MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4312472411 · doi:10.5406/21558450.48.2.19

Latinos in American Football: Pathbreakers on the Gridiron, 1927 to the Present

2021· article· en· W4312472411 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacynda Ammons

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Sport History · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSports, Gender, and Society
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFootballAmerican footballPopulationPrivilege (computing)Order (exchange)ConsciousnessPolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesMedia studiesPsychologyLawDemography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Mario Longoria and Jorge Iber remind us that sports matter in Latinos in American Football: Pathbreakers on the Gridiron, 1927 to the Present. Longoria and Iber's book is published at an important time in history, as they hope Latinos in American Football “will aid in bringing the lesser known of these many heroes to a broader audience” in order to show how Latinos/as “used this sport to claim a space for themselves in the national sporting consciousness” (317). Not only do Longoria and Iber place Latinos in the sporting consciousness of the United States, but they also show how football carved out spaces that were marked by discrimination at times, as well as paths to success and equality for the country's fastest-growing minority population.As the United States and the world are grappling with ways to challenge white privilege, Longoria and Iber help us re-examine “America's sport” by incorporating Latinos into the history of football, to which they have long been neglected. Longoria and Iber write in the introduction, “Suffice it to say that the lack of attention to such atletas (Latinos in football) pales in comparison to the extensive treatment available on other groups of participants in the history of the game” (3). Even though the purpose of Latinos in American Football is to resurrect the history of individuals of the sport, it is clear Longoria and Iber are also cognizant of the influence of identity in the seemingly innocuous fields of play. As noted in the introduction, in the Dallas metroplex, there are many school districts where most students have Spanish surnames, yet there are few coaches of Hispanic and Latino backgrounds (9). Part of the reasoning given for this is the historic inequities Latinos experience in the United States, as well as the unfounded assumption (in which academics are partly to blame) that Latinos are not interested in football. As the United States thinks about representation at every level of society, Longoria and Iber remind us to include Latinos and football in these national conversations. In what could seem like a simple retelling of Latino excellence in football, Latinos in American Football argues for academics, sports fans, and society as a whole to reconsider ideas about ethnicity and inclusion in “America's” game, not just to include white and African American athletes but also Latinos.Using extensive secondary resources and providing new primary sources such as interviews and letters with the athletes highlighted in the book, Longoria and Iber provide almost an encyclopedic description of Latino contributions to American football in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The greatest accomplishment of Latinos in American Football, however, might be the ways in which the authors connect sport to the push-pull of Latino equality in the United States. In Chapter 2 on the World War II and postwar period, Longoria and Iber discuss a history that would be familiar to most academics of the twentieth century, with stories from an era in which participation in war and wartime changes brought about opportunities for equality. However, the advancements in equality for Latinos were not without contestation from recalcitrant whites. One enlightening story that brings Latino discrimination to the forefront of post–World War II analysis is the El Paso Bowie Bears baseball team. During a state championship run, the Bowie Bears were forced to sleep on cots under the stadium bleachers at the University of Texas because no hotel would provide rooms to the team. This is just one of many enlightening anecdotes that explain the prejudice Latinos encountered in playing sports in high school, college, and professional leagues. As Longoria and Iber point out, “Even success on the fields of athletic competition and of battle in World War II were not sufficient to overcome the negative perceptions of many Texans” (68). Serving your country and showing your prowess in America's popular past times did not provide the full path to equality for which Latinos had hoped.Throughout the chapters, Longoria and Iber weave the stories of individuals and then highlight some in separate biographies at the end of each chapter. Through the narratives of Latinos playing football, we learn not just about their lives on and off the gridiron but also how those who identify as Latino and Hispanic in the United States need to be better represented in national histories. While the analysis is interwoven into the stories of individuals and teams, more insights about what Latinos did or did not accomplish for equality through football could be provided. However, as the authors note, not much has been written on the topic of Latinos and American football. This synthesis can be the starting point in the underdeveloped topics of sports and Latino history, in particular, for others to write more analysis of what football meant for Latinos and what Latinos meant for football. Latinos in American Football and the subsequent works it will no doubt inspire will help academics of sports and race better understand how underrepresented groups in the United States saw a connection between sports and avenues for equality.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,241
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,503

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,275
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Sport HistoryMême sujetSports, Gender, and SocietyTravaux en français237 207