- Brazil Takeover on the 10/24 Gregg & Joe Show
- MuscleSport TV Announcement
- Lee Priest, Kleber Caramello Represent mSm in Brazil
- “The Blueprint” Matt Morgan Joins MuscleSport Magazine
- Winners & Losers at the 2016 Olympia – Men’s Open Bodybuilding
- Branch Warren an Olympia Non-Factor, Anyway
- Helle Trevino – Diary of a Female Bodybuilder (Pt. 2)
- AMI’s David Pecker Trump Administration Material?
- IFBB International ‘Pedophilia’ Divisions
- AMI/FLEX Causing Kai Greene to Skip Olympia Again?
Pathetic Sports Blogger Calls “Hoosiers” a Racist Movie
- Updated: July 30, 2015
Sports are viewed as an escape from reality, away from the daily grind and constant force feeding of political views from the left and right. And sports movies are supposed to deliver an enjoyable two hour session with a predictable feel-good story at the end. Such was the case with 1986’s “Hoosiers,” a critically acclaimed blockbuster with an All-Star cast commonly regarded as the single greatest sports film of all time. So the last thing that anyone expected to hear as it prepares to celebrate its 30th anniversary is a dressing down of the movie and it being considered racist, of all things, by someone who doesn’t even deserve the designation of being called a sportswriter.
We’ll give Rodger Sherman of the popular sports website SB Nation the benefit of the doubt and at least put him in the blogger category. Not exactly a compliment, mind you, but his reading into “Hoosiers” to meet his liberal agenda is not worthy of one, either.
Sherman – who describes himself on his Twitter page with: “Professional internetsman/tweeter for
@SBNation. I ran @sippinonpurple. I’m a recovering Northwestern frat boy, a proud half-Cuban, and I make rap jokes.” – posted an article simply titled “Hoosiers Sucks” on 7/28/15 on SB Nation that was deplorable on so many fronts.
He started off with a few jabs but reserved what he apparently felt was the knockout blow for the end…and that’s where we’ll start off. Mind you, this fictional story in the movie took place in Indiana in 1951. (Our country was a much different place then as opposed to today – as difficult as the left tries to make us all believe that nothing has changed in all of these decades past.)
The one-horse town Hickory Huskers ride a wave all the way to the state championship game versus a South Bend team that is portrayed as being the convincing favorite to come away the victor. But of course in the David versus Goliath world of Hollywood, Hickory wins a tight rough one with a buzzer beater.
But that’s not the same movie that little Sherman watched. No, he saw this movie in black and white…literally. You see, South Bend actually had (gasp!) a few NEGROES on their team, which the ‘professional internetsman’ made a point that the championship game at the end was the “first evidence that black people exist in the movie.” (So it wasn’t a rumor, after all!)
He then tells the poor readers that Hickory should not be the team to root for (because they are all white boys), but rather we should stand up for the integrated South Bend players, and that he, for one, would have been “fascinated by the experiences these young men must have faced as white and black teammates in 1950s Indiana.”
That wasn’t the premise of the film, young man. But here’s a recommendation to fill your quota for that topic, albeit a different sport – “Remember the Titans.” You’ll get your white/black love fest with that.
But Sherman’s piece gets even more bizarre than that. Try these lines on for size: “The makers of “Hoosiers” counted on the racism of its viewers,” and “They used the black skin of Hickory’s opponents as an indicator telling viewers to root against them.”
Not exactly, kid. Using your logic, the same holds true for Apollo Creed being a big, bad black guy to Rocky’s great white hope. (There’s an idea for your next ‘masterpiece.’)
The other issues that this Roger Ebert of sports flicks had were also ridiculous, but pale in comparison to the racist rant. Small things, such as hot head coach Norman Dale (portrayed wonderfully by Gene Hackman) not deserving a second chance after being fired from the college he coached at for striking a player. (Pssst…this is not a documentary.)
Another bone that Sherman had to pick was that the team wasn’t very good until their star player – Jimmy Chitwood – decides to come back to the team after initially balking with the new sheriff/coach in town. Of course once this natural returns to the hardwood, the team goes on its run, even though the players around him (including little Ollie McLellan) can’t hold his jock.
Hmmm…let’s see. Basketball. Star player. Difference maker. Mediocre supporting cast. Sounds an awful lot like what takes place in real life. (See: Michael Jordan, LeBron James).
And how could we forget Sherman’s hatred for the style of play that was commonplace for the sport in the 1950s. Instant classics such as, “Look at this freakin’ basketball,” and utter disdain for the picket fence and ‘four passes’ do more than border on the comical. They are outright douche chill-inducing when read.
Perhaps calling Rodger Sherman a blogger was being too kind, after all.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We reached out to Rodger Sherman via e-mail and on Twitter for a response and will update the article as necessary if he decides to grace us with a few words.