View Single Post
Old
03-30-2013, 10:30 PM
  #60
scotchex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 569
vCash: 500
Hmmm. There's a major problem with Deadspin's thesis that the NFL Facebook map reveals a history of Southern blacks rooting for the Cowboys because they turned away from the racist, non-integrating Redskins -- much of the "surprising" Cowboy regions on their map are areas of the South with very few black people.

Take southwest Virginia. According to that map tons of Cowboys fans. That's Appalachia. That's mountains and hills. If you look at the Census maps that breakdown ethnic and racial geography you quickly learn that Appalachia is very, very white. Like Iowa white. It was in 1950. And it still is in 2013.

The areas of the South that have a large black % are the flat, lowland regions where, historically, there was farming and plantations. Southeast Virginia is an example, as is eastern North Carolina.

The much more likely explanation for why so much of southern Virginia (both the nearly all-white southwest and the 1/3rd black southeast) roots for the Cowboys is because they are the hated rivals of the Redskins.

In Virginia politics, the rich Northern Virginia area has come to dominate. This naturally causes resentment in the rest of the state. NoVa people root for the Redskins. The rest of the state hates the NoVa people and thinks they are rich snobs and all around jerkfaces so they cheer for the opposite of the Redskins -- the Cowboys.

Of course, maybe Deadspin is right and the poor, rural white Appalachian mountain counties turned against the rich, big city Redskins because they were slow to integrate black players in the 1950s.

scotchex is offline   Reply With Quote