4 More Super-Racist Team Owners

Donald Sterling wasn’t the first awful racist to own a major American sports team.

Mark J. Terrill/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The NBA weighed in Tuesday on the calamity that is racist Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling, handing down a lifetime ban from the NBA (which is a big deal) and a $2.5 million fine (which isn’t, really). Professional sports team owners have been known to be assholes in all sorts of ways, but some take it to another level. Here are four owners who, like Sterling, caused controversy thanks to their racism, but unlike Sterling never got the boot because of it.

Marge Schott, Cincinnati Reds:

Tom Uhlman/AP

Marge Schott only owned the Cincinnati Reds for 15 years, but in that time the equal-opportunity racist uttered slurs against blacks, Asians, gays and Jews. She was fined $25,000 in 1993 ($41,000 in today’s dollars) and suspended from day-to-day operation of the Reds for a year. She got in trouble in 1996 for reiterating earlier comments about how Hitler started off as a good leader but later took things too far. Some choice nuggets: “Only fruits wear earrings,”; referring to one of her black players as her “million-dollar nigger,”; and referring to one of her former marketing directors as a “beady-eyed Jew.” Schott eventually caved to MLB penalties and public pressure, selling most of her shares in 1999.

Tom Yawkey, Boston Red Sox:

Tom Yawkey

Library of Congress/Wikimedia Commons

Tom Yawkey owned the Boston Red Sox from 1933-1976. Many know that he was a recalcitrant racist, fighting integration until 1959 and giving the Red Sox the dubious distinction of being the last integrated team in baseball, a full 12 years after Jackie Robinson broke baseball’s color barrier. Even as he tried to defend himself from charges of racism, he told Sports Illustrated in 1965 that “colored people” were “clannish” and blamed them for the perception that he was racist.

George Marshall, Washington football team

George Preston Marshall bought the Boston Braves in 1932. Four years later, he had changed the team’s name to the [Redacted] and moved it to Washington, DC. While he left a legacy of change within the NFL—championing splitting the league into two divisions, deciding a champion with a playoff system, and accepting the forward pass—Marshall is best remembered for decades of unrepentant racism. He steadfastly refused to integrate his team, even after every other owner in the NFL had done so, leading Baltimore African-American sportswriter Sam Lacy to dub Washington the “lone wolf in lily-whiteism.” The team signed its first black players only after the federal government threatened to revoke its stadium lease in 1961.

Despite all his work opposing integration, Marshall was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame, the website of which lists his contributions to the NFL with only a passing note of how he “endured his share of criticism” for his racism. At Marshall’s funeral in 1969, then-NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle said, “Mr. Marshall was an outspoken foe of the status quo when most were content with it.” Where it counted, though, Marshall was exactly the opposite.

Calvin Griffith, Minnesota Twins

Calvin Griffith

Gene Herrick/AP

Calvin Griffith inherited the Washington Senators baseball team from his uncle Clark Griffith in 1955. Despite claiming the team would stay in Washington “forever,” Griffith moved the franchise to Minnesota in 1961, where it became the Minnesota Twins. While that may have made him a DC sports pariah, Griffith’s low point came in 1978 during a speech in Waseca, Minnesota. Local reporter Nick Coleman was there to write down what happened when the owner was asked why he had moved the team:

At that point Griffith interrupted himself, lowered his voice and asked if there were any blacks around. After he looked around the room and assured himself that his audience was white, Griffith resumed his answer. “I’ll tell you why we came to Minnesota,” he said. “It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don’t go to ball games, but they’ll fill up a rassling ring and put up such a chant it’ll scare you to death. It’s unbelievable. We came here because you’ve got good, hardworking, white people here.”

Multiple black players requested trades from the Twins after the comments were made public, with future hall-of-famer Rod Carew telling Jet Magazine, “I’m not going to be another nigger on his plantation.” Griffith sold the Twins in 1984. Twenty-six years later, the team built a statue of him.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate