Article: Racial stereotypes in CBB

[Hoya06]

www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/17376844.html

[The Stig]

Great article. I liked how he pointed out that nobody mentions Hansbrough's athleticism. It's as if white players are inherently disadvantaged and get where they are through hard work, while black players get where they are because they're naturally gifted.

[moe09]

Nice find, 06, it's definitely about time somebody spoke up about this in the media.

[idhoya]

nobody mentions it cause he has very little of it. He has to work hard.

[RBHoya]

There's a lot to this, but I don't completely agree.

I do agree that people usually assume that good white players are self-made... guys like Hansbrough, Budinger, Joe Alexander etc are all pretty damn good athletes, but you don't hear much about that. And when black players are self-made through effort, you don't usually hear much about that either.

Also there are certain buzz words that you always hear with white players... the next time I hear a white player has great "basketball I.Q." I think I'm gonna throw up. That's why I was so glad Kevin Love's fat ass didn't make the championship game. Other favorites of white analysts on white players... "gym rat", "hard-worker", "hustle player", "gritty", "savvy, student of the game", etc.

But I think he obfuscates his point a little bit with Memphis, and don't think they are worthy of comparison to JT II's teams. People aren't hating on them because they're an all black team or because they're perceived as athletes only, but because they are pretty clearly the college equivalent of a basketball factory. I think like more than half of their team went to prep school because they couldn't graduate high school/qualify the first time around. A lot of their players also have arrest records. And they're also tied to "Worldwide Wes", which is how they get their Dajuan Wagners and Derrick Roses. The fact that CDR says that his teammates are good guys in an interview doesn't change these facts.


Anyway, I think the hype for guys like Hansbrough, Love, everybody on Duke etc. is over the top at times. And it's obvious that none of these guys are ever going to amount to anything in the league (though Hansbrough would if he was 2-3 inches taller). But that doesn't mean they aren't good college players. I don't like the guy but it's tough to deny that Hansbrough was outstanding this year, and I honestly think that he deserves all the awards he's getting, even though Beasely was more dominant and will have an exponentially better professional career.

I think that the question of race in how we view basketball is something that a lot of white people want to ignore/brush off, and that's wrong. But I wasn't blown away by this take on the subject.

[RDF]

Patrick Reusse wrote about Worldwide Wes in Monday's Paper too--he's not giving Memphis a pass--he's just a fan who is tired of hearing that you have to be "boring" or play "slow" to be considered a "disciplined, smart team". Reusse is also very fond of the Hoya program--he wrote some wonderful columns covering the '06 run in tournament and enjoys Big East basketball. He's a very blunt columnist too-if you can't play-he won't sugarcoat things--be it for the hometown team or any team. If you are overhyped--so be it--he calls it out.

Hansbrough isn't athletic---Alexander and Budinger are. Hansbrough is a hard worker who isn't very natural in his play--so I understand the praise for work ethic--but my issue as Reusse was pointing out in his column--the praise goes way over the top and it's ridiculous. Do other players of any race not work hard and just are "born with it"? Or is it just a UNC/Duke thing?

[swhoya]

Ok, before someone jumps down my throat, I want to first say that I agree that the racial stereotypes described in this article still remain.

BUT, I don't think it's nearly as bad or as clear-cut as people here are claiming. Don't think the media ever calls black players "gritty?"

www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/2004/03/21/2004-03-21_gritty_st__joe_s_still_flyin.html

Never refers to a black player as a "gym rat"?

www.charlotte.com/308/story/527143.html

Yes, I'm sure you could find a lot of articles to back up the counter argument. Again, I agree there is some basis to the Star Tribune's article. I'd bet a study of statements by the talking heads would probably come out on the side of white players = gritty, black players = athletes.

But I don't think it would be by that great of a margin, and at least as it pertains to Psycho T, it's ridiculous. Does anyone want to really argue that he does have the athletic ability of Michael Beasley? As much as I detest UNC, give me a break, the guy does work his butt off and he is a damn gritty player, whatever his skin color may be. You can make arguments about racial stereotypes, but when you claim that some talking head calling Hansbrough gritty as Exhibit A, it's just ridiculous, because he is. Give credit where it's due, don't make him the poster child for something that he didn't create, just because he does happen to work as hard as anyone I've seen on a basketball court.

[summersshowers]

Apr 8, 2008 12:21:21 GMT -5 RBHoya said:

There's a lot to this, but I don't completely agree.

I do agree that people usually assume that good white players are self-made... guys like Hansbrough, Budinger, Joe Alexander etc are all pretty damn good athletes, but you don't hear much about that. And when black players are self-made through effort, you don't usually hear much about that either.

Also there are certain buzz words that you always hear with white players... the next time I hear a white player has great "basketball I.Q." I think I'm gonna throw up. That's why I was so glad Kevin Love's fat ass didn't make the championship game. Other favorites of white analysts on white players... "gym rat", "hard-worker", "hustle player", "gritty", "savvy, student of the game", etc.

But I think he obfuscates his point a little bit with Memphis, and don't think they are worthy of comparison to JT II's teams. People aren't hating on them because they're an all black team or because they're perceived as athletes only, but because they are pretty clearly the college equivalent of a basketball factory. I think like more than half of their team went to prep school because they couldn't graduate high school/qualify the first time around. A lot of their players also have arrest records. And they're also tied to "Worldwide Wes", which is how they get their Dajuan Wagners and Derrick Roses. The fact that CDR says that his teammates are good guys in an interview doesn't change these facts.


Anyway, I think the hype for guys like Hansbrough, Love, everybody on Duke etc. is over the top at times. And it's obvious that none of these guys are ever going to amount to anything in the league (though Hansbrough would if he was 2-3 inches taller). But that doesn't mean they aren't good college players. I don't like the guy but it's tough to deny that Hansbrough was outstanding this year, and I honestly think that he deserves all the awards he's getting, even though Beasely was more dominant and will have an exponentially better professional career.

I think that the question of race in how we view basketball is something that a lot of white people want to ignore/brush off, and that's wrong. But I wasn't blown away by this take on the subject.

While this stereotype is tirelessly applied to Love and Hansbrough, I have to disagree with you about Alexander and Budinger. Most announcers are quick to note those two guys' athleticism--I would even say they tend to beat this point into the ground because they don't fit the typical "white college player" mold.

[aggypryd]

I don't dislike Tyler Hansbrough, but I do dislike the 'Machine' that makes players like him into college basketball gods (Sheldon Williams of Duke would fit into this category).

He definitely has the athletic ability to make it on the next level. But he, like a lot of college players, have to work on that skills set in order to succeed on the next level.

[idhoya]

there are exceptions to every rule. the point is too often black players are given too much credit for their athleticism and not enough for their hoops IQ. also too often the white media is looking for he next "great white hope" and will do whatever or hype up whoever to make that said player fit the mold. Let's just call em what they are. If the kid is slow and white or smart and black, then thats what he is. And vice versa.

[aggypryd]

Apr 8, 2008 12:53:50 GMT -5 swhoya said:

As much as I detest UNC, give me a break, the guy does work his butt off and he is a damn gritty player, whatever his skin color may be. You can make arguments about racial stereotypes, but when you claim that some talking head calling Hansbrough gritty as Exhibit A, it's just ridiculous, because he is. Give credit where it's due, don't make him the poster child for something that he didn't create, just because he does happen to work as hard as anyone I've seen on a basketball court.

How can you say that Player X works harder than Player Y?

Unless you’ve observed both of them practice/work-out, it’s hard to make that assertion.

[ExcitableBoy]

While I agree with the article/most of the comments on a broader perspective, this years' Hoyas team certainly doesn't fit the fawning announcer "black=athletic, white=gritty" mold.

Roy was consistently praised for his work ethic (cut to the story about Big John calling him "Big Stiff" freshman year) while Jon was consistently praised for his poise, smarts, and work ethic (cut to story about Jon shooting jump shots over a broom his mother held up, then walking on to Georgetown program in transition only to earn a scholarship, become "the coach on the floor/floor general" and start every game). By the end of the year, some announcers even started to notice Pat's effort and 'gritty intensity'.

[swhoya]

IDhoya,

I like your point, I'd love to just be able to call someone smart or athletic or whatever, regardless of race.

But the problem with the sort of absolutism of some of the other posters is that it obscures the fact that sometimes the Tyler Hansbroughs of the world are smart and gritty, and sometimes the Michael Beasleys are freakishly athletic (although I would say, and I've heard other talking heads say, that he has a pretty high basketball IQ as well, you don't get positioned for rebounds the way he does because of your athleticsm). The problem is that there's an inbalance in how those terms are applied.

But to listen to some posters, anyone that praises Hansbrough is doing it just as matter of wanting to praise the supposed characteristics of that particular race. Take for example, summersshowers post that Alexander is praised for being athletic b/c it doesn't "fit the mold." Frankly, I think that's as demeaning to Alexander as it is to the commentators, because now NO ONE can comment on his athleticism because they would only be pointing out he's the exception to the rule--he just created a heck of a Catch 22.

Those stereotypes exist, but the sort of absolutism of some posts means you can't praise Hansbrough for being gritty, which he is.

[aggypryd]

This subject has been beaten to death on this board. We've discussed it intelligently and, IMO, respectfully.

This is something that we can argue all day.

All it means is that we still have some work to do.

[swhoya]

You're right, I haven't seen player Y and player X work out. But I've watched a hell of a lot of basketball games and I can say that player Y, at least when he's in a game, works his tail off, usually more than 95% of the other players I've seen.

Does that clarify it?

[SFHoya99]

Tyler Hansbrough isn't athletic? He's extremely quick up and down the floor and he's actually a pretty good leaper. I mean, he's not Dwight Howard, but he's amuch better leaper than say, Roy.

What Tyler isn't is particularly skilled. Though he's getting better.

[aggypryd]

Apr 8, 2008 13:24:46 GMT -5 swhoya said:

You're right, I haven't seen player Y and player X work out. But I've watched a hell of a lot of basketball games and I can say that player Y, at least when he's in a game, works his tail off, usually more than 95% of the other players I've seen.

Does that clarify it?

not really...

just because a guy looks like he's laboring more doesn't mean that he's working harder than someone else.

Larry Bird, Earvin Johnson, Michael Jordan made the game look easy, but they also worked their tails off.

[Deleted]

Apr 8, 2008 13:23:49 GMT -5 aggypryd said:

All it means is that we still have some work to do.

I'm going to work on my grittyness AND my athleticism!

[swhoya]

So what is your point, exactly? That I can't say Michael Jordan was a hard worker and that Derrick Coleman was lazy (although by definition, all syracuse players are)?

I agree that in the middle, who is "working harder" than anyone else is hard to say, but let's be real here: there are certain players you would agree are lazier than others. So why can't I say that I think Hansbrough is as relentless as anyone on the court?

[Hoya TMF]

Apr 8, 2008 12:53:50 GMT -5 swhoya said:

Ok, before someone jumps down my throat, I want to first say that I agree that the racial stereotypes described in this article still remain.

BUT, I don't think it's nearly as bad or as clear-cut as people here are claiming. Don't think the media ever calls black players "gritty?"

www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/2004/03/21/2004-03-21_gritty_st__joe_s_still_flyin.html

Never refers to a black player as a "gym rat"?

www.charlotte.com/308/story/527143.html

Yes, I'm sure you could find a lot of articles to back up the counter argument. Again, I agree there is some basis to the Star Tribune's article. I'd bet a study of statements by the talking heads would probably come out on the side of white players = gritty, black players = athletes.

But I don't think it would be by that great of a margin, and at least as it pertains to Psycho T, it's ridiculous. Does anyone want to really argue that he does have the athletic ability of Michael Beasley? As much as I detest UNC, give me a break, the guy does work his butt off and he is a damn gritty player, whatever his skin color may be. You can make arguments about racial stereotypes, but when you claim that some talking head calling Hansbrough gritty as Exhibit A, it's just ridiculous, because he is. Give credit where it's due, don't make him the poster child for something that he didn't create, just because he does happen to work as hard as anyone I've seen on a basketball court.

This post does not add any credibility to your point. If anyone else actually read the articles you posted, they'd realize two things:

1. The article about St. Joseph's begins by talking about Pat Carroll, a white player almost as much as Jameer Nelson, its first team All-American. In addtition, "the team" was described as gritty without reference to any specific player, so it's difficult to see how the label applies only to Nelson or any other black player.

2. The second article is an interview transcript. Despite the title, it is Dell Curry, Stephen's father who calls him a "gym rat from day one" That's why the title is in quotes. Besides, Stephen Curry is not really an apt comparison because he plays on a media darling team in a tiny conference. Most good players from small schools are portrayed as underdogs who had to practice a lot to overcome their physical shortcomings, etc. Comparing apples to apples, black players are not often if ever described as hard working or having high basketball i.q.'s.

It's a small point, but if you're going to try and refute or challenge or esplain the media's portrayal of players based on racial stereotypes, maybe do more than five seconds of research.