Thursday, April 24, 2014
Final Reflections
Going into this class, I thought it would be class where we just learned about different sports in the US. With the semester ending in a weeks, I feel that I have a better understanding of sports and how they affect our society and vis versa. Being a competitive volleyball coach, I look at coaching at a new level. I don't think of it as just solely a form of entertainment, but I believe that sport changes and effects lives. Being able to learn about the sports ethic, diversity and gender, body images and more, I understand why certain athletes are the way they are. It is so interesting to comprehend how sports can be overlooked as means of entertainment but people don't realize the importance it has on our society. I can honestly say that when I leave this class, I not only will be looking at sports through a new light but this class has changed the way I look at media and entertainment. This was not only the best course I have taken at CU Boulder, I will be recommending this class to all my friends. Thank you.
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Sport and Ethnicity
I believe that in many movies there is a portrayal of sports in African American lifestyle. Looking back at Hoop Dreams and referencing to the movie the Blind Side, I believe that sports was a way of life and also a means of a possible successful future. In Hoop Dreams, both the boys needed to make it big and play in the NBA in order to have financial security. They also loved the sport. They moved schools and made sacrifices in order to have a chance to make it big. In the film Blind Side, Michael the protagonist, needed to succeed in football in order to go to higher education. Unlike the boys in Hoop Dreams, Michael was successful in making it pro. I would say that in these two examples it shows sports relevance in African American culture. I wouldn't say that sport is damaging race; however, I do believe that the portrayals of African Americans in sports film is often portrayed as a lower class individual who needs sports in order to make it big and be successful. While this can create a dramatic lively movie, I believe it reinforces the idea that African Americans can only be successful through sports. It also once again implies that anyone will be successful in the sporting industry if they work hard and overcome adversity. I think that through this portrayal, we are reinforcing racial and social injustice.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Interrogating inequalities in Sports Media: Examining gender/race representation in Sports Illustrated
Through my observations, I have come to the conclusion that gender/sex stereotypes are still being reinforced through the media. Through sports media, we not only see that females are seen as highly sexualized. In the sports illustrated covers, the only time women were seen was if they were half naked or in the background used as means of a diverse crowd. While sex plays a role, there is an expected gender that follows sex. People don't realize that both men and women can have different genders. When most of the sports illustrated covers show that all the male athletes are muscular, it shows that men need to be masculine. We rarely see skinny feminine men on covers. This just shows how society praises the ideal masculine man. In addition to men being held up to certain standards, women also are. If society deems that women need to look like Kate Upton, it hold women to a standard that they all need to look like models. By sports illustrated normalizing the ideal body of men and women, it reinforces the idea that if men and women don't look a certain way, they are deemed not as ideal.
References:
http://cnnsi.com/vault/cover/select/2013-01-01/2013-12-31/dd/3/index.htm
Reflecting on the Shame of College Sports: Should NCAA Div 1 Basketball and Football players get paid?
The argument of should NCAA Division 1 basketball and football players get paid, is one of the "hottest" topics in both the academic and popular news world. The articles discuss both the positive and negative implications of the argument. The stem from the problem is money. Money is what drives most Americans. I make the claim that Americans go to work and go to school, for the reason that one day they want to live a comfortable lifestyle. Aside from my personal beliefs, the article of "The Shame of College Sports" explains that there are thousands of collegiate athletes in America; however, there are millions of spectators that interchangeably attend sporting events. In the article it discusses that collegiate sports has become the brand for universities/colleges. The article also brings up that money is driving most players and coaches. Players said in the article that there they would rather be participants in sports rather than being "professional performers". However, there are investigations against universities paying athletes in some for in order for them to sign and play for their university. Through this the article also states that coaches are being paid outrageous amounts of money to coach for universities. These two claims alone show that money drives collegiate sports.
Personally I believe that NCAA division 1 basketball/football players shouldn't get paid. In a way, universities will pay for their schooling through scholarships and grants. If these players get paid, then will universities also pay for their schooling. What kind of message would we be sending if we show that you can make a living being a college athlete? Another issue I foresee, is that there is already a difference in pay with men and women in professional sports. If there is a salary difference, would there be a salary difference with college students. I see an issue that a college football player would be paid more than a college girl basketball player. Overall I see more issues with paying college athletes. In a way, we already pay our college athletes through scholarships. Will non-college athletes ever have a chance of getting grants/scholarships if universities will give most of their money/endowments to athletes?
References:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/2/
NY Sports Economy
Coakley
Personally I believe that NCAA division 1 basketball/football players shouldn't get paid. In a way, universities will pay for their schooling through scholarships and grants. If these players get paid, then will universities also pay for their schooling. What kind of message would we be sending if we show that you can make a living being a college athlete? Another issue I foresee, is that there is already a difference in pay with men and women in professional sports. If there is a salary difference, would there be a salary difference with college students. I see an issue that a college football player would be paid more than a college girl basketball player. Overall I see more issues with paying college athletes. In a way, we already pay our college athletes through scholarships. Will non-college athletes ever have a chance of getting grants/scholarships if universities will give most of their money/endowments to athletes?
References:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/2/
NY Sports Economy
Coakley
Thursday, February 13, 2014
High School Sport
High School Athletics are something that is taken for granted here in America. Through the reading, I learned that High School Athletics is a rare to some countries. The United States is the only nation that has sponsors and has a huge focus on interscholastic athletics. I personally was involved in high school athletics and currently coach a high school team. I found what I learned very interesting.
There can be many arguments to what the social conditions for high school sport emerged. I learned that an example of football in Odessa, Texas, football was used to show masculinity among men. This shows that socially at the time, it was necessary for boys in high school to show how masculine they were. It has also been an opportunity for young women to participate in sport. In our history, women have been oppressed and as a result they were able to participate in athletics in our history. Overall the support/emergence of high school sports comes from our unique American Culture that supports high school athletic programs in a positive way.
There are many objectives for high school sport. There has been a positive correlation of high GPA and participation of high school athletics. Grades is an effect of the participation; however, some participants see an objective of trying to be a collegiate athlete. It is impossible to compete in college athletics if you didn't do well in high school or attend high school. While this is an objective I see while I coach, it also creates a sense of identity among athletes. It helps them find their strengths while learning to be disciplined high school athletes.
Like stated, high school and collegiate athletics is a widely accepted activity in America. According to Coakley we learn that: "the United States is the only nation in the world where it is take for granted that high schools and colleges sponsor and fund interschool or varsity sport programs" (Coakley 472). All states have a high school athletic organization. In Colorado, CHSAA is the governing high school athletic organization. According to CHSAA, "In May of 1921, a group of superintendents and principals met in Boulder, Colorado, and organized the Colorado High School Athletic Conference. The purpose of this organization was to better regulate and develop the interscholastic school athletic program.". Clearly, the emergence of high school athletics caused states to react with athletic organizations. While sports in America play an important role, if it wasn't for state athletic organizations, there would be no continuity among high school athletics.
While there are many positive effects of interscholastic athletics, there are also some negative implications. These negative implications have resulted in arguments against interscholastic sports. Some of these claims include, distraction from academics, they create a hierarchy of athletes in school, and can often time cost a lot of money to maintain. These claims exist because there is an idea that high school administrators should emulate big-time intercollegiate sports. They try to over develop sport programs in schools in order to try to seem as desirable to colleges/universities. With administrators with an emphasis on the development of programs, athletes tend to over conform to the sport ethic. This can have negative effects on their lives outside of athletics, i.e., grades, identity confusion, and relationships.
To solve this issue, I believe the addition of an athletic director whose main focus is student athletes will help maintain the emphasis on school and sports. The idea of eligibility due to grades has already had an effect on high schools. Most schools won't allow their students to participate unless they have certain grades in their classes. With athletic directors who focus on both school and sports, there is a promising future for athletes when their athletic careers end. They will become more well-rounded and educated.
Clearly high school sports play a big role in our society. We sometimes don't realize that they are a "seed" in which feeds universities, which then feeds professional programs. Interscholastic sports is unique to our society and clearly has both positive and negative implications. In order for sports to continue at both the college and high school levels, I believe that there needs to be a social norm of athletes becoming more well rounded as a student. Being a high school coach, this article and Coakley have opened my eyes to a world that should be more than just sports, but having a well rounded athlete.
References:
http://chsaanow.com/history/sketch/
Coakley
Dohrmann
There can be many arguments to what the social conditions for high school sport emerged. I learned that an example of football in Odessa, Texas, football was used to show masculinity among men. This shows that socially at the time, it was necessary for boys in high school to show how masculine they were. It has also been an opportunity for young women to participate in sport. In our history, women have been oppressed and as a result they were able to participate in athletics in our history. Overall the support/emergence of high school sports comes from our unique American Culture that supports high school athletic programs in a positive way.
There are many objectives for high school sport. There has been a positive correlation of high GPA and participation of high school athletics. Grades is an effect of the participation; however, some participants see an objective of trying to be a collegiate athlete. It is impossible to compete in college athletics if you didn't do well in high school or attend high school. While this is an objective I see while I coach, it also creates a sense of identity among athletes. It helps them find their strengths while learning to be disciplined high school athletes.
Like stated, high school and collegiate athletics is a widely accepted activity in America. According to Coakley we learn that: "the United States is the only nation in the world where it is take for granted that high schools and colleges sponsor and fund interschool or varsity sport programs" (Coakley 472). All states have a high school athletic organization. In Colorado, CHSAA is the governing high school athletic organization. According to CHSAA, "In May of 1921, a group of superintendents and principals met in Boulder, Colorado, and organized the Colorado High School Athletic Conference. The purpose of this organization was to better regulate and develop the interscholastic school athletic program.". Clearly, the emergence of high school athletics caused states to react with athletic organizations. While sports in America play an important role, if it wasn't for state athletic organizations, there would be no continuity among high school athletics.
While there are many positive effects of interscholastic athletics, there are also some negative implications. These negative implications have resulted in arguments against interscholastic sports. Some of these claims include, distraction from academics, they create a hierarchy of athletes in school, and can often time cost a lot of money to maintain. These claims exist because there is an idea that high school administrators should emulate big-time intercollegiate sports. They try to over develop sport programs in schools in order to try to seem as desirable to colleges/universities. With administrators with an emphasis on the development of programs, athletes tend to over conform to the sport ethic. This can have negative effects on their lives outside of athletics, i.e., grades, identity confusion, and relationships.
To solve this issue, I believe the addition of an athletic director whose main focus is student athletes will help maintain the emphasis on school and sports. The idea of eligibility due to grades has already had an effect on high schools. Most schools won't allow their students to participate unless they have certain grades in their classes. With athletic directors who focus on both school and sports, there is a promising future for athletes when their athletic careers end. They will become more well-rounded and educated.
Clearly high school sports play a big role in our society. We sometimes don't realize that they are a "seed" in which feeds universities, which then feeds professional programs. Interscholastic sports is unique to our society and clearly has both positive and negative implications. In order for sports to continue at both the college and high school levels, I believe that there needs to be a social norm of athletes becoming more well rounded as a student. Being a high school coach, this article and Coakley have opened my eyes to a world that should be more than just sports, but having a well rounded athlete.
References:
http://chsaanow.com/history/sketch/
Coakley
Dohrmann
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Once the cheering stops: The life of a retired pro-athlete
After reading the two articles and watching the ESPN documentary, I feel more informed about players after they retire from their professional athletic careers.
In society, there is a huge focus on the current athletes and the sport itself. Not too many people think about the players after their career ends. Unless you were a superstar like Michael Jordan or etc, you are often overlooked after your career. The life of the retired athlete according to the articles and documentary can differ. In the documentary, the people that are interviewed explain how most athletes end up broke and filing for bankruptcy or some end up making more money than they did when they were athletes. They explained how often times athletes have such a bad habit of spending money, they don't realize that they aren't bringing in enough money to live their lifestyle anymore. They also say, the athletes who were successful were the ones who put aside money and decided that they need to have a plan after retiring from sports.
The transition from playing to retiring was hard for some and easy for others. The situation differed. Like stated, some athletes had a plan after their sports career would end. Those were the ones who were successful, went back to school, operated businesses, and even invested money. There were others who had accumulated so much money, they continued to live a comfortable lifestyle until they were forced to try to budget. One example they gave in the documentary was that some athletes had commitments of paying for family expenses or child support and through the transition was not able to afford these commitments. Depending on how well you planned, deemed if you were successful after retiring.
I think that these athletes struggle with the transition because they often times are under the impression that they are going to be consistently making their salary. In the articles/documentary, we learned that some athletes will get hurt and get a small severance check. This severance check is no where near what their salary is. With them developing the habit of unrealistic spending, they are so comfortable with their lifestyle they don't know any other way to live. I think this reflects society because be deem athletes successful based on popularity and how much money you make. If athletes main focus is money, then they can get lost on what to do when they don't have that reliable paycheck.
I believe that major sport organizations need to continue to perform and better their rookie programs in order to educate young athletes about the life changes that they are going through. I think most people don't realize how drastic your life changes. In the documentary one athlete said, you become an instant millionaire. I think that is crazy to think about.
According to an article titled Life after Sport, they said an important quote: "It is often said a sports star will die twice, once after retirement". This quote demonstrates how these athletes are not prepared to live outside of their professional athletic lives. It shows that society needs to show how money isn't a resource that you can obtain whenever you want. You have to work hard for it even after you retire. I think major sport organizations need to prepare athletes for the world outside of professional sports.
References: ESPN's "30 for 30
ESPN_retired athletes
NYT_retired athletes
http://www.thesportinmind.com/articles/life-after-sport-depression-in-retired-athletes/
In society, there is a huge focus on the current athletes and the sport itself. Not too many people think about the players after their career ends. Unless you were a superstar like Michael Jordan or etc, you are often overlooked after your career. The life of the retired athlete according to the articles and documentary can differ. In the documentary, the people that are interviewed explain how most athletes end up broke and filing for bankruptcy or some end up making more money than they did when they were athletes. They explained how often times athletes have such a bad habit of spending money, they don't realize that they aren't bringing in enough money to live their lifestyle anymore. They also say, the athletes who were successful were the ones who put aside money and decided that they need to have a plan after retiring from sports.
The transition from playing to retiring was hard for some and easy for others. The situation differed. Like stated, some athletes had a plan after their sports career would end. Those were the ones who were successful, went back to school, operated businesses, and even invested money. There were others who had accumulated so much money, they continued to live a comfortable lifestyle until they were forced to try to budget. One example they gave in the documentary was that some athletes had commitments of paying for family expenses or child support and through the transition was not able to afford these commitments. Depending on how well you planned, deemed if you were successful after retiring.
I think that these athletes struggle with the transition because they often times are under the impression that they are going to be consistently making their salary. In the articles/documentary, we learned that some athletes will get hurt and get a small severance check. This severance check is no where near what their salary is. With them developing the habit of unrealistic spending, they are so comfortable with their lifestyle they don't know any other way to live. I think this reflects society because be deem athletes successful based on popularity and how much money you make. If athletes main focus is money, then they can get lost on what to do when they don't have that reliable paycheck.
I believe that major sport organizations need to continue to perform and better their rookie programs in order to educate young athletes about the life changes that they are going through. I think most people don't realize how drastic your life changes. In the documentary one athlete said, you become an instant millionaire. I think that is crazy to think about.
According to an article titled Life after Sport, they said an important quote: "It is often said a sports star will die twice, once after retirement". This quote demonstrates how these athletes are not prepared to live outside of their professional athletic lives. It shows that society needs to show how money isn't a resource that you can obtain whenever you want. You have to work hard for it even after you retire. I think major sport organizations need to prepare athletes for the world outside of professional sports.
References: ESPN's "30 for 30
ESPN_retired athletes
NYT_retired athletes
http://www.thesportinmind.com/articles/life-after-sport-depression-in-retired-athletes/
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Sports, Politics and the Olympics
The 1936 Olympic Games were held in Berlin. There is great significance to these Olympic games because it occurred during the start of the Nazi regime. According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, the Olympic games in 1936, were used as a tool in order to show the world how tolerable and peaceful Germany was. While slowly expressing their true goals, throughout the games, Germany was trying to be seen as tolerable of everyone. Propaganda was used during the Olympic games in order to show the false rhetoric of the Nazi Party. There were boycotts of Jewish athletes at the Olympic games, but many of which failed. There was talk of having the United States not participating; however, ended up with the second largest team at the 1936 Olympics.
This leads into the question of how was sport used for political measure. In the 1936 Olympic Games, it was clear that sports were used as a propaganda vehicle. According to Eitzen and Sage's article, in the 1936 Olympics, Adolf Hitler used sports in order to introduce Nazi culture to other nations. Sports as a propaganda vehicle is just one of Eitzen and Sage's 5 political ways of sports.
I disagree with the statement of: "Sport is pure and devoid of political interference". I believe that this is a false statement because of what happened in the Olympic Games in 1936. Through research, I have found that in almost every sporting event, there is some sort of nationalism. Nationalism equates to politics. If there is politics then it interferes with sport. For example, when you go to a high school, college, or professional basketball game, the National Anthem is performed. This is a huge political statement of nationalism. At the Olympics, if a country wins the gold medal, their national anthem is played. These are just a few examples that show how nationalism is evident in sports.
Through researching the 1936 Olympics, I have come to the conclusion that Sport isn't pure and devoid of political interference. If anything, sports is reflected through politics. While the 1936 Olympics shows a negative political interference, I do believe that it is important to have some nationalist ideals. We should be proud to live where we live. I am proud to be an American. Since sports play a big role in American society, American society (politics) should play a role in sports.
References:
Eitzen and Sage
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005680
This leads into the question of how was sport used for political measure. In the 1936 Olympic Games, it was clear that sports were used as a propaganda vehicle. According to Eitzen and Sage's article, in the 1936 Olympics, Adolf Hitler used sports in order to introduce Nazi culture to other nations. Sports as a propaganda vehicle is just one of Eitzen and Sage's 5 political ways of sports.
I disagree with the statement of: "Sport is pure and devoid of political interference". I believe that this is a false statement because of what happened in the Olympic Games in 1936. Through research, I have found that in almost every sporting event, there is some sort of nationalism. Nationalism equates to politics. If there is politics then it interferes with sport. For example, when you go to a high school, college, or professional basketball game, the National Anthem is performed. This is a huge political statement of nationalism. At the Olympics, if a country wins the gold medal, their national anthem is played. These are just a few examples that show how nationalism is evident in sports.
Through researching the 1936 Olympics, I have come to the conclusion that Sport isn't pure and devoid of political interference. If anything, sports is reflected through politics. While the 1936 Olympics shows a negative political interference, I do believe that it is important to have some nationalist ideals. We should be proud to live where we live. I am proud to be an American. Since sports play a big role in American society, American society (politics) should play a role in sports.
References:
Eitzen and Sage
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005680
Thursday, January 30, 2014
London Calling: The Globalization of the NFL
After reading the article London Calling, I have many thoughts about the possibility of the NFL moving to London. I have three main thoughts: NFL would be hurting players in order to make more money, there are too many scheduling issues, and it wouldn't insure that the move to London would be profitable.
In the article, Bill Barnwell, explains the negative implications of traveling to another country. One of his main points is the fact that by moving to London, we would be taking a negative tole on the players' bodies. He explains that the flight to London, is lengthy and players would have to adjust to a different time zone. The fact that players would have to fly out to London, and then immediately fly back to the states would cause players to be extremely jet lagged. I agree with Barnwell's claims. I couldn't imagine flying to another country for just a few days, and then returning home immediately. There is no way, that I would not be jet lagged. Crossing over the ocean and into different time zones, would most likely mess up the sleep schedules for athletes. There is discussion of making a satellite location to where the London team could practice at in the states. My question is, why have a satellite program if you have facilities in the US? It makes me wonder, if London is the best location.
Barnewell also brings up the issues of scheduling. Toward the end of his article, he discusses how the NFL would have to make specific changes to a teams scheduling in London. There would be an issue of right after having a team go to London, they would have a by-game. This would be really unfair to the teams that have to travel to London early in their season because they would have to play consecutive games for the rest of the season. The fact that it could also be unfair for the London team because they would try to schedule away games in bulk and then home games in bulk, in order to decrease travel expenses. I agree that these changes would affect the athletes directly. I could also see how fans could be affected by that. The inconsistency of when there would be home games and away games could make some fans unhappy.
Lastly Barnwell also brings up the issue that we can't be positive that through globalizing the NFL, if it would be profitable. He claims in his article that even though stadiums get filled when NFL teams travel to London once in a while, we can't be sure that Europeans would be willing to spend excess amounts of money to watch a team. In the article he quotes a fan saying that, "it was a no brainer to travel...". Barnwell doubts that europeans would be likely to spend hundreds of euros more than once a season in order to travel and watch the NFL play in London. He also brings up the point that most europeans are fans of the NFL and not a specific team. This also plays into, that once we bring a team over to London, it is unpredictable what the fan basis would be. I definitely agree with him. Here in America, we learned that we idolize our specific regional/state teams, and if London's fans don't connect with the American players, what would happen? Also, would the NFL open up the team to europeans or would it strictly be Americans on the London football team?
Overall, I think that by Globalizing the NFL would take a negative toll on the players and the organization itself. I believe that because American Society takes a very unique role around sports, it is impossible for us to judge if it would be successful in London. I believe that the negative implications far outweigh the good of this situation. Ultimately, sports are changing and it is unpredictable to know what will happen; however, we as americans, must not forget about where sport has originated from. Do we want to ignore the sport itself in order to make more money?
References:
London Calling: Bill Barnwell
In the article, Bill Barnwell, explains the negative implications of traveling to another country. One of his main points is the fact that by moving to London, we would be taking a negative tole on the players' bodies. He explains that the flight to London, is lengthy and players would have to adjust to a different time zone. The fact that players would have to fly out to London, and then immediately fly back to the states would cause players to be extremely jet lagged. I agree with Barnwell's claims. I couldn't imagine flying to another country for just a few days, and then returning home immediately. There is no way, that I would not be jet lagged. Crossing over the ocean and into different time zones, would most likely mess up the sleep schedules for athletes. There is discussion of making a satellite location to where the London team could practice at in the states. My question is, why have a satellite program if you have facilities in the US? It makes me wonder, if London is the best location.
Barnewell also brings up the issues of scheduling. Toward the end of his article, he discusses how the NFL would have to make specific changes to a teams scheduling in London. There would be an issue of right after having a team go to London, they would have a by-game. This would be really unfair to the teams that have to travel to London early in their season because they would have to play consecutive games for the rest of the season. The fact that it could also be unfair for the London team because they would try to schedule away games in bulk and then home games in bulk, in order to decrease travel expenses. I agree that these changes would affect the athletes directly. I could also see how fans could be affected by that. The inconsistency of when there would be home games and away games could make some fans unhappy.
Lastly Barnwell also brings up the issue that we can't be positive that through globalizing the NFL, if it would be profitable. He claims in his article that even though stadiums get filled when NFL teams travel to London once in a while, we can't be sure that Europeans would be willing to spend excess amounts of money to watch a team. In the article he quotes a fan saying that, "it was a no brainer to travel...". Barnwell doubts that europeans would be likely to spend hundreds of euros more than once a season in order to travel and watch the NFL play in London. He also brings up the point that most europeans are fans of the NFL and not a specific team. This also plays into, that once we bring a team over to London, it is unpredictable what the fan basis would be. I definitely agree with him. Here in America, we learned that we idolize our specific regional/state teams, and if London's fans don't connect with the American players, what would happen? Also, would the NFL open up the team to europeans or would it strictly be Americans on the London football team?
Overall, I think that by Globalizing the NFL would take a negative toll on the players and the organization itself. I believe that because American Society takes a very unique role around sports, it is impossible for us to judge if it would be successful in London. I believe that the negative implications far outweigh the good of this situation. Ultimately, sports are changing and it is unpredictable to know what will happen; however, we as americans, must not forget about where sport has originated from. Do we want to ignore the sport itself in order to make more money?
References:
London Calling: Bill Barnwell
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Sociogenesis of Lacrosse
While I never participated in an organized or competitive lacrosse team, I always have had a passion for watching and playing with my family or friends. Lacrosse always interested me, I was never really familiar with the background behind the sport or the rules. Through research I have found answers to a few questions that I had regarding the sport.
Lacrosse was a sport that was predominantly popular with Native Americans. Much like Coakley talked about sporting events in Ancient Rome and Greece, lacrosse was played at traditional Native American games. These games were major events and would last for a few days. Lacrosse had both religious and recreational purposes. More importantly it was used in order to prepare young native americans for war. While there is no specific date of when Lacrosse began, the first non Native American's began playing it in the mid-ninteenth century.
After colonization began in America, we learn that Lacrosse as a sport also spread. It was predominantly played near the Great Lakes and would find its way to at a time being the national sport of Canada.
The name and rules of lacrosse were not given until the early french settlers came to North America. It was at that time where the sport changed from being an event at a traditional Native American festival to a sport that would soon spread. As the sport progressed and became more organized, the equipment changed. They would rid of the traditional wooden balls and now more modernly use plastic balls.
Presently, while Lacrosse's is becoming more and more predominant at the youth, high school, collegiate, and professional level, it is important to understand where the sport began and how it has changed. It makes me think, that if traditional Native Americans used lacrosse as a tool in order to prepare for battle or religious purposes, what purpose does it serve in the United States? Is it now just a means for entertainment. If so, does that carry any implications or show any disrespect to any native americans that are still present in North America?
References:
Coakley
http://filacrosse.com/origin/
http://www.uslacrosse.org/about-the-sport/history.aspx
Presently, while Lacrosse's is becoming more and more predominant at the youth, high school, collegiate, and professional level, it is important to understand where the sport began and how it has changed. It makes me think, that if traditional Native Americans used lacrosse as a tool in order to prepare for battle or religious purposes, what purpose does it serve in the United States? Is it now just a means for entertainment. If so, does that carry any implications or show any disrespect to any native americans that are still present in North America?
References:
Coakley
http://filacrosse.com/origin/
http://www.uslacrosse.org/about-the-sport/history.aspx
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Sport in the Ancient World
After reading and understanding more about how sport was in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, it is clear that there has been a development of sport. Through the article by Guttman, Coakley, and various youtube videos, I have learned what types of sports were played in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, the characteristics of these sports, the functions/role of sports in these respective societies, and who the participants in the sports were.
To start, track and field events were very predominant in Ancient Greece. The discus, triple jump, javelin, and sprints are just a few track and field events that were popular then and are still popular now. In Ancient Greece we also learned about how tie breakers were handled, in which they would end up in wrestling matches. While there were very few contact sports in Ancient Greece, we learned that in Ancient Rome, almost all of the sporting events were contact oriented sports. Ancient Rome was definitely more deadly and physical than Ancient Greece. They would engage in fights of Gladiators with weapons and spectators would crave to see these gladiators spill the other opponents blood.
The structure of the sports were laid out very differently. In Ancient Rome, Gladiators fought in an Arena which was open to most of the public. It would allow citizens of Rome able to see the bloody fights that ensue. In comparison, Ancient Greece was set up similar to an ancient olympic games. The sports would be very organized and participants and spectators knew what the expectations were, such as false starts (flogging), misbehaving (beatings), etc. While in Ancient Rome, there were very few rules besides win or die, Ancient Greece was far more formal in the fact that there were specific rules.
The function of sports was very different. In Ancient Greece there was a huge reliance that sports were religious based. According to an article by the Olympic.org, the olympic games were closely linked to the religious festivals of the cult of Zeus. The whole reason for sports was to show respect towards Zeus, and in doing so would allow Zeus' sister to be the only female spectator. The games would serve as entertainment but mostly for religious motives. In Ancient Rome, we see the games as more of an entertainment event. An opportunity for spectators to fall in love with a gladiator and to hate another. The gladiators were also seen as objects of desire from the public. While there was little religious motive for the games in Ancient Rome, it's clear that the sports were organized as a means of entertainment.
In Ancient Rome, we see that the participants of the gladiator fighting sport were gladiators. These gladiators were most likely barbarians or slaves. They were given a very strict diet and forced to maintain a very athletic body. These participants were seen as dispensable because of how there was little need for keeping them around since death was always an outcome. In Ancient Greece, the participants were men and no women were allowed during the main events; however, in the article by Guttman, we learn that women were allowed to compete at a separate game. The participants could be from any ages and would be sorted out so no one had an unfair advantage no matter what age. The winners of their respective sports were seen as desirable as showing the most respect to Zeus and would earn a excess amount of money. Competing in these sports was seen as a profession just as it can be seen today.
Clearly there are some complete differences of ancient sports in comparison to modern sport. We learned about then types of sports that were played, the characteristics, the function/role, and who participated in the sports. I believe that while there are some major differences such as how religious some events were and how death was an almost for sure outcome, there are also some similarities. In modern sports we enforce a strict structure and organization. We also push athletes to maintain the "ideal" body. The biggest similarity I identified was that if you win, you are valued and are important. While there were differences, I found it very interesting that there were some similarities that haven't changed.
References:
Ancient Greece: Youtube videos provided
Ancient Rome: Youtube video provided
Coakley Sports in Society
Guttman
http://www.olympic.org/ancient-olympic-games
To start, track and field events were very predominant in Ancient Greece. The discus, triple jump, javelin, and sprints are just a few track and field events that were popular then and are still popular now. In Ancient Greece we also learned about how tie breakers were handled, in which they would end up in wrestling matches. While there were very few contact sports in Ancient Greece, we learned that in Ancient Rome, almost all of the sporting events were contact oriented sports. Ancient Rome was definitely more deadly and physical than Ancient Greece. They would engage in fights of Gladiators with weapons and spectators would crave to see these gladiators spill the other opponents blood.
The structure of the sports were laid out very differently. In Ancient Rome, Gladiators fought in an Arena which was open to most of the public. It would allow citizens of Rome able to see the bloody fights that ensue. In comparison, Ancient Greece was set up similar to an ancient olympic games. The sports would be very organized and participants and spectators knew what the expectations were, such as false starts (flogging), misbehaving (beatings), etc. While in Ancient Rome, there were very few rules besides win or die, Ancient Greece was far more formal in the fact that there were specific rules.
The function of sports was very different. In Ancient Greece there was a huge reliance that sports were religious based. According to an article by the Olympic.org, the olympic games were closely linked to the religious festivals of the cult of Zeus. The whole reason for sports was to show respect towards Zeus, and in doing so would allow Zeus' sister to be the only female spectator. The games would serve as entertainment but mostly for religious motives. In Ancient Rome, we see the games as more of an entertainment event. An opportunity for spectators to fall in love with a gladiator and to hate another. The gladiators were also seen as objects of desire from the public. While there was little religious motive for the games in Ancient Rome, it's clear that the sports were organized as a means of entertainment.
In Ancient Rome, we see that the participants of the gladiator fighting sport were gladiators. These gladiators were most likely barbarians or slaves. They were given a very strict diet and forced to maintain a very athletic body. These participants were seen as dispensable because of how there was little need for keeping them around since death was always an outcome. In Ancient Greece, the participants were men and no women were allowed during the main events; however, in the article by Guttman, we learn that women were allowed to compete at a separate game. The participants could be from any ages and would be sorted out so no one had an unfair advantage no matter what age. The winners of their respective sports were seen as desirable as showing the most respect to Zeus and would earn a excess amount of money. Competing in these sports was seen as a profession just as it can be seen today.
Clearly there are some complete differences of ancient sports in comparison to modern sport. We learned about then types of sports that were played, the characteristics, the function/role, and who participated in the sports. I believe that while there are some major differences such as how religious some events were and how death was an almost for sure outcome, there are also some similarities. In modern sports we enforce a strict structure and organization. We also push athletes to maintain the "ideal" body. The biggest similarity I identified was that if you win, you are valued and are important. While there were differences, I found it very interesting that there were some similarities that haven't changed.
References:
Ancient Greece: Youtube videos provided
Ancient Rome: Youtube video provided
Coakley Sports in Society
Guttman
http://www.olympic.org/ancient-olympic-games
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Sport, Society & Me
Sports plays a huge role in my life. From when I was little, I was always doing something sports related; whether that was going to the Nuggets game with my family, participating in martial arts tournaments, volleyball games, or watching my family members play their respective sports. Even to this day, I actively play volleyball and am a competitive volleyball coach. I also just was offered a position at a local sports performance gym to do private volleyball lessons this summer. Needless to say, sports revolves around my life on a daily basis. I think I developed this connection to sports because it is how I grew up. Because of being introduced to sports at such a young age, it is familiar to me, it is an outlet, and it is enjoyable. It is almost a tool for me. I truly believe it is because I was introduced to sports at such a young age.
Scholars may argue that sports play a negative role in society; however, I believe that it plays a positive role. While there are negative effects to having a society that has a focus around sports, I believe that the positives outweigh the negatives. In the US, I believe that sports teaches us fundamental values of commitment, discipline, and staying healthy. I remember when I was little, I wanted to quit doing martial arts after a year of doing it. My parents explained to me, that by me pushing through and never giving up shows a lot of commitment. To this day, I feel like my commitment to school, work, and coaching evolved from being taught at a young age to be committed. Because of the values that I believe sports teaches, I find it very important to our society. While I understand that there are people who might not be athletically talented, unable to play due to physical restraints, or those who have had bad experiences of playing sports, I believe that yet again the pros outweigh the cons. For those people who are unable to play sports, there are always different sports, while you might not be fast enough to play soccer, you could always do golf. If you are short and can't play basketball, you could run cross country. There is a misconception as far as there is a sport for everyone out there. You just have to do the research and test sports out.
In society, I believe that athletes are held to a high standard. To explain, I believe that successful athletes are praised for doing good things and athletes who do bad things (drugs and breaking the law) are seen as bad people and are judged in the media spotlight for those actions. This high standard shows everyone who are positive and negative role models. One example that shows how the media holds athletes to a high standard is baseball player, Alex Rodriguez. "A-rod" was suspended for a numerous amount of games for his involvement in physical enhancement drugs. The media spotlighted this case and shows that if you participate in bad behavior, you will be caught and have negative repercussions. The article by Eitzen explains how there are numerous negative and positives with sports in society. While I understand the points being made, I believe that when Eitzen makes claims about the paradoxes of sports, he fails to mention how some of these paradoxes are highlighted through the media in a negative way. A prime example is this case of Alex Rodriguez.
I believe that sports plays a positive role in society and should continue playing a positive role. While I understand that there are some negative consequences such as the paradoxes listed by Eitzen, I still believe that sports teaches basic fundamentals that are important to our society.
References:
http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2014/01/alex_rodriguez_deserved_suspension_hall_of_famer_says.html
D. Stanley Eitzen: Fair and Foul Ch. 1
Monday, January 20, 2014
The Sport Ethic
The Sports Ethic by Hughes and Coakley is an article that discusses positive deviance within sports. Sports Ethic is defined as, "when athletes...emphasize the sacrifice for The Game, seeking distinction, taking risks, and challenging limits". In this article Hughes and Coakley discuss how athletes are deviating from norms in a positive way. Hughes and Coakley argue in the article how through sports ethic, athletes within a sport feel the need to show their commitment to a value system that we stress; however, it is not due to the disregard or rejection of cultural/social norms.
In the article Hughes and Coakley refer to four dimensions of sport ethic: being an athlete involves making sacrifices for the game, striving for distinction, accepting risks and playing through pain, and refusing to accept limits in the pursuit of possibilities. In the article Hughes and Coakley explain that athletes are pushed to conform to these boundaries by coaches; however, it is still considered something that is completely voluntary.
They also explain the two conditions that can lead to athletes over conforming to the sport ethic. They explain that athletes who have low self-esteem and those who will sacrifice anything for their achievement are prone to the over conformity. In the article I believe the most important line is: "attempting to change the behavior of such person by helping them learn to conform to social rules and live up to social expectations would only increase their [positive] defiance". With that quote in mind, it makes sense that these individuals that are prone to over conform are also the ones being told to change. Personally I don't understand why there is an issue of over conforming. If someone over conforms to the sports ethic, it only affects the person who is doing the over conforming. According to an article posted by sportsinjuries.org high school athletes alone account for an estimated 2 million injuries a year. With this statistic in mind, I can understand why there might be a concern; however, it shouldn't be an issue to anyone but the athlete and these 2 million injuries could easily be as little as a sprained ankle. Thus, I don't quite understand why there is a concern for the over conformity.
I personally have experienced all four the dimensions of sports ethics. I was taught the sports ethic by my parents and coaches. While they didn't call it the sports ethic, they had certain expectations of me that are very similar to the sports ethic. When I was in martial arts, I had to continue to fight a sparring match with a broken foot; which demonstrates the accepting risks and playing through pain. I also refused to accept the limitations I had when I had knee surgery and continued to play varsity soccer and club volleyball. In addition to those two examples, I have also sacrificed time in school to travel with sports teams, which shows sacrifice. Seeking distinction is difficult for me to relate too. If there is one experience that I believe is closely related to seeking distinction is doing sports that are not as popular as football, basketball, and baseball.
Through this article I have learned what the Sports Ethic is, what the four dimensions are, and also who is prone to over conforming to the sport ethic. As someone who is surrounded by sports on a daily basis, I found this article interesting and helpful in understanding why competitive athletes are the way that they are and what rules some of them live by.
References:
Hughes and Coakley: Sports Ethic
http://www.stopsportsinjuries.org/media/statistics.aspx
In the article Hughes and Coakley refer to four dimensions of sport ethic: being an athlete involves making sacrifices for the game, striving for distinction, accepting risks and playing through pain, and refusing to accept limits in the pursuit of possibilities. In the article Hughes and Coakley explain that athletes are pushed to conform to these boundaries by coaches; however, it is still considered something that is completely voluntary.
They also explain the two conditions that can lead to athletes over conforming to the sport ethic. They explain that athletes who have low self-esteem and those who will sacrifice anything for their achievement are prone to the over conformity. In the article I believe the most important line is: "attempting to change the behavior of such person by helping them learn to conform to social rules and live up to social expectations would only increase their [positive] defiance". With that quote in mind, it makes sense that these individuals that are prone to over conform are also the ones being told to change. Personally I don't understand why there is an issue of over conforming. If someone over conforms to the sports ethic, it only affects the person who is doing the over conforming. According to an article posted by sportsinjuries.org high school athletes alone account for an estimated 2 million injuries a year. With this statistic in mind, I can understand why there might be a concern; however, it shouldn't be an issue to anyone but the athlete and these 2 million injuries could easily be as little as a sprained ankle. Thus, I don't quite understand why there is a concern for the over conformity.
I personally have experienced all four the dimensions of sports ethics. I was taught the sports ethic by my parents and coaches. While they didn't call it the sports ethic, they had certain expectations of me that are very similar to the sports ethic. When I was in martial arts, I had to continue to fight a sparring match with a broken foot; which demonstrates the accepting risks and playing through pain. I also refused to accept the limitations I had when I had knee surgery and continued to play varsity soccer and club volleyball. In addition to those two examples, I have also sacrificed time in school to travel with sports teams, which shows sacrifice. Seeking distinction is difficult for me to relate too. If there is one experience that I believe is closely related to seeking distinction is doing sports that are not as popular as football, basketball, and baseball.
Through this article I have learned what the Sports Ethic is, what the four dimensions are, and also who is prone to over conforming to the sport ethic. As someone who is surrounded by sports on a daily basis, I found this article interesting and helpful in understanding why competitive athletes are the way that they are and what rules some of them live by.
References:
Hughes and Coakley: Sports Ethic
http://www.stopsportsinjuries.org/media/statistics.aspx
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
Sport(s) in the USA
For those of you who have never set foot into the United States or seen any USA sport on television prepare to be amazed about our American Culture around sports. Here in the US, football, and baseball are probably the three most predominant sports. According to CBS Sports: "Football and baseball are the two most popular sports in America. These two sports have some shared characteristics. Two shared characteristics are that men engage in these activities, and these two sports are highly commercialized and can be seen on television. What is amazing about these two sports, are the fan bases behind them. In America, we support our local/state teams. If you are from Denver, there is a giant chance that you support the Denver Broncos and the Colorado Rockies.These are our "home" teams.
Let's take a closer look at the Denver Broncos. On a typical Sunday night in Colorado, most Coloradans are dressed in Bronco apparel and are sporting orange and/or blue. Americans choose to wear sports apparel to not only show support towards a team, but to show their spirit and pride towards a local group of athletes. Lately I have noticed that on social media many people participate in bad mouthing other teams. For example, if the Denver Broncos lost to the New England Patriots there would be some profane name calling and bad mouthing Patriot fans from Broncos fans. This activity has almost been normalized. I see adolescents and adults participating in this across Facebook and Twitter. According to Jay Coakley in Sports in Society, he explains that by looking through a sociological lens, we can see how sports have a culture: "Overtime every team creates a and maintains a particular culture or way of life" (Coakley 4). Being supporters/fans, are in a way part of the team spiritual. In doing so we are part of that teams culture. The American society then has a culture that says it is okay to be rude to the winning team if you lose. While this shows our support for our local teams, this normalizes bad sportsmanship through our sports culture.
Aside from showing support for a team, let's look closer at the athletes on the team. In America we measure success based on how much money you are paid, how popular you are, and sometimes if you are attractive. We see that most professional athletes are paid large amounts of money; however, the popular professional athletes get even more money. In America we believe that popular athletes equates to athletes who are athletically talented. Very rarely is there a lot of attention on a professional athlete who struggles within his/her sport. Ultimately Americans equate success with popularity.
While you may feel that sports in the USA is different from what you are used to, this is how it is America. We are die hard fans who will support popular male professional baseball and football players. I hope after reading this post, you feel more informed about Sports in the USA! Until next time!
References:
Coakley, Jay. Sports in Society. 10th Ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009. Print.
Coakley, Jay. Sports in Society. 10th Ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009. Print.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/21511690/poll-finds-baseball-as-secondmost-popular-american-sport
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)