Skip to content

We tend to ignore the hard work, as opposed to the athleticism, of black players

Mar 20, 2014, 11:32 AM EST

The basis for this New York Magazine piece on the different way broadcasters describe black athletes and white athletes is college basketball, but it’s every bit as applicable to baseball too. Whites are described as hard workers — and their hard work is often specifically described — blacks are assumed to be naturally gifted and athletic and their hard work is often overlooked.

And it’s not out of animus or bigotry. It just happens because it has always happened that way:

The situation is far better than it was three or four decades ago, when announcers would liken the skills of black players to animals. Today, they have some awareness of racial stereotyping. What’s left, I think, is far more characteristic of how racial bias typically works. Bad intent does not come into play. White people simply have certain preconceptions, and preconceptions make you see the things you expect to see and miss the things you don’t.

I agree with all of that, with the possible exception of likening the skills of black players to animals. That still happens:

source:

I don’t care if Vin Scully is the one who coined “Wild Horse” for Puig. It still falls into this rubric of attributing the exploits of some players to some beastly, untamed quality that is so often used as a placeholder for otherness that we don’t too closely examine.

149 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:36 AM

    In before 60+ comments of well educated, sympathetic discussion where everyone plays nice.

    • spudchukar - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:14 PM

      Yasiterra strikes again!

      • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:23 PM

        What? Clear the coastline and summon Godzilla!

      • spudchukar - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:25 PM

        It is my newly anointed moniker for the Craig/Puig bromance.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:28 PM

      So that’s like the wordiest “First!” ever? ;)

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:28 PM

        I HATE these new emoticons! :( Argh.

    • cur'68 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:47 PM

      Yep. Wish I’d been awake to get this in first. As you know (if you’ve been paying attention to me: and if not, WHY not, hmm?), I’ve been on this paradigm change thing for a while now. My one-commenter quest to refer to white guys as “gifted athletes” and black guys as “hard working students of the game”. Its a process but I’m a hard worker so I have hope. You naturally gifted commenters have it easy.

      • nbjays - Mar 20, 2014 at 6:13 PM

        I know, right? We can see how hard you work at this, Cur.. whereas Old Gator just naturally lets the bafflegab flow.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 8:44 PM

        Oh, look. I found this site with a whole list of nicknames for Bryce Harper…and not one of them is related to an animal.

        http://www.bryceharperfacts.com/12/post/2012/06/list-of-bryce-harper-nicknames.html

        BTW, for fun I did a google search on Trout and the only animal nicknames I found were ichy…ichty…ich…fish-related (which is obviously about his name and not comparing him favorably with an animal…unless he’s scaly in person, and I know nothing about that).

    • moogro - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:55 PM

      HBT + discussion of otherness = awesome. Next up: baseball media as a Mirror Stage, followed by Blog as anti-writing.

    • stercuilus65 - Mar 20, 2014 at 5:12 PM

      Pot meet Kettle….

  2. kingscourt25 - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM

    Here we go

  3. halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:40 AM

    All I can offer is the major 2 topics in Philly right now. Jimmy Rollins and DeSean Jackson are under fire from fans right now because of their attitudes. I’m on the fence with this. Maybe it’s racial at this point. I don’t know. Only thing I can say is I’m sick of hearing about both of them in the media.

    • ochospantalones - Mar 20, 2014 at 3:48 PM

      When people happily accept Riley Cooper back and want DeSean Jackson (a MUCH better player) run out of town I think the jury is in on whether it is racial. And if I read another philly dot com comment about how Cooper is just like Wes Welker (he bears no resemblance to Wes Welker, except for being white) my head is going to explode.

      • largebill - Mar 21, 2014 at 12:28 PM

        Problem with that analogy is it assumes everything else between Cooper and Jackson is the same and the teams is just racist in choosing the elss talented receiver. Reality is players have different ages, different salaries, etc and football has a salary cap so one man’s salary affects decisions regarding other players.

        I openly admit I have no idea of the age & salary of Cooper or Jackson.

  4. rollinghighwayblues - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:40 AM

    “I don’t care if Vin Scully is the one who coined “Wild Horse” for Puig. It still falls into this rubric of attributing the exploits of some players to some beastly, untamed quality that is so often used as a placeholder for otherness that we don’t too closely examine.”

    Seriously?

    • NatsLady - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:56 AM

      Agree. I fail to see how “Wild Horse” is a symbol for otherness. A wild horse isn’t a mysterious, ferocious animal out of the depths of some dark jungle.Wild horses were once common in the West, and still exist. They had to be “tamed” in order to make them useful, and I don’t know how many articles I’ve read suggesting Puig’s raw talent needs to be “harnessed.”

      Now, whether you want to liken a baseball player to ANY animal is a different question…

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:16 PM

        I think the issue is that it suggests emotional, non-rational (as opposed to intelligent) play, when it happens that white players are described as playing smart and black players as athletic. It’s perhaps a less offensive analogy, but it dips into the same well.

        BTW, those wild horses were not indigenous to North America. Spaniards introduced them, and they were really re-tamed later.

      • adenzeno - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:21 PM

        Pepper Martin, “The Wild Horse of the Osage” wants to speak

      • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:29 PM

        Coincidentally, Montezuma and his people didn’t even realize they were separate animals at first. They thought the men astride those beasts were some kind of demi-gods, which was one huge reason Cortes and a few hundred men could topple an empire. I think their confusion was actually latent racism. They deserved to get conquered. Also, the ripping out the still beating hearts thing. Not cool.

      • spudchukar - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:29 PM

        As Historio mentioned, the “wild horses were once common in the West, is partially accurate. But they died out eons ago, and were much, much smaller. What now roams the west are actually feral Arabian bred equines, brought to America by the Spanish.

      • mikhelb - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:24 PM

        @historiophiliac: wild horses were common in north america, they were indigenous to north america but were used for food some 10,000 years or more before the spaniards arrived to América with arabian horses. That is described in the memoirs of the first spaniard colonists in California when they arrived to what is now Baja California and left their horses because in other southern tribes the horses caused horror since it was an animal unknown to them, but when the spaniards woke up the next morning in Baja, their horses were gone… and hours later the locals arrived with a feast made up of cooked horse, the locals knew about horses and were not affraid of them, it was an animal they ate because they knew them and hunted them back when wild horses roamed free in the west coast (plus old osaments of horses have been found that support that claim made in the mid 1500s).

        @yahmule: the real name is not “montezuma” and it has never been the name of that emperor, it is Moctezuma. The bastardized version in english usually adapts names onto something different (monte in spanish is a mound which it makes no sense plus there was no ‘N’ in the languages spoken in pre-colony México).

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM

        mikhelb, read down to the part under the headline “Humans and Horses.”

        http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/ma05/indepth/

        (Sorry I went Canadian with the link, but it was the quickest to find.)

  5. jonmarkbarre - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM

    dam man save u writin 4 somthin else lol

    • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:31 PM

      Upvoted for awesomeness.

  6. historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:46 AM

    I was having this conversation with a buddy just the other night. One of the thing that amuses me about it is that you have these white guys essentially saying that white people are lesser athletic talents — which is pretty insulting to white people. I find that strange, but it seems to fit the horrible old notion that white people were superior because of their intelligence while other races were stronger and that intelligence is what gives humans (read: white people) right to rule the earth.

    Sadly, and ironically, my buddy had had this debate with some co-workers and a couple of them who are white suggested it was racist of him to accuse white sportswriters/announcers of bias in the way they talk about black players. Which returns us to my point about white people saying white people are athletically inferior. It’s so strange.

    • cur'68 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:52 PM

      With Mike Trout right out there in front of them, too eh? I mean, I haven’t seen a more gifted natural athlete like Trout in a long time. He was born with all the right tools.

      At this juncture we’ll just have to point out that Yasiel Puig is having to work really hard to make the most of his abilities.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:12 PM

        Meh, no one’s afraid of fish. Now, if his name was “Mike Stallion”…well, that’s a name that beats MVP Miggy, hands down.

      • nbjays - Mar 20, 2014 at 6:16 PM

        Mike Stallion? You been watching porn movies, Historio?

    • moogro - Mar 20, 2014 at 3:09 PM

      There’s a logic to it. If our current society privileged natural athletic ability as the most important thing per se, and not one of many avenues (enviable shortcuts?) to making the most money, you would see different language being used.

  7. chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:46 AM

    Craig’s liberalism is seeing racism where none exists

    • paperlions - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:57 AM

      Actually, there have been a great number of studies of word usage in this regard and everyone of them has concluded that there is distinct bias like this associated with race and ethnicity. It is racist because the basis of the disparity is only associated with race, and not with talent, work ethic, or anything else.

      • chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:05 PM

        I’m sorry, saying that Yasiel Puig is a raw, but talented athlete is not racist…it’s a true statement and if Mike Trout played his game the same way Puig plays his, my guess is that the same statement “wild horse” term would apply to him.

        And if you had an African American player who played baseball the way David Eckstein did, then he too would be a “grinder.”

      • spudchukar - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:19 PM

        There is no such thing as race. But racism is alive and well.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:43 PM

        And if you had an African American player who played baseball the way David Eckstein did, then he too would be a “grinder.”

        Name 3 African Americans who get the “grinder” label. I’ll sit here and wait.

      • spudchukar - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:59 PM

        Eric Young, Chone Figgins, and Jose Altuve. But I still agree wholeheartedly with your question, it is rare that “gritty” is used to described black Baseball players. Maybe Dusty Baker too.

      • Reflex - Mar 21, 2014 at 4:35 PM

        While I agree with your assessment of the three players you mention, I have never, ever in the press seen them described that way. Which is the point.

  8. chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:52 AM

    It’s easy to attribute racism to thing when you’re actively seeking it out. It’s called race baiting.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:53 AM

      So, in your opinion, how does one know the difference?

      • chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:31 PM

        This is a prime example. Saying an AA is “athletic” isn’t racism or stereotyping. Jason Heyward is very athletic. Prince Fielder is not as much so. Mike Trout is athletic. Freddie Freeman not so much. My point is that the above article is the writer searching for something that isn’t there. As for the grinder label, I would argue it implies a guy isn’t particularly athletic. You could call that racism if you were overly sensitive. I wouldn’t but I bet Craig would.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:38 PM

        1) He’s not saying that we apply these labels only to one group or another. It’s that one tends to get one from sportswriters, while the other gets the other. It’s about percentages, not absolutes. Why don’t you do an experiment and count the number of times you see black players described as really smart as opposed to athletic and let us know what you find out?
        2) You can call me a homer, but I think Prince Fielder is athletic. I think you’re confusing “overweight” with “not athletic” and they are different things.
        3) You still haven’t given me a good rule of thumb for how you judge race-baiting v. non-race-baiting, which suggests it’s a subjective assessment you make — in which case, you should recognize other people’s assessments may not agree and be just as valid then.

      • chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:59 PM

        I just don’t buy it. We hear this a lot about QBs. Black QBs have trouble reading defenses… I’ve heard people say that’s a racial stereotype. Have you ever seen Mike Vick play? He actually can’t read a D. Has nothing to do with him being black. Warren Moon didn’t have this problem.

        When judged against the general population of course Fielder is athletic. One can’t reach his level of success otherwise. But in the universe of MLB players he is not athletic. It’s all relative. And when one player is called athletic and another is not you have to take that into account. Technically all pro athletes are athletic.

        And lastly, the term grinder implies ones skills are inferior. So that is a racial stereotype (since they tend to be white), right? Sometime racial stereotypes are accurate… whether they are flattering or not. It doesn’t make one a bigot or racist to acknowledge that.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:05 PM

        1) I did not read your 1st paragraph because you started in about mouthbreatherball.

        2) I still think you underestimate Fielder’s skills in comparison to other players. He’s not Trout, but he’s better than people often give him credit for.

        3) “Grinder” would then be a nice way to spin white player’s lack of skills by giving them credit for trying or something. And, that does suggest a racial stereotype if black players get dismissed for lack of skill instead of complimented for trying as well.

        4) You still haven’t given me your race-baiting litmus test measure.

      • chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:12 PM

        If you had read the first paragraph you’d have the example. And what is mouthbreatherball?

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:16 PM

        I read your first paragraph, but the example you gave only applies in that specific instance. Are you saying that that is the only instance where race-baiting would occur? I asked you for a general rule of thumb that you use to determine in various instances to make your determination, but if you’re now saying that it only happens in this one instance, I have my answer.

      • chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:20 PM

        Of course not, you asked for 1 example and I provided it. It’s not my lot in life to provide you multiple instances. Keith Law of ESPN gets all lathered up in his chats when someone uses the word “athletic” to describe a black player/prospect. That is race-baiting. Inserting a racial element into something that it has no business being in.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:22 PM

        I did not ask you for 1 example. I asked you how you know — besides arbitrarily deciding that it is — what qualifies as race-baiting and what are legitimate concerns about race. I really want to know how you judge that.

      • chc4 - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:30 PM

        Ok last one… because Mike Vick really can’t read defenses. To claim there is some racial undertone in that assessment… one can only draw one conclusion. That’s the definition of race baiting.

        Or it’s in vogue to be called a racist if you disagree with Obama. I assume you’ve heard that one. Most who disagree with him don’t like his policies or how he governs. Doubt I would’ve been very complimentary of Gore/Kerry either. Nothing to do with race, it’s all about substance. And no I won’t go down a political discussion… was just the easiest example to use.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:32 PM

        Ok. again you lost me with the mouthbreatherball. You realize this is HBT, right?

        I still have no idea how you decide — now I just know how you get defensive. Have a nice day.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:37 PM

        Ok last one… because Mike Vick really can’t read defenses. To claim there is some racial undertone in that assessment… one can only draw one conclusion. That’s the definition of race baiting.

        There is no racial undertones in saying that Mike Vick specifically can’t read defenses. Neither can Vince Young. The VY example is a statement of fact as Jaws pointed out before the draft. However, neither of those are racist/using racial undertones as long as you are describing the individual’s skills.

        Now, if you said they can’t read defenses BECAUSE they are black, that’s racist. If you say that black quarterbacks have difficulty reading defenses because they are black, that’s racist. It’s when you insert that race is a defining reason for a belief is what makes the comment racist.

  9. uwsptke - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:58 AM

    Technically, Puig likely wouldn’t consider himself to be black. Dominican, Cuban & other players of Carribean ancestry (Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, etc) identify themselves as Hispanic. I had a history professor from Haiti who said she never thought of herself as black until she came to America, where people projected black stereotypes on her because of her skin color.

    • natocoles - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:03 PM

      Your history professor is one side of things, but people in Latin America do split Hispanic up into groups. Race in Latin America is such an interesting topic. Look into the different ways people self-identify in Brazil. Up here we would lump the whole population under “latino/latina” or “hispanic”, but in Brazil they have a plethora of categories.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:22 PM

      That’s actually why I stopped using “African American” so much. I had black students from the Caribbean who felt “African American” did not describe them accurately and missed their different cultural experience. They recognized, however, that color was something they had in common with blacks in the US though, and as they were comfortable with recognizing that, I came to use it as well. And, yes, folks in Latin America use different categories.

    • flatsorter - Mar 21, 2014 at 8:32 PM

      You are right, Puig is the same race as Jose Iglesias and Jose Fernandez. I can tell by looking at them.

  10. justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:59 AM

    Right…when the white point guard comes in the game the commentator cant help but talk about his high basketball IQ.

    BUT HERE IS AN IDEA: White people should just stop talking about racism.

    99% of all media, all the news, all the power structures are created by people who are never racially offended. SO STOP TRYING TO TALK ABOUT IT or UNDERSTAND IT.

    • 18thstreet - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:15 PM

      I don’t understand volcanoes. Should I stop talking about them, and stop trying to understand them?

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:24 PM

        I appreciate you trying to understand that post, because I didn’t and I wasn’t going to talk about it.

      • justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:38 PM

        no but when you try to talk about them you end up looking like an a$#@%#$%.

        case and point.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:46 PM

      99% of all media, all the news, all the power structures are created by people who are never racially offended. SO STOP TRYING TO TALK ABOUT IT or UNDERSTAND IT.

      So we just sit back and let it happen then?

  11. pilonflats - Mar 20, 2014 at 11:59 AM

    By “we” in the title I think the author meant “I”. btw Brandon belt’s nickname is the “baby giraffe” – is that racist too?

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:25 PM

      No, because giraffes are legit.

      • pilonflats - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:31 PM

        touche

  12. holleywood9 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:00 PM

    You can only be so careful with what you say, people will find a racial meaning with anything that’s said. Example being Daniel tosh is it racist slurs…

  13. chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:01 PM

    Interesting article about this topic from a few years back: http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/michael_johnsons_gold_medal_in_ignorance/

  14. natocoles - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:01 PM

    Lance Berkman was called Big Puma (although I always preferred Fat Elvis). Adam Dunn is Big Donkey. Everyone likes a good animal nickname.

    As long as non-European-descended athletes aren’t ONLY talked about in terms of athletic ability rather than hard work and intelligence, I think everyone should be cool with appropriate animal nicknames.

    • forsch31 - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:25 PM

      Which is really the point that Craig misses.

      The New York Magazine piece highlights two similar college basketball players and opinions how they’re described by announcers, leading to the concluding paragraph that Craig quotes.

      It’s not some kind of study. It’s an editorial based on an observation the writer made about how two players from his alma mater. It’s a good observation, but then Craig spins it into something that it isn’t (“rubic”? Really?).

      Take 5 minutes to check, and you’ll see that, at least in baseball, players have been nicknamed after animals no matter their color, because the way they play or their personalities remind fans, announcers, media, and fellow players of some nature of that animal. Calling Puig the “Wild Horse” has as much to do with “a placeholder for otherness” as calling Berkman “Big Puma” had. Which is to say nothing at all.

      So, basically, this is Craig’s version of sound and the fury.

  15. yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:01 PM

    Vin’s anthropomorphic bigotry is well known. Bulldog Hershiser can well attest. Also, a pretty sarcastic guy. I remember him continuously referring to a coke addicted Dodger right fielder as “Straw.”

  16. jm91rs - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:02 PM

    Race, Pete Rose, and Puig. Those 3 are sure page hit generators and I’m starting to see too much of this stuff here when real baseball is starting back up Craig! You better get them out of your system before April.

  17. yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:04 PM

    • 18thstreet - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:16 PM

      Did Frazier mind? DOES ANYONE KNOW IF FRAZIER MINDED?

      Sheesh. Go read a book.

      • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:33 PM

        Did Frazier ****ing mind?

        Did you really ask that ****ing question, you ignorant ***hole?

      • 18thstreet - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:37 PM

        I was being sarcastic. Of course I know Frazier minded being called a gorilla. It’s a good example of how comparing someone to an animal can be offensive. I felt like you shared the link to show that, since Ali called Frazier a gorilla, it’s not offensive to compare a black athlete to an animal.

        Let’s move on, since I feel like neither of us understood what point the other was trying to make, and this is a bad venue to figure it out (mostly because I should be working now).

      • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:35 PM

        You’re officially the goddamn dumbest person on this board.

      • 18thstreet - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:38 PM

        Well, this was productive.

        Have a good day.

      • Reflex - Mar 21, 2014 at 5:49 PM

        I thought I was the dumbest person on the board. I feel so neglected now.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:52 PM

      So what was your point in posting this?

  18. justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:07 PM

    Say something is racially offensive.

    Watch white people offer counter examples involving white people. Then ask..”is this racism too”

    No.

    • chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:13 PM

      Wasn’t aware that racism was only applicable to non-whites.

      • justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:41 PM

        It basically is in this country.

        Racism by definition is the idea that one’s race is superior to others. There is no way you could have grown up in this country with a hint of the notion that one’s non-white skin was somehow superior to white skin when every aspect of this nation’s history is centered around the notion that whites are superior.

      • chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 2:53 PM

        That’s asinine. You’re telling me that if an African American calls me something derogatory for being Jewish that’s not racist because I’m white and historically whites have oppressed non-whites?

        Or that when someone like Al Sharpton calls the Trayvon Martin murder a hate crime but says nothing about the thrill killing of Christopher Lane by three African American teens who said they wanted to go have some fun and kill a white guy – that’s not racial bias?

      • Reflex - Mar 21, 2014 at 5:55 PM

        chips56 – One of the killers was white. The only motivation any of them ever gave was ‘boredom’. The only people who have claimed it was racially motivated are right wing nuts like Rush. I suggest you broaden your news sources and stop repeating easily debunked drivel.

  19. justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:08 PM

  20. chip56 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:15 PM

    I’m not saying there isn’t racism in the world. I am saying that calling Puig a “wild horse” is not an example of it.

  21. El Bravo - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:23 PM

    Puig is Cuban right? Shouldn’t he be fiery or spicy or caliente? I mean, if you are gonna be racist, do you have to be ignorant too? Sorry dumb question.

  22. tysonpunchinguterus - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:24 PM

    I still cringe when I hear someone refer to Lou Gehrig as “the Iron Horse.” Just because it was okay then doesn’t mean it’s okay now. Don’t even get me started on Mark Fidrych.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:27 PM

      What?

      • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:31 PM

        Mark Fidrych’s nickname was the “Bird”, which is an animal. Same with the Lou Gehrig “Iron Horse” comparison. The commenter is cogent with his comparisons.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:03 PM

        Honey, I didn’t mean I didn’t understand what he was saying…but for what it’s worth, an Iron Horse is a machine or mechanical thing — not an actual animal.

      • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:07 PM

        @historiophiliac,

        Honey? Is that what you are calling me now? I didn’t realize we were on that level.

      • tysonpunchinguterus - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:12 PM

        Animal nicknames. I could add Catfish Hunter, Greg Luzinski (the Bull), Mike Mussina (Moose), Harry “the Horse” Danning, Adam Dunn (“Big Donkey), Ron Guidry (“Gator”), Greg Maddux (“Mad Dog”), Fred “Chicken” Stanley, etc.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:14 PM

        No, I got it. I just don’t think you’re clever.

      • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:17 PM

        @historiophiliac,

        You’re right about that. I’m not very clever.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 1:20 PM

        I didn’t mean you with that…and honestly, clever isn’t the best thing in the world anyway.

    • 18thstreet - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:32 PM

      Has anything changed since Gehrig’s time, with regards to our attitudes toward race? Anything at all?

      I mean, I’d appreciate some context. Like, what were some of the nicknames for Gehrig’s black teammates?

      • yahmule - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:36 PM

        Sarcasm, you stupid ****.

        Jesus Christ!

      • historiophiliac - Mar 20, 2014 at 3:21 PM

        Oh, he think’s he’s being clever by being reductive. He’s just shrinking the argument down to his size.

  23. jimmyt - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:35 PM

    The writer makes the classic mistake that most do. He thinks everyone else must be as racist as he is.

  24. justicepeaceandtruth80 - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:42 PM

    white people.

    • halladaysbiceps - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:45 PM

      white people.

  25. thetxhammer - Mar 20, 2014 at 12:44 PM

    I never realized the Rangers calling Craig Gentry “kitten face” was racist stereotyping.

    I may have to reconsider my 25 years of fandome…

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (4562)
  2. M. Kemp (3650)
  3. M. Cabrera (2877)
  4. J. Kang (2578)
  5. M. Morse (2568)
  1. J. Upton (2488)
  2. A. Rios (2199)
  3. C. Headley (2164)
  4. W. Middlebrooks (2091)
  5. C. McGehee (1875)