Richard Sherman: Can Alternative Worldviews Prevail?

Richard Sherman: Can Alternative Worldviews Prevail? by Thabiti Lewis | special to NewBlackMan (in Exile)
The frenzied media responses to Richard Sherman and the Richard Sherman’s of the world inspired me to write Ballers of the New School: Race and Sports in America (Third World Press, 2010).   The response to Sherman’s post-game comments (not tirade, which is a long angry speech of accusations) is a complex issue involving multiple facets that need to be teased out regarding issues of cultural hegemony, truth about the NFL, and, unfortunately race.   
The most glaring issue is that people were unprepared to see the adrenaline that accompanies sports performances on the highest level.  Anyone who has participated in an intense sport like football knows that the energy Sherman displayed immediately following a game his team won on the last play (because of his play against a player who had “dissed” him and an ex-college coach who also “dissed” him by passing on drafting him) was a high adrenaline moment for Mr. Sherman.  
When a fifth round draft pick that rises to All-Pro, is touted as one the best corners in the game, and makes the game-saving play has the mic he might feel justified in reminding the world that it was wrong about him.  The NFL is marketed as harmless fun. What fans see and hear are edited, pre-scripted expressions.  But the truth is that football is a very violent game where people get hurt often and suffer debilitating injuries. 
Another tangled issue is that we live in a sound bite culture where far too many who call themselves journalists or reporters lack the depth, intelligence, or creativity to come up with really interesting stories.  However what may never quite get untangled but at least needs a comb put to it is the social and racial hegemonic discourse that dictates what is right and who gets to decides what is wrong or right.  
In other words, Sherman's vilification is not unrelated to the fact that he is a victim of a culture that creates contrasts and otherness in the bodies of black men—even when they hold heroic status.  Thus, if you study the comments about his post-game exchange with Erin Andrews, you will hear that some of the outrage or fear stems from the belief that she was a little afraid or threatened (which she says she was not).
Where I am from the guys on sidelines know their place.  They only get to comment so much, and they do not get to dictate the culture of how and what those performing and acting should or should not do. 
Equally problematic is the media spin of Pete Carroll as “father” to his misguided son.  I am certain Sherman respects and looks up to Carroll who is his elder but the racial dynamics of narrative is tired and worn out.  Moreover, I am suspect of Carroll as role model given his USC history.  Thus he is perhaps not in the position offer the best advice, except about how to escape cleanly from a bad mess (come to think of it, perhaps he should listen to Carroll).  As Sherman has demonstrated repeatedly from the whipping he gave Skip Bayless last spring on “First Take” to the many composed thoughtful interviews he has conducted, he is smart enough to speak for himself—and he has done so countless times since Sunday’s “incident”.  We undoubtedly live in a world of double standards for black athletes.
So rather than try to speak for Sherman I will speak to the racialized hegemonic discourse that gives life to double standards and is allowed to label Sherman a thug, inappropriate, ungracious, and classless.  Indeed, I will speak truth to the parameters of a worldview that is culturally framed by a primarily white and male sports media (about 85-90% white and male if memory serves me correctly).   To shift the worldview away from these individuals allows us to see Sherman’s post-game comments in a different light.  Not as a tirade, but more of a “setting the record straight” session. 
You see, where I am from if you “put up” (win) you can say what you want—but you have to win.  To paraphrase Tom Brady conceded that if you don’t like a guy talking smack when he wins—beat him to shut him up. If you lose you must endure him talking smack.  Perhaps more members of the media-- producers and directors of sports shows—need to spend more time “around” players to learn the rules of the game. 
Where I am from we question and become suspect of those raising a big fuss about Sherman’s behavior as odd, strange, or unacceptable according to proper “standards”.  We ask what these people are they trying to control and protect? Let me shift into academic gear for a second as I make one thing clear: there is a symbiotic relationship between hegemony and ideology.  This is at the core of the Sherman debates. Therefore the prevailing questions remain: (1) Who constructs the parameters in which young black men expressing themselves in sport culture is often conceptualized as negative?  (2) Why is this often the case?  (3) Who controls the narratives that define cultural productions such as Sherman’s post-game comments?  (4) Who decided what THE right or ONLY valid worldview is?
But also where I am from young brothers like Sherman know better than to forget to shift out of “game mode” for a media interview.  They are taught to know that such enthusiasm can and often will be used negatively against you despite countless displays of composure and intellect—even if you graduate with honors from Stanford.  They know this because where I am from we acknowledge the unfortunate racist nature of our society. 
As I spent a good portion of Ballers of the New School explaining, those in control of sports narratives can, and unfortunately too often do, take comments or demeanor out of context to create villains of people of color and further stoke the flames of racial tensions and divisions.  But in all fairness to Sherman, he did not have time to switch into the same interview demeanor he displayed in his CNN interview a few days later.  To be fair, Andrews pulled for an interview moments after making one of the biggest plays of his short career and the world got a glimpse of the mode nearly all players are in during the heat of battle.    
However, I am most troubled by what is not being written about Mr. Sherman. His story is inspirational.  I just finished reading Malcolm Gladwell’s “David and Goliath” and it struck me that the real story is one of how Sherman, an underdog, has gone toe-to-toe with NFL convention that said he was no better than a fifth round back-up defensive back and he has proved them all wrong.  He trumped the experts—the  Goliaths!  For me, Sherman's story is a true American drama of how a kid from South Central Los Angeles without the academic resources that many of his peers had prior to coming to Stanford excelled at Stanford, an elite university. 
Why not praise the underdog who turned disadvantages (not rich, suffered injury that compelled him to switch to from receiver to cornerback near end of college career) was turned into an advantage because they deepened his resolve.  Or, we could talk about how he has put his Stanford Communications degree to good use by maximizing every opportunity to make the world stand up, notice, and discuss him. Why are we not hearing the amazing story of how a kid who led his college team in receptions changed positions and became a stand-out defensive back in college, survived being drafted in the fifth round, then worked his way into the starting line-up, earned All-Pro status, and is now considered one of the very best defensive backs in football! 
Some smart journalist might consider writing a comparative story about how like Peyton Manning who was written off because of his neck injury Richard Sherman has also overcome injury and the odds, proving the critics wrong.  Where is the story about how hard Sherman studies his opponents? Or that it will be interesting to see how Sherman matches wits with Manning?  Will Manning be Sherman’s next victim or will Manning finally put Sherman in his place? Hmm…now those are topics worth talking about.  And if those topics are too daunting for the more daft members of the media they can always lean on the fact that America loves an underdog—right?  Richard is a “David” if I ever saw one. 
***

Thabiti Lewis, Visiting Scholar, Center for the Humanities at Washington University in St. Louis and the author of Ballers of the New School: Race and Sports in America (Third World Press).