The Ugliness of Fans

In tandem with my most recent post about the fans of sports dictating the magnitude of future athletes coming out as gay, I anticipate some questions arising. In my last post, I stated how I believe fans can sway an athletes decision to declare sexual orientation if negative. Where I believe some might disagree with me, is the common "they would never do that." In fact, some fans do. Which is why there is reason to worry.

On the account of race, some fans around the world have been outspokenly racist. The worst part, is that it is during the games in which they are racist. During the game is when a player should be worrying about the game itself and not feel threatened due to the color of his skin, or in this more recent case, his sexual orientation. Nevertheless, fans continue to defy acceptance, instead comparing black players to monkeys.

This was a banner displayed at a Russian soccer game in response to the acquisition of a black player. Clearly displayed in the middle of the banner is a banana, relating the newly acquired black player to a monkey. 

Even in this image, a fan is striking a monkey pose, directed at the black player in the image. These hate crimes cannot keep occurring. Not only does it make black players feel, without a question of a doubt, unsafe, but it deters players from playing in those leagues all together due to fear. 

This is the fear that may decide whether or not many athletes declare as gay in major professional American sports. Given, these images were from overseas. Hopefully Americans are more tolerant when an active major professional athlete comes into their stadium. If they are treated like any other athlete should be while playing the game, the successes could be outstanding. If not though, it would be a true shame and a significant blemish on the tolerance and acceptance of America. 

Are American fans different from those overseas? What do you think will happen when a rostered player comes out as gay and plays in front of opposing fans?

Lying in the Hands of the Fans

An NBA player announced he was gay today. In fact, this marks the first time that an active American major professional sports figure has announced his affinity for the same sex. Jason Collins, an NBA veteran Center declared it today. For more on his decision click here. 

Jason Collins

His decision is truly monumental. Not only will it provide comfort for other athletes to come out, but also many other people around the country. Because professional athletes have such a widespread influence on fans, seeing that an idolized figure, especially in something so masculine as sports, can come out and still lead a successful, professional career, will undoubtedly provide comfort. 

In fact, there is a current NFL player considering coming out, but, according to CBS reporter Mike Freeman, is "holding back out of fear of homophobic fan reaction." This fear is a very valid concern. Jason Collins is a free agent right now, meaning he isn't on an NBA roster at the moment, but is still considered an active player. Because he doesn't play for a team, he won't need to endure possible denigratory insults hurled his way. This is a whole different story for the NFL player. The NFL is currently rostered and would need to play amongst fans (especially when playing at another teams stadium with their fans) who may not be in approval of such a decision. Fan reaction may in fact decide the breadth of athletes coming out. If the unknown NFL player were to come out and receive intense hostility over his sexual orientation, then other players would, with reason, hesitate to come out. If greeted with acceptance, the perennial flood gates would certainly open. 

I hope for the sake of hesitant athletes and fans around the country, questioning whether to come out as gay, that fans accept outspoken athletes identified as gay. For that reception may have more significance than imaginable. 

What do you think the fans reaction to an active, gay athlete would be? What would subsequently occur in either case? Let me know with your comments!

The College Student: A Lopsided Treatment

In continuation of my last post over the Auburn football team getting illegal grade changes to comply with NCAA regulations of maintaining a 2.3 Grade Point Average to be eligible to compete in college football games, I couldn't help but think about the students of universities. I'm talking about the students, not the student-athletes. In my opinion, one of the most glaring reasons to not pay student-athletes for playing, are the students of various universities.

Most athletes of universities receive some form of scholarship to play sports at the university they attend. Even if they don't, they still have incredible benefits normal students could only dream about. As Paul Daugherty, a former professor at the University of Cincinnati noted in one of his courses he taught, "[his students] were not people who asked to be paid to attend college. These were folks who paid for the privilege" (Daugherty). 

Cheesman-Day & Newberger Study

Daugherty mentions some really important points in this passage. The most glaring in my opinion though, is stating how college is a "privilege". College is a privilege. I'm sure tons of people across the country would love to attend college, but simply cannot afford it. I will be able to go to college, which I feel is a huge privilege. In fact,  I could never imagine demanding money to receive a college education in the process. Receiving a free or discounted education is more than enough reciprocity for playing a sport. A sport in which the athlete most likely loves to do. 

To further bolster the point about a college education being a fine mode of reciprocity, a Cheesman-Day & Newberger study showed that individuals who received a degree from a university averaged over $1 million more over their lifetimes versus those who didn't. That's more than enough in my opinion. And to receive such an opportunity at a discounted price (what most athletes get) is incredible. Daugherty also stated that a lot of students leave school with a "five-figure yoke around [their] necks" (Daugherty). 

The students of universities are paying top-dollar for the privilege of attending a university. In hopes, they can receive a degree and better themselves for their lives ahead. College athletes are getting the same education, the majority of which are receiving it at a discounted price, and are now asking to be paid on top of such a privilege. Through the research I have conducted, I render it ridiculous. 

What do you think about this? Do you think a college education is an effective enough mode of reciprocity for student-athletes? Please let me know your thoughts!

Do Academics Matter?

Almost directly on cue with my research over collegiate athletes getting paid, the Auburn football program has recently come under fire about violating NCAA policies. The most glaring violation was changing grades of players to maintain their eligibility. For a more detailed report on the allegations, follow this link. Once hearing this, I immediately related it to the research I have been conducting for my junior theme.

The term "student-athlete" is heard everywhere, but it's starting to seem to me that coaches, fans and universities alike care more about the "athlete" part of that term a whole lot more. Bruce K. Johnson, an economics of sports professor wisely stated, "If a player reads like a fifth-grader but leads his team to the Rose Bowl, neither coaches nor fans will object. But at most athletic-powerhouses, if a coach bragged that his losing squad enjoyed a 100% graduation rate, fans would call for -- and likely get -- his head" (Johnson). 

NCAA Ad-Campaign for a 2.3 GPA

I found this to be right on par with Auburn's ideals. Fans truly would care if Auburn "enjoyed a 100% graduation rate". They only care about winning championships. In order to win championships, the Auburn players needed to be eligible to compete, and NCAA rules call for a 2.3 Grade Point Average to be eligible to participate in athletics. Based on the Auburn allegations, grades were altered to comply with such NCAA requirements. 

Such actions really made me think about the ideals of large American universities such as Auburn. Does academic integrity really matter to them? Or is it all about pleasing their fans, illegally putting an ineligible team on the football field?

Do you think athletic-powerhouse universities really care about academic integrity if it's at the cost of the team they put on the field? Please share your thoughts!

A Popular Distraction

Over the next two days, the NCAA March Madness College Basketball tournament will begin with it's opening round games. Historically, these games are the most riveting, as the most games are played in the shortest amount of time. In addition, the sheer number of upsets (lower seed beating a higher seed) increases as well, keeping viewers on the edge of their seat.

Even if someone isn't particularly a fan of the 68 teams in the tournament, there is a whole other side to the March Madness season-ending tournament that guarantees excitement: betting. And betting lots for that matter. RJ Bell of Pregame.com, March Madness betting in 2012 totaled 12 billion dollars, versus 10 billion dollars for the next biggest event, say, the Super Bowl! For more on the topic, check out this Forbes article.

"Boss Button" Option

What shocked me the most, is that sports have enveloped the workplace. It was estimated by a Challenger, Gray & Christmas of Chicago survey that decreased productivity in the workplace during these next two days will result in at least $134 million dollars lost of work not performed. In tandem, an estimated 3 million workers average 1-3 hours of watching the games instead of working. CBS Sports offers free viewing of the games on their website, which includes a "boss button" to cover up the games  with a fake email account if one's boss walks by while they are watching the games on the job.

These numbers and are staggering. It's ridiculous to know that Americans value sports enough to let it disrupt their professions. It truly shows how deeply rooted sports are in the American culture. Costing various companies a total of over a hundred million dollars just to watch college basketball games. I'm not saying I don't enjoy watching them, but know the time and place to do so.

A Politically Perfect Bracket

As is now tradition with President Obama, he fills out a bracket before each March Madness tournament begins. When watching this years selection of his, I couldn't help but wonder if there were underlying politics within his picks.

64 teams make the tournament and are placed in 4 different regions, where they are given seedings of 1-16. So, there are 4 one seeds (best overall) through 4 sixteen seeds.

When filling out a bracket, one has to determine who they think will win each matchup of the NCAA March Madness tournament, striving for perfection. Within every bracket, there are certain "upsets" which may take place, which the creator has to consider picking. "Upsets" are when a lower seeded team beats a higher seeded team in which they are playing against. Upsets are risky, but can yield high rewards if correct, as not many people choose them.

For the President of the United States, choosing an upset may be considered radical (due to the scarcity of being chosen), though free-thinking, which is why he must find a balance between the two when making his bracket.

In other words, I feel that President Obama may be voicing his ideals through his bracket. He chooses a few "upsets" to show his free-thinking and innovativeness, while sticking with the best overall teams in tandem. This balance, in my opinion, actually makes a lot of sense for his political sake. Showing both sides of his mindset, all within a seemingly harmless bracket.

A Dangerous Rule Change?

As discussions continue about possible NFL rule changes, one (commissioner proposed) rule change may be jeopardizing players further.

The proposed rule change would penalize running backs for lowering their heads to initiate contact with an oncoming defender. Although for the safety of defenders, the proposed change may actually put running backs in further danger. As seen with the image on the right, the running back is lowering his head to initiate contact with the defender, this results in an imminent head to head collision, which can injure the defender, as the running back normally has built up more speed than the defender on the run. 

If this were to be made illegal though, defenders would still be able to lower their shoulders into a hit, but the running back would now have his head up, meaning a potentially malicious hit on the running back. These occurrences would undoubtedly lead to more brain injuries for running backs, which is certainly not the intentions of the NFL. 

Outcry from running backs have been immediate. Matt Forte, the Chicago Bears running back, called the proposed rule change "absurd". 

Changes surely need to be made to improve the safety of the NFL, but not ones that could inadvertently injure players further.

What do you think about this proposed rule change? Should it pass in your mind?

More Than a Game

DiPietro looking at taunting fans

Rick DiPietro, a failed goaltender for the New York Islanders NHL hockey team, revealed something truly eye-opening for fans across the country of all sports.

In 2006, the Islanders signed DiPietro to a previously unseen 15-year, 67.5 million dollar contract. It turned out to be a complete mistake. Less than half-way through the deal (7 years to be exact) DiPietro's struggles compiled so incredibly that the team was better-off without him manning their nets. A colossal financial mistake, but one that had to be done for the sake of the team.

How bad was he? He allowed an average of 4.10 goals per game. To put that into perspective, the average goals allowed per game is 2.67 goals per game. In other words, he played horribly.

What was the most eye-opening in my opinion though, was the fact that DiPietro admitted to struggling with depression while on the Islanders. Once hearing this, I really started to put sports into perspective. Sure, these athletes are paid unearthly amounts of money to play games, but they are human beings at the end of the day. Although they may show a strong outer shell during games, they have emotions just like you and I have, which must be respected regardless of their play.

Americans in general I feel struggle with grasping the fact that athletes are simply humans and must be respected. I for one get caught up in the moment during sports games and jeer my hometown athletes when they struggle, but never would have thought that it could have such profound effects on them. Depression is serious, as I would never have thought that playing a sport one loves could result in a mental disorder. Americans need to change this mentality to allow the widespread enjoyment for all athletes. The last thing they need is to worry about disorders forced upon by fans versus that of other athletes within their respective games.

Do you find this surprising? Have you ever possibly contributed to this problem? Let me know your thoughts!

Just a Color?

In tandem with the ongoing in class talks about the biased incarcerations of blacks versus whites, the simple "color" problem is really persisting. 

From a New York Times article surprisingly about the drop in percentages of blacks versus whites incarceration, a glaring number still stood out to me. "Over all, blacks currently make up about 38 percent of inmates in state and federal prisons; whites account for about 34 percent."

Keep those numbers in mind:

38% Black
34% White

Based on the United States Census, the racial percentages are as follows:

13.1% Black
78.1% White

Why the disparity in percentages?

I feel that a sort of hard-wiring has overtaken American ideals over the years. Aside from the most affluent black people in the USA such as Oprah, Obama, athletes and countless others, it seems that a common misconception of seeing a group of black men on the street versus white men on the street is made constantly. A group of black men could symbolize a gang meeting, which leads to the stops and incarcerations in conjunction. A group of white men wouldn't make a police officer think twice.

Whether or not that can or will change is anyone's guess, but I would love to hear your thoughts about why you think the numbers of incarceration vs. population are such opposites. Do you think the color of one's skin correlates to assumptions and incarcerations?

How Good Do We Have it?

Orma Men on Village Patrol

         Currently in Kenya, upcoming elections have stirred incredible violence between neighboring clans. The Orma and Pokomo ethnic groups are resorting to physical violence in support of their political leaders. As this New York Times article states, "ethnically based militias are mobilized, and neighbors start killing neighbors." Neighbors are killing each other. Under no circumstances could I ever visualize my neighbors killing each other. Regardless of ethnicity or political preferences, such actions shouldn't ever occur.

         Once seeing these atrocities in Kenya, it really opened my eyes to how wonderful elections are in the United States. Never would I think that widespread death would ever occur as a result of an American election. Sure, with opinion clashes comes disagreement and insults, but not to the magnitude like what's transpiring in Kenya currently.

Voters Voting

         I know that my neighbors have different political affiliation than my family, but something that petty I feel would never spark violence between us. For that reason, I feel truly proud to live in this current peaceful Democracy. Even if one's preferred candidate doesn't win the election within the United States, violence is really never an option, which is beautiful in comparison to Kenya. 

As seen in the picture at left, these Americans are most likely voting for different candidates, but violence isn't in the cards like it will be for Kenyans. It's a beautiful thing.