that was clearly inherited and guided from his father.  I want to see Coach Frazier do well, not only because he is a great Black coach but because he is a great Black man and role model!  He is my real life Tony Dungy!  But that’s another blog!        

The Black head coaching situation is a classic case of what I have termed Blaxspectation.  You all have heard me refer to this before, but those who are reading my blog for the first time, watch the video below as Chris Rock explains it best!

Chris Rock on his home in New Jersey

 

 

Simply put, the reason it is always about race when Black coaches are concerned is because it is!

Happy New Year to all my blog supporters!!

“Broke: Champagne Taste with Beer Money"

           

     The ESPN 30 for 30 Film entitled “Broke” aired tonight, ironically the same day TMZ reported that Michael Vick has spent $29 million dollars since filing for bankruptcy in 2008.  Most of Vick’s money is being spent paying back the debt he incurred from the dog fighting case, but his reality is like many of the athletes featured in the film.  My friends probably think I might consider utilizing this film in my class because 30 for 30 films are currently integrated into my course curriculum, but not this film.  This film will be more useful to me when I am facilitating player development with teams or individual athletes.  There are 30 for 30 films that are useful in my class because they address some of the broad topics we cover in sport sociology but others that are designed to speak to individuals.  This is that film.   

            As stated in the film, “that’s not going to be me” is the detrimental mentality that makes some players great athletes but leave most left by the wayside.  As a sport sociologist and aspiring player development specialist, I believe that my job is to offer players the alternative perspective to what “not going to be them” looks like.  What I know for sure, is that you are not going to convince an athlete that there is a possibility they might not make it to the league, or that they could be filing bankruptcy after their first year in their respective sport.  In a world that convinces these young men and women that they are superhuman, anyone who comes along and tells them any different will for sure be overshadowed.  So, I agree, “that’s not going to be you” and this is how we are going to make sure that it’s not.         

 

            The NFL and NBA both host rookie symposiums in hopes to prepare these players for “life” in the professional league.  I am sorry to say that these programs are ineffective mostly because it is simply too late.  Once they sign those contracts I believe invisible ear plugs form and all reason is blinded by the cars, big houses, and jewelry.  Half the money these young men are going to make has already been spent before they even make it to the rookie symposium.  I mean, think about how the average person manages their money.  I am sure that you have said at one point or another, “that paycheck is already spent”.  I think the reason players are not prepared for the professional life prior to rookie symposiums is the detrimental philosophy of athletic and academic institutions that we should not prepare for the unknown.  This means, we do not want to have a professional athletics major because it is not considered a career.  I hope films like this will start people considering the necessity for a professional athletics major.  Worst case scenario, if they do not achieve a professional athletic career at least they are well educated in the areas of business, financial management, sociology, and many other important areas of life.  I will save my campaign for a major in professional athletics for another blog.

          

      I continue to stand behind the belief that the same pitfalls that professional athletes face with being millionaires is simply amplified compared to many others who make the same mistakes.  I actually believe that it is possible for professional athletes to support their friends and families, make investments, and experience the finer things in life.  The way to make this happen is to first accept the fact that these things are going to occur.  How are you going to tell a professional athlete he cannot buy a house for his/her parents?  I know when I start making money it is going to be my first major purchase.  The goal is to sit down with them and budget their desired purchases with them.  The real problem is that these athletes are not a part of the financial planning process as it is taking place.  I believe this problem would improve significantly if a player is allowed to consider desired purchases with a more hands on approach as opposed to the hands off system or simply being told you cannot help your friends and family.     

 

            This film did a great job of covering the variety of ways that professional athletes are left broke after their athletic career.  I hear too often the blame being placed on friends and families who are taking advantage of these young men.  I hope that most viewers will not focus their attention on the portion that reinforces this narrative about “groupies”, baby mamas, and ex-wife “gold-diggers”.  For me, this film was about choices and as an undergraduate college mate of mine presented to me, sometimes “choiceless choices”.  At the end of the day, we cannot just watch these films and hold them totally responsible or blame the people they associate with.  Well we could, but I chose to consider ways that we can help these young men be productive members of society.  Not waiting until it’s too late before we begin to educate them about the wonderful and detrimental experiences that playing in the professional league can bring should be our goal.  Starting with college athletes would be a good change but teaching your sons and daughters would yield greater results.             

            Finally, I want to draw your attention to the fact that this film was completely focused on male athletes.  While there are several female professional athletes who face financial challenges, we have to recognize their story is a completely separate conversation.  The income disparities that exist in professional sports are consistent with those in the broader society.  A conversation about women and “Broke” would probably look like a very different film.