-
Epilogue
- Rutgers University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
134 In the forty years since Wyoming students criticized the pressure white society placed on black athletes, college fans have continued to rely on sport to represent their institutions in ways that transcend mere “school spirit.” According to media reports, in 2007 Virginia Tech University turned to football’s “healing power” in the aftermath of one student’s rampage, when he gunned down thirty-two people on campus in the largest mass murder in the nation’s history. Four months later, the press announced that the Hokies opening home game against East Carolina University was “more than the start of a new season” when 66,233 fans gathered at Lane Stadium in Blacksburg to watch the school take its “biggest step towards a return to normalcy.” One alumnus told the Associated Press that the game was “like a funeral service . . . like a memorial.” Faced with incredible expectations, the team (fielding 85 percent African American players ) delivered victory, and spectators reacted with both “tears and cheers.” “It’s a relief that we made the community proud,” said Victor Harris, a twenty-oneyear -old black cornerback from Richmond.1 Much has changed in the sixty years since Harvard’s Chet Pierce became the first black to play football against a southern university in nearby Charlottesville, Virginia. What has not changed, however, is the meaning that schools and fans tie to their athletic teams. Although this volume has tried to illuminate the varying reactions to black athletes in different places and at different times, one consistent theme is the immense pressure intercollegiate sport has always placed on students, especially blacks who realized that the meaning behind their accomplishments transcended school sprit, regional pride, and economic gain. Another theme has been the continual shift between amateurism and professionalism at the collegiate level, which often influenced Americans’ responses to black athletes and their grievances. African American students like O.J. Simpson were considered professionals well before they graduated, and in Epilogue achieving immediate financial success at the professional level they reinforced the idea that intercollegiate sport rescued African Americans from inner-city poverty and taught them how to succeed in “mainstream” society. Many Americans also believed that sport provided amateur collegians simple life skills, familial support , and an education. As criticism of the black family grew in the 1970s, some white fans embraced the idea that collegiate teams gave young black males the family structure they lacked at home, especially through white coaches who filled the gaps left by delinquent black fathers. Since then, amateurism and professionalism have continued to blend together, and by the 1980s many schools embraced the idea that college teams could be both families and lucrative business ventures. “You have a culture, you always want them to feel like they’re a part of your family and will be part of your family,” explained Duke University basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski in a 2007 speech describing his recruits. The coach was speaking to a group of businessmen who paid $1,600 each to attend his annual leadership conference in Durham, North Carolina, which included the opportunity to attend a closed practice and watch Krzyzewski run his players through drills while providing the audience business and motivational tips. “It’s like hiring,” Krzyzewski told the crowd when describing his recruitment strategy. “I would never just hire people from a resume.” Responded one IBM manager after the practice: “It was amazing how quickly the players changed their roles and got into whatever they were doing. That’s very important in the business world.”2 These connections between collegiate athletics and big business persist even as reports are beginning to question whether big-time sports actually bring in big-time money. According to a 1998 study by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, top-tier Division I programs spent an average of 38 million dollars per year, of which 45 percent went to football. At the University of Michigan, the school lost 2.8 million dollars on athletics, despite averaging 110,000 fans at each home football game. Revenue is failing to keep up with budgets, and athletic departments at all levels—from small liberal arts colleges to major programs —are reporting more deficits.3 Although diversity is rarely mentioned in contemporary discussions of revenue and general deemphasis on collegiate sport, race must factor into any future decisions regarding athletic programs, for if there is renewed backlash to college sport in the next twenty years the most significant impact will be its adverse...