Richard Sherman
An interesting thing happened the last few days: A football player was attacked by the same, predictable racism that athletes usually have to endure when they speak out…and he won.
Well, he won the game. His team, the Seattle Seahawks, are going to the Super Bowl and (despite a $7,875 fine from the National Football League) an epic post-game rant might net him millions in endorsements.
Richard Sherman’s words sent football fans running to social media to voice their approval and disapproval. The disapproval, not surprisingly, was soaked in racism. Deadspin (1/19/14), a sports-oriented blog, chronicled some of the Net’s absolute worst, which included “Guys a fricken jungle monkey” and “Richard Sherman’s an ignorant ape,” followed by long line of comments featuring the subtlety of the N-word.
But the key word in the Sherman brouhaha was “thug,” and for many it was code for the what some of those N-word dropping Sherman-haters were using. Deadspin (1/21/14) reported that it was used 625 times on the day after the game.
If you follow sports, then there’s nothing new about sports fans embracing the classic Monday Morning Quarterback role of criticizing coaches for play calls and players for mistakes made during the game. But acting brash and ranting after a game seems to only be particularly offensive when black athletes do it. Jim Souhan of the Minneapolis Star Tribune (1/26/14) noted that Peyton Manning, the Denver Broncos quarterback whom Sherman will defend against during next weekend’s Super Bowl, had perhaps a more selfish post-game rant a few years back (ABC Sports, 2/2/03) with none of the outrage. Manning is a white future hall-of-famer and a player whom the League promotes as one of its most prominent and recognizable faces.
Again, when players are at the mercy of the fans, it usually doesn’t bode well for the player. Former Pittsburgh Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall drew the ire of America when he criticized reactions to the death of Osama Bin Laden (Chicago Tribune, 5/3/11). Mendenhall also backed up fellow running back Adrian Peterson of the Vikings when Peterson said in an interview that the NFL was like “modern day slavery” (USA Today, 3/15/11). More recently, New York Giants wide receiver Victor Cruz was forced to apologize for angry tweets made after the acquittal of George Zimmerman.
The backlash for those players, each of whom is African-American, was immediate and perhaps to be expected. Those were, at the very least, controversial subjects already. But what was controversial about Sherman saying he’s the best at what he does? Most football analysts say he probably is.
Eventually media figured that out, too. They also realized that Sherman is a pretty smart and interesting guy (New York Times, 1/25/14). They absolved him from being a “thug” (CBS Sports, 1/24/14). Even Fox‘s Greta Van Sustren backtracked.
After a few days, it became clear that the reactions to Sherman’s rants, especially the racist ones, were becoming the story. Sherman, to his credit, never really backed down. As these things go, athletes who don’t go on apology tours for getting mouthy usually get all sorts of terrible labels and character attacks thrown their way for the rest of their careers (read: Terrell Owens). Sherman apologized for not putting his team first, but he didn’t back down from the subtle racism embedded in much of the criticism coming his way. And as the controversy was swirling, Sherman said that “thug” “seems like an accepted way of calling someone the N-word now.”
This is when things took a different turn than they usually do for athletes. While the social media battles raged online, some conventional sports media agreed with Sherman. They even had some semblance of race analysis that was somewhat honest. The Boston Globe agreed with Sherman and pointed to the grotesque amount of obviously racist Internet commentary. Even ESPN Radio‘s Mike and Mike Show acknowledged that race was fueling much of the reaction.
While it was still tough to stomach media’s fascination with Sherman’s academic credentials and the novelty of a black athlete that could brag on a football field and also be articulate and well-spoken, it seemed as though there was a change in some conventional media. If sports talk radio, not usually known for its race-conscious content or callers, was able to admit racism was at the core of the Sherman controversy, then perhaps black athletes might actually be able to speak without having to face an onslaught of racist remarks.
Professional sports in America today has so thoroughly been scrubbed of political thought that for the Sherman incident to raise question of racism is somewhat remarkable. While we may not be seeing a resurgence of race and politics in sports (no one may pick up the mantle of Muhammad Ali), it’s becoming clear that social media is making some stories harder for traditional media to ignore. Not only are athletes now capable of causing a firestorm via a hasty tweet–now sports fans are finding that their social media reactions creep into the story as well.
What’s missing from this is any sense that Sherman’s comments are anathema to any sense of sportspersonship, however much of a hypocritical facade that may be in the sports world.
Just as I can criticize Ali’s arrogance while still abhoring the racism that infused much of the condemnation of it, and just as I realize that it really wasn’t about that character flaw, but about the fact that a black person evinced it, and even more about his righteous stand against that racism
So I can find Sherman’s, and Manning’s, and every other athlete’s who feels compelled to behave like an ass (unlike the Jerry Rices and Tim Duncans of sportsdom) idiocies worthy of rebuke.
While the virulent prejudice that suffuses the castigation of Sherman is the more important story here
Let’s not lose sight of the culture of self centered machismo of which his comments are emblematic.
Or the corporations which seek to profit off the promotion of that culture by associating themselves with him.
Saying the guy acted like a jerk and a fool is not racist. There needs to be room for that opinion.
I agree with Doug and John. Right after you barely win a game isn’t a good time to be going, “We rule, you suck!”
Using the race card is just an excuse. Bill Laimbeer, Claude Lemeiux, and Bill Romanowski were also considered thugs in their day. Maybe the thug label is inconsistent and unfair but I can find as many black athletes who were beloved who got away with just as thuggish behavior as their hated counter parts.
The reason why Richard Sherman is disliked is not because he is black or has dreadlocks but he went over the line. Recall the movie North Dallas 40. The former star football player is ostracized by murders and robbers because cheating in football is something even worse.
Richard Sherman broke one of the most basic rules of sports. You can talk down a person before a game, during a game, and long after you have won a game. But you don’t step on their face and rub it in in their greatest moment of hurt. The realization that their dream is over is a deeply personal moment of grieving that should be left to the individual to decide how to handle. To interfere in that moment of intense loss and grief is the nastiest worse thing one can do to another on the playing field. Richard Sherman attempts to equate a hockey fight to his antics? Not even close.
In the old days of tribal warfare the winners often taunted the losers as they ran away from the battlefield routed. You taunted your defeated opponent because if you could no longer kill them it was the worse thing you could do to them. Sports is not life or death. Thus in my opinion the reason why we treat our opponent with respect. Our society sometimes allows poor sportsmanship. But only the crassest fans cheer an opponent who has entered that circle of grief. In my opinion Richard Sherman is no better then the Seattle fans who taunted Bowman when he was carted off the field after making an amazing play.
I agree with Steve on this one.
Actually what we witnessed was a classical example of class-stratified behavior. The rule-abiding middle class has been taught and nearly hardwired to show “grace in victory” and “dignity in defeat.”
I suspect many individuals raised in different economic environments find it a bit tough to display this aspirational form of noblesse oblige. They have been exposed to way too much posturing, abuse and arrogance in their socio-economic environments to display a false modesty, especially in their greatest moment of triumph.
They speak their feelings of pride in victory and superiority because such was modeled for them by either their rivals, “their betters” or both. And now, they feel, its their turn.
With our deeply hard-wired, middle class mores we may believe these guys may be “jerks,” but in their block and among their impressionable/formative-age peers, they have earned the right to scream “victory!” And “next!”
A brief tutorial in middle-class etiquette, expectations, mores and humbling life experiences will modify the man.
Get over it.
There are plenty of professional athletes who did not grow up in the middle class who have sportsmanship.
Thug is NOT the new N word.Anymore than my grandmothers hooligan was.Or calling hockey players hoods is.Or gangsters.Crowds out of hand are the mob(no correlation to Italians)The term red neck is thrown around a lot lately.No tie to racism though many would believ that.This is an off shoot of the rap generation.Look how many times M and m uses it in his songs.And a lot of football players use that music even in practices.It has become a part of the football culture.I recently read an article about Manning.It said “Manning is a thug in how he runs this team on and off the field.Not at all liked by many on the team.Some have even called him a bully”The word that should of been used by this Seattle player is bad spotsmanship.For the sake of getting his name on the page.And its all so phony.With free agency this clown could be playing for Denver next year.Money…thats all that matters.Want me to believe how earnest he is in his feelings?Say out loud that you will never play for Denver no matter how much green they offer.How about phony?Yeah that is a good word for him.
i’m sure the bill o’reilly v. heather mallick incident which gave birth to “the paris business review” is still available online. yet, to my knowledge, bill was never called a thug, nor was his educational background deemed worthy of discussion – in spite of his efforts to confuse the gullible by willful misrepresentation, while managing only to confuse everyone, including himself.
Bill has been called a thug.A bully. and everyting else and in between.
I’ll watch Spies of Mississippi, but as I hope you all do, I subscribe to The Southern Poverty Law Center newsletter. There is chilling news from a white supremacist town in North Dakota. But it’s a question of Mason Dixon for most of the media. We’ve gone beyond that, I’d hope.