nykola.com | bothering people since 1981

On June 10, during a rountable discussion on ESPN, Larry Bird commented that the NBA needed more white superstars. I think it's worthwhile to point out that the question of whether the NBA could use more white stars was actually asked of Bird. He simply responded to the question. Was it a set up? Who knows. While Bird went on to explain his rationale,

"I think it's good for a fan base because as we all know, the majority of the fans are white America. And if you just had a couple of white guys in there, you might get them a little excited...But it is a black man's game and it will be forever. I mean the greatest athletes in the world are African-American,"

the masses were dwelling on the "more white superstars" comment. The media ensued. People were making all kinds of racial accusations, and as columnist Leonard Pitts put it,

"You'd think Bird had burned a cross on magic Johnson's lawn, so great has the uproar been. He's been called a "lunkhead" a "nitwit" and a "bigot" among other choice epithets."

Thankfully, many people have come to the rescue of Bird, who probably has a better rapport with black people than the average white American, being that he did play with them for so many years in the NBA.

Mark Starr of Newsweek has one of the better commentaries I've read thus far on the Larry Bird fiasco. He brings things into a broader perspective remarking,

"Now, older and far more cautious if not downright cowardly, I am more likely to avoid than to address the racial issues of this era. While such matters still fascinate me, attempts to discuss race-no matter how reasoned and rational you may believe your own voice to be-are fraught with peril. I have little appetite for how ugly and accusatory the discourse can rapidly turn and appropriate fear of how it can tarnish a reputation. It is simply not safe for a white man (just ask Paul Hornung) or a black man (just ask Bill Cosby) to engage the subject publicly with any degree of candor."

Preach brother, preach. The reactions to Bird's comments could be a lot worse. Then again, they could be a lot better too. Ultimately, anyone with eyes can see that the NBA is dominated by black players. Does this mean they need more white players? It depends on your definition of "need". If "need" is dictated by ticket, paraphernalia, and endorsement sales, then probably, yes. If "need" is dictated by an overwhelming desire to make every crevice of the world "equal opportunity", no. There are 500% more black superstar basketball players than there are white. And? There are many reasons for this. One, in my opinion being that black culture pushes out better players. Now don't get all intense. I don't say this with pride as this isn't necessarily something to gloat about. There are cultural and socioeconomic factors at work in this reality for which both black and white people an be held accountable. Historically, in certain communities one's ability to play ball has been exalted above one's ability to think. This is a can of worms I don't wish to open at this present time. Another day another post.

Whether Larry Bird was right or wrong is not really paramount. Even columnist Starr agrees with that

"Though I'm not sure Bird is right, I can certainly make the argument for him. Even black hip-hop culture, which has captivated white suburban kids, seems to fire on all cylinders-the music, the movie, the mooning on the MTV awards-when a white superstar like Eminem is channeling it."

I can agree with this statement mostly. Except I disagree that hip-hop culture is "black". The response Bird got is pretty typical in this country. We can talk about black/white sports issues in barber shops, supermarkets, and family rooms, but certainly not on ESPN. The disappointing thing is that when someone really does step out of line in their comments, people turn a deaf ear because wolf has been cried so many times.