Part Two: Sticking to sports is not an option

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

In today’s political climate, it’s imperative for those who have a platform to use it for causes they believe in. Fans have political and social opinions just as the athletes. It’s very interesting that many of the same people who are suggesting athletes “stick to sports” aren’t doing the same with their own occupations as they discuss sports. Some often forget that athletes are just human as they themselves are. We don’t own the athletes and have no right to dictate what they do outside of sports. They are people with thoughts, feelings and opinions like everyone else; however, they must be prepared and remain vigilant when they face backlash from fans who disagree with their stances on certain issues.

In Part One, a diverse group of men gave their opinions. Today’s participants are: Jonathan May, Rafael Torres, Kenneth Frank Childers, Nekias Duncan and Evan F. Moore.

1) What are your thoughts on athletes who are using their platform to speak out about social issues and politics? What would you say to the stick to sports crowd?

Jonathan May: Athletes are real people with a full range of interests and opinions, and they have every right to share those opinions. I think beyond a “right”, many feel a responsibility because they can reach so many with their message, and I encourage them doing so. As to the “stick to sports” folks, that’s the flip side of the “it’s their right” coin. It athletes choose to speak, they have to be willing to accept attrition of a segment of their fan base. The “stick to sports” crowd may be on the wrong side of history, but if they want to run around twitter yelling at athletes and journalists, they are welcome to do so (and be judged for it).

Rafael Torres: I believe people need to stop treating athletes as if they were robots. I see comments on a daily basis, “why are you watching a football game when you should be in the gym practicing?” and these comments irk me. The same way I am allowed to have a voice in whichever platform or field I choose, so should they. I am all for athletes sharing their opinions on world problems including social issues and politics. To the “stick to sports” crowd, I am sure they wouldn’t say that to the athletes if they were in person. Those people are cowards who devalue opinions because they are opposing to their own.

Kenneth Frank Childers: Athletes in our country might have the biggest platform there is. I know more people that don’t watch the news than people that don’t watch sports. I have no problem with anyone using their platform to stand up for their social and political beliefs. I also believe if you’re going to use your platform you should understand what you might be risking.

The “stick to sports crowd” is a harder question for me. I understand people’s views that don’t want everything in life politicized. Athletes and sports reporters get this constantly. I’ll take the side of having an opportunity for dialog when someone doesn’t “stick to sports”. We all need to talk more with people that disagree with us. Stop using issues to divide people and see where we have common ground.

Nekias Duncan: I’m glad that more players are starting to take stances. The athlete-fan dynamic has always been peculiar to me; athletes are mostly isolated due to their financial status, but that seems to work both ways. They can appear to be larger than life; in general, fans don’t like that. But when players speak out on societal or political issues, fans want them to put the muzzle on — like being rich somehow removes them from reality. For example: ask Thabo Sefolosha or Michael Bennett if being rich, talented athletes stopped them from having unnecessary experiences with the police.

As for the “stick to sports” crew, I get it. I mean, they’re wrong, obviously, but I understand their gripe. For many, sports aren’t just entertainment; it’s way to get away from the ugliness of the world. I can understand fans getting frustrated by wanting to watch their favorite teams or players to get their mind off of politics, only to see countless discussions going on. However, people have to realize that athletes are humans, too. Using their platform to bring awareness or spark change on issues should be applauded.

Evan Moore: Good on them. Athletes aren’t immune to the issues of the day. Believe it or not, Black athletes are indeed black people, so that means they deal with the same thing you and I deal with everyday. In the Black community, if you have a platform, you have an obligation to participate in the uplift. Having said that, a lot of players ought to educate themselves on the issues of the day so the message doesn’t get twisted.

Stick the Sports is what happens when people decide the look at history in the lense of partisan politics. History, sports and politics are intertwined. Did this group say that when ESPN had a segment on Republican Presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s high school basketball career? Or when ESPN hired Rush Limbaugh? Stick to Sports only happens when conservatives believes their political beliefs are threatened.

2) Do you think the fear of being “Kaep-ed” is keeping some NFL players from actively speaking out against social injustice and politics?

JM: Before Trump changed the entire dynamic, my answer was that it depends on the player. Over the last few years, top-tier NFL talent has literally gotten away with murder (and rape, and domestic violence and cheating) and gotten to stay on the field. I believe the NFL is willing to overlook almost anything if you’re a difference-maker on the field. It’s the guys in the middle — the ones who aren’t substantially better than their available replacement — who are getting squeezed. Those guys are definitely worried about how their words are going impact their career. However, once Trump stuck his nose into the discussion, it obviously galvanized the players, as we saw across the league in Week 3 (and probably will continue to see). I think the gloves are off now, and individual players have less risk than the NFL.

RT: I think so. This isn’t something these players only do for fun. It’s their way of life and how they put food on their tables. The way Kap has been treated is embarrassing to say the least and I’m sure most of those guys are well informed of what is going on.

KC: Absolutely. I don’t have any specific examples I can give, but with the average NFL career being less than 4 years and contracts not fully guaranteed, it would surprise me more if it wasn’t a fear for some players.

ND: I do think so. Colin Kaepernick has clearly proven his heart’s in the right place, but it’s also fair to point out that he’s made plenty of money in his NFL career. If he never plays another down in the NFL (he absolutely should!), he’s still set. An undrafted free agent, on the other hand, would have to think twice about the ramifications of taking a stand or being vocal.

EM: Yes, there’s a long history of precautionary tales in sports. Tommie Smith/John Carlos, Muhammad Ali and Craig Hodges. When guys have spoken out, the blowback came for them. And other players saw it and said I don’t want that to me. Football is a dangerous sport, where a guy can lose his career and a way to earn for their families. They are always “one play away.” A lot of player feel the way Colin Kaepernick, Michael Bennett and others do. They just don’t want to risk their careers by speaking out.

3) Are you actively participating in the grassroots campaign #BlackoutNFL? Why or why not? Do you think it has the potential to affect profits for the league?

JM: I haven’t really watched the NFL in years, just because the product doesn’t resonate with me and I don’t have any particular team allegiance. I do think it has the potential to affect the league, and already has in terms of coverage and publicity. It’s too soon to tell how it will affect profits, I think. I do know that the NFL is getting it from both sides now — the #BlackOutNFL protest is now being echoed on the right by people burning their season tickets after the Week 3 league-wide activism.

RT: I am not currently participating in the campaign but I do think it is a great idea. I haven’t read much into it or educated myself on the topic, but the NFL has soo many die hard fans I don’t see it losing much profit.

KC: This is the first I’m hearing about this boycott. I’m watching the 49er game as I write this so no I’m not participating in any NFL boycott even though I support their stance. I have no doubt Colin Kaepernick would be on a roster if it weren’t for his activism. I’m a 49er fan and wish we had him back. Kaepernick had some missteps along the way that didn’t help: wearing a Fidel Castro shirt and socks with pigs dressed as cops. I believe that hurt him more than kneeling during the anthem. As far as having an impact on NFL profits, I believe it would take millions of people joining a boycott like this to make even a small dent.

ND: I personally haven’t participated, mostly because I haven’t heard much about it. I’m sure it could make an impact if enough people went through it; the NFL, and its fandom, is pretty hard to put a dent into.

EM: No, I’m a sportswriter so I have to watch. My story into becoming a journalist is different than most. In a short time, I went from being a fan to covering and writing about player I once idolized. So when that happens, it becomes more of a job instead of entertainment.

4) Should NFL coaches speak out and be more vocal about social issues like some of their NBA counterparts?

JM: This is a tough one. The NFL and NBA are so different, from the top down. I don’t think how many NFL coaches who could speak with credibility the way that Pop, Fizdale, Kerr, etc have spoken recently, just because they’ve usually steered clear of such things. I have a hard time telling someone that they “should”, even if I am entirely supportive of their freedom to do so. It is a very personal choice with effects that are hard to predict. Like it or not, I think the average NFL fan and the average NBA fan have different political and social values. Of course, there is plenty of overlap and fans of each on all sides of the issues, but I think the “median NFL fan” falls further right than their NBA counterpart.

RT: I believe they should. I think anyone with an opinion should voice it. Whether it be an opinion I agree with or not, they should let themselves be heard.

KC: I don’t believe you should tell people what they should do just the same as I don’t feel you should tell people what they shouldn’t do. Two sides of the same coin in my opinion. With that said, I think by taking a stand on political and social issues NFL coaches run a greater risk of alienating players in their locker rooms just because of the size of the rosters. For example, If there are 10–15 guys that don’t agree with the stance their coach is taking, there’s a chance it could ruin a team.

ND: In theory, yes. It’d be nice if NFL head coaches — most of them being white — would show solidarity with their black players. Realistically, I don’t *expect* that from them. That mostly boils down to the owners, and that’s a whole different issue altogether.

EM: They are the most vocal. Not because the NBA is a Black league, it is because their league can’t hold the access to a guaranteed contract over their heads like what happens in the NFL. The NBA guys are on much more of united front. The NFL is a Black league too but we’re seeing the growing pains of what it means to be an activist and an athlete.

5) What are your thoughts on the president’s controversial comments regarding Jemele Hill, NFL players who protest and withdrawing the White House invitation to the Golden State Warriors?

JM: This administration continues to be an absolute embarrassment. The President’s approach to all of these things — Jemele’s remarks, NFL protests and the conflict with Steph Curry — reflect two awful truths. First, this White House considers nothing “out of bounds” when it comes from distracting from its continued failures on policy, politics, and leadership, not to mention the ever deeper investigation into the 2016 election. Second, the President is an unapologetic racist who intentionally plays to the latent (and for many, sadly, blatant) racial biases of his “base”. I think there are times where it is completely appropriate for a president to speak on cultural issues that intersect with sports, but context and intent matter. Here, we’re seeing a deliberate effort to divide our country along dangerous lines, and it breaks my heart to see so many of our fellow Americans drift further from the light because of it.

RT: I think that the comments that Donald Trump has made actually show the kind of person he is. He’s not fit to be president and he just keeps adding on to his unfit resume. He is a celebrity and that is what he wants to be. He doesn’t genuinely care about the people he swore to unite. I have not once heard or read of him admitting that he’s wrong on anything. He’s arrogant and he dismisses important world issues. While Puerto Rico is suffering, he is more worried about what people think of him or his famous “Fake News” statements. I’m sorry if I’m being informal, but that man is a clown. As LeBron James put it, he’s a BUM.

KC: The White House commenting on the employment status of a private citizens is insane to me.

On Jemele: The Trump White House should’ve taken a lead from the Obama White House and not commented on a TV host tweeting that a sitting U.S. President is racist.

On NFL players: The president’s comments have done more to cause division in our country than the protest. And in making such divisive comments he’s made the protests more about him than social issues. I have no problem with the president saying he would prefer all players stand for the anthem. He’s the president. That’s what I would expect him say. I have a huge issue with using his position to call for people to be fired for exercising their right to free speech.

On the Warriors: I think it was petty and unnecessary but its ultimately the president’s choice to do what he wants. It’s a missed oppurtunity to exchange views for both sides and that’s what i think the goal should be.

ND: It’s a bunch of foolishness, honestly. As offensive as Mr. Trump has been throughout his short-lived political career — and even before that, considering how hard he went after former President Barack Obama — it’s ridiculous that he would essentially send out a statement calling for Jemele’s job.

Trump pulling the White House invitation was hilarious, honestly. “Un-inviting” someone that said they didn’t want to come just reeks of sour grapes. But, hey: for someone that’s had so much handed to him, I imagine it’d be pretty difficult to accept someone not respecting you.

The “S.O.B” comment was obviously out of line, but this isn’t anything new with Trump. The fact that he was able to, single-handedly, shift the narrative of the protest is what made the situation so frustrating. Colin Kaepernick was crystal-clear about why he was sitting during the anthem; remember, he only decided to kneel after consulting with Nate Boyer, a former player and current Green Beret. Despite that consultation, and despite Kaepernick explicitly explaining his cause, the narrative of the protest has shifted from police brutality and racial inequality, to one of American hatred and military disrespect. It’s disingenuous, unfair, and … not surprising in the least bit.

EM: We’re at the point in American history where we can’t even decide if something is blatantly racist or not. If what I’m saying is hard for you to understand, ask yourself when a white person says “Black people are killing each other in the inner city; it’s not racist since it’s true,” why is that person’s thoughts seen as “the truth?” But when Hill calls President Trump “Hitler,” why is she branded a racist?

And while many of you have your thinking caps on, did they complain when ESPN hired conservative radio show host Rush Limbaugh? No, they didn’t.

His comments on NFL players shows that he is still angry from the time he sued the NFL as an owner of a USFL team. He said the NFL colluded against him. For his trouble, he was paid $3.76 in damages by the league. That level of pettiness doesn’t subside with time. I think the shots he took the NFL were specifically placed. The USFL tried to go up against the NFL are they were publicly embarrassed. Why would he pay nice with the NFL? A man with the level of power he has acquired since he becoming president, doesn’t forget those who’ve crossed him in the past.

It goes to show you what happens when someone has a fit when it becomes known that you don’t mess with them like that. President Trump won the election by getting a demographic who has everything going for them to believe that they’ve been mistreated somehow.