What do you think?
Rate this book
Common Enemies: Georgetown Basketball, Miami Football, and the Racial Transformation of College Sports
During the 1980s Black athletes and other athletes of color broadened the popularity and profitability of major-college televised sports by infusing games with a “Black style” of play. At a moment ripe for a revolution in men’s college basketball and football, clashes between “good guy” white protagonists and bombastic “bad boy” Black antagonists attracted new fans and spectators. And no two teams in the 1980s welcomed the enemy’s role more than Georgetown Hoya basketball and Miami Hurricane football.
Georgetown and Miami taunted opponents. They celebrated scores and victories with in-your-face swagger. Coaches at both programs changed the tenor of postgame media appearances and the language journalists and broadcasters used to describe athletes. Athletes of color at both schools made sports apparel fashionable for younger fans, particularly young African American men. The Hoyas and the ’Canes were a sensation because they made the bad-boy image look good. Popular culture took notice.
In the United States sports and race have always been tightly, if sometimes uncomfortably, entwined. Black athletes who dare to challenge the sporting status quo are often initially vilified but later accepted. The 1980s generation of barrier-busting college athletes took this process a step further. True to form, Georgetown’s and Miami’s aggressive style of play angered many fans and commentators. But in time their style was not only accepted but imitated by others, both Black and white. Love them or hate them, there was simply no way you could deny the Hoyas and the Hurricanes.
Georgetown and Miami taunted opponents. They celebrated scores and victories with in-your-face swagger. Coaches at both programs changed the tenor of postgame media appearances and the language journalists and broadcasters used to describe athletes. Athletes of color at both schools made sports apparel fashionable for younger fans, particularly young African American men. The Hoyas and the ’Canes were a sensation because they made the bad-boy image look good. Popular culture took notice.
In the United States sports and race have always been tightly, if sometimes uncomfortably, entwined. Black athletes who dare to challenge the sporting status quo are often initially vilified but later accepted. The 1980s generation of barrier-busting college athletes took this process a step further. True to form, Georgetown’s and Miami’s aggressive style of play angered many fans and commentators. But in time their style was not only accepted but imitated by others, both Black and white. Love them or hate them, there was simply no way you could deny the Hoyas and the Hurricanes.
304 pages, Hardcover
Published November 1, 2021
1 person is currently reading
38 people want to read
About the author
Thomas F. Schaller
11 books22 followersTHOMAS F. SCHALLER is professor of political science at UMBC. He is a former national political columnist for the Baltimore Sun, and is the author of five books, including White Rural Rage and Whistling Past Dixie.
Tom Schaller is the penname of Thomas F. Schaller.
Tom Schaller is the penname of Thomas F. Schaller.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
November 22, 2021
Two of the most successful college sports teams in the 1980's were the men's basketball team at Georgetown University and the football team at the University of Miami (Florida). These teams not only dominated their respective sports and contended for national championships for several years, they did so with unique styles that were early versions of the "Black style" of play and became the perceived antagonists in the previously mostly staid world of college sports. Their success on the field and importance in college sports' revolution is the subject of this excellent book by historian Thomas F. Schaller.
The book's main "characters" are the two coaches who won the most games and brought their coaching styles to the schools – John Thompson for Georgetown and Jimmy Johnson for Miami. It should be noted that Schaller gives credit to Howard Schnellenberger, Johnson's predecessor, for first bringing Miami football into prominence with the 1983-84 national championship. Schnellenberger left soon after that victory, opening the way for Johnson and his recruiting of local Black talent. Thompson did pretty much the same thing for Georgetown, but that's where the similarities in their styles end.
Thompson was not only a coach and recruiter of Black players, he was their mentor, disciplinarian and protector. He would not let players speak freely to the media, he would often challenge the standard beliefs of what his players should do and he also stressed education. He let his record on the court and the graduation rates of his players speak for themselves. The player spotlighted for Thompson's coaching was the biggest star for Georgetown during this time, Patrick Ewing.
Johnson, on the other hand, let his players have much more freedom, especially in expressing themselves on the field. This often led to criticism from others in the college sports business, whether they were coaches, administrators or media. Celebrations that were deemed excessive or examples of poor sportsmanship were often cited as a program that was out of control, as well as when Miami would be called out for running up the score, such as was the case during a 58-7 thrashing of Notre Dame. The player spotlighted for Johnson's program was wide receiver Michael Irvin.
It should be noted that both players not only were stars in these systems but they both went on to professional careers that resulted in their inductions into their respective Halls of Fame. Neither one, however, ever forgot what their college coaches did for them, nor was the importance of their teams lost either.
That "importance" was that a major shift was now occurring in college sports thanks to Miami and Georgetown. The "bad guys" were teams who were almost all Black, very successful and talented and had no problem showing that off to fans and opponents. From Miami players taunting defeated opponents to Georgetown Starter jackets now becoming fashionable among Black and white fans alike, these two teams brought about a huge shift in nearly all aspects of the business. More importantly, they brought attention to some of the institutional racial issues in college sports. The progress that has been made can be directly traced back to these two teams. While Schaller correctly points out that there are still some of these issues existing today, these two teams should be noted for their place in college sports history and the changes they introduced. A great read for anyone who is a college sports fan or college sports history buff.
I wish to thank University of Nebraska Press for providing a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review.
https://sportsbookguy.blogspot.com/20...
The book's main "characters" are the two coaches who won the most games and brought their coaching styles to the schools – John Thompson for Georgetown and Jimmy Johnson for Miami. It should be noted that Schaller gives credit to Howard Schnellenberger, Johnson's predecessor, for first bringing Miami football into prominence with the 1983-84 national championship. Schnellenberger left soon after that victory, opening the way for Johnson and his recruiting of local Black talent. Thompson did pretty much the same thing for Georgetown, but that's where the similarities in their styles end.
Thompson was not only a coach and recruiter of Black players, he was their mentor, disciplinarian and protector. He would not let players speak freely to the media, he would often challenge the standard beliefs of what his players should do and he also stressed education. He let his record on the court and the graduation rates of his players speak for themselves. The player spotlighted for Thompson's coaching was the biggest star for Georgetown during this time, Patrick Ewing.
Johnson, on the other hand, let his players have much more freedom, especially in expressing themselves on the field. This often led to criticism from others in the college sports business, whether they were coaches, administrators or media. Celebrations that were deemed excessive or examples of poor sportsmanship were often cited as a program that was out of control, as well as when Miami would be called out for running up the score, such as was the case during a 58-7 thrashing of Notre Dame. The player spotlighted for Johnson's program was wide receiver Michael Irvin.
It should be noted that both players not only were stars in these systems but they both went on to professional careers that resulted in their inductions into their respective Halls of Fame. Neither one, however, ever forgot what their college coaches did for them, nor was the importance of their teams lost either.
That "importance" was that a major shift was now occurring in college sports thanks to Miami and Georgetown. The "bad guys" were teams who were almost all Black, very successful and talented and had no problem showing that off to fans and opponents. From Miami players taunting defeated opponents to Georgetown Starter jackets now becoming fashionable among Black and white fans alike, these two teams brought about a huge shift in nearly all aspects of the business. More importantly, they brought attention to some of the institutional racial issues in college sports. The progress that has been made can be directly traced back to these two teams. While Schaller correctly points out that there are still some of these issues existing today, these two teams should be noted for their place in college sports history and the changes they introduced. A great read for anyone who is a college sports fan or college sports history buff.
I wish to thank University of Nebraska Press for providing a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review.
https://sportsbookguy.blogspot.com/20...
May 27, 2022
Having lived through the heyday of Georgetown basketball and Miami football during the 1980s I can say that Thomas Schaller has written quite an interesting book. I enjoyed revisiting the memories of both programs imposing their will against so many unsuspecting opponents. I smiled when I read about The-no-interview sessions of Georgetown and reluctantly accepting coach Thompson’s demands to have Georgetown staff record every interview. I smiled as I read about the Canes coming off the plane in Tempe wearing fatigues, or the downright belligerence displayed toward the hypocritical culture of the media that constantly chirped on the Canes and Hoyas. I basked and smiled as the media begrudgingly lived through all the winning. I was captivated and wanted to see if the author had reached similar conclusions as I had as he opined on the cultural impact that my Canes had upon the American culture. Initially I thought that the book should have been written about the UNLV Runnin Rebels basketball program along with the Hurricanes football program but being reminded of all that coach Thompson had accomplished, the decision to choose the Hoyas was correct. Perhaps a book on the Hoyas, Rebels and Hurricanes needs to be written.
As a young teen I loved that Georgetown and Miami taunted opponents. I mean why not? Those programs were despised by the media and for what reason? In the streets we all felt that it was because of the ethnic make-up of the teams. The Canes and Hoyas celebrated scores and victories with an in-your-face swagger. As Bennie Blades said in the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary on The U, ‘We were the Ali’s of that time. When we played you, we would tell you that we were going to beat you, we would talk to you while we were beating you, and then we would remind you after we beat you.’ I’ve always had an appreciation for coaches who raised the stakes and temperature of the conversation. Whether it was coach Thompson admonishing his players to play and in-your-face style game or if it was Jimmy Johnson admonishing his team to ‘pour it on and not let up,’ against the Fighting Irish. For years the Penn States and Notre Dame’s of the world were heralded as model citizens, standards of what young people should be and become. To me this was hypocrisy at best. Think about it, who chirped and decried when the supposed ‘great’ Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Alabama teams ran up the scores against opponents? The media loved it and so did America. So why was there such hatred against the Canes and Hoyas for doing the same? Was it the color of the skin of both teams? Was it that they taunted their opponents? Did not all of these would-be opponents taunt and talk when they were winning? What was the difference?
Without giving much of the book away I will simply say that the Hoyas and Canes were a sensation because they made the bad-boy image look good and the teenage culture of those days took notice and we loved it. The author made some interesting points regarding sports and race that need to be developed further. My 80’s generation of college athletes were taking the baton and advancing what was begun by the likes of Muhammad Ali and it would be accurate to say that the 80’s and early 90’s were a special time. It’s true that the Georgetown’s, UNLV’s and Miami’s aggressive style of play angered many fans of opposing teams, commentators, and even politicians. But in the same fashion that truth goes through three stages before it is widely accepted, in time what the Canes, Hoyas, and Runnin Rebels brought to the table was ultimately not only accepted but imitated by others, both by blacks and whites. Love them or hate them, there was simply no way the Hoyas and the Hurricanes would be denied. I know when I enjoy a book, especially when I'm very familiar with the subject. I usually read the book in days and Common Enemies was precisely that, a GREAT read.
As a young teen I loved that Georgetown and Miami taunted opponents. I mean why not? Those programs were despised by the media and for what reason? In the streets we all felt that it was because of the ethnic make-up of the teams. The Canes and Hoyas celebrated scores and victories with an in-your-face swagger. As Bennie Blades said in the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary on The U, ‘We were the Ali’s of that time. When we played you, we would tell you that we were going to beat you, we would talk to you while we were beating you, and then we would remind you after we beat you.’ I’ve always had an appreciation for coaches who raised the stakes and temperature of the conversation. Whether it was coach Thompson admonishing his players to play and in-your-face style game or if it was Jimmy Johnson admonishing his team to ‘pour it on and not let up,’ against the Fighting Irish. For years the Penn States and Notre Dame’s of the world were heralded as model citizens, standards of what young people should be and become. To me this was hypocrisy at best. Think about it, who chirped and decried when the supposed ‘great’ Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Alabama teams ran up the scores against opponents? The media loved it and so did America. So why was there such hatred against the Canes and Hoyas for doing the same? Was it the color of the skin of both teams? Was it that they taunted their opponents? Did not all of these would-be opponents taunt and talk when they were winning? What was the difference?
Without giving much of the book away I will simply say that the Hoyas and Canes were a sensation because they made the bad-boy image look good and the teenage culture of those days took notice and we loved it. The author made some interesting points regarding sports and race that need to be developed further. My 80’s generation of college athletes were taking the baton and advancing what was begun by the likes of Muhammad Ali and it would be accurate to say that the 80’s and early 90’s were a special time. It’s true that the Georgetown’s, UNLV’s and Miami’s aggressive style of play angered many fans of opposing teams, commentators, and even politicians. But in the same fashion that truth goes through three stages before it is widely accepted, in time what the Canes, Hoyas, and Runnin Rebels brought to the table was ultimately not only accepted but imitated by others, both by blacks and whites. Love them or hate them, there was simply no way the Hoyas and the Hurricanes would be denied. I know when I enjoy a book, especially when I'm very familiar with the subject. I usually read the book in days and Common Enemies was precisely that, a GREAT read.
March 30, 2022
A pretty good look at how college sports in the 1980's changed and its position grew in popular culture mostly due to Black athletes. Schaller focuses on Georgetown Hoyas basketball and head coach John Thompson and the Miami Hurricanes football program. Georgetown and Thompson were hated by a wide swath of white America as being too Black and "The U" was hated for being flamboyant, brazen, and Black (see the ESPN "Catholics vs Convicts" documentary). Schaller also gives a history of the traditional racial makeup in college sports, extremely white until the 1970's and still pretty white into the 1980's, and the reason Black sports fans had been traditionally less apt to support many non HBCU programs (history of segregation, rural locations removed from Black centers of population, few Black athletes on home state teams). The book recalls the national popularity of Georgetown and Miami among Black sports fans who would often root for them against their home state teams. We also get a fair amount of DC history (segregation, the DC riots of 1968, the creation of a Black majority with white-flight, a touch of Marian Barry, and gentrification) and Miami (old southern city with traditionally Black neighborhoods like Liberty City, riots in the 80's, Colombian and Cuban drug wars, 2 Live Crew, and the new modern glamor city, and more).
Only two real big misses in this very enjoyable and I would say informative book; but I'm old enough to remember everything that was in this book. The first miss in my opinion is, while Schaller alluded to the racial dynamics of the Magic Johnson (Lakers) and Larry Bird (Celtics) feud he doesn't touch on what may have been the most racially polarizing and ugly event between fans of the decade- the heavyweight championship boxing match between Larry Holmes and Gerry Cooney. The second issue is Schaller basically giving Nike a pass for their exploitative labor practices in China (and other places) including operations in areas where Uyghurs are facing a genocide from the Chinese and Party and their Han Nationalism. A few woke commercials and some donations can't erase that. I'll also push back on the "other athletes of color" framing, which I know is a popular progressive argument, in the 1980's, as the book correctly notes despite this rhetorical ode to academic/ gentrifier Twitter, Black athletes alone changed college (and pro) athletics bringing style, bravado, and fashion (at a time when The Cosby Show was #1 and hip-hop was emerging as a dominant cultural force).
He closes with a lot of information on the exploitative economic model of college sports (and this is the big two of course. The only college sport I follow is wrestling and like most college sports it doesn't generate revenue for the majority of programs).
I reccomend this book for younger readers interested in the culture of 1980's college sports and those who want a trip down memory lane.
Only two real big misses in this very enjoyable and I would say informative book; but I'm old enough to remember everything that was in this book. The first miss in my opinion is, while Schaller alluded to the racial dynamics of the Magic Johnson (Lakers) and Larry Bird (Celtics) feud he doesn't touch on what may have been the most racially polarizing and ugly event between fans of the decade- the heavyweight championship boxing match between Larry Holmes and Gerry Cooney. The second issue is Schaller basically giving Nike a pass for their exploitative labor practices in China (and other places) including operations in areas where Uyghurs are facing a genocide from the Chinese and Party and their Han Nationalism. A few woke commercials and some donations can't erase that. I'll also push back on the "other athletes of color" framing, which I know is a popular progressive argument, in the 1980's, as the book correctly notes despite this rhetorical ode to academic/ gentrifier Twitter, Black athletes alone changed college (and pro) athletics bringing style, bravado, and fashion (at a time when The Cosby Show was #1 and hip-hop was emerging as a dominant cultural force).
He closes with a lot of information on the exploitative economic model of college sports (and this is the big two of course. The only college sport I follow is wrestling and like most college sports it doesn't generate revenue for the majority of programs).
I reccomend this book for younger readers interested in the culture of 1980's college sports and those who want a trip down memory lane.
May 12, 2023
Reread for a class. Maybe marked down a star the second time through for some repetitions and shaky copyediting. (The chapter on Jimmy Johnson, John Thompson, Michael Irving, and Patrick Ewing repeats multiple anecdotes, for one, and other narrative points--Miami's 58-7 demolition of Notre Dame, Georgetown v Princeton in March Madness--get touched on repeatedly as well.) The story, though, of how and why two athletically irrelevant schools became cultural and racial flashpoints at more or less the same time (both won national titles in 1984) and have since sunk back into, at best, semi-relevance, is worth telling, and Schaller connects the dots well.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews