Perspective_on_Football

Critical thinking: Sociological In American culture football is the most popular sport of all. Football is more than just a sport it is a group of people that can be considered friends and even sometimes as family. Football is only one of a thousand “groups” that brings together young men that develop over time into close-knit relationships outside of the family dynamic. The game of football is a competition between two opposing teams that face off in order to out skill one another in order to achieve one goal; winning. Approximately 5.5 million children from the ages of 8 to 14 alone play football. High school statistics for the ages of 14 to 18 is approximately 1.1 million players. So roughly in the age groups of 8 to 18 roughly 6.6 million children are playing football today. In the NFL, there are approximately 1,700 players with approximately 61% being African Americans, Hispanics, Samoans, etc (non-whites) and the remaining 39% of players are white. Sociological theories are the best methods to analyze the structure, relationships and impact of groups such as football players. The main three sociological areas to examine football players are structural functionalism, Conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. No matter which view is used when examining football, football is a complex sport and each theory provides a different view on the success of each team reaching their goal of winning. “Structural-Functionalism views shared norms and values as the basis of society, focuses on social order based on tacit agreements between groups and organizations, and views social change as occurring in a slow and orderly fashion” (Ritzer 286). “Structural-Functionalists would state that sports overall play a very important role in our society. To a degree functionalist would state that a sport team is a small sampling of American society. The reason is that all the players have a specific role, which they study, hone their skill set at and overall contributes to the primary goal of the team... winning games. Not everyone will make it to the top due to lack of skill or even personal drive while others will make it to the top must also have a lot of discipline and drive to excel. “Durkheim would say that sports serve the ritualistic function of keeping society bonded and people (fans and teams) in solidarity with each other” (Ritzer 286). The best athletes deserve the money they get because they help us as a society determine who we are and establish a sense of togetherness. Structural functionalist tend to believe that sports are popular and important to society because they maintain stability and normalcy in today’s society. Structural Functionalist also sees the various entities that are involved in the overall concept of a football game. They focus on the dynamics between coaches, players, referees, owners and most importantly the fans. Each of these has their own job to do with assigned tasks. The two largest entities are the players and coaches. The player’s role is to learn the sport, hone their skills and to actually entertain the fans with way they play the game. But it doesn’t stop there for the players. They also have responsibilities off the field. They have to practice, workout, watching films of opposing teams and themselves, and also to keep up a public image. The coaches role on the other hand is to be invented with developing plays, developing the practice program, running practice, pushing the players to their limits, calling the right plays throughout the games and to also watch films of opposing teams to develop strategies to beat their opponents. Together, the players and coaches have to be in sync and have the greatest impact on the outcome of a game. When it comes to game day, the coaches and the players stand on the sideline mentally preparing together and facing off the opposing team. The biggest difference is that coaches are the ones directing the game and all the plays that the players will execute. One could say the players are the puppets and the coaches are the puppeteers. A latent function is the development of an identity. Coaches have the biggest role in this. If a coach for example teaches “to win we praise God, to lose we praise God” then the team will develop an identity as a Christian team. But if the coach teaches with a negative, cursing mouth then the team will follow suit. Bottom line, the coaches develop the identity of a team and that attitude is put on the players and then displayed for the public. A manifest function of the coaches is to get the team ready for games and to ensure they have the right person playing the right position. On the flip side, if a coach does not have the right strategy planned out for a game this could lead to the team failing and this would be a dysfunction of the coach. One last dysfunction of a team comes through money. Owners can lose sight of their players and coaches as people and only see them property or moneymakers or losers. This cannot have a significant impact on the moral of the team. The last area of dysfunction for a team comes in the area of race. Racial differences and opinions cause a lot of discourse in sports, which leads to “stacking”. “Stacking in team sports is considered the overrepresentation or under representation of racial or ethnic groups in certain positions. Generally, the under representation is noted in what are considered central positions or leadership/strategic positions within team sports” (Craig). Structural functionalists view things as in sync with a team’s purpose, norms and values, conflict theorist views things in the more negative. Conflict theory focuses in on “coercion, domination, and power” (Ritzer 287). According to Ralph Dahrendorf, “Authority is located not within people but within various positions. Authority is created by the expectation of certain types of action associated with particular positions, including subordination of others and subordination to others” (Ritzer 287) When one first sits down to watch a football game it may not be clear that it is truly a game of conflict; a game of power. Each team puts its best players out on the field playing offensive versus defensive at various intervals of the game. Both teams are fighting for the same thing...to dominate the field. If one team has better field position than the other, i.e. is in the opposing team’s end zone, then they are more likely to gain the advantage in touchdowns and then be successful in winning the game. Both teams cannot have “good field position” at the same time. Conflict theory says that this creates a struggle between the two teams. Each play that occurs helps one or the other team to gain the best field position or to keep a good field position. Another area of team conflict is the area of best players. During the draft and throughout the year teams are trading and bidding for new players. This helps the team owners and coaches to build the ultimate team that they believe will get them to the super bowl. The other advantage for working to get the best players is to help balance the rest of the team. This way they know where there is a weakness a better player can fill in the gap. Where things get heated is when different teams are bidding and fighting for the same players. And where this gets really tricky for NFL players is money. Who is going to give the longer contract and the best salary' All teams have a limit or ceiling on what they can play any given player. This creates some conflict between getting the best players and maintaining that ceiling on their salary. So it’s money versus talent that comes into play. Also, “sports focus the attention and the emotions of the have-nots in society on escapist spectator events that distract them from the economic issues and policies that reproduce their own powerlessness in society. Therefore, sports, especially mass spectator sports, are organized and sponsored by wealthy people and large corporations because they perpetuate capitalist values and a lifestyle based on com- petition, production, and consumption” (Weber 24). The last area of conflict theory is the difference between race and social class implications. Sports represent of one the fewest areas for upward social movement. Sports careers are sought by working-class and lower class men- despite the impossible odds they face in order to make football a lifelong career. “Only 6% of high school football players ever play in college, and only 2% of eligible college football athletes ever sign a professional contract” (Weber 26). The possibility for becoming a professional football player are “4 in 100,00 for a white man, 2 in 100,00 for a African Americans and 3 in 1,000,000 for a US born Latino” (Weber 26). More middle class white men are pushed to attend college and get a degree. This way they can eventually become some form of a professional businessman, manager or administrator. African American males are sought after due to the “belief” that they are faster and stronger than any other race. Between structural functionalism and conflict theory is symbolic interaction. “Research based on interactionist theory helps us to understand how people define and give meaning to themselves, their actions, and the world around them. It also helps us to understand human beings as choice makers and creators of identities and relationships” (Weber 26). Most of the player’s identities come from the position and stature of the elite professional. While others identities come from their own attitude, personality and beliefs. For example, Tim Tebow was not only identified as a football player but as a Christian believer. While others establish a “bad boy” identity through their actions on and off the field. For example, football has its all time greats such as Peyton Manning because of his skill and abilities. Where, Vaughn Miller has had continued run-ins with the law, drug abuse charges and put on a six game suspension with the league has a reputation as a “bad boy”. There are also many other various symbols throughout the game of football, each having a different meaning in order to impact people differently. Some symbols are as simple as the team logo or as complex as the coaches hand signals to their players. These hand signals enable the coach and the team to communicate nonverbally, and in their own language that the opposing team does not understand. The game of football is also a national symbol itself. Many Americans spend their Saturday/Sunday afternoons and Monday nights in front of the television cheering on the their favorite teams. The love for football can be seen through the wear of a team jersey which can be seen being worn in most stores, churches and bars every weekend or even throughout the season. Then to top it all off, the biggest symbol for football has go to be Superbowl Sunday! Superbowl Sunday is almost as important as a holiday. Fans everywhere celebrate it through parties and wearing of team jerseys. “This recognition was evident in last year’s Super Bowl, when about 164 million people, or 71% of TVs in the US, tuned in to watch” (CBS Sports). “The weight a single game of football has on American society, that causes discussion of an official Super Bowl holiday, shows how significant the sport itself is within American culture” (Malcolm). Each sociological perspective provides a different outlook to the sport of football. Functionalist look at it from the interactions of the players and coaches, while conflict theorist look at the make up of the team, the racial makeup and the impact of money of the overall sport. Lastly, symbolic interactionalist looks at it from an identity perspective not just on the players but also on society as a whole. All three views provide a well-rounded analysis of the sport of football. Works Cited "'Race' And Sport: Critical Race Theory." Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews 39.2 (2010): 224-224. Print. Craig, Peter. Sport sociology. 2nd ed. Exeter [U.K.: Learning Matters, 2010. Print. Malcolm, Dominic. Sport and Sociology. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2012. Print. Ritzer, George. "Structural Functionalism, Neofunctionalism, and Conflict Theory." Sociological theory. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, 1996. 284-289. Print. Weber, Lynn. "Conceptual Framework for Understanding Race, Class, Gender and Sexuality." Psychology of Women Quarterly 1 Sept. 1998: 13-32. Print.