Story by Blake Sandlin
Sports Editor
It’s no secret our country is currently experiencing a period defined by unprecedented division and partisan politics. Fortunately, there are liberating outlets like sports available where we can momentarily escape from the frenzied political and social landscape around us. Unfortunately, as reality slowly begins to seep into the sports world, the idea of the two operating independently is becoming just as unrealistic as playing basketball without a ball.
Whether it’s protesting racial inequality at a football game or a moral conundrum facing fans of a football team, there’s no denying the simple fact that sports and reality are now more juxtaposed than ever. That notion compelled me to seek advice from an expert in order to understand the psychology driving sport and fandom.
Daniel Wann, a professor of psychology at Murray State, is an acclaimed sports psychologist nationwide. Having published two books, he primarily specializes in the psychology of sports fans and has been featured in publications like HBO, Bleacher Report, Sports Illustrated and ESPN. Wann has even worked with notable athletes like Michael Phelps and Cal Ripken Jr. on various subjects.
BS: Collin Kaepernick and the debate over kneeling during the national anthem was a looming issue over the NFL last season and doesn’t seem to be ending anytime soon. What are your thoughts on the issue?
DW: I think what’s interesting about that is people don’t know the NFL was paid by the military to have their players come out for the national anthem about 10 years ago. That’s what I’ve read, anyways. But I think the NFL felt [the protests] last year. You look at the TV ratings, and there were other things going on, but to say that that wasn’t part of it is probably being blind that there were enough people upset about the protesting of the players that it negatively impacted the brand of the NFL. And then Nike just fueled it with gas.
BS: Is there a solution to the problem?
DW: There’s no solution to the problem when you have people that are so opposed on the same issue. There are people out there that people believe that everyone has the right to protest injustice. There are people out there who believe that the worst thing you could ever do is to not stand for the national anthem. No amount of discussion is ever going to get those people to go, ‘Yeah, there’s common ground here.’ There is no common ground, so the NFL has to hope it goes away.
People use sports as a platform, and they always have and always will. Why did Kaepernick pick that platform? You can argue, ‘Jeez, you could’ve done it in a better way, a more sensitive way.’ You can argue that, but it certainly got people to pay attention; not necessarily the attention to the message you were trying to bring, but if the point was to get people talking, they’re talking.
BS: Do you think it will take league action to coerce the players into standing?
DW: I don’t know how you can mandate that a player stand. I don’t see how that holds up in a court of law. I don’t know how our Supreme Court would interpret that because it seems in some ways ironic: a document about freedom evaluating someone’s freedom [to kneel]. Of course, if the league does levy a fine, that just gives more attention to it. Some of it’s kind of silly because I don’t hear anybody writing about all the people in the stands that aren’t standing for the national anthem and putting their hand on their heart, but they’re not sitting because of protest, they’re sitting because they’re lazy or drunk.
BS: Can a heavy issue like protesting racial inequality have any bearing on a locker room or player performance?
DW: I think obviously it can. You can make lots of arguments that it will, not that it does, but it could. In my classes we talk about a limited cognitive capacity – you can’t think about everything. So if your brain is thinking, ‘Should I stand or kneel?’, then you’re not thinking about the game plan. Your mind’s not in the right place in terms of performance. In the locker room, I can see it being somewhat disruptive. You may not see it publically, but if there are fans who think it’s terrible for the players to not stand, it’s unreasonable to think there’s not players who think the same.
BS: Ohio State Head Coach Urban Meyer was recently suspended for three games for failure to report domestic abuse allegations against former assistant Zach Smith. In situations like these, can OSU fans remove personal bias to see a serious moral issue for what it is?
DW: I have a lot to say about that because Michelle, my wife, is an Ohio State grad. A three-game suspension is a weird suspension and a weird number. From the fan perspective, everybody who’s not an OSU fan thinks Urban got off too easy. And all the OSU fans were like, ‘Oh yeah, that was way more than enough,’ because we’ll be biased in how we determine that stuff.
The fans will always see their heroes as guilt-free. Yeah, Ohio State fans don’t think he did anything wrong. Had that been (Michigan Head Coach Jim) Harbaugh, they’d have said he should’ve been suspended for a year or fired. The funny thing is they don’t see that. We protect the things that are central to our identity, and sports fans hold those teams tight, tight, tight. They mean everything to them. So when a team has this threat to your identity, it’s not just that Ohio State is bad, it’s that I’m bad too. How do you deal with that? You deal with it by saying, ‘He didn’t do anything wrong.’ Coping strategies are great because they work so well.
BS: The Supreme Court recently legalized sports betting nationwide. Have you done any research on the topic and its effect on fans?
DW: I’ve led the research [on sports betting]. I was hired by New Jersey when they tried to legalize it about five years ago to write a report to be read to the courts on the stupidity of the league’s claim that it was going to change fandom and hurt their product. The only thing the research would suggest is maybe a few more people would become fans because it would give them more of a reason to attach to a team. I worked with the state of New Jersey to write that report, and actually portions of that report were read to the Supreme Court.
BS: What kind of effect will this have on the viewing habits of fans?
DW: The research is very clear: for some types of people, it’ll be a positive influence – not a big one, a small positive influence. The bottom line is, in the research we’ve done through multiple studies, the net gain will be positive, but small. For some of them it will slightly increase their interest in sport, slightly increase their consumption of sport and slightly increase the likelihood they’ll gamble on sport. It will probably make a little bit of money for the leagues if they can figure out a way to tap into it. Vegas will make money; the only person screwed is the bookie.
