I spend most of time writing over at my site TheSportsNotebook.com, which focuses on a mix of sports history articles and contemporary commentary. As a fan of the woeful Washington Redskins, there's one topic that's been on my mind a lot lately, but I thought it might be better suited for this venue--it's whether race is playing a role in the current quarterback/coach drama in Washington.
If you're a sports fan, you probably know the details, given that most media outlets are all over it. If you're not a sports fan, here's a basic primer on what you need to know for this particular discussion...
*There seems to be a serious conflict between Redskins' head coach Mike Shanahan, who won the Super Bowl with the Denver Broncos in 1997-98, but has struggled with both the Broncos and Redskins since 2005, and his young quarterback Robert Griffin III, known casually as "RG3." The cause of the conflict isn't pertinent to this piece, but my take on the entire timeline of events from 2012-13 is here.
We should note as a disclaimer that neither side will acknowledge their distaste for the other, but it would be a big upset if the media speculation in this regard wasn't true. Almost as big an upset as the Redskins actually winning a game. Sorry, I let some frustration fly there.
*RG3 is an African-American quarterback and looks the part, with his long dreadlocks. Indeed, when he was drafted with the second overall pick in the spring of 2012, a friend of mine texted me to inform me that my team had "spent $50 million on a guy who looks like he just knocked over a 7-11."
I should note that this friend is *not* a racist--he's more like our version of Charles Barkley, the African-American basketball commentator renowned for saying race-oriented things that virtually everyone in our social circle, exclusively of European heritage (not by design, just the way it is) appreciates. I suppose a lot of people also call Barkley a racist, but I'm not one of them. I think those that do need to stop creating this ultra-tense racial climate that's already led me to write several disclaimers and explanations before we even get into the meat of the story.
*RG3 was benched for the final three games of this season. A big part of the reason is health-related. He tore an ACL last season, has never looked fully healthy and Shanahan's ostensible reason was to make sure that the young quarterback can have an offseason devoted to progressing as a quarterback rather than rehabbing. The fact Washington has a talented backup quarterback--a white guy in Kirk Cousins surely contributed to the coach's thinking.
*In the aftermath of the decision, a commentator on the NFL Network, Michael Irving--former wide receiver with the Dallas Cowboy teams that won three Super Bowls from 1992-95, dropped the race card on the table. Irvin pointed out that Shanahan had clashed with two other high-profile African-American players during his troubled tenure in Washington, and then asked "Do you think they would do this to Andrew Luck?" Luck is the player chosen one spot ahead of RG3 in the 2012 draft and is a clean-cut white guy from Stanford.
*This isn't the first time RG3's race has become an issue. It was last year at this time that an African-American commentator, Rob Parker, then of ESPN, called the quarterback a "cornball brother", because he was marrying a white girl and there are rumors he might vote Republican. Parker added "it makes me wonder if he's down with the cause." Parker was correctly fired by ESPN and even his colleague, the proudly black Stephen A. Smith, said during the live broadcast that he was "uncomfortable with where this was going," and said RG3's personal life was his own business.
That's the backdrop to the current drama. So now let's get to the question. Is race a factor in the benching of RG3 or any other part of this Redskins' soap opera?
****************
I'm going to begin with what I think is the easy answer--race is almost certainly *not* an issue with Shanahan and RG3. The fact is that the head coach also had serious problems with his quarterback in Denver, the legendary John Elway, a white player. The breach was so bad that Elway refused to return to the organization after retirement (he's currently the team president and doing quite well at it) until Shanahan was gone. It appears the Redskins' head coach just has a hard time playing well with others.
The harder question is whether there is a racial dynamic going on with media coverage and public perceptions of RG3. The quarterback has not been shy about getting endorsement deals, nor does he shun the TV cameras. With his team struggling (as one who's watched every game, he doesn't deserve the blame for the losses, but that's what happens you are the quarterback), the media has piled on. RG3 is being called a diva, a prima donna, an egomaniac, being full of himself, you name it.
This is where I think race is driving this coverage and my problems date back to last year, when RG3 was riding high, on his way to Offensive Rookie of the Year. My issue can be summed up thusly..
*RG3 comes from an outstanding family. Both of his parents served this country in the military, and his father, now retired, continues to work with veterans.
*As you would expect from a product of this environment, RG3 has never had a problem with authority. He went to school at Baylor, won the Heisman Trophy, helped lift a long-struggling program back to national prominence and there was never a whiff of any difficulty between him and his coaches. Indeed, his high character was something NFL scouts felt added to his draft value.
My thesis is this--if a clean-cut white guy came out of a military family, built a good reputation for character, lifted a struggling program to prominence and then played great in the NFL his first year, all the while repeatedly putting his body on the line in ways pro quarterbacks aren't supposed to do, the mainstream media would eat this up. He would be held out as more than a good football player, but as a role model. The same would be true for his family.
And if this same quarterback later had run-ins with a head coach with a documented track record of not getting along with people, the media would be sure to point that out
Instead, media coverage last season--while indisputably positive--was more about RG3's electric style of play (he's an exceptionally fast runner) and not about the many things that mark his entire family as role models. When the worm turned for the worse this season, media coverage has excoriated the quarterback on a much more personal level. Shanahan's atrocious record of dealing with people has been left unmentioned by all but Irvin.
This is the racial dynamic that disturbs me--the Griffin family, by all accounts, is what we want to uphold. When the opposite happens, it's fair to wonder if there's something more than just football evaluations in play.
I want to be clear that no accusations are being directed at those who think RG3's play has been poor (though I disagree) or who think that Cousins should be the quarterback (I also disagree right now, but am open to being persuaded). Those are football judgments and it's what we talk about at TheSportsNotebook. You can hold either view, while still agreeing that there's an unhealthy racial dynamic in the conversation about the Redskins' quarterback.
***************
One of the reasons I founded the Blue Dog Reaganite blog and shun the political mainstream is that I want to ask uncomfortable questions of my own political ideology, something that doesn't go over well in a world where political activists pride themselves on thinking they are ceaselessly correct every time they open their mouth. And the race issue in general, particularly what we have discussed here pertaining to RG3 raises some uncomfortable questions.
The Blue Dog Reaganite heritage can be defined as an embrace of the pre-1968 Democratic Party, before they lurched radically to the left and the trifecta of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II, who combined to break the back of the Soviet Union. Is that heritage, broadly defined, closed off to those of African-American descent?
We should note that this is quite different from asking of whether the heritage is racist. Politicians in the pre-1968 Democratic Party were instrumental in the civil rights movement and Ronald Reagan didn't have a racist bone in his body. But like with the whole RG3 scenario, there can be a unhealthy racial dynamic that doesn't involve actual racism.
I'm an Irish Catholic and quite proud of my cultural and political heritage. There's no question there were rivalries between the Irish and black communities in America and it spilled out in the aftermath of the civil rights movement. The same would be true of other Euro-ethnic groups. Ronald Reagan also came under fire from the organized political community and race became a wedge issue that left a lot of socially traditional Democrats crossing over to vote Republican, while the African-American vote became the political base of the left wing as they hijacked the Democratic Party.
Ronald Reagan, in a decision that should never have been made, opened his 1980 presidential campaign with a speech at Philadelphia, Mississippi, a place that had been the site of violence against African-Americans during the civil rights movement. I maintain firmly, after reading much of Reagan's writing, that this was not a product of his personal beliefs. But can an African-American be blamed for feeling like they might not be wanted?
The political Left went on to consolidate the African-American vote as their own--they were "down with the cause", as Parker might put it, and used the civil rights experience to create a false linkage with today's debates over gay and lesbian rights--there is quite a difference between race and one's sex life, but African-Americans are being bullied into backing this latest left-wing cause on the grounds that's a natural extension of the civil rights movement.
I find this all quite frustrating, but whenever there's frustration it's always good to start by asking what your own role in it might be. Or in this case, the role of the ideology and heritage that I subscribe to. If we haven't reached out to African-Americans aggressively enough, if we haven't sought to build bridges based on shared values, then is it any surprise if they choose to go another direction in their voting patterns?
As it pertains to this topic, if we don't see the Griffin family's values and service to the country and celebrate them the same way we might if their last name was Murphy, should we be shocked if African-Americans notice and act accordingly?
The Blue Dog Reaganite philosophy and heritage is something to be proud of, but any political construct is always going to have shortcomings. Our political ideas are ideal for those in the African-American community, and our social values have much in common. Our forebears were great people, and our own motives in carrying that out have been good, but there were battles that left us divided. It's okay to acknowledge our own role in it and to make some amends. It's called acknowledging we are human, and not always in the right.
For me, that starts with this--in the debate surrounding my favorite NFL team, the Irish Catholic head coach (whose hiring I enthusiastically supported) is wrong and needs to tone down his ego. The African-American quarterback with the long dreadlocks (whose drafting of which I was skeptical) might not be perfect, but his values and those of his family are what we should be supporting.
It's a small decision and on a matter that's not of great social consequence. But if all of us make a lot of small decisions and make them well, they'll eventually have an impact of great social consequence.
Recent Comments