RBR Reading Room: Turning of the Tide

USC running back Sam Cunningham’s standout performance in the 1970 season opener against Alabama has become the stuff of legend. More than four decades on, the significance of the 42-21 victory by the Trojans has swelled immeasurably and the misconceptions surrounding it have blossomed apace.
Today it’s tough work hacking through the thickets of preconceptions and myth to discern the facts of what happened that Sept. 12 afternoon in Birmingham. Don Yaeger’s 2006 book, Turning of the Tide: How One Game Changed the South is the most recent effort to set the record straight and, to its credit, has done an impressive job of clearing the underbrush.
Cunningham’s 135-yard, two touchdown performance has come to signify the point when the previous situation of race relations in Alabama – and the south as a whole – was set aside for a new and more enlightened state of affairs. The famous adage oft attributed to Jerry Claiborne is that the black running back's ability to surmount the Crimson Tide’s all-white defense on grass of Legion Field that day "did more to integrate Alabama in 60 minutes than Martin Luther King did in 20 years."
The provenance of the quote, as well as many other incidents and comments that allegedly occurred that day have proven remarkably difficult to ascertain. The symbolism of the event has become so powerful separating fact and fiction across the gulf of time may never be completely possible. Turning the Tide makes a solid attempt, delving deeply into the substantial details surrounding the game yet, like the other tomes that try to tackle this topic, it seems to come up short.
While Turning the Tide starts out with the tone that threatens to veer off into tedious sermonizing it really hits its stride when it comes to painting the backdrop of the contest both in terms of both the Alabama and Southern California programs. It precisely paints the individuals who were directly affected by the contest as well as the broader social context it occurred in. From there the book becomes an engrossing examination of just about every aspect of the game, it's participants and the wider public who witnessed it.
From that point things get stickier. Once the book starts to grapple with the motivations of the people directly involved in the drama and the particulars of what may or may not have occurred that day, Turning the Tide finds itself on shakier ground.
Part of the problem are the complexity of the questions it is proposes to answer: Did Coach Paul W. Bryant schedule the game to build support for his existing plans to integrate the program? Did Bryant really bring Cunningham to the Alabama locker room after the game and say, "This is what a real football player looks like?" Was Cunningham’s performance a direct catalyst for changes that rapidly followed or did it come to represent a longer processes of transformation that was completely independent of that happened to peak at the same time?
Instead of making a case one way or the other for these many vexing questions, Turning the Tide makes an effort to follow all the lines of inquiry and let the reader decide. In this respect, it makes a far greater case for the overall importance of the events than lobbying for any single resolution. That's a strength of the book but the manner it lays out the evidence certainly indicates its bias to the answers.
Yeager is scrupulously fair in his accounts of Alabama’s efforts to integrate athletics and but also explicitly clear in the assessment of how the inability to do so was seen beyond the borders of the state. Although it is never precisely formulated, this disjunct is a key reason for the confusions that surround the game today.
Turning the Tide offers a detailed look at the actual state of integration in the Alabama program including the presence of Wilbur Jackson on the freshman team and the efforts to snare John Mitchell from under the nose of USC.
The book also mentions regularly overlooked incidents that were part of the background of the game such as the 1955 riots that occurred when Autherine Lucy was admitted into the school as well as controversy surrounding the 1959 Liberty Bowl that had saw Alabama face an integrated Penn State squad.
Moreover, Turning the Tide takes time to show how racial tensions also were a struggle for the USC team, something almost always overlooked in accounts of the contest. It is interesting that the book seems to overlook the economic disparity that might have further fueled the divisions that emerged surrounding the contest. The 1960s saw California emerge as one of the country’s primary economic powerhouses while Alabama and much of the south still languished far behind in just about every statistical category.
The West Coast’s unpleasant sense of entitlement that prompted Stanford backers to throw change on the field in the 1934 Rose Bowl to divert the poor Alabama players was certainly alive and well in the early 1970s. The nauseating tendency of the Los Angeles Times columnist Jim Murray to use the contest to drape his columns with moral rectitude certainly created a precedent taken up with vigor by his successor, the nigh-unreadable Bill Plaschke.
In the end, Turning the Tide shows that coming up with a clear and precise answer as to what exactly happened that fall day in Birmingham may be asking a bit much of a sport that tends to appeal to strong emotions and definitive outcomes. Yet Yeager's effort clearly shows there is a substantial reward in undertaking the effort to grapple with these controversies given the importance of what was - and is - at stake.
Next week: Career in Crisis
22 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I've read this one...
…and basically agree with your assessment. However, I did enjoy learning about the perspectives of a couple of the USC players who participated in those games. The book is something of a disjointed effort, with more finger-pointing than I prefer, but I’m glad I read it.
"High standards come from passion within...." --Coach Nick Saban
by NiceLittleSaturday on Jun 21, 2011 8:30 AM CDT reply actions
Saw a special on FoxSports West..
…. a few years back that had a writer, Sam Cunningham and maybe a radio guy. Might have been for this book. But it was pretty much a infomercial. Anyway, they were all sitting there with highlights and “gloating” (Thats how I took it) about how they single handedly changed race relations in the south, and how glorious USC and heroic Cunningham set a bunch of Southerners straight. Like we needed their help. I kept waiting for the other side of the story to come, the Bryant-McKay connection, Bryant’s flight to LAX and the meeting that took place to make the series. But that side never came. After 20 minutes, I got tired of the 100% USC Save the South from itself via one guy story.
There are 3 sides to every story, theirs, ours, and the truth. 2 were missing in that commercial.
Previous comments hit upon important point
This myth of the “incorrigible southern white” has two major effects.
1) All the shameful aspects of southern culture are simply American values in exaggerated form. When you look at the history of slavery, lynching, economic disparity of minority groups, racial basis of capital punishment, and so on— it’s quite clear that these are national issues. But putting it on the southerner allows the rest of the nation to feel better about itself and it’s own hypocrisy and remain apathetic.
2) It seems to have a reverse effect on the obstructing population (“the obstinate southerner”). Rather than create embarrassment and motivation to change, this kind of rhetoric seems to entrench people into their beliefs even more so through this process of alienation and constant focus on the North/South dynamics in which the “southerner” takes up this equally problematic myth of the confederacy— that it is their tradition they are honoring by obstructing social equality.
I think the most valuable issue to be drawn from this story (Howard Zinn writes well on this matter) is challenging the myth of gradualism. It’s a myth that plagues us on many levels— “you can’t force things on people, they have to have time to adapt.” This as well as other developments that (I think) far more significant to the integration history of our state reveal that on the contrary, you change the structures and institutions of society and their values change accordingly, not the other way around.
Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.
interesting points
i’d like to offer one ancillary observation. gradualism isn’t the same as evolution and looking over the whole span of the civil rights struggle in alabama it becomes clearly an evolving process. as much as certain incidents capture the attention of the casual observer, even a cursory detailed look reveals it to be a longer process of advances setbacks and difficult change. it’s hard to say any specific point in time is precisely where the situation changed to something else.
that said, many events have become associated with those moments of change at least in a symbolic sense. often, this is long after the fact. i believe the usc game is like that.
the process of integration for the university of alabama football team is a long and difficult tale that defies simple description. i believe it also resists detailed description because of the vast amount of outside factors that influenced it. still, at some point, the change did occur. not just the policy of allowing blacks on the team but the public mindset to that. and, to the populace at large, this one game has come to represent that transition.
because if you’d be truly interested in pinpointing the watershed game for the alabama team, it would have to be the 71 season opener that closed the book on the past and paved the way for one of the most successful decades in college football history. sadly, there are very few books and articles devoted to the racial implications of that specific game.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
To further your ancillary observation. Evolution (in historic frameworks) really amounts to narrative framing (storytelling). Stories/histories by nature exclude and pick certain events to back up the narrative arch. For instance, for an observer in 1949, the “civil rights era” had already happened (and failed). It was called “Reconstruction”. It was only after new events could we then reshape the narrative and we could very well have picked different symbols to construct this narrative around. It’s a well known fact that Jackie Robinson had duplicated Rosa Parks’ transformative bus refusal before she did. If the boycotts had been unsuccessful, her story would have also been forgotten. Point being (i’m beginning to digress) is that these events never cause history qua “History”, they are attributed to it.
This game is, in my view, one of the most over-emphasized accounts of this story (the story of Alabama integration) and is clearly one of the most elusive, peculiar symbolic moments in Southern sports. It’s “strong time” is actually more contemporary; meaning more significant to people today than historically significant. In fact, growing up in public housing (early 90’s pre-Nicole murder) many people would sit around and talk about how OJ Simpson beat up Bear Bryant’s team so bad, he had to go out and recruit some blacks. Clearly, history is itself susceptible to anachronistic meaning contexts, but one so emotionally charged in a precedent-obsessed popular culture (“1st black super bowl QB, 1st woman to walk the moon”, etc) is bound to offer up strong elusivity. And the story of Sam Cunningham’s importance as historical cause (not to be confused with “history”) goes from unsound historiography to near absurdity depending on who is telling it.
Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.
by zarahoopstra on Jun 21, 2011 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions
BTW. Excellent review. My favorite so far.
May actually go buy this book.
Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.
given your comments here
i’d urge you pick up these instead:
College Football and American Culture in the Cold War Era by Kurt Edward Kemper
probably the best and most complete examination of race issues in the context of college football out there. this is a superb book and deserves a wider readership
Benching Jim Crow: The Rise and Fall of the Color Line in Southern College Sports, 1890-1980 by Jim Martin
another great examination of the issue but with a wider historical and athletic scope (it covers basketball and other sports). the upshot is better context, the downside is the granular detail to the necessarily complex role race relations affected football.
The Sporting World of the Modern South edited by Patrick Miller
this is a collection of essays dealing with an array of sports with the common theme of how they affect/and are affected by the culture of the south. one section is devoted to race issues and the articles in it are uniformly excellent. of particular note are:
“Integrating New Year’s Day: The Racial Politics of College Bowl Games in the American South” by Charles Martin – a detailed look at how racial mores affected the bowl system and the various incidents that changed it and, by extension, college football as a whole.
“An Atheist in Alabama is Someone Who Doesn’t Believe in Bear Bryant: A Symbol For The Embattled South” by Andrew Doyle – examines the symbolic importance of coach bryant to the region as a whole and how the changes of integration that affected the alabama program created a ripple effect in the society. doyle also has an essay in the book on how southern progressivism affected the evolution of the sport that is fascinating as well.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
Thanks so much for putting that together.
Those appear much more my style. Really some interesting looking stuff- particularly the first and last selections. I’ve had a hard time finding insightful sports books. I’ll give some of these a try. They may also help me convert my lady-friend; an epidemiologist that I’ve only recently been able to get to watch a game. Luckily her indoctrination began with the championship year and we even got her to an A-day game. She takes the Chomsky view on sports (which is understandable) but when it’s viewed sociologically, one gets a better appreciation for the importance of the sports phenomenon. Basically, I’m attempting to pull a Denis Covington on her (Salvation on Sand Mountain).
Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.
by zarahoopstra on Jun 21, 2011 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions
i tend to be suspicious of the extremes
the opinion of an intellectual who feels obliged to completely dismiss the importance of sports is as useless as that of the diehard who assumes football is the acme of everyone’s existence. and neither sounds particularly appealing to sit next to at a bar on gameday while waiting for bama to take the field.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
by kleph on Jun 21, 2011 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly; which is why I had to convert her to keep her.
Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.
by zarahoopstra on Jun 21, 2011 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Roll Tide!
"All I wanna do is drive around in my truck and drink Jack Daniels... and they just don't understand."- Kenny Stabler
I'm sorry, did you say there was something BESIDES Bama football?
:)
There's no way, *no* way that you came from *my* loins. Soon as I get home, first thing I'm gonna do is punch yo mamma in da mouth! - B.T.J.
and now i can also reccomend
my story on the 1959 liberty bowl in this year’s RBR season preview magazine. that game was the first time alabama played a team with a black starter. it was controversial at the time, controversial for the era and is almost completely overlooked today.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
this is exactly the kind of apocrophal nonsense
that has cluttered up a reasonable understanding of what transpired that afternoon. this book makes a good effort at racking down the more reasonable of these but ones like that are just ridiculous. alabama had a black player at the time the game was played, john mitchell. but since he was a freshman, ncaa rules prohibited him from suiting up with the team.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
I think Wilbur Jackson was the black freshman who watched the game from the stands in 1970...
John Mitchell wasn’t a Freshman at Alabama in 1970, he was playing for Eastern Arizona and was a Junior College All-American that year. (http://news.steelers.com/team/coach/49264/) Both Jackson and Mitchell became the first African-Americans to play varsity football at Alabama in 1971. (http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/face/Article.jsp?id=h-1668)
Thirteen.
by Darth Saban on Jun 22, 2011 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, I'm not certain who was the first to actually PLAY...
but they were the first two players on the varsity team, both in 1971. Most of the sources I’ve seen indicate that Wilbur Jackson was the first African-American offered a scholarship to play at Alabama, while it seems that John Mitchell was the first to actually play.
Thirteen.
by Darth Saban on Jun 22, 2011 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions
you are right
i got them mixed up. mitchell was the first to play, jackson was the first black player.
Remember the Rose Bowl: The Story of the Alabama Crimson Tide & the Grandaddy of Them All
Great write up Kleph....
definitely my favorite review so far – my dad has this book and I think I will read it now that I have read your breakdown of it.

by 






















