A Contested Cultural Space

College and Diversity/Multiculturalism

While variously defined (McLaren, 1995), embracing multiculturalism is widely considered a marker and moral imperative for citizens of any modern nation (Kymlicka, 2007). Challenging archaic ideas about race and culture is considered an important social and educational outcome of a college experience in the United States (Hurtado, 2005; Johnston et al., 2015). College occurs during impressionable years and in an educational context that facilitates greater interrogation of the complexities of life (Cole, Case, Rios, & Curtain, 2011). College is a crucial site for social and personal development and (re)establishing behavioral norms dictating and foreshadowing students’ interactions in a diversifying world (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). The move to college often presents a sharp contrast to home environments, which are heavily segregated by race and culture (Boustan, 2011; Chesler, Peet, & Sevig, 2003), by presenting diverse campuses where race/whiteness is contested and/or disrupted (Cabrera, 2014b; Feagin, Vera, & Imani, 1996).

Despite offering a more diverse experience for many students, college remains a place where whiteness is normalized, in part because students, faculty, and administrators remain overwhelmingly White. Colleges and universities in the United States are places where diversity is a reactive not proactive process or entails a curriculum reliant on traditional pedagogies disregarding racial differences (Cabrera, 2011; Chesler et al., 2003; Gusa, 2010). Multiculturalism efforts are often uneven and who benefits the most depends on the racial group. Diversity is especially useful in that it increases the odds that White students will cross racial boundaries (Engberg & Hurtado, 2011). However, many students resist these efforts. Some White students may reconstitute home environments on campus (Antonio, 2004; Hikido & Murray, 2016), reinforcing ahistorical and astructural interpretations of race (Chelser, Peet, & Sevig, 2003). Cabrera (2014b) found that many White male college students, even after graduation, saw race as individual acts of meanness and saw the importance of race as overblown, except in viewing minority privilege at White expense.

Race and (College) Football

Long before it became a political truism, sports in the United States had been characterized as color-blind, depicted as a unique institution in advancing the democratic ideal of upward mobility based strictly on meritocracy (Young, 1963, p. 2). Sport can be seen as a small-scale version of society, reflecting racial attitudes and replicating our hopes and reality as a society (Billings, 2004; Davis, 2007). Whether it is in terms of the level of integration or how awards are earned (Berri, Van Gilder, & Fenn, 2014), sport is commonly seen as an all-but-ideal race-neutral space. Sportswriters reify this idea, when, as in the case of the controversy created by Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Donovan McNabb a few years ago, as a group they offered a color-blind critique, marshalled around individualistic rhetoric (Hartmann, 2007). Baker and Boyd (1997) argue, “the rhetoric of sports reiterates an ethic of integration and incorporation: insisting that individuals put aside differences, put the team first, and play by the rules” (p. 11).

The selection of three Black quarterbacks in the first round of the 1999 National Football League (NFL) draft was signaled as significant racial progress (McIntyre, 2013), both for sports, but also for race relations more broadly. The notion of racial progress was reinforced when another Black quarterback, Michael Vick was selected as the number one pick in the 2001 NFL draft. Given the pivotal role of the quarterback, many characterize their success as indicative of a new America, one in which racial diversity and opportunities, based on merit not race, are expansive even in power positions. As Thomas (2012) noted:

Russell Wilson, Cam Newton, Robert Griffin III, Michael Vick—they’re all simply quarterbacks. A post-racial America often seems like a sickeningly unattainable dream. Who’d have thought the NFL—an institution that can sometimes lag behind modernity—would be one its vehicles? (para. 7)

Racial prejudice may be subtle and several studies have shown that perceptions differ by race. For example, Harrison and colleagues (Harrison, 2006; Harrison & Valdez, 2004; Lawrence, Harrison, & Bukstein, 2016) have shown that while White students offer positive support to White and Black athletes, they have a noted preference for the former (Comeaux, 2010). Lawrence, Harrison, and Bukstein (2016) discovered that even when offered minimal information (a picture of a White athlete being handed a graduation diploma), White students expressed pride in his accomplishments and ascribed his success to being a good student-athlete and having worked hard for graduation. In contrast, in similar circumstances, other studies describe student skepticism when told about a Black athlete, suggesting his diploma was fraudulently acquired, since he probably failed to gain admission based on academic ability, hard work, or merit—his degree was thus considered illegitimate (Harrison, 2006; Harrison, Lawrence, & Bukstein, 2011).

Media play a pivotal role in the way athletes are perceived (Armour, 2016; Wilson, 2014). During the “rise of the Black quarterback,” Buffington (2005) found that Black athletes were celebrated for their “natural” abilities or physical gifts, while White athletes were praised for their work ethic and mental capacity. Paradoxically, Buffington (2005) also found narratives suggesting “the boundaries and stereotypes for black quarterbacks to be overcome or quickly fading” (p. 30). In contrast, Mercurio and Filak (2010) revealed a “subversive” and “dangerous” trend in which journalists repeatedly essentialized athletes by race. Rada (1996) suggested that these trends inferred that African American players are “athletic, but not intelligent; animal-like or possessing animal and not human characteristics; and lacking positive character traits” (p. 238). Finally, Hartmann (2007) describes sports writers as dismissing notions of racism inherent in Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Donovan McNabb as being an inferior quarterback. Comments were couched in color-blind terms, reinforcing the notion that sport is a sacred cow and above race and politics.

Billings (2004) examined ideas inscribed in talking about quarterbacks in 54 professional and college football games. Billings noted that despite having mostly Black players, teams

usually had a white quarterback directing the offense, fulfilling the two most common stereotypes of ethnicity in sports (a) the perceived superiority of white athletes in measures of intelligence and work ethic and (b) the presumed athleticism on the part of black athletes. (p. 202)

Warikoo and Novais (2015) identify three race frames among White undergraduate students from elite U.S. universities. Their color-blind frame suggests that overt racism has disappeared and/or is countered via equal rights protections and by White ignorance of race’s persistent role in society (Lopez, 2014; Worthington, Navarro, Loewy, & Hart, 2008), which are linked to Bonilla-Silva’s abstract liberalism and minimization frames as both assume that race has little meaning. The culture of poverty (very much like Bonilla-Silva’s cultural racism) frame highlights minority disadvantages as stemming from cultural characteristics such as a disregard for marriage or lack of work ethic. The color-blind and culture of poverty frames reflect the functionalist-evolutionary paradigm with its emphasis on individualistic understandings of race. The diversity frame moves from a focus on individuals and culture to highlighting how racial differences are equally meaningful. While the diversity frame would envision, as a positive, a special program to assist racial minorities, such as affirmative action, the culture of poverty approach would see such policy as rewarding minorities who do not accept mainstream cultural values such as the work ethic. Thus, a multicultural/racial perspective is esteemed since it accurately reflects a diversity of perspectives and experiences.

While there have been positive changes, sport remains a “contested racial terrain” (Hartmann, 1997, p. 232). Sport is “not just a place (or variable) where racial interests and meanings are either inhibited or advanced but rather a site where racial formations are constantly—very publicly-struggled on and over” (Buffington, 2005, p. 31). We investigate the way university students discuss race in college football. More specifically, we coded open-ended responses to questions related to racial phenomena in college football to examine the way college students link or do not link race to college football. In our second round of coding, we compared our coding to Bonilla-Silva’s color-blind racism frames.

Procedure and Materials

A 20-question survey on race and sports was distributed to 365 undergraduates enrolled in history and culture classes at a Division I university that belongs to one of the power conferences and is very good at football. At the time, the University had a 3% Black student body and Black men represented about 1% of the undergraduate student body, but about 48% of the individuals on the revenue generating basketball and football teams. In terms of graduation rates, Black male student-athletes graduated at a 40% rate while the rate for all undergraduates at the same university was over 80% (Harper, Williams, & Blackman, 2013). Black male student-athletes at this university had graduation rates lower than all student-athletes, 40% and 68%, respectively (Harper et al., 2013).

These data were collected during the spring 2012 semester before the launch of Black Lives Matter and other popular social movements. Students were allowed to take the survey during class time; those who did not want to participate were allowed to leave. The survey took approximately 10 min to complete and was approved by the institutional review board. All survey questions can be found in the Online Appendix.

Measures

Race in football

Survey respondents were asked questions about issues that may be associated with race in college football. They were asked “—Insert university name—football players are 40% African American, while the University population as a whole is 2.6% African American. What do you think is the primary cause of this discrepancy?” Ninety-six percent of 365 respondents answered this question. Table 1 contains the themes from our initial coding.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Themes From Participants’ Responses to the Discrepancy Between African American Population of the Football Team Versus Their Population in the Overall Student Body.

Theme	Number of Responses
African American more athletic/inherent prowess	121
African American culture values football more that White American	33
African American don’t care about school	22
Stereotypes/societal pressure	23
Geographical reasons	32
Recruiting	69
Football is a path to education	14
Social issues making academic entrance difficult	25
Scholarships	26
Just happened/not race	23
Recognition of discrimination	16
Avoids the question	26
Other of note	22
School only wants Black athletes	3
Not sure/don’t know	9

Note. Responses could be in more than one category.

Respondents were also asked, “—Insert university name—players have a graduation rate of 65%, while the student body as a whole has a graduation rate of 80%. What do you think is the primary cause of this discrepancy?” Of 365 participants, 360 offered responses. These responses were also open coded for frames. Table 2 shows our initial coded themes.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Themes Associated With Participants’ Responses to the Question About the Graduation Rates Among the Football Team Versus that Rate Among the Undergraduate Student Body, Generally.

Theme	Number of Responses
Time demands	128
Not motivated to graduate/cultural	144
Professional draft/professional football	101
Not smart enough	53
Less high school preparation	7
Pursue other opportunities	4
Not held to the same academic standards	9
No support from the university/taken advantage of	12
School takes advantage	9
Recognition of discrimination	4
Avoids the question	4
Other of Note	8
Not sure/don’t know	1

Note. Responses could be in more than one category.

Additionally, respondents were asked, “Hispanics and Asians are rare in college and professional football. What role does race play in this?” Of 365 respondents, 337 elected to answer the previous question (see Table 3 for our coded themes). Finally, we asked about the important qualities of quarterbacks, generally, as well as Black and White quarterbacks, specifically.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Themes Associated With Participants’ Responses to a Question About Individuals of Hispanic and Asian Descent Participation in College and Professional Football.

Themes	Count
Genetics/body type or size	85
Cultural factors/don’t value football	191
No role models	5
Denied the opportunity/discourage/discriminated	25
Stereotypes against it	30
Emphasis on foreignness/otherness	15
Avoids the question	1
Race not a factor	20
Don’t know	13

Note. Responses could be in more than one category.

Minimization of Racism

The minimization of racism frame arises when discussing the few Black students on campus relative to the number of Black football players. One group cited geography as the primary cause of these disparities, suggesting that the number of Black students is representative of their numbers in the state: “African Americans are good athletes [but] ‘the state’ is in a White area.” Another student also cited the racial demographics of the state and the school, “‘The university’ has a high in-state population and is a predominantly White state. Athletes tend to travel further to pick the best programs.” Similarly, one respondent wrote, “I think it is more about the location of our school and the population of this area as a whole”, another proposing the high numbers of Black football players was a consequence of recruiting: “They recruit for the football team, while the University is a state school and thus reflect ‘the state’s’ demographics.” Most respondents find no place for race in deciphering student versus athletic representations.

Respondents also evoked the minimization of racism frame in arguing that the quarterback position is about merit, many asserted that “the same qualities being [sic] needed,” no matter who it is. One participant suggested that being a quarterback is not for everyone: “Race does not play a factor in my mind, but the quarterback position is an ‘attitude’ in which only a few fit.” Another argued, “I didn’t think it really mattered, good players at the same position will exhibit similar skills.” Other respondents noted the position fits a certain type: “I think a quarterback (QB) is in the position that they are because they fit a mold for the QB position- I don’t see how race is a requirement that is considered.” Another noted more pointedly, “I don’t think race has anything to do with being a good QB. If you’re from Mars and can throw a touchdown, good for you.”

Commonly, respondents saw this as about a reality of equal opportunity and “nothing to do with race; players are chosen for their skill set on a one-on-one case.” Another student noted, “It’s about skills and know [sic] the game-NOT RACE [emphasis original].” This belief in a meritocracy reflects a tendency for some college students to “give lip service to the existence of discrimination,” to be “sensitized to discrimination,” but to simultaneously believe that “discrimination and institutionalized racism” are not reasons communities of color “lag behind” in comparisons to Whites (Bonilla- Silva, 2010, p. 43). For respondents, being a good quarterback is about skill, even though the position has been dominated by White players, a fact one respondent only minimally addressed: “While Black QBs are rare, I think they exhibit the same qualities.” Respondents either disregarded or are blind to the link between race and being a quarterback.

Cultural Racism

Many respondents offered up the idea of essentialized aspects of life among people of color to explain diverse experiences in college sports. The first cultural stereotype discovered here serves to essentialize college football players as inherently less qualified students. When describing the disparities in graduation rates, respondents described college football players as having less high school preparation and that they were not in school with academic scholarships but athletic scholarships. One respondent wrote, “disadvantages in secondary and primary education which makes athletic scholarships the more likely course of college enrollment.” Others make a tortured link between being on an athletic scholarship and an inability to do the work: “Many of them are here because they got a scholarship, and they wouldn’t have made it in if it wasn’t for a scholarship. Therefore, they are unable to keep up the rigorous courses in the university.” In contrast, some point to college athletes’ lack of motivation: “visions of grandeur in the NFL (going pro early); low focus on academics for student-athletes.” While it is not easy to discern whether these comments refer to all football players or just Black football players, they do suggest that football players, generally, are perceived to come from underprivileged backgrounds; and somehow, this is inherently problematic with being successful in college. Given that most football players are Black, it is not unreasonable to assume respondents had that kind of player in mind when responding to the survey.

A second cultural stereotype used by respondents asserts that Black people do not value education and/or value athletics more than other nonspecified groups. Some respondents assert that more African American students “aspire to sports than to academia” or are “interested in playing college football,” and finally, some argue that athletics play a more “prominent role in African American culture.” Other participants argue that African Americans prefer sports to education, such that “African Americans would prefer to go to college for athletics than education” or “the African American community identifies with and cares more about football.” Put differently, some respondents asserted that White people do not value sports as highly as Black people: “African Americans work harder at football compared to Whites, and it is seen as more valuable than for Whites where intelligence is pushed.” What has been termed the “culture-structure” debate (Rudman, 1986), about whether racial differences in interest and participation in sport are the result of racialized positions of social class location or reflect Black cultural orientations to sport, suggests that there are both cultural and structural forces at play (Harrison et al., 2011). Most of the respondents ignore an impact of structural forces.

Another stereotype of Black culture is that athletes lack resources and are poor. The relatively large presence of Black athletes on campus was linked to college being an important avenue of upward mobility. In statements like “sports are often a means to an escape from poverty” or “athletics are a way to escape minority situations, without athletics, there would be fewer opportunities to come to college,” football is seen as giving Black players an opportunity to make it out of “their circumstance.” These ideas rely on long-standing stereotypes that associate poverty with blackness. Some refer specifically to this idea: “the African American community is poorer and gets poorer education growing up making it hard for them to get into college.” Another participant described the issue as a fundamental cultural difference between Black and White communities: “Disproportionate investments in non-White community [sic] in athletic skill. Education of non-White communities not national priority.” Finally, another respondent wrote: “Exceling in football provides African American students the opportunity for higher education that they might not otherwise have/they view as their only opportunity.” Thus, respondents automatically affiliate African Americans and African American athletes with (inferior) public education, poor neighborhoods, or inner cities. The automatic link between poverty and blackness in these statements contrasts with a poverty rate of 27% among African Americans in 2013 (The Guardian, 2015). Moreover, implicit in these comments is the idea that going to college enhances prospects for African Americans to go pro. While truer for African Americans than for Whites who start life disadvantaged, the best predictors of going professional are growing up in a middle-class family (Dubrow & Adams, 2010).

This stereotyping may also be at play in how respondents explain Latino and “Asian” lack of interest in football. Respondents referenced Latino and Asian American cultural stereotypes when thinking about football (Call-Cummings & Martinez, 2017; Cabrera, 2014a). Some respondents suggested that the popularity of football reflects cultural differences, suggesting that Latino and/or Asian American communities “don’t have football so therefore they don’t have a lot of opportunities to play” or “football is not a sport that is widely popular w/in [sic] many racial communities and may deter prospective players from getting involved at a young age out of fear of having to step outside their community.” Respondents suggested that a lack of Latino or Asian players may be linked to “cultural preferences” and upbringing: “tougher to recruit; likely less players due to their own sports preferences (soccer being much more popular) many Hispanics/Asians have likely never gotten the chance to be on a football team” or “football just isn’t played while they were growing up so that wasn’t a custom of their culture like soccer or baseball would be.” One person suggested that, “Football is more of an American sport, so there may be stronger ties to other sports (like soccer) which are more prevalent in their heritage.” References to cultural preferences or a lack of experience with football growing up underline essentialized notions of both groups. Consider that while many Latino/as do prefer soccer, most of those who speak primarily English like football (http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/from-futbol-to-football--how-the-nfl-and-soccer-are-competing-fo.html). Implicit in the portrayals of both groups is an assumption of foreignness (Cabrera, 2014a; Call-Cummings & Martinez, 2017).

Naturalized Physical Abilities

Respondents tapped into a link between African Americans and physical gifts. A respondent wrote, “I don’t know many Black quarterbacks, but they seem more physically gifted than White quarterbacks.” A common variation on this theme was to associate blackness with athleticism (seemingly a natural ability) and whiteness with intelligence. One respondent wrote, “Around the country, white QBs are praised for their intelligence while AA QBs are praised for athleticism. Very rarely do they get combined (Steve Young or Michael Vick are examples).” Another participant replied, “I think whites, since most don’t have the athleticism that African American QBs have, have to rely more on good decision making in order to excel since most aren’t able to scramble.” Other examples pointed to the stereotype of Black athleticism: “less athletic, white QB need to rely on intangibles.” Finally, a respondent wrote, “The main difference is in the style of the most prominent African American QBs vs. white QBs. Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and Peyton Manning are mostly pocket passers, while Michael Vick and Cam Newton are feared for their ability to scramble.” More rare are those respondents who seem to question the stereotype: “It seems that black quarterbacks have been glossed over as a single type of only athletic or ‘dual threat’ while White quarterbacks are praised for heady decisions and smart players.” Thus, a common assumption is that Black quarterbacks are naturally gifted in some areas, while White quarterbacks may have natural intellectual talents or may rely on intangibles.

Abstract Liberalism

Finally, there are two themes that reference the abstract liberalism frame: (1) the conflicting priorities of college athletes and the university and (2) the role of media. Some respondents argued that academic culture was undermined when playing college football. Some thought football “is basically a full-time job,” which “takes away from academics” and “players might decide to go pro or transfer before they finish their degree.” One participant argued

The pressures of fulfilling their responsibilities as a student and an athlete are very high. There is a fight for what takes first priority. I think football usually wins that fight. It is also hard to learn when you miss class for football.

Some respondents commented that the university had warring priorities. The perspective of some respondents was that the university was more concerned with making money than educating athletes: “Players are brought to the school for making money and for the athletic program, players are athletes first and students second” or “the school believes that it is more important to be good at sports than it is to produce well educated members of society.” Another participant noted, “football players are brought here to play football nobody cares how they do academically if they perform on the field.” In contrast, one respondent linked race and warring priorities,

Blacks are the best athletes, but in the eyes of the university not the best students. So, let’s just use the Blacks as athletes to make money for us and make it appear as if ‘the school’ is very diverse which really it’s not (in terms of Blacks, not Asians/Indians, etc.).

Limitations

We acknowledge that our results are limited in several ways. Our questions elicited a limited range of information pertinent to this topic. Second, since the sample is limited to one university and a limited number of classes, the results have limited generalizability. Finally, since timing is everything, perhaps our results might be different if we had surveyed before the raft of police shootings and/or right after the recent presidential election.