Who mourns for Adolph Rupp?

by Truzenzuzex on Sep 11, 2007 6:44 PM EDT in Commentary Comment 14 comments

I came across an article today that intrigued me. Since the movie Glory Road hit the theaters last year, there has been a lot of talk about how that movie depicted history, how much was dramatized and what parts were pure fiction. There have been a good number of articles written about Rupp back then, including this one by Gregory Favre, who claims to have interviewed Rupp. In the article, Rupp suggests to Favre he would be happy to coach an integrated team, then feels compelled to back off this statement after his comments cause an uproar in Birmingham, Alabama. Favre alleges that Rupp called him and told him to say he was misquoted because of all the heat he was catching, presumably from those SEC teams firmly opposed to integration.

This article paints Rupp in an interesting and fairly negative light, as a man who was apparently not opposed to integration, but who was unwilling to go to the mat for it. It also paints Rupp as a bit of a megalomaniac, recalling that he suggested integration in the SEC would happen when Rupp said it would.

I can't say whether or not the author was being truthful, or his memory accurate -- 45 years is a long time to remember something and it may well be that he doesn't get it right. But even if he does, it calls into question the perception that Rupp was a racist. The article speaks more of a man in touch with the politics of the league and of the South at that time, and a person unwilling to risk his reputation or his position by pushing for racial integration at Kentucky.

Supposing this is true, I have to wonder what all the uproar is about. As a person who lived through the civil rights era, albeit at a very young age, it strikes me that racial politics haven't really changed all that much in spite of our advances. Anyone who was not willing to sacrifice themselves for what was right is seen in hindsight as opposing right and enabling wrong. But is that the same thing as racism as is often alleged by others? I'm not so sure.

The saying "hindsight is 20/20 surely comes to mind when we look at America in those days. Yes, we know perfectly well now that the Jim Crow South was a sad chapter in our history. Yet there are many people who were in an even better position than Rupp to fight for change, though they generally get a pass for not doing so. That doesn't seem to be the case with Rupp. Somehow, the basketball coach at Kentucky has been placed in such a position of power and importance by historical hindsight that nobody can understand how Rupp could be unwilling to put his career on the line for such a noble cause.

In another article I ran across today, Larry Conley, a man who is well-known and respected in the Commonwealth and who played on the 1966 Kentucky men's basketball team was allegedly interviewed by a person I have never heard of who goes by the handle of tcgathens. Tcgathens interviewed Conley and asked him specifically about racism and Rupp, and his answers are quite illuminating. Now, I can't vouch for the veracity or accuracy of this interview, so I ask the reader to consider that this interview can't really be verified, but as far as I know, neither can some of the comments by Gregory Favre above.

I found this quote by Conley quite interesting:

Question: But many people over time have said that Adolph Rupp was a racist, and the movie portrays him as such.

Answer: Listen, Adoph Rupp may have been many things, but he was not a racist. He was a brilliant man. On plane trips, he did not read basketball playbooks, he read the New York Times. He was a very well read man. People have told me that I only say these things about him because he was my coach. No way. I hated every minute I played for him because of the type personality he had. He was also a very aloof man. He was cold to many, many people and it had nothing to do with race.

So here we have it -- still more in a long line of remembrances that either tend to indict or exonerate Coach Rupp of allegations of racism during his years as head coach at Kentucky. Favre indicts Rupp for not standing up for his apparent comfort with coaching an integrated team, and then asking him to deceive his readers after his comments brought on criticism. That is certainly inherently blameworthy, and that in retrospect, Rupp is surely deserving of criticism for trying to convince a reporter to dissemble.

Even Conley said that he didn't like playing for Coach Rupp, because he was "aloof" and "cold to many." There can be little doubt that Rupp was something of a shameless self-promoter and is hardly a lovable historical figure except to his family and Wildcat fans who remember the success of his basketball teams. He is rarely remembered as a warm, loving person -- to the contrary, "aloof" and "cold" are far more frequently used to describe him, at least in his capacity as head basketball coach.

In sum, I have no idea if Rupp was a racist or not, but based on what I have been able to find, he doesn't fit the mold in a simplistic or white supremacist kind of way. Does the fact that he may not have been an overt racist get him off the hook? How much inaction in an environment such as the one which existed in 1961 or even 1966 becomes blameworthy when it comes to standing up for the rights of the oppressed? When does a failure to lead become racism?

These are questions we can't even answer now, 46 and 40 years (respectively) removed. I doubt we will ever be able to answer them in the context in which they occurred.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

RUPP

there is no proof of Rupp being racist. Glory Road did it to create an antagonist and that is that. Every former player or a person that has been around Rupp for a long time says he was in no way he was a racist. And even if he was racist [which I don't believe is true] there were a lot of racist white people in the south at this time. All I want as a UK fan is for Mr. Rupp to be recognized as one of the greatest college basketball coaches of all-time. Instead most of idiots that aren't UK Fans recognize Rupp as a racist. That's about it for this rant.

by UK44 on Sep 11, 2007 8:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me

Seems to me that if your going to call Rupp on his inaction during that time then you need to call on most of white society at the time. There were plenty of people who werent racists but at the same time werent really going to go the extra mile and put a stop to it. I agree with you that remaining silent is as bad as partaking in it BUT its not as black and white (NO PUN INTENDED) as it appears.
Personally I think Rupp would have used anyone to win no matter their skin color as long as they could gaurentee him a W but was unwilling to put his reputation at stake to do it, especially ifhe was already winning with the talent he had. Now that doesnt make him Rascist and it doesnt make him not rascist, it makes him a person willing to use anyone for personal gain, which is my general perception of him. He certainly won at UK and for that I respect him but Im not sure I would want him for my coach in this day and age.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Sep 11, 2007 8:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Really ...

I think you are exactly correct. In the two interviews that I linked, the one thing I saw that was certainly blameworthy in Rupp's case was the allegation that he tried to get the reporter to dissemble to his readers. That was wrong, but given the context of the day, it's hard to say it was racism in action. Self-interest at the expense of others, certainly, but not racism.

As far as inaction goes, we have to remember the times. Many, perhaps even most, whites in the South in those days were uncomfortable with the treatment of African Americans, but few had the courage to agitate for change. Many feared repercussions from those who really were racists, and rightly so.

How Rupp would fit into the pantheon of UK coaches today is interesting -- he was quite different from the affable Pitino or Gillispe, and even more so from the fatherly Smith. There are no coaches left like Rupp, although there were several in his day -- aloof, cold, distant and demanding. Given his success, who can say that his style wasn't part and parcel of why Kentucky has so many national championships?

by Truzenzuzex on Sep 12, 2007 7:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Linked this post at Wildcats Thunder Blog

with the Adolph Rupp Video I have posted there. If you get the time check it out.

by bigdaddy on Sep 11, 2007 8:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I absolutely ...

will. Thanks a lot, bigdaddy.

by Truzenzuzex on Sep 12, 2007 7:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rupp

It's easy to say you'd stand up and fight against Racism if you were in his shoes. But would you really put your reputation and job on the line if YOU had a family to feed? I wouldn't.

by GregJ on Sep 12, 2007 1:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly ...

my point.

Its very easy, in hindsight, to go back and say that Rupp made the wrong choices. But the question then becomes, "Would I have risked it all had I been in his place?" And risky it would have been, without question -- quite possibly, advocating publicly for racial integration would have ended his career, at least in the SEC.

Although many of us would like to think we would have risked our livelihood, I believe an honest assessment would be otherwise. Rupp may not have been a "Profile in Courage", but its hard to say based on the totality of information available that he was a racist, especially considering the times.

In fact, although many people won't acknowledge it, but the very definition of what behavior falls under the rubric of racism has changed dramatically over the years. Society now declares many more behaviors equivalent to racial bigotry than it ever did in Rupp's day, which is why it's so difficult to supply contemporaneous context. Many would argue, and a good number have, that Rupp was progressive for a man of his time living in the South.

I find it interesting that Favre, for instance, really enjoys the fact that Rupp got portrayed as a racist in Glory Road, even though I doubt he believed Rupp was racist at the time. With him, it is a case of perfect 20/20 hindsight, and deliberately ignoring historical context in order to climb aboard his moral high horse and become a scold.

It's very hard to reconcile social consciousness across several decades, and the "Rupp was/wasn't a racist is a perfect example of how subjective such an exercise can be. I think Conley gets a good bit more of it right with his reflection that Viet Nam was on the minds of everyone, and a fear of being killed in battle. As a veteran, I might take as much umbrage with that as anything, but to be honest, I didn't have to suffer the draft -- it was stopped just before I came of age. I think, therefore, such a judgment would be just as wrong-headed as Favre's.

by Truzenzuzex on Sep 12, 2007 7:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rupp Legacy

The Rupp Racism arguments have always been full of b.s. You can never critique 1960 culture and behavior thru 2007 knowledge. I prefer to believe someone who was there - Larry Conley.

On another note, I find the whole Rupp Racist argument interesting in that every now and then a non-Kentuckian writes an unflattering article or book or makes a silly movie and then Kentuckians get understandably sensitive and defensive.

The truth is, Kentuckians are really the only ones who pay attention to any of these silly details. People from Kansas and the Carolinas care as much about the details of Rupp as we care about the details of Phog Allen or Frank McGuire. From an outsiders perspective, they are all just great basketball coaches and the rest is nonsense.

It's only natural for us to protect the legacy of our own but I think the history books speak loud enough. I think Adolph himself wouldn't give these characters a second's thought.

by run and gun on Sep 12, 2007 8:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Rupp Legacy

There has never been a comment from a former player of Rupp's that said Rupp ever made any racist comments or was racist in his actions. Coaches, like the late Red Auerbach, who personally knew Rupp stated that he never ever heard or saw anything from Rupp that would indicate he was a racist. It is very revealing that all those who knew Rupp on an intimate basis never heard anything or saw anything that indicted that Rupp was a racist. Instead, all the racist accusations come from various columnists years later who had no intimate knowledge of Rupp. I remember the UK-Texas Western game very well and all this importance that is now placed on that game was non existant in 1966. Loyola of Chicago started 4 black players a few years earlier in the NCAA final four. As we all know, Duke started an all white team as did many other colleges in 1966.

The truth of the matter is that UK played in the SEC conference....they would have to take black players in the deep South where they couldn't stay in the same hotel as the team or eat in the same restaurants. Plus, black players would have faced great hostility in the deep South. It was a shameful time in US history. One can always say that Rupp could have been more proactive, perhaps a bit sooner, but that, in no way, makes Rupp a racist. Lots of people in our country could have done more sooner, but it was a different time in US history. Frankly, there is a certain arrogance among too many columnists and scholars who go back in history and criticize individuals, even out Founding Fathers, for not doing this or that. They didn't live in those times and know nothing about all the reasons and circumstances that various decisions were made.

In short, Adolph Rupp was a great coach...a hard taskmaster....often hard to get close to and not well liked.....but respected by the vast majority of his players such as Pat Riley....but, Adolph Rupp was not a racist. Frankly, these accusations of racism have been so unfair and hurtful to the Rupp family and to the great Rupp legacy at UK. It sicken me when I hear or read these racist charges leveled at a good and decent man like Rupp.

by Lwcat on Sep 12, 2007 10:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

History of the game

the ease of Google allows one to see the unrelenting pressure on one coach - Rupp - for what still remains to me as unkind and unfair reasons to be something many others in the era were not. I was young...but recall some of the firsts across the faces of sports ....both in bowl games and the SEC. Basketball in Kentucky was similar to and not more cowardly than others but not as blantant as some. The West Texas game was first because of numbers not because of race impact. The most important game...still not disected by millions and not commintted to a movie script was a Loyola game. A quick link brought this. "The 1963 NCAA Men's Basketball Championship and the obstacles faced on the team's road to victory in a racially segregated country put Loyola in the national spotlight. Before the championship, there was a gentlemen's agreement among college teams limiting how many black players could play during a game. Beginning in 1961, Loyola head coach George Ireland broke the gentlemen's agreement by putting as many as four black players on the court at every game.[7] In 1962-63, Ireland played four black starters in every game. In a game in Oklahoma City against Wyoming, Ireland replaced fouled-out starter John Egan with Pablo Robertson (even with two white players available on his bench), marking the first time a Division I college team fielded five black players." This link was impacting...."Rather than being a racial pioneer, George Ireland should be remembered as a man that wanted to win at any cost, and a man that would defend his players to the end. It just so happened that he decided to choose most of his players from among the multitude of African-American players that couldn't otherwise find a spot with major colleges because of "gentleman's agreement" quotas that limited basketball scholarship participation on the basis of race-the fact that only two or three scholarships could be given to African-Americans on most major college basketball teams."

The issues were raging across the nation...A link to football segration."
A poignant example of how the South resisted the gradual process of integration that Northern universities had adopted came in December of 1955. In a Sugar Bowl match-up between Georgia Tech vs. Pittsburgh, the segregationist Governor of Georgia at the time, Marivin Griffin, asked Georgia Tech to reject their bowl bid because Pittsburgh had a black player ( Hinton, Reese, Davidson,1986, C2). http://www.csupomona.edu/~rrreese/INTEGRATION.HTML" This one is rich and should be checked out because it further involves university presidents, state legislatures, the Sugar Bowl history and the college game in general.

Rupp lived in his time. He was not courageous, not a risk taker just a basketball coach that added to our love of the game. As with many individuals his personal life is not the reason we revere the man. We love his coaching style, the game contributions he made to the university and the nation and the players he gave us. Then and now our love of the game needs to be separated from the life of the coach.

by CAWebb on Sep 12, 2007 11:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Who mourns for Adolph Rupp?

I'm from Hopkinsville. There is a dentist in town, Tommy Porter, who played on that '66 team who was interviewed in a Kentucky New Era article when the movie came out. He said the same thing Larry Conley said, that basically there were no rebel flags and there was no thought process by UK that this was anything other than a championship game. Not to take away from Texas Western, but I give more credit to the flu that was affecting several members of the team than to the Texas Western starting five for UK's loss. As has been mentioned above several times, UK was far from the only all-white team in those days, and Texas Western wasn't the only team with multiple black players. It was a different era. I was in grade school in 1968 when my school system integrated. There weren't any riots that I can recall. In fact, from a sports point of view, the quality of athletics took a big boost when Attucks High School players came over to Hopkinsville High School in the early/mid 1960's. However, when some of the northern secondary school systems integrated several years later, (Boston, I remember in particular), took great exception to the requirement. My point is that racism is not a north/south thing or even a regional thing. It was, and still is everywhere. UK and Adolph Rupp are not the center of that terrible episode in our country's history, despite what Hollywood and other 'haters' would like to indicate... because by pointing fingers at the 'racist south', they hope it takes the spotlight off of their own region's less than stellar past during the same period.

by kilroy44 on Sep 12, 2007 3:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That is an interesting take ...

and I'm not sure there isn't a lot of truth to it.

What was it Christ said? "Remove the mote from thine own eye, and then you may see clearly to remove the mote from thy brothers eye."

Seems to me that a lot of those pointing fingers at Southern eyes were half-blinded themselves.

by Truzenzuzex on Sep 12, 2007 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now and then...

the thing that really burns me about stuff like this is that so many people want to judge people in the past by today's standards. I think if you were to ask the older generations now, who were middle aged in those days, you would get a totally different reaction to what is/was socially acceptable. That same generation, if asked today, would most likely think that the Gen-Xers and baby boomers are ruining social morality and personal responsibility in society. Too much has changed to even attempt to make comparisons.

In the 50's and 60's the "undercurrent" was the movement to accept the minority populations and it was met with considerable opposition from the Upper and Lower Social classes. Today, you could compare that situation to the pressure for acceptance of homosexuals and issues like abortion. I bet you would be hard pressed to find many people out there right now that couldn't, on some level, consider both sides of those issues. However, growing up with the principle of equality, you can't even begin to understand why society excluded people from businesses and events based on race, let alone trying to find gainful employment if you happened to be born with the wrong skin color.

I just don't understand how ignorant people must be to base their evaluation of a person's life on a movie that was created for generating a profit. I'm sure the movie producers were more interested in making a "historically accurate" film, rather than a profit. If you believe that, I have some property in Tennessee with a GREAT view of the Pacific Ocean. I'll even give you a deal on it...

by blueblood on Sep 12, 2007 11:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs