Global Sport Institute Research

NFL Social Justice Report Card

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:31 +0000

NFL Social Justice Report Card

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

More than T-shirts and hashtags: Measuring social justice impacts in the NFL

As controversies regarding kneeling as a form of protest have receded from global headlines, little has been written about what those same athletes and organizations are doing now regarding the issues at the heart of the demonstrations.

Following up on the efforts at initiating social change, the NFL has increased community outreach.
At the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University, we were curious about the actual impact the NFL was having in this “2.0” phase of athlete activism. We asked the NFL for, and received, internal reports on this activism. This represents our second report capturing the end-of-season detail – the first report was done at the NFL season midpoint. We hope we can do the same thing with other professional sports leagues.

In the meantime, we are identifying other cases of social justice activities by athletes in the U.S. and abroad, historical and current, and are working on a more comprehensive report that highlights the convergence of sport and social issues and how athletes and sport organizations have been sites for challenges to social justice and active towards furthering social justice.

Download the full report | Read the report on globalsportmatters.com

Global Sport Institute Research

nfl-socialjusticereportcard-digital-share.pdf (669.88 KB)

Athlete Transitions

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:29 +0000

Athlete Transitions

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

Collegiate and professional athlete transitions are not like other transitions out of other fields due to the intense level of identity and connectedness that goes with being a serious athlete and those who focus entirely on being an athlete (identity foreclosure). There is a sacrifice of their education and additional identity options/career aspirations, that make this type of transition more difficult. We know that the earlier you transition out of the dream, the more time you have to focus on the dream of the traditional working life. Similarly, transition is eased for athletes that engage in learning continuously and when they have a plan in place before their athletic experience ends.

After meeting with professional and national sports organizations, along with years of engagement in this space, GSI has developed concrete research questions that need answers:

How can we decrease the time it takes for athletes to transition to new careers?
How can we lessen the number of transitions (finding the career that sticks) and mitigate the stress that athletes experience?
How can we be proactive in improving the number of athletes who finish their education and/or get credentialed/training for both sports and non-sports careers?

We can still provide the items listed above: education, counseling, degree completion, entrepreneurship, and certificates. However, we now are clear that the Global Sport Institute can play a much bigger role by developing the intake tools and systems responsive to these research questions. What we also know is that such a tool cannot be “one size fit all.” We are building it with a flexibility, but we can only do so by working with sports entities interested in accomplishing that same goal.

Our research will:

Build on existing research in the area, including the comparison of military personnel and athletes’ transitions, commonalities, and dissimilarities.
Refine and create instruments for assessment and test the delivery of existing instruments.
Explore mental and social well-being, particularly, how athletes develop new purpose and meaning, and the role of others in athletes’ transitions.
Describe and investigate intake/assessment processes to develop a customizable model for sports entities and individuals.

To find out more about our athlete education and transition initiatives, visit our Education page or contact us.

Global Sport Institute Research

athlete_transition_statement.pdf (950.84 KB)

Athlete Education

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:29 +0000

Athlete Education

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

Roundtable Thoughts on Athlete Education & Transition: Collegiate and European Focus

“Every athlete dies twice” is one of those long–existing, unattributed quotes with powerful meaning. Whenever the College Football Playoff has been won or NCAA March Madness is over, most of these college athletes are finished with an activity that has captured much of their lives. For the majority of others, the end occurs at even more inopportune moments. To be sure, there are multiple athlete transition moments worthy of exploration. These include all youth levels and various professional-level transitions. The Global Sport Institute (GSI) looks forward to being engaged in examining them all.

In March 2018, the Global Sport Institute hosted a day of events to learn more about the challenges and opportunities of athlete education. In this conversation we focused primarily on the transition from playing college sports to no longer playing and on the European models for transitioning from playing sport. We sought the expertise of industry professionals, researchers, and athlete education program developers from both the US and Europe. Four important themes evolved from the panel discussion and one-on-one conversations:

Race
Athlete identity
Meaningful athlete education
Athlete transition

Following the panel discussion and one-on-one conversation with Jacques McClendon (former student-athlete, NFL player and current Director of Player Engagement for the Los Angeles Rams), we convened a roundtable to exchange ideas and solutions. We began by identifying current barriers. This quickly introduced complexity in terms of whom to include (amateurs/student athletes and professionals; timing of degree programs during athlete careers and transitional degree programs post career) and the different types of barriers. Next, we asked how to best remove barriers.

This document is a working paper and a starting point, rather than a final report. We expect to hold additional roundtables globally, seek additional insights from insiders, and host other events to investigate these topics further, including youth and professional levels. Ultimately, our final report would cover athlete education and transitions beyond those discussed herein as well as be more global and rigorous. We thank all of our roundtable panelists and participants and give a special thanks to Molly Ott (Arizona State University), Colin Williams (Ross Initiative in Sports for Equality), and Martin Carlsson-Wall (Sports and Business Centre, Stockholm School of Economics) who graciously volunteered to contribute to this working paper, but the final product, particularly any negatives, is the responsibility of GSI. In that spirit, your comments, corrections, and suggestions are all encouraged.

Here is what you will find in this working paper: a brief that draws from existing scholarship pertaining to athlete education to describe and analyze the themes that emerged during roundtable discussions, makes brief recommendations/suggestions, and offers “next steps” and topics to be touched upon at future roundtables and discussions; and, an appendix that summarizes the day’s roundtable and development of important areas in athlete education (US) and career transition (Europe).

Download the full report.

UPDATE: See the post-research update in our Athlete Transition section.

Global Sport Institute Research

athlete_ed_working_paper_0.pdf (2.44 MB) athlete_transition_statement_0.pdf (950.84 KB)

Field Studies: A 10-Season Snapshot of NFL Coaching Hires

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:27 +0000

Field Studies: A 10-Season Snapshot of NFL Coaching Hires

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

Volume 1 Issue 1

Abstract

At the end of the 2018-19 NFL season, five of the eight head coaches fired were African American, and only one vacancy was filled by a coach of color. This inequity raised the question: is the Rooney Rule, the NFL’s diversity hiring plan, working? The Global Sport Institute, with the Paul Robeson Center for Innovative Academic and Athletic Prowess (PRRC), sought to answer one question: What can we say about the NFL’s hiring of coaches of color? The purpose of this work is to explore and report on coach hiring and firing trends, not to extrapolate how or why these patterns occur. While other research has considered changes on a year to year basis, we looked at changes from the 2009-10 NFL season through the 2018-19 season. All the data presented have been gathered from publicly accessible sources. We conducted two phases of data collection and analysis. Our findings show that the number of head coaches of color has gone up and down. Overall, head coaches of color are hired at older ages, have more significant and relevant playing experience and do not receive equivalent “second chances.” Specifically, when African American head coaches have been fired in the NFL, it has been more difficult for them, as compared to white coaches, to obtain another head coaching position at the same level.

Introduction

Tom Fears (Los Angeles Rams) was the first Latino American head coach in the NFL (1967), and Joe Kapp was the first Latino American NCAA Division 1-A coach at a predominantly white program (1982), University of California-Berkeley. Tom Flores (Oakland Raiders) was the first Latino and coach of color in the modern NFL era (after the 1970 NFL-AFL merger). Art Shell (Los Angeles Raiders) became the first African American head coach in the modern era (1989), and Willie Jeffries was the first African American NCAA Division 1-A coach at a predominantly white program, Wichita State (1979). The push for greater representation of coaches of color within the NFL has been well documented, especially since the adoption of the Rooney Rule in 2003.* The Global Sport Education and Research Lab, with the help of the Paul Robeson Center for Innovative Academic and Athletic Prowess at the University of Central Florida, sought to answer one question: What can we say about the NFL’s hiring of coaches of color?

Rather than exploring the question in the snapshot of a single year, we examined this issue with an in-depth approach. We analyzed who was hired and fired and looked for patterns over a ten-year window, from the 2009-10 NFL season through the 2018-19 season. The data below are not exhaustive, and we will continue to build on this research, searching for more patterns and additional questions. The total number of coaches in this data set is insufficient for inferential statistical analyses. The purpose of this report is to explore and report on coach hiring and firing trends, not to extrapolate how or why these patterns occur.

*The Rooney Rule requires clubs hiring a head coach to interview at least one person of color.

Read the full working paper here or visit globalsportmatters.com.
Shortcut to Volume 1 Issue 2

Global Sport Institute Research

field_studies_nfl_12.14.2020.4pm.pdf (737.74 KB)

Coaching: Public Perceptions of Shoving Players and Mandated Certification

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:24 +0000

Coaching: Public Perceptions of Shoving Players and Mandated Certification

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

RESEARCH NOTE

Introduction

In a 2020 poll of U.S. residents’ perspectives designed and analyzed by the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University, we asked questions about coaching, including coach certification and physical aggression toward players at various competitive levels. Coaching is integrated into society at a personal level, as many children and their families interact with coaches of youth teams on a regular basis. It is also prominent on a larger societal and media scale because college and professional coaches are often in the news for their hiring qualifications, salaries, and treatment of players. A quick web search of “high school coach shoving player” will likely yield several local and national news stories about coach resignations, suspensions, and/or controversy, including a recent action by Tara Poovey, a Phoenix, Arizona, high school girls’ basketball coach. Prominent former men’s college basketball coaches, such as California Berkeley’s Mike Montgomery, Rutgers’ Mike Rice, and, most famously, Indiana’s Bobby Knight, received a wide range of consequences for their physical aggression toward players. Researchers have analyzed such aggressive behaviors for their effects on athletes and performance (Kassing & Infante, 1999), coach-athlete conflict more generally (Wachsmuth et al., 2017), and fostering appropriate coaching behaviors (Paterick et al., 2015). On a related note, there are currently no universally-mandated certifications for coaches across all levels of sport, including community youth leagues, high school, college, and professional. This may be on the horizon as many universities now offer coaching certificates and degrees (e.g., Texas Tech University, Michigan State University). We have seen the media reports and read the scientific evidence, but we wanted your perspectives. So, we asked.

Download the full research note here.

Global Sport Institute Research

researchnote-poll-coachesshovingplayers-6.19.20.pdf (714.25 KB)

Banned Substances in Sport: Public Perception of Performance-Enhancing Drugs and Marijuana Use by Athletes

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:24 +0000

Banned Substances in Sport: Public Perception of Performance-Enhancing Drugs and Marijuana Use by Athletes

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

RESEARCH NOTE

Introduction

In a 2020 poll of U.S. residents’ public perspectives designed and analyzed by the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University, we asked questions about banned substances, including performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) and marijuana use in sports. Drug use among athletes has been a widely-discussed topic among sport enthusiasts, researchers, healthcare providers, and government agencies. When a beloved athlete is caught using PEDs, or “doping,” it makes headlines, spurs discussion on social media, and generates policy from sport governing bodies.

The topic spans different sports, includes a wide range of ages and playing levels, and supersedes race and country. American baseball players, such as Alex Rodriguez, have attracted national attention and governmental investigation. Internationally, we have witnessed systemic doping by countries, as in the case of East Germany’s Olympic teams in the 1970s and ’80s and Russia’s Olympic teams in the past decade. Cyclist Lance Armstrong dominated the Tour de France for seven years before being caught in a doping conspiracy. Before cannabis was banned for Olympic athletes, in the late 1990s, Ross Rebagliati won a gold medal for snowboarding, lost it after testing positive for marijuana, and then regained it because the drug wasn’t yet on the banned substances list.

In addition to substantial news and social media coverage, researchers have investigated health-related consequences of doping (e.g., Chyka, 2003; Ostovar et al., 2017), issues that drive athletes to take banned substances (e.g., Nicholls et al., 2017), and people’s perceptions of banned substances use (e.g., Landy et al., 2017). We have seen the media reports and read the scientific evidence, but we wanted your perspectives. So, we asked.

Download the full research note here.

Global Sport Institute Research

researchnote-poll-banned_substances-6.17.20_0.pdf (532.93 KB)

Gambling in Sport: Public Perception of Sports Betting by Athletes and Coaches

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:24 +0000

Gambling in Sport: Public Perception of Sports Betting by Athletes and Coaches

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

RESEARCH NOTE

Introduction

Betting on sporting events and accusations of game “fixing” go back a long time in sports history. From the “Say it ain’t so, Joe” Shoeless Joe Jackson 1919 World Series game-fixing scandal through the lifetime ban of Pete Rose from Major League Baseball, these controversial betting and game-fixing episodes have been front and center in North American news. Internationally, leagues and clubs have been rocked by similar scandals, such as the 2009 European Football betting scandal or the 15- to 20-year suspensions of players by the Badminton World Federation in 2018.

With the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing individual states to legalize gambling, many in the media and scientific communities have talked about the dangers of gambling. In an article in Time (2018, May 17), Gregory cites concerns from the National Council on Problem Gambling about the uncontrolled expansion of gambling venues. Indeed, a quick search on the internet reveals a plethora of online and in-person gambling opportunities, many of which focus heavily on sports. However, some people have advocated that there are benefits to legalized sports betting, citing improved safety and increased tax revenue (Smiley, 2017).

While the legality of gambling is determined in the United States at the state level, it is seen as controversial in general. That controversy increases when discussion turns to athletes and coaches betting on their own sporting events. Researchers have provided evidence that college student-athletes engage in gambling at higher rates than their non-athlete peers and may have a propensity toward problem gambling¹ (Ellenbogen et al., 2008; Martin et al., 2016). Similar findings have also been applied to professional athletes (Grall-Bronnec et al., 2016). In their study, Rodriguez-Monguio et al. (2017) identified connections between mental health and substance abuse disorders in problem gamblers.

The facets of sports betting controversies span social, moral, ethical, legal, and financial realms, with very little agreement about the topic among experts and enthusiasts. We at the Global Sport Institute have read the media reports, explored the history, and reviewed the research on the consequences of sports betting and game-fixing, but we wanted to get a bead on current public opinions. So, we asked.

Download the full research note here.

Global Sport Institute Research

researchnote-poll-gamblinginsport-6.17.2020.pdf (568.77 KB)

2020 Global Sport Research Conference

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:22 +0000

2020 Global Sport Research Conference

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

The 2020 Global Sport Research Conference (ReCon) was a virtual gathering of researchers worldwide held to listen, present and connect on current work and findings, on July 22, 2020.

The theme was ‘exploring edgework and risk taking in sport’ with presentations from Arizona State University’s Global Sport Institute researchers and University of Brighton Sport and Leisure Cultures research group on areas within sport and social sciences.

The flow of the presentations purposely guides the viewer through to examine edgework and risk taking as it pertains to race, gender, identity, public space and property, community, and violence.

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference: Intro w/ Scott Brooks

(1:49) Scott Brooks welcomes attendees to the 2020 Global Sport Research Conference, presented by the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University and University of Brighton Sport and Leisure Cultures research group.

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Daniel Burdsey

(21:48) Black Lives Matter and English soccer: thinking, acting and resisting across space and time
By: Daniel Burdsey, PhD, School of Sport and Service Management, University of Brighton

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Scott Brooks and Anastasiya Khomutova

(29:54) Can’t Have Too Many: How Black American male professional basketball players are perceived, characterized, and treated by East European coaches
By: Scott Brooks, PhD, Director of Research, Global Sport Institute
& Anastasiya Khomutova, PhD, Senior Lecturer, University of Brighton

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Rachel Lofton

(20:14) Mixed-Gendered Plus Sport Programs: A Bottom-Up Approach to Gender Reconstruction in the Sport for Development Movement
By: Rachel Lofton, Graduate Researcher, Global Sport Institute

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Luke Brenneman

(23:30) You Had to Be There: Fans' National Identity in Shared Spaces at the Rio 2016 Olympics
By: Luke Brenneman, PhD, Postdoctoral Researcher, Global Sport Institute

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Paul Gilchrist

(24:04) Parkour, conviviality and the negotiation of urban space
By: Paul Gilchrist, PhD, Principal Lecturer in Human Geography, School of Environment & Technology, University of Brighton

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference; Alex Cannon

(23:52) Violence, Communities, and the Constitution of the Self through 'Edgework' in Mixed Martial Arts
By: Alex Channon, PhD, Principal Lecturer in Human Geography, School of Environment & Technology, University of Brighton

Video of 2020 Global Sport Research Conference: Closing w/ Anastasiya Khomutova

(2:06) Closing thoughts on the research presentations from Anastasiya Khomutova, University of Brighton

Global Sport Institute Research

Field Studies: A 10-Season Snapshot of NCAA Power Five Head Football Coaching Hires

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:15 +0000

Field Studies: A 10-Season Snapshot of NCAA Power Five Head Football Coaching Hires

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to explore and describe coach hiring and firing trends at the highest collegiate levels. We sought to explore head coach hiring patterns over the past 10 seasons in the Power Five conferences. All data presented have been gathered from publicly accessible sources, such as news articles and press releases, that report on coaches’ entrances into and exits from coaching positions. Trends in hiring and firing related to race are examined, along with patterns related to coaching pipelines and pathways. Implications for future research and need for data-driven policy are discussed.

Introduction

Tom Fears (New Orleans Saints) was the first Latino American head coach in the NFL (1967), and Joe Kapp was the first Latino American NCAA Division 1-A coach at a predominantly White program (1982, University of California-Berkeley). Tom Flores (Oakland Raiders) was the first Latino and Coach of Color in the NFL’s modern era (after the 1970 NFL-AFL merger). Art Shell (Los Angeles Raiders) became the first Black head coach in the modern era (1989), and Willie Jeffries was the first Black NCAA Division 1-A coach at a predominantly White program (1979, Wichita State). The push for greater representation of Coaches of Color within the NFL has been welldocumented, especially since the 2003 adoption of the Rooney Rule, which requires NFL teams to interview ethnic-minority candidates for head coach and senior football operations jobs. In the NCAA, this topic has also been a part of recent discussions by journalists (e.g., Myerberg, 2018; Newberry, 2020) and researchers (e.g., Turick & Bopp, 2016). The Global Sport Institute, with the help of the Paul Robeson Center for Innovative Academic & Athletic Prowess at the University of Central Florida, sought to answer one question: What can we say about hiring of head Coaches of Color by NCAA member institutions?

Read the full paper here or visit globalsportmatters.com.

Global Sport Institute Research

field_studies_ncaa_power_five_-_final_12.17.20.pdf (507.72 KB)

Field Studies: NFL Head Coach Hiring and Pathways in the Rooney Rule Era

Anonymous — Tue, 06 Sep 2022 17:01:14 +0000

Field Studies: NFL Head Coach Hiring and Pathways in the Rooney Rule Era

Anonymous (not verified) Tue, 09/06/2022 - 10:01

Volume 1 Issue 2

Abstract

The NFL’s Rooney Rule, established in 2003, has required franchises to interview candidates of Color for senior football operations and head coaching positions. The purpose of this report is to describe coach hiring and firing patterns and pipelines leading to head coaching and to expand our original analyses to include seasons from the start of the Rooney Rule. The data in this study indicated differences in pipelines and pathways, experiences, and opportunities. The analyses provided details to the racial/ethnic composition of the 18 seasons since the Rooney Rule was implemented and answered the question, “What are the similarities and differences for coaches of Color and White coaches?” These data pointed to possible challenges, barriers, and opportunities. Although there were years with spiked increases in hiring diversity, neither bookend, nor aggregate, nor year-to-year comparisons showed a steady or consistent increase in the number of head coaches of Color, offensive coordinators of Color, or defensive coordinators of Color hired over the 18 seasons examined here. Future directions are discussed.

Introduction

In 2019, the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University, with help from the Paul Robeson Research Center for Innovative Academic & Athletic Prowess at the University of Central Florida, developed a working paper (Brooks et al., 2019) that reviewed the hiring patterns for head coaches of Color in the National Football League (NFL) across a ten-season window. The original paper cited the Rooney Rule as the impetus for examining the current state of hiring and firing and for investigating pipelines and pathways for head coaches of Color compared to White head coaches.

The NFL’s Rooney Rule, established in 2003, has required franchises to interview candidates of Color for senior football operations and head coaching positions. After Tony Dungy and Dennis Green were fired following the 2002 season, despite their relative success, civil rights lawyers Johnnie Cochran and Cyrus Mehri (2002) published a study that revealed African American head coaches were “last hired and first fired” when compared to their White counterparts, despite having higher winning percentages.

Before the Rooney Rule was established, a variety of sources identified racial inequities in sport (e.g. Bivens & Leonard, 1994; Shropshire, 1996; Wilbon, 1999). Since the onset of the Rooney Rule, researchers and media outlets have asked, “Has the Rooney Rule’s interview quota led to more head coaches of Color getting and keeping their jobs?” In an update to their 2004 and 2009 studies, Madden & Ruther (2011) focused on the diminished early finding that African American head coaches performed better than White head coaches and cited the continued absence of African American offensive coordinators being promoted to head coach between 2003-09. Another quantitative study (Braddock et al., 2012) identified the effects of race on access to coaching positions in the NFL, finding that race limits access.

The media has had mixed reviews of race in the NFL since the implementation of the Rooney Rule. In a Business Insider article written in 2017, Gaines touted the success of the Rooney Rule by examining total numbers of minority head coaches. However, he did not examine year-to-year hiring patterns. In a 2014 Washington Post article, Mark Maske offered “praise” for the NFL when two minority head coaches were hired, because none had been hired the year before. More recently, media outlets have criticized the lack of diversity in the NFL (e.g. Armour, 2019; Today Show, 2020), but they have presented only limited examples of head coach hiring related to race and ethnicity. These smaller data sets and snapshots have not captured the full picture of hiring patterns. The need for more comprehensive analyses drove the data collection in the initial study.

The Global Sport Institute published an analysis (Brooks et al., 2019) of hiring and firing trends of NFL head coaches, offensive coordinators, and defensive coordinators for the decade that spanned the 2009-10 NFL season through the 2018-19 season. In short, our report found that while most coaches from 2009-19 were former players, and most players have been men of Color, the vast majority of coaches were White. As measured by previous playing and coaching experience, coaches of Color had more robust statistics when hired than White coaches. Regardless of ethnicity, all outgoing head coaches achieved similar winning percentages. The age at the time of hire showed a wider range for White head coaches than coaches of Color, and White head coaches were also hired more frequently and for more senior positions after being fired. Lastly, offensive coordinators, the vast majority of whom are White, were much more likely than defensive coordinators to be hired as head coaches.

As we pursued a deeper understanding of the pipeline, the equity of hiring processes, the league and franchise organizational practices, and the persistence of disparate outcomes, we stepped back to analyze all head coach and coordinator hiring and firing from the year prior to the Rooney Rule going into effect in 2003 and expanded our previous analysis by six seasons. We also added the 2019-20 season.

The purpose of this report was to explore and report on coach hiring and firing patterns and pipelines leading to head coaching in seasons beginning from the start of the Rooney Rule. As in the initial working paper, we aimed to report the data, not to extrapolate how or why these patterns occurred.

Read the full paper here or read our issue on Global Sport Matters: How the NFL Moves Forward.
Read our Best Practices for diverse hiring in the NFL here.
Shortcut to Volume 1 Issue 1

Global Sport Institute Research

globalsportinstitute-fieldstudiesnflfeb2021.pdf (1.06 MB)