Gender and Racial Equity in Sport

Full Article: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/19090953/troubling-trends-college-sport-racial-gender-report-card

On May 30 and 31, 2017, our class covered Modules 9 and 10, which discussed gender equity and racism in sport. Even 45 years after the passage of the Title IX legislation, problems regarding racial and gender hiring practices are still very evident, and prominent for that matter. How can that be? If the legislation was intended to level the playing surface for male and female, why is it the case that we are witnessing a reversal in the progress? The author of the article above is implying the same curiosity. He also sheds light on some interesting trends involving both racial and gender equity, or inequity if you will.

Annually, The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport (TIDES) releases a racial and gender report card. The focus of the report card is on hiring practices. In 2016, college sports received the worst overall grade it ever has, confirming that inequity in sport is surprisingly getting worse (Lapchick, 2017). Colleges, according to the results gathered from the report card, remain the worst employer for women and people of color. Here are some of the startling statistics that TIDES found (2016):

• 86% of D1, 88% of D2, and 92% of D3 men's coaches were white
• Only 20.8% of all head coaches in D1 basketball were African American
• >60% of the women's teams across all three divisions are coached by men
• Of the 30 conferences, only 10 women and two people of color were conference commissioners
• Only 16 head football coaches at the FBS level were of color, 88% were white

Most of the numbers for women and people of color are actually trending downward, according to the results of the last few report cards. That should worry the institutions across the country, because this particular decline comes in spite of legislation that has been trying to reverse the trend for almost half a century. According to Module 10, women's participation in sport increase substantially. Specifically, in high school sports, female participation has increased by 847% since the passage of Title IX. However, the work is not done. There continues to be an imbalance of diversity in the workplace, especially in sport.

The common misconception, however, may be that this is only the case in college sports or high school sports. The fact of the matter is that gender and racial inequity in the workplace is present in many sports, institutions, and common businesses within the general population. For example, the MLB's report card grades are going down by a considerable margin as well. They scored an overall C+ in racial and gender hiring practices in 2016 (Harris, 2017). Though baseball is known for its diversity among its players, the same may not always be said about those within the organization that contribute off the field. Currently, Dave Roberts, Dusty Baker, and Rick Renteria are the only three black managers in the major league (Harris, 2017).

That just goes to show that inequity is a problem in all sports, and general occupations. It would seem as though, now, that more changes should be instituted to turn this trend around as soon as possible. The article above suggests a few changes, all of which Module 10's "strategies to promote gender equity" would agree with. Here are the suggestions that the author made:

1. Eddie Robinson Rule--would require institutions to interview at least one minority candidate for all head coaching and leadership positions before making the final hiring decision
2. Judy Sweet Rule--would require a diverse pool of candidates, including women and people of color for all senior administrative positions at the NCAA headquarters and D1 athletic departments

I have no doubt that Title IX boosted female sport participation and hiring practices upon its enactment, and that the nature of the legislation was good and necessary. However, it seems as though we "created the clock" when we passed Title IX, but then let it sit without adjustment, while dramatic demographic and social change occurred around it. By that I mean we cannot assume its intentions have been fulfilled, or that its work has been done. We must continue to assess the area of change the legislation originally intended to affect. The two rules listed above would be an excellent start to bringing gender and racial equity back to a healthy balance, for it is troubling to see the truth. The truth is that, as Module 10 accounts, women and minorities are incredibly under represented in sport on and off the playing surface. Of the total number of male student-athletes in Division I athletics, 58% are white, and, furthermore, white males make up 86% of the coaching population in D1 athletics (Lapchick, 2017).

45 years of Title IX, and inequity is getting worse. It is time to change that. The stepping stones for this particular change are very clear. and achievable. The NCAA just needs to step in, as the governing body of college sport, and demand change. The women and minorities of this country--and others--deserve to be equally represented, equally funded, and given equal opportunity.

Additional Source(s)/Reference(s):

Lapchick, R. (2017, April 6). Troubling trends in the college sport racial and gender report card. Retrieved from http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/19090953/troubling-trends-college-sport-racial-gender-report-card

Harris, T. (2017, April 18). MLB receives overall C+ in racial, gender hiring practices | Sports | lacrossetribune.com. Retrieved from http://lacrossetribune.com/sports/local/mlb-receives-overall-c-in-racial-gender-hiring-practices/article_4ca43382-b551-523a-ae84-2f9e0f4f9da7.html

Deviance in Sport

 Full Article: https://www.thoughtco.com/how-anabolic-steroids-work-608399

On May 26, 2017, our class covered deviance in sport, specifically performance enhancing drugs in Module 8. Throughout the course, we have often illustrated the linkages between society and sport, and the effects they can have on each other. Sport, being one of the biggest industries in the United States, is observed by millions of people every day. For youth, the professional athletes that compete in sport are idolized and looked up to. The activity, good or bad, that they engage in can have a direct effect on how the youth model themselves. The author of the article above illustrates what anabolic steroids--one of several performance enhancing drugs mentioned in Module 8--are and the effects that they can have on both adults and underdeveloped adolescents.

Anabolic Steroids:

• increase the rate of protein synthesis within cells
• influence masculinity, cause growth of the vocal chords and body hair
• increase aggressiveness and competitiveness, which are most often desirable traits in sports
• block the effects of cortisol, the catabolic hormone that breaks down muscle tissue
• causes changes in cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, liver damage, and acne among other severe side effects

Side effects are not the only problems with using performance enhancing drugs. They come with many other societal, physical, and emotional effects as well. Consider the effect it may have on youth, especially those who aspire to become just like their favorite athlete. The Digital Citizens Alliance conducted a survey in 2013, asking 350 high school and college male athletes about their perception of steroid use in professional sports (Toporek, 2013). About 77 percent of them said that it is has a trickle-down effect, making it feel as though they need to take the drugs to keep up with the competition. High school and college athletes have been known to take steroids for this reason, so let us assess what is happening in their underdeveloped bodies. Youth drug use can result in the early onset of puberty, and furthermore can "stunt" growth by prematurely stopping the lengthening of bones (Helmenstine, 2017). Below is an illustration of the problems with steroids that have been detected in youth.

What, then, do we do? We try to put a stop to the use of PED's in professional sport, the philosophy of which is that "if the pros stop, so will the kids." Thus, suspensions are getting longer, drug tests are becoming more frequent and random, and more drugs are being added to the list of drugs that are prohibited. PED use has seemingly gone down since the "Steroid Era" in baseball, which roughly spanned the last five years of the 20th century and the first five years of the 21st century. However, athletes still do it at an "uncomfortable rate," if you will.

Some people believe that it is time to allow the use of PED's in professional sports, and to stop fighting a losing battle. I have been given no reason to believe that this is a good idea. The health risks are substantial, and sometimes permanent. In fact, the author of the article above also states that while the side effects of steroids for adults can be reversed over time, there can be permanent negative consequences for adolescents. Allowing adults on the biggest stage--that is, pro sports--to take illegal drugs that enhance performance, and ultimately ignite the trickle-down effect to our youth is beyond unacceptable.

That, of course, goes for all drugs, not just performance enhancing drugs typically used in sport. After all, according to Module 8, Americans spend approximately $64 billion per year on illegal drugs, which could include everything from PED's to methamphetamines.

My point remains the same. Our youth must be protected, and given the proper tools and standards by which to live. The athletes of pro sports, to whom these youth look up to, need to be the good role models that they are supposed to be. Legalizing PED's in professional sport would not only tarnish the good spirit of sport today, but tarnish the good spirit of future sport, which will be played by the same youth I just referred to.

Below is a YouTube video clearly illustrating the use of performance enhancing substances in high school athletics, and the epidemic it has become.

Additional Source(s)/Reference(s):

Toporek, B. (2013, July 29). Survey: youth athletes feel pressured by steroid use in pro sports - schooled in sports - education week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/schooled_in_sports/2013/07/youth_athletes_feel_pressured_by_steroid_users_in_pro_sports.html

CNN Library. (2016, January 26). Performance enhancing drugs in sports fast facts - CNN.com. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/06/us/performance-enhancing-drugs-in-sports-fast-facts/

Helmenstine, A. M. (2017, February 19). Anabolic steroids - performance enhancing drugs. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/how-anabolic-steroids-work-608399

Jones, A. M. (2016, May 26). Performance enhancing supplements among teens [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/ogIvNuifkJk

Sport Stadiums and the Economy

Full article: https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/

On May 23, 2017, Module 5 discussed information regarding the correlation between sport and the economy. The article above focuses on sport stadiums specifically. It provides information and analysis on spending, economist's point of view, and opportunity costs, which parallels the discussion of Module 5. Following are some of the points, made in the article, on each of those aspects.

Spending:

• stadium subsidies are justified because of their economic impact on the community
• proposed Rams Stadium in Inglewood, CA predicted to cost $3B
• estimated economic impact of people who attended St. Louis Cardinals home games in 2015 was $343.9 million
• stadium construction can be proposed as an economic development initiative pending the location of construction

Economist's Point of View:

• 86% of economists agreed that local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sport franchises
• oppose the provision of taxpayer money in the form of subsidies
• 83% agree that providing subsidies will cost the taxpayer more than the economic benefits generated

Opportunity Costs:

• opportunity costs are often not accounted for when calculating economic impact
• options that increase productivity, and are thereby investments, are recommended by economists
• roads, education, environmental improvements--among other things--are thought to be better investments
• increased productivity has the potential to increase the rate of economic growth and also increase the standard of living

U.S. Bank Stadium, home of the Minnesota Vikings. It is the newest NFL
stadium.

Billions upon billions of dollars are being proposed for the construction of new stadiums all across the United States. With research already showing that it is in fact taxpayers who are paying the largest sum of money for these projects, we cannot help but wonder if the return on those "investments" is worth it. Take, for example, the Minnesota Vikings' new stadium. It was a $1.1 billion project, of which nearly half of the money came from state and local governments. That may sound like a fair trade, but it may not be when one considers the fact that those are taxpayer dollars being used. Since 1995, taxpayers, whether they know it or not, have spent approximately $7.5 billion on the construction and renovation of NFL stadiums alone (Farren 2017). Including other professional sports aside from the NFL, 101 new stadiums/facilities have been built within the last two decades (Module 5). They have not only cost taxpayers money, but cities as well.

As the article above and Module 5 stresses, stadium projects cost cities millions, if not billions of dollars (Citi Field will cost New York approximately $177 million), and yet we consider them to be good public investments. We understand that not every public investment we make will turn up a profit, or return the investment in some way. However, economists argue, if money is to be lost, why not lose it in paying for projects that increase productivity and the standard of living? Why lose tremendous amounts of money for incredibly complex stadium projects?

The government has the opportunity to make a change in what they decide to fund. They could, after all, devote larger sums of money to other infrastructure or education, or even both. Instead they use over half--on average--of public funds to pay for the following projects (Wolla, 2017):

• $710M--Lucas Oil Stadium (Indianapolis Colts)
• $1.1B--AT&T Stadium (Dallas Cowboys)
• $1.6B--MetLife Stadium (New York Jets/Giants)
• $1.1B--U.S. Bank Stadium (Minnesota Vikings)

Those are just to name a few. In fact, 29 of the 31 NFL stadiums have been paid for, in part, by public funds (Farren, 2017). Public funds, as I have come to emphasize, are taxpayer dollars. We, as citizens, are willing to contribute to the greater public good, but we should not be contributing to economically devastating projects, which is what these massive stadiums have to come to represent.

Below is a video from 2012 outlining the economic impact of sport stadiums, which includes input from economists who strike down the claim that these stadiums/events have an overall positive effect on the economy.

Additional Source(s)/Reference(s):

Farren, M., & Philpot, A. (2017, February 27). Raiding taxpayers' pockets. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-02-27/subsidizing-new-raiders-stadium-in-las-vegas-is-a-bad-deal-for-taxpayers

The economics of sports stadiums [Video file]. (2012, August 18). Retrieved from https://youtu.be/ouQJJ4mP4hI

Wolla, S. A. (2017, May). The economics of subsidizing sports stadiums - page one economics - St. Louis Fed. Retrieved from https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/

Youth Sports: What Happened?

Full Article: http://www.theindependent.com/opinion/another_opinion/g-i-s-youth-sports-are-missing-the-point/article_00441838-5763-11e1-8b20-0019bb2963f4.html

On Friday May 19th, 2017, we covered Module 3: Sports and Youth. Organized youth sports made their rise in the 20th century, particularly in industrialized areas during WWII. For decades following the war, and leading up to the 21st century, participation in youth sport skyrocketed. Currently in 2017, an approximated 47 million children participate in youth sports. Despite the staggering number of young participants, youth sport is not what it used to be. In fact, it is leaning toward out of control. The author of the article I have provided the link to above agrees with this statement. He provides a slightly more heated argument against the modern "standards" of youth sport, with his focus being on the parents of young athletes.

He poses three questions during his "rant," if you will:

1. When did youth sports become about elite travel teams?
2. What ever happened to the quality recreational programs that taught kids the basics of the sport they wish to play?
3. Is this what we've become as a society?

These are obviously rhetorical questions aimed at striking a chord in the adults who provoke or endorse the negativity seen in youth sports. However, it stands to reason that these questions are grounded solely upon coherent observation of the negativity in youth sports today, for I myself have seen it as well. To couple these questions with an underlying point, he alludes to a topic that has surfaced more than once in the coverage of the first three modules of this class. That is, the over-emphasis on winning. Instead of "we have to win, we have to win," the author suggests teaching youngsters how to win with class, how to lose with dignity, and teach them about time management and dedication. These lessons, he suggests, lead to the realization that wins are not always portrayed on the scoreboard, rather in who these young boys and girls become.

In addition to that, the author strikes down the common claim that the only way to develop your child's skills and earn them scholarships is submitting them to elite-level competition. This directly correlates with one of the major problems in youth sport discussed in module 3: instilling unrealistic goals of stardom or professional status into young minds. This leads to an immense number of dropouts in youth sport, but it does not have to. All we must do is get back to the basics.

The following graph illustrates the decline in youth sport participation over the course of just five years. One thing we can conclude from this graph is that if nothing is done to turn the tables, these numbers are going to continue to go down.

Almost every sport is seeing a decline in its youth participants. While a variety of reasons do contribute to this, a few take center stage--coaching, parental misleading, and the concept of "just win." It is no wonder kids no longer want to play. They have been told that they need to win, and sometimes punished for not doing so. So, they think, "The thing I once chose to do for fun is no longer fun." It becomes work. As the video provided in module 3 outlined, it is about we give the game back to the kids.

After all, there are several benefits to youth sports:

• Fitness
• Preparation for a competitive real world
• Learning values
• Interaction with others
• Chance to experience and exemplify leadership

I am positive we can turn youth sports around, and ultimately give it back to the kids. It will obviously require increasing awareness, as it has already begun to move. Having played baseball from the time I was four years old to 17 years old, I have witnessed, and been victimized by some of the major problems in youth sports today. I recognize what good it can do. However, to do good, parents and coaches need to take a step back and let the kids play the game. If more and more adults come to understand that simple concept, their children may continue to fully enjoy what it is they are doing, and shape themselves accordingly as they develop.

Additional source(s)/reference(s):

Youth Sports Participation Statistics and Trends:. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.engagesports.com/blog/post/1488/youth-sports-participation-statistics-and-trends

 

Sport Values, Violence, and Society

Full Article: https://www.twrsports.com/2017/03/27/violence-in-sports/

On May 17th, 2017, during the first day of class, sport values and how they reflect societal values (and vice versa) were discussed in Module 1. Often we see things during sporting events that, if seen in the street, would summon law enforcement to the scene. Therefore, where do we draw the line? Or better yet, why has it become accepted? The author of the article to which I am referring (see link below) provides perspectives on both questions.


Rougned Odor, 2nd baseman for the Texas Rangers, landing a solid right
hook on Blue Jays outfielder Jose Bautista after a hard slide into 2nd
 

As discussed in Module 1, modern-day sports are "submerged in an embarrassment of," among other things, violence, scandals, and ethical disgrace.


The Sport Industry is the 4th largest industry in the United States, and its products and services are consumed by people of all ages, usually starting around age three or four. The only problem is, what these people are consuming is becoming less and less socially acceptable. Athletes, more and more, are engaging in brawls, postgame derogatory commentary, and other forms of societal discontent, all of which are being absorbed by the minds of the consumers. Take, for example, NFL arrest rates. We all can agree that it seems as though every other day, there is a report of yet another NFL athlete being held on criminal charges. The following graphs illustrate that point:

Given that these athletes are adults, and for the most part have had the time to mature as public figures, why is it that they are participating in the inexplicable action on and off the playing surface? Well, it can easily be traced back to youth sports, and the moral foundation on which these athletes are built. Youth sports are not what they used to be. The same can be said for what young athletes are being taught individually nowadays.

A big part of the problem here is the over-emphasis on winning, and how it ultimately leads to the concept of "winning at all costs." At this point, the integrity and sportsmanship of the athletes is disregarded, first and foremost--usually--by the coaches. So, instead of striving for excellence, these athletes just do what they have to do to win. Such actions are most often unsportsmanlike. The author suggests that it a lot of the action you see on the playing surface comes as a byproduct of the lessons or tasks given by coaches. However, some of it does stem from the spontaneous initiative of young athletes to engage in unsportsmanlike behavior.

The governing bodies of the major sports of our time are doing what they can to ensure player safety and conformity of their rules without jeopardizing the nature of the game itself. They have recognized the increased hostility, and are attempting to make a positive change. Now, it is up to the individuals of sport to make the lasting difference on how sport and societal values correlate.

The violence needs to stop, along with the unacceptable verbal usage that has found its way into sport. We understand the physical nature of some sports, and that injuries are a part of the game. However, it is the unnecessary physicality and violence that causes injury that must be brought to an end.

We can attempt to eliminate the violence and unsportsmanlike conduct portrayed in the video above by starting from the bottom with our youth, and working upward. Here are some rearranging values, discussed in module 1, that might help with that:

• focus on cooperation more and competition less
• focus on "ours" rather than "mine"
• focus more on social responsibility and less on profit motive
• focus on building, NOT destroying self concept

Additional source(s)/reference(s):

The Rate of Domestic Violence Arrests Among NFL Players | FiveThirtyEight. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-rate-of-domestic-violence-arrests-among-nfl-players/