Jonathan Howe, Temple University

In an effort to avoid stereotypes about Black male athletes, such as being labeled a “dumb jock,” Spike, a college football player, says he wore athletic clothes to class as little as possible.

“I mean, granted, I’m a 6-foot-4, 240-pound Black kid on campus, so it’s kind of hard to get away from that,” he said. “But I didn’t want any, you know, significant confirmation that I was an athlete. So, I just wore like a collared shirt, jeans and nice shoes every day.”

Trey, a baseball player, refrained from speaking up or sharing personal information – even with his teammates.

He said he was often “outnumbered in opinion” as he was one of two Black athletes on a team of 40, which led to him “not even wanting to speak up” about issues that may cause conflict with others. “I’m a Black student-athlete and, like, that already makes me have to carry myself a different way,” he said.

I’m a professor of sport management who researches the experiences of Black male college athletes. During the 2020-21 academic year, I interviewed 16 Black male college athletes at Division I colleges across the U.S. I wanted to know how they changed their behavior to navigate stereotypes about them.

I also asked participants, who competed in numerous sports – including football, baseball, cheer, diving, and track and field – to record audio diaries about the topic as part of the study.

I found that these college athletes, at times, went out of their way to change how they present themselves to others in order to avoid anti-Black racism and “dumb jock” stereotypes on campus. At other times, they pushed back against these stereotypes as a form of resistance.

Advertisement

‘I don’t bring up that I am a student-athlete’

Self-presentation refers to how someone acts or behaves during social interactions in order to influence how others perceive them. For example, a person may change how they speak, or their word choices, depending on who is around them.

The Black male college athletes in my study altered their presentation in a number of ways, including their dress or clothing and their speech. They also limited how much information they shared, and at times they hid details about their identity.

Marc, another football player, reflected on how being a Black male college athlete affected how he spoke – both the frequency and delivery – during class. “You have to be, like, more engaged,” he said. “You got to assert yourself more and you got to be more analytic about things.”

These adjustments were not restricted to academic environments. Marc was also careful about what information he shared in various athletic settings, too. “You do not really talk about personal stuff or anything like that,” he said.

Participants did not want their vulnerabilities used against them by their coaches or academic advisers.

Another strategy Black male college athletes used was hiding details about their identity – most often their athletic identity. Tyler, a track athlete, noted, “I try to make sure I don’t bring up that I am a student-athlete. I’m just trying to build my identity away from the sport.”

Black students, white campuses

Black men represent about 6% of total college students in U.S. four-year public institutions. Yet at Division I schools, the highest level of college athletic competition, they represent roughly 45% of football players and 51% of men’s basketball players.

Advertisement

Overall, Black men represent 12% of all Division I college athletes, excluding historically Black colleges and universities.

Meanwhile, at Power Five schools, where college football is a big-time business, as many as 1 in 6 Black male students are athletes, compared with 1 in 50 white students.

The vast majority of Division I schools are predominantly white institutions. Their athletic departments, including coaching staffs and administrators, are overwhelmingly white. For example, 78% of Division I athletic directors, 81% of head coaches, 68% of assistant coaches and 90% of head athletic trainers are white.

Similar to their athletic experience, these athletes do not see many other Black people across campus. Faculty on these campuses are 93% non-Black.

Racism and discrimination

It is well documented that Black male college athletes experience racism and discrimination while attending these predominantly white schools. This includes, for example, unequal enforcement of school policies and less access to educational opportunities.

They are discriminated against for being Black, for being Black males and for being athletes. Although touted for their physical prowess, Black male athletes are often labeled “dumb jocks” – their intelligence somehow discredited by their physical stature.

They are sometimes seen by students, faculty, staff and even fans as lacking the intellectual ability and motivation to succeed academically. They are characterized as illegitimate students who undermine the academic mission of the university and receive special treatment.

One study found that professors and academic counselors had lower academic expectations of Black college athletes compared with their white counterparts and that these athletes lacked autonomy in making academic decisions. Academic counselors often selected their courses, as opposed to the athletes registering themselves, which made the athletes feel powerless.

Advertisement

Another study found that faculty members were more likely to attribute Black male college athletes’ success to policies, such as affirmative action, instead of their merits, as they did for white athletes.

Resisting societal pressure

Not all the athletes altered their behavior or appearance to avoid anti-Black stereotypes. Keyvon, a football player, expressed that he presents himself authentically in predominantly white spaces as a way to “apply pressure” and force people to get comfortable with his Blackness.

Being a big-time college athlete indeed presents privileges, such as a pseudo-celebrity status, which at times can shield Black male college athletes from the impact of stereotypes and anti-Blackness. However, this is often the case solely when Black males perform well in their sport.

Sport performance should not determine how people treat Black male college athletes. Nor should Black male college athletes be placed in a box when it comes to how they present themselves, or risk anti-Black discrimination if they express themselves authentically. Ultimately, Black male college athletes will present themselves in a manner they deem appropriate – whether that aligns with what society expects or not.

Jonathan Howe, Assistant Professor of Sport Management, Temple University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisement

The Sports section of STM Daily News is your ultimate destination for all things sports, catering to everyday fans and dedicated enthusiasts alike. We cover a wide range of topics, from the thrill of amateur competitions to the excitement of semi-professional and professional leagues. Our content delves into physical and mental fitness, providing insights and tips that help individuals elevate their performance, whether on the field or in their personal wellness journeys. Stay informed and inspired as we explore the dynamic world of sports, celebrating both the passion of the players and the joy of the fans.

https://stmdailynews.com/sports

Please leave this field empty

Want more stories
“Your morning jolt of Inspiring & Interesting Stories!”

Sign up to receive awesome articles directly to your inbox.

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Please check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Joshua Lens, University of Iowa

Ever since the NCAA permitted college athletes to get paid by companies that use their names, images and likenesses, athletes have tested the limits of their increasing power.

One of the latest examples is Matthew Sluka, the starting quarterback for UNLV’s first three games of the 2024 season. After helping lead UNLV to three wins and potential contention for a prestigious College Football Playoff bid, Sluka announced on Sept. 24, 2024, he would sit out the rest of the season. His decision is the result of a dispute over compensation for use of his name, image and likeness, commonly referred to as NIL.

While the decision sent shock waves through college athletics, it also shines light on the changing balance of power that favors athletes over their coaches and universities.

As a former lawyer and college athletics compliance administrator – and also as a current university faculty member who has authored several law review articles on legal issues related to NIL – I suggest that Sluka’s situation exemplifies how collegiate athletes can use recent NCAA rules changes to improve their financial situation in the NIL era of college athletics.

Promises and denials

Sluka’s NIL agent claims a UNLV assistant coach failed to fulfill a promise he made Sluka during the recruiting process. That promise, according to Sluka’s agent, was that Sluka would receive US$100,000 of NIL compensation from an NIL collective should he attend UNLV. NIL collectives are generally formed to pool individuals’ and businesses’ funds to provide NIL opportunities and compensation for athletes.

Any such promise by a UNLV assistant coach would violate current NCAA policy. That’s because NCAA policy prohibits coaches from making NIL compensation offers contingent on whether a student enrolls. NIL collectives, on the other hand, may negotiate with athletes during the recruiting process as the result of a U.S. District Court ruling. That ruling prohibits the NCAA from penalizing collectives that negotiate NIL compensation with athletes during the recruiting process.

In a forthcoming BYU Law Review article, however, I suggest that a university whose star athlete transfers because another school’s collective recruited the athlete possesses a viable legal claim against the collective. That claim would be for inducing the athlete to transfer and violate their athletics scholarship agreement.

Advertisement

UNLV denies Sluka’s version of events. The university asserts that Sluka’s representative demanded more compensation from UNLV and its NIL collective in order for Sluka to continue playing. UNLV says it then refused, as such a “pay-for-play” agreement violates NCAA policy, which states that athletes may not accept NIL compensation based on “play” or on-field results.

Perceptions and ‘pay-to-play’

In Sluka’s case, further complicating things is the issue of whether Sluka’s NIL representative is properly registered with the state as an agent, as required by Nevada law. The state may be interested in pursuing enforcement, given the Nevada secretary of state’s relationship with UNLV’s NIL collective. More specifically, Nevada Secretary of State Francisco V. Aguilar co-founded Blueprint Sports, which operates the collective.

NCAA rules allow a football player to retain a year of eligibility if they play in four or fewer games in a season. Sluka exercised this ability by leaving his team. There is little that UNLV can do about it beyond taking away Sluka’s athletic scholarship for leaving the team.

Universities, however, must be increasingly sensitive to providing the necessary procedures, such as hearings and appeal opportunities, before disciplining athletes in the NIL era. As I explain in a forthcoming SMU Law Review article, a recent U.S. District Court decision involving then-University of Illinois men’s basketball player Terrence Shannon Jr. precluded the university from enforcing its suspension of Shannon without providing appropriate processes, lest he lose out on NIL compensation, which the court classified as a constitutionally protected interest.

A slew of lawsuits

Before it granted college athletes the ability to get paid through NIL deals, the NCAA faced long-standing criticism that its policies were unfair to athletes. The argument was that athletes benefited relatively little compared with the NCAA, conferences and universities, even though it was the athletes who provided the product. Along those lines, former college football stars Terrelle Pryor, Reggie Bush and Denard Robinson all recently filed separate lawsuits against the NCAA over denied NIL compensation opportunities.

Some college football luminaries are now questioning whether the pendulum of power has swung too far in favor of athletes in the NIL era. Examples include former Alabama head coach Nick Saban and former Ohio State quarterback and longtime ESPN commentator Kirk Herbstreit. Saban has openly wondered whether the current college football model is sustainable. Herbstreit has lamented “the players having all the control” without any accountability to their coaches and universities.

High-profile college football players, such as quarterbacks Kelly Bryant and D’Eriq King and receiver Gary Bryant Jr., previously exploited NCAA rules permitting them to play in four games and then transfer to another university without sacrificing a season of competition eligibility.

At least publicly, their decisions were due to on-field considerations such as playing time. Sluka’s decision to forgo playing the rest of the season and transfer was different. It is the first time – but likely not the last – a college athlete has publicly based their decision to leave their team mid-season on an NIL dispute.

Advertisement

Sluka’s departure from UNLV makes clear that collegiate athletes’ power to move freely between universities in pursuit of their best financial situation has greatly increased. Meanwhile, their coaches’ and universities’ power to keep them on the team and participating has significantly decreased.

Joshua Lens, Associate Professor of Instruction of Sport & Recreation Management, University of Iowa

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Sports section of STM Daily News is your ultimate destination for all things sports, catering to everyday fans and dedicated enthusiasts alike. We cover a wide range of topics, from the thrill of amateur competitions to the excitement of semi-professional and professional leagues. Our content delves into physical and mental fitness, providing insights and tips that help individuals elevate their performance, whether on the field or in their personal wellness journeys. Stay informed and inspired as we explore the dynamic world of sports, celebrating both the passion of the players and the joy of the fans.

https://stmdailynews.com/sports

Advertisement

Molly Yanity, University of Rhode Island

The “Caitlin Clark effect,” or the impact on women’s basketball from a ponytailed rookie phenomenon from America’s heartland, is real: The 2024 WNBA season shattered viewership, attendance and merchandise sales records.

Clark, however, didn’t get a chance to compete for a league title.

The Connecticut Sun eliminated Clark’s team, the Indiana Fever, in the first round of the playoffs with a two-game sweep, ending her record rookie-of-the-year campaign.

And it may be just the latest chapter in a complicated saga steeped in race.

During the first game of the series, the fingers of Sun guard DiJonai Carrington hit Clark in the eye as Carrington followed through on a block attempt of a Clark shot.

During the next day’s media availability, USA Today columnist Christine Brennan recorded and posted an exchange between herself and Carrington.

In the brief clip, the veteran sports writer asks Carrington, who is Black, if she purposely hit Clark in the eye during the previous night’s game. Though Carrington insisted she didn’t intentionally hit Clark, Brennan persisted, asking the guard if she and a teammate had laughed about the incident. The questions sparked social media outrage, statements from the players union and the league, media personalities weighing in and more.

Advertisement

Hit the pause button here.

As a longtime sports writer who has covered the WNBA – and as a journalism scholar who studies women’s sports and fandom – I’ll concede that Brennan’s line of questioning seems, on its face, like business as usual in sports journalism.

After all, haven’t most baseball fans seen a scribe ask a pitcher if he intentionally beaned a batter?

But Brennan’s questions were not asked in a vacuum. The emergence of a young, white superstar from the heartland has caused many new WNBA fans to pick sides that fall along racial lines. Brennan’s critics claim she was pushing a line of questioning that has dogged Black athletes for decades: that they are aggressive and undisciplined.

Because of that, her defense of her questions – and her unwillingness to acknowledge the complexities – has left this professor disappointed in one of her journalistic heroes.

Brennan and much of the mainstream sports media, particularly those who cover professional women’s basketball, still seem to have a racial blind spot.

The emergence of a Black, queer league

When the WNBA launched in 1997 in the wake of the success of the 1996 Olympic gold-medal-winning U.S. women’s basketball team, it did so under the watch of the NBA.

Advertisement

The NBA set out to market its new product, in part, to a white, heterosexual fan base.

The plan didn’t take hold.

While the league experienced fits and starts in attendance and TV ratings over its lifetime, the demographic makeup of its players is undeniable: The WNBA is, by and large, a Black, queer league.

In 2020, the Women’s National Basketball Players Association reported that 83% of its members were people of color, with 67% self-reporting as “Black/African-American.” While gender and sexual identity hasn’t been officially reported, a “substantial proportion,” the WNBPA reported, identify as LBGTQ+.

In 2020, the league’s diversity was celebrated as players competed in a “bubble” in Bradenton, Florida, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They protested racial injustice, helped unseat a U.S. senator who also owned Atlanta’s WNBA franchise, and urged voters to oust former President Donald Trump from the White House.

Racial tensions bubble to the surface

In the middle of it all, the WNBA has more eyeballs on it than ever before. And, without mincing words, the fan base has “gotten whiter” since Clark’s debut this past summer, as The Wall Street Journal pointed out in July. Those white viewers of college women’s basketball have emphatically turned their attention to the pro game, in large part due to Clark’s popularity at the University of Iowa.

Money is also pouring into the league through a lucrative media rights deal and new sponsorship partners.

Advertisement

While the rising tide following Clark’s transition to the WNBA is certainly lifting all boats, it is also bringing detritus to the surface in the form of racist jeers from the stands and on social media.

After the Sun dispatched the Fever, All-WNBA forward Alyssa Thomas, who seldom speaks beyond soundbites, said in a postgame news conference: “I think in my 11-year career I’ve never experienced the racial comments from the Indiana Fever fan base. … I’ve never been called the things that I’ve been called on social media, and there’s no place for it.”

Echoes of Bird and Magic

In “Manufacturing Consent,” a seminal work about the U.S. news business, Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky argued that media in capitalist environments do not exist to impartially report the news, but to reinforce dominant narratives of the time, even if they are false. Most journalists, they theorized, work to support the status quo.

In sports, you sometimes see that come to light through what media scholars call “the stereotypical narrative” – a style of reporting and writing that relies on old tropes.

Scholars who study sports media have found that reporters routinely fall back on racial stereotypes. For example, coverage of Black quarterbacks in the NFL as less intelligent and more innately gifted would go on to hinder the progress of Black quarterbacks.

In Brennan’s coverage of the Carrington-Clark incident, there appear to be echoes of the way the media covered Los Angeles Lakers point guard Magic Johnson and Boston Celtics forward Larry Bird in the 1980s.

The battles between two of the sport’s greatest players – one Black, the other white – was a windfall for the NBA, lifting the league into financial sustainability.

But to many reporters who leaned on the dominant narrative of the time, the two stars also served as stand-ins for the racial tensions of the post-civil rights era. During the 1980s, Bird and Magic didn’t simply hoop; they were the “embodiments of their races and living symbols of how blacks and whites lived in America,” as scholars Patrick Ferrucci and Earnest Perry wrote.

Advertisement

The media gatekeepers of the Magic-Bird era often relied on racial stereotypes that ultimately distorted both athletes.

For example, early in their careers, Bird and Johnson received different journalistic treatment. In Ferrucci and Perry’s article, they explain how coverage of Bird “fit the dominant narrative of the time perfectly … exhibiting a hardworking and intelligent game that succeeded despite a lack of athletic prowess.” When the “flashy” Lakers and Johnson won, they wrote, it was because of “superior skill.”

When they lost to Bird’s Celtics, they were “outworked.”

Framing matters

Let’s go back to Brennan.

Few have done more for young women in the sports media industry than Brennan. In time, energy and money, she has mentored and supported young women trying to break into the field. She has used her platform to expand the coverage of women’s sports.

Brennan defended herself in a lengthy interview on the podcast “Good Game with Sarah Spain”:

“I think [critics are] missing the fact of what I’m trying to do, what I am doing, what I understand clearly as a journalist, asking questions and putting things out there so that athletes can then have an opportunity to answer issues that are being discussed or out there.”

I don’t think Brennan asking Carrington about the foul was problematic. Persisting with the narrative was.

Advertisement

Leaning into racial stereotypes is not simply about the language used anymore. Brennan’s video of her persistent line of questioning pitted Carrington against Clark. It could be argued that it used the stereotype of the overly physical, aggressive Black athlete, as well.

At best, Brennan has a blind spot to the strain racism is putting on Black athletes today – particularly in the WNBA. At worst, she is digging in on that tired trope.

A blind spot can be addressed and seen. An unacknowledged racist narrative, however, will persist.

Molly Yanity, Professor and Director of Sports media and Communication, University of Rhode Island

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.

https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge

Advertisement