For Once, "Black Sunday" is a Good Thing: The Success & Continuing Problems of Black Coaches in the NFL

Much of the racial discussion this week has focused on the historical development of a black head coach taking his team to the Super Bowl. Not only is this a first, but both of the teams’ coaches this year are black (Indianapolis’s Tony Dungy and Chicago’s Lovie Smith). It’s not surprising that the media has picked up on this, and the story is getting an appropriate amount of attention. What is not happening, however, is a sophisticated discussion about why a league that has had a disproportionate amount of African American players and (recently) assistant coaches has not had more black head coaches.

In the Chicago Tribune, columnist Rick Morrissey shrugs off the issue and explains his disinterest by boasting about how many black head coaches/managers Chicago teams have hired. He reduces the race issue to individual-level bigotry: “There are too many people around with ugly hearts. But when I look at Smith, I see a coach. And I get the distinct feeling from listening to him that he would like to be viewed that way too. Not as a black coach. As a coach.” We’re sure he would, but we are also sure that both Smith and Dungy are well aware that they are NOT simply viewed that way. Morrissey, like most Americans, claims to be color blind. Impossible. He may not make conscious negative judgments based on his awareness of people’s color, but he cannot and does not fail to notice that these men are black simply because he’s used to having black coaches lead his favorite teams.

To be sure, having race not serve as a barrier to the top coaching spot is a goal for many. John Wooten of the Fritz Pollard Alliance is quoted in an MSNBC story as follows: “After Doug Williams won and Steve McNair and Donovan McNabb played in Super Bowls, Wooten said, ‘We don't talk about it anymore. That's what we want to see happen throughout.’" Part of the reason that’s becoming a reality is the so-called “Rooney Rule,” which requires that National Football League teams interview at least one minority candidate when they have a head coach opening. The rule is named after Pittsburgh Steelers owner and chairman Dan Rooney, whose team just hired only its third coach since the 1960s – Mike Tomlin – who is black.

The plan has had clear results. According to USA Today: “The NFL had a record seven African-American head coaches in 2006 and a record 197 coaches, including seven assistant head coaches. The numbers reflect much progress with diversity in a league where roughly two-thirds of the players are minorities. In 1980, there were 14 African-American assistants in the entire league; Art Shell didn't become the first African-American coach with the Los Angeles Raiders until 1989.”

Why is such an affirmative action plan needed in the NFL, a league where seventy percent of its players are black? After all, the AP reports that the National Basketball Association has much closer proportionality of black players to coaches: [The NBA] currently has 11 black coaches for 30 teams, and there have been 56 in its history. It’s not because of overt bigotry in football. NFL owners are business-oriented people who want to win. They will hire the best coach they can fine, irrespective of race. But Rooney understood what most of the media is ignoring during this historic time: cultural racism drives a wedge between qualified black coaches and owners in an implicit and deeply troubling way. It’s the same barrier that was faced by black quarterbacks for many years. Specifically, there is a deeply rooted cultural presupposition that African Americans are less trustworthy and less intelligent than whites. That is why young black men who were star quarterbacks at their predominantly black high schools were often converted to other “skill” positions when they got to college. It’s what led Jimmy “the Greek” Snyder to absent-mindedly declare that black Americans had superior athletic ability because of purposeful breeding by slave masters. It is these stereotypes of strength over intellect that have led to countless injustices and presumptions in sports, business, academia and every other aspect of society. Black Enterprise magazine’s Alan Hughes sees this as an “evolution” of racial justice in professional sports, paralleling black players breaking color barriers in baseball (Jackie Robinson) and basketball (Early Lloyd).

This historic occurrence is an opportunity to discuss the reasons that it took so long for a black coach to make it to and (now inevitably) win the Super Bowl. Predictably and unfortunately, though, the mainstream media has missed yet another opportunity to raise consciousness, instead relegating the issue to individual-level attitudes and the ostensible end to another historic injustice perpetuated by thoughtless whites who didn’t know any better. Dungy and Smith clearly know that the issue is much deeper than this, but they clearly have their hands full with other matters. To expect them to carry the weight of meaningful addressing of racial injustice is to once again shift the burden of the struggle for racial equality to the folks who have been doing most of the work anyway. We congratulate both coaches on their achievements. Now it’s our turn to shoulder our share of the load.

News Mistake Likely Prophetic of an Obama Presidential Race

It’s been less than a week since Senator Barack Obama announced his possible plans to run for the presidency. And, it’s taken less than that for us to get the first taste of what Obama will likely face throughout a presidential campaign should he decide officially to run.

This segment of a newscast was first posted on YouTube, actually preceding by three days Obama’s January 16 announcement that he’d formed his presidential exploratory committee (though the expectation of his candidacy has of course been extremely high).

We fully expect that this was a mistake. Some director rolled the wrong footage during the sex offender story. Many, if not most, viewers would see it as such, but some, particularly if they are not paying close attention, are watching it without sound (such as in a restaurant), are just not too bright, might really think, if just for a few days, that Obama was accused of being a sex offender. Mistake notwithstanding, however, it seems perhaps the news anchor might at least venture a passing explanatory comment or disclaimer.

The insinuations and connotations of the Obama’s appearance here need no explanation. However, sadly enough, such images that intimate Obama’s black visage to negative racial stereotypes are likely to flourish throughout and Obama presidential run – purposefully – particularly by conservatives who are so adept at constructing such messages.

But we’ve come to expect as much. What will be more tragic is if the media, as it some times has (and, in did in this case albeit, perhaps, accidentally) aid and abet such race-baiting strategies by refusing to frame the image or message for what it is, or otherwise decline to critique such messages – leaving open the possibility that viewers might consciously or unconsciously associate the image of Obama with (in this case) the unsavory feelings we attach to sex offenders. Though the sex-offender angle is quite novel (and peculiar, since blacks have rarely been guilty of such crimes) in terms of visual associations, its linkage to criminality in general, and the depth of disdain associated with this form of criminality in particular make it especially revolting.

Recent polls have consistently shown that Americans say we are ready for a black president. But the political reality is that America would choose to do so over the vociferous objections of many in this country who do not embrace the ideal of full racial equality and who would see the election of Obama as upsetting the last remaining vestige of claims to white superiority.

Black People Love Us!

First, we need to apologize for not having an entry last week. Stephen had child care responsibilities due to the winter break, and Charlton came down with whatever nasty bug has been going around. We hope this week makes up for being absent last Friday.

We are intrigued by a satirical website we ran across a few weeks back. It’s called “Black People Love Us,” and it’s maintained and about a (presumably) fictitious young white couple, Sally and Johnny. The site contains narratives about how happy these two are that black people like them since “lots of Black people don’t like lots of White people.” The front page and the “testimonials” page contain pictures of black folks beside quotes about how much (and for what reasons) they love Sally and Johnny. Answers range from “Johnny doesn’t smell like a wet dog when he gets rained on” to “Sally and I go out to the clubs a lot and she always says she wishes she had my natural rhythm.” The “about us” page lists all of their stereotypically white hobbies (golf, horseback riding, gardening,” while the “hanging out” and “one love” pages contain pictures of black folks partying it up with our hosts. The “stuff our friends care about” page actually has useful links to legitimate (though not all sites we’d include) pages of interest to students of black history and culture.

The most interesting part of the site, though, is the “your letters” page. Here we find comments from folks who have visited the site. These posts are ripe for critical analysis. Here’s just an example of some of these comments. First, there are a number of comments that reflect that some folks aren’t getting the satire. In fact, some of the posts are quite hostile at the perceived racial insensitivity:

“This has to be a joke. You guys are the biggest bunch of fuckin' idiots I've ever seen. White people like you are the worst kind. You know nothing about the history and don't connect with black people on a level of humanity, but rather on the basis of race. Get a book and a clue too. I'm not going to waste anymore energy on you pathetic losers!
-- A black person who doesn't think you dumb asses ‘are so cool’”

“i am black and i dont love u, so fuck ya'll”

While the comments from folks who don’t “get it” are amusing, there are many by folks who understand that it’s intended as satire, but nonetheless think it’s problematic:

“To take this as a joke, is not funny. Some people really think that you are for real. I just hope you are not people of color,doing this. Yes we all knows how racisms work is this country and AROUND THE WORLD To make fun of it,,just lets people off the hook. The way the world is today, you would think you could be a little bit more sensitive. Some group of people are tried of being the butt of jokes. Yes some white people have been given the power to say and do what they want, to anybody. I love to laugh at jokes but not if it's about making someone else feel bad or less like.”

“i dont like the fact that you make fun of a serous topic in todays society i can understand what your trying to do and it is very funny but i think its not exactly right coinsidering african americans has been picked at and abused enough i think all we need now is understanding.
-- Nicole”

These comments, and many others (too long to print here) get to a rather sophisticated understanding of the complexity of race in America. So-called “political correctness” has reduced the issue to simply being prejudiced against certain races. That ignores the systemic problems of race that are rooted in America’s history and continue through our institutions, norms and deep-seated and shared broader cultural beliefs. For that reason, the site is very important. It is true that if someone takes satire literally, he or she is walking away with a very different impression of the message. That burden falls largely on the shoulders of the satirist, but figuring out where we are collectively and individually is also useful. When Jonathan Swift suggested that the poor eat their children, no doubt some were appalled by such a horrible idea. So it is possible that this site will perpetuate racial stereotypes, but likely with folks who continue to buy into them all anyway. More often, folks will have their eyes open to the futility of believing that combating racism can happen at the individual level (by just not hating people because of the color of their skin). For instance, one writer noted:

“I'm a white male that grew up in suburbia. We only had two black children in my school. I never understood racism because I never saw evidence of the stereotypes. Although I feel that I am as non-racist as a person can be, I do appreciate your site because it helps me to understand that there are perhaps many black people who continue to suffer from such abhorent stereotypes. It also helps me to understand the attitudes of my black college roommate who seemed more prejudiced against whites than any whites against blacks that I had ever met. I think I will try to more closely scrutinize my actions and comments when I speak to my black friends to see if I subconsciously suffer from any racist based beliefs. Thank you for your satirical approach to the common annoyanced suffered by American blacks today. --Sincerely, An articulate white man with a few articulate black friends. :-)”

That’s a result that we often can’t get after an entire course at the college level! That’s usually because of the mindset of many of today’s young students, which is nicely epitomized by this note:

“Hey guys, I see the satire and irony in your site, but feel the whole theme is really ‘last year’. Is race still an issue? I thought as a nation, we were over that shit.
--‘Surfdaddy’”

We hope Surfdaddy is joking, too, but it’s tough to tell for sure. He could be poking fun at folks who really think this by noting that it’s so “last year,” but he also could be serious – many of our students (white and non-white) agree with these statements. So while we appreciate the site for its creativity, sophistication and purpose-driven humor, we, too, worry that if it’s misinterpreted by those who need to understand it the most, its power will be minimal.