Super Bowl '85: The official start of the Caste Fo

[screamingeagle]

Super Bowl 85 was the year that the Cast Football system came out in the open. It had been building up but now the powers-that-be felt it was safe to bring it out.
When I was young, like many people, I was told that the evil racist system of segregation was keeping the Negro down. The only away around this was through success in athletics. When the game started, no one cared what color you were, it was how you helped to win the game.
Then the Civil Rights act of 1964 was passed. Now the barriers of segregation have been broken down, Negros could focus on getting a good education. (We know Negros have a strong interest in education, that is why they fought so hard for school desecregation.) They would not have time for sports.
However, there were many negros in the system. I figured that the 70's would be the decade of the black athlete, then they would fade away. Negros would be too busy with schoolwork to bother with sports.
I would have never believed that they would delute the quality of play for a caste system to make sure that their teams had a majority of black players.
Until '85, the media would talk about individual athletes. Now the media claimed that key to winning championships was to stock your team with negro players. All negros were superior to whites. The media would talk about the black players and rarely mention the whites- except for the punky QB. (He was a class whore, anyway.) They even try to replace the Chicago Bears fight song with a rap song. (This failed.)
The 85 bears proved that a nehro culture would be accepted and there would be no backlash. From this point on, it was full steam ahead.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

screamingeagle, while the success of the 1985 Bears certainly didn't hurt the Caste System, I don't think you can pinpoint that team as being a major reason why we have the Caste System of 2010. Attitudes had changes more before that year than since. There were definitely some coaches talking about the "necessity" of having great black athletes on their teams. I know we like to find a "point" at which to say something began or ended, but the caste system doesn't really work that way. To be sure, the mid 1980s were a turning point as far as the system being fully implemented, but it had been heading that way for quite a while.

 

[Don Wassall]

The Bears' "rap video" in 1985 was given a huge play by the corporate media, and MTV had it in its regular rotation (yes, MTV actually showed music videos at one time!). That video was naturally enough comprised of mostly black players, which helped create in the public mind the image of a football player as typically black, but that Bears team overall had 3 White starters on defense and 7 or 8 on offense. I'm pretty sure their Super Bowl opponent that year, the Patriots, had fewer White starters, as I remember Sports Illustrated in 1982 stating that New England was then the blackest team in the league, at about two-thirds black. (The Jets were then the Whitest team, at two-thirds White; the league overall wasapproximately 50-50 but by the late '80s it was close to what it is now, withlittle variation in the intervening 20+ years other than becoming slightly more black over time.)

 

[sport historian]

I recall Sports Illustrated stated in 1979 that pro football was becoming "pro basketball in shoulder pads." In other words, pro football was now or soon would be a mainly black sport.

 

[Truthteller]

The Bears' "rap video" in 1985 was given a huge play by the corporate media, and MTV had it in its regular rotation (yes, MTV actually showed music videos at one time!). That video was naturally enough comprised of mostly black players, which helped create in the public mind the image of a football player as typically black, but that Bears team overall had 3 White starters on defense and 7 or 8 on offense. I'm pretty sure their Super Bowl opponent that year, the Patriots, had fewer White starters, as I remember Sports Illustrated in 1982 stating that New England was then the blackest team in the league, at about two-thirds black.

Don, you are probably correct. I don't remember all the players on the Bears and Pats from that era, but based on an "estimate count/guess"**I just did, Bears had between 28 and 30 whiteson their Super Bowl team in 1985. Pats had about 15 or 16 whites, at most, based on my best guess/count? James at RB and Nelson at LB are the only whites, other than the OL's and QB's, that started or even played much.


'85 Bears: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/1985_roster.htm

'85 Pats: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/1985_roster.htm



Considering the Bears were fairly white friendly, and the fact the white friendly San Fran' 49ers and Redskinsof the latter 80's and early 90's won a lot, I'd switch my attentionto Jerry Jones' and Jimmy Johnson's Dallas Cowboys of the early to mid 1990'sas the more likely team that ushered in the Caste system,with a full head of steam.....By the way, funny this was brought up. Earlier today, when I saw Pitt fired Wannstedt, I recalled that the Bearsof the early 1990's, with Ditka, seemed to be very white friendly -- almost 50/50. So the Bears stayed almost 50/50 for aboutseven year after that SB, untilCowboys DC/Caste clown Dave Wannstedt took over and purged many whites.....Also, it must be noted that Cowboys OC/Caste clown Norv Turner took over the Redskins and they, also,went frombeing fairlywhite friendly to almost completely black in a few years. Again, it that Cowboys connection from the early 1990's rearing it's ugly head

** "estimate count": I had to guess based on names, schools, ect.for some players. For example, I assume Bears WR Brad Anderson, from BYU,iswhite.....And guessed James Maness, from TCU is black, ect. Anyway, I think it's pretty close to the Bears having twice as many whites as the Pats.

Edited by: Truthteller

 

[white is right]

I recall during the broadcast that the late Merlin Olsen was the colour commentator and he stated that the veterans on the defense kept Perry in line. Meaning that guys like Hampton, Mongo, Singletary, Duerson and Fencek kept his mind focused on the task at hand. I also recall Dick Enberg talking about the rookies larger than life persona already getting him commercial endorsements. Back then Black veterans were much more conservative than many "leaders" today.

 

[whiteCB]

I recall Sports Illustrated stated in 1979 that pro football was becoming "pro basketball in shoulder pads." In other words, pro football was now or soon would be a mainly black sport.

Oh the euphemisms SI will come up with. Not a bad one. It's in your face yet quirky and cute. The prefect antidote to put one right over the heads of DWFs who never question's why, how, or what is going on with the trend.

People get a line thrown right in front of their face and act like their dog "Spot". See Spot run, see Spot follow, see Spot get the blinders pulled right over their eyes.

 

[Van_Slyke_CF]

screamingeagle, while the success of the 1985 Bears certainly didn't hurt the Caste System, I don't think you can pinpoint that team as being a major reason why we have the Caste System of 2010. Attitudes had changes more before that year than since. There were definitely some coaches talking about the "necessity" of having great black athletes on their teams. I know we like to find a "point" at which to say something began or ended, but the caste system doesn't really work that way. To be sure, the mid 1980s were a turning point as far as the system being fully implemented, but it had been heading that way for quite a while. 

Excellent post, Colonel Reb.

 

[screamingeagle]

Other teams may have contributed to the Caste system.
There was the Pittsburgh Pirates of the 70's. Suddenly all the himies were wearing Pirates hats and clothing to show their support for the "black team." The pirates were more an example of black superiority than a caste system. Besides they were a baseball, and not as important as Football.
The Fab Five of micgigan is another example. They started the trend of wearing clown pants in basketball. This is college basketball, and it is not that important.
These two examples were the heralds of the coming of the caste system, not the caste system itself.

 

[JReb1]

I remember a commentator during the 85 SB or after the SB made a comment that the Pats will "never win a SB with that kind of a starting RB" and the other commentator (both White) said that James had a really good year with over a 1,000 yards and good YPC only to be trumped by the caste clown with a comparison to Walter Payton, saying something like he's no Payton or he will never be a Payton.

 

[Average American]

The idea of an 'official' unveiling of the caste is kinda funny..
I agree with the basic consensus of this thread, it was an ongoing process, both before & after the '85 Bears..
I think the more meaningful milestone is when? did caste disciples become the simple majority in recruiting & coaching (?) There are some good references in this thread..
A guy who wasn't mentioned, who I think deserves a dishonorable mention is Howard Schnellenberger. To his credit, he built a legit rags-to-riches story with the early 80s Miami Hurricanes. He took a failing program, & created a new paradigm for their recruiting success. Schnellenberger went straight into the local 'hoods & got talent that previously wasn't really considered college material.. but with that talent came the thuggish idiocy & off the field drama, that is now routine in college sports. His recruiting was a game changer in college sports. I cant remember if there was a coach between Schnellenberger & Jimmy Johnson... but Johnson definitely upheld Schnellenberger's legacy at the U..

Late '70s Knicks would be a caste watershed too, no (?) They were celebrated by bigots, as a first in the NBA to have no White players on the court..

 

[foreverfree]

Per http://www.hurricanesports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&ATCLID=205820405&DB_OEM_ID=28700 , Johnson did immediately follow Schnellenberger.

John

 

[dwid]

lets do some revisionist history on this 85 Superbowl. Craig James was coming off two straight 100 yard rushing games in the playoffs being a crucial part in bringing them to the Superbowl. What would have happened if the guy behind center played decently and wasn't the ONLY qb to START a Superbowl without completing a pass, and Craig James rushes for 100 yards leading them to victory, would we have seen more White backs?

I doubt it, but we might have seen one or two per year starting, probably more in a rotation. James never had more than 263 in a season and some samoan got a decent amount of carries as well as afflete Collins, but in the playoffs James was the man averaging about 22 carries the 3 playoff games leading up to it (and I believe holds the record for most yards from scrimmage by a White rb in a regular season with 1568). The years before it was basically Riggins starting and that was it. Kind of like Hoge was used mostly as a blocker/short yardage guy but in that one playoff run he was the main guy, two straight rushing performances, their team losing by one point to the Elway led Broncos I believe.

Basically we might have had seen a few more Alstott types. because when highly talented White backs came out of bigger programs they were hybrid fullbacks/halfbacks like Muster (mostly fullbaack) and Tommy Vardell (varied between the two positions even as a top 10 pick and saw too many carries from the fullback spot) otherwise he would have had a 1k season, and then solely used as a blocker later on with some catches out of the backfield, which was Barry Sanders best season (his 2k season) when they used a fullback for the majority of the snaps for the first time in his career and it was Vardell, Sanders was too inpatient to wait on slower blockers, Vardell had some speed). This is where the argument for Sanders vs Emmith Smith comes up, that Smith always had a great fullback, and a better line, but Sander's line was good, he just was inpatient and danced around a lot, lots of negative gains, and then a few big ones to make up for it. With Vardell that one season he changed a bit and was more likely to follow his blockers.

but the switch from split back sets to more i formation diminished carries greatly by White fullbacks. In the split back set they were lined up pretty evenly about 5 to 6 yards back, in the I they are closer to the line, with less time for the blockers to open up holes, basically quick hitters. The Saints were creative with Gajan, lining him up about 5 yards back and the the tailback 7, with most i formations the fullback is 3, maybe 4 yards back, they ran lots of counters where he would fake one way and go the other way allowing the line time to block, one of the highest ypc in NFL history for a season with 6.03 (minimum 100 carries for the criteria)

in the 80's they varied between split back sets and i formation, but in the 90's it was mostly i formation or single back set, with a few exceptions, like Vardell being used in split back sets sometimes. Riggins got to run out of the I formation quite a bit, as well as Alstott, but they usually let him get those carries inside the 20, maybe 30, usually resulting in tds, his ypc might have been higher if they had used it more deeper in the field.


but for Craig James in that Superbowl, by the time they switched qbs they were too far behind 3- 20 and were in catchup mode. James only had 5 rushes. If he had more he would have put up better numbers, and then he saw his carries drop the next year by over a hundred, and the main carrier Collins averaged less ypc than him despite James being used more in a blocking/short yardage role.

Its not like the guy that replaced Eason performed well either , his 2 completions in the late 2nd quarter were to the backs James and Collins for 8 and 6 yards. His first completion to a wideout was in the 2nd half, his biggest of the day when they still had somewhat of a chance was 24 yards, after a 5 yard sack, a 5 yard penalty and a 13 yard sack putting them at 4 and 9 after the reception, so then a punt and McMahon pretty much killed any hope by bring the lead up 30 to 3, and even 20-3 was much harder to come back from behind back then.

Interesting fact from that game, White "fullback" Matt Suhey had 1 td, 52 yards on 11 carries and one reception for 24 yards. while Walter Payton had 0 tds, 61 yards on 22 carries, 0 receiving yards. Never scored in the Superbowl.

The first td was all Suhey, a 2 yarder then an a 11 yard td. The next td he ran hard on 3 run plays to put them close to the goal line, McMahon rushed for a td. Next td, Suhey ran for 8 putting them closer to the redzone, then a 7 yard pass to a White receiver Ken Margerum putting them even closer to the endzone, another rushing td by McMahon. 3 of the 4 rushing tds were by White men on the Chicago side, then the game out of reach 30-3. a pick six by a black db and Perry getting a goal line carry.

Not sure when it started, Collinsworth came out in 81 at wideout he was considered the great White hope which tells me there was a huge drop off in the late 70's.

 

[Europe]

"while Walter Payton had 0 tds, 61 yards on 22 carries, 0 receiving yards. Never scored in the Superbowl."

Payton was very upset after the game because he wasn't the main man. Ditka was sorry that he didn't let Payton score.

 

[Don Wassall]

Payton was very upset after the game because he wasn't the main man. Ditka was sorry that he didn't let Payton score.

The pathetic mangina, boner-pill pushing Ditka of recent vintage is sorry that Payton didn't score in that game. At the time Ditka was only concerned with winning, not with appeasing Walter Payton.

 

[celticdb15]

I've never liked Ditka. i respect him as a player but to me always seemed like a grade A *******. Treating Payton like that is a damn shame. Giving the ball to a fat ass DT is a slap in the face to arguably the bears best player in their history!