Columnist Dean Juipe: Bird’s view doesn’t jibe with reality

Dean Juipe

Tuesday, June 15, 2004 | 9:07 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4084.

Looking for a photo that would include the crowd from the classic Michigan State vs. Indiana State NCAA basketball championship game in 1979, I came across The Complete Book of Basketball by the New York Times. And the picture I needed was right there on the cover of the 1982 publication, shot the night of March 27, 1979, at the Special Events Center in Salt Lake City.

The fans' faces are somewhat distorted yet it's clear the audience is mostly white.

That generalization was not unusual then, nor is it now. Due in large part to such necessities as disposable income, sports crowds in America frequently have a greater ratio of whites than is prevalent in society as a whole.

Simplistic as that is, it seems to have been lost on Larry Bird. And maybe Magic Johnson.

Bird came out a week ago and denounced the lack of white superstars in pro basketball, adding that if there were more white stars it would be good for the game from both aesthetic and revenue points of view. Johnson concurred and cited the 1979 NCAA title game as an example of the heightened awareness that occurs when a team fronted by a white star (as was the case with Bird and Indiana State) is competitive with a team fronted by a black star (as was the case with Johnson and Michigan State).

I think they've both taken too many elbows to the head.

Michigan State's 75-64 victory against Indiana State is rightly regarded as one of the greatest games of all time, but it had nothing to do with race. Call me naive or too idealistic, but I don't believe the ethnicity or race of the athletes is ever a factor in determining the makeup of the crowd at a major sporting event in this country.

People go to games because they like the sport, or enjoy the competitive nature of the event or have a regional rooting interest. The race of the participants has no bearing on their decision.

If Bird thinks otherwise, maybe it needs to be pointed out to him that the ongoing NBA Finals are being broadcast in 37 languages to people without the physical or financial ability to attend. Those people don't care if every starter from the Los Angeles Lakers and Detroit Pistons is black, nor do the people in the crowds that have packed those teams' arenas.

What keeps would-be fans from attending games are steep prices, or a reluctance to subsidize the outrageous salaries paid to today's athletes, or a dissatisfaction with those athletes' moral standards. Race is irrelevant and wouldn't affect more than 1 percent of those inclined to buy a ticket.

The face of sports in 2004 is more cosmopolitan and diverse than ever, with more and more athletes having been born outside the United States. With rare exceptions, most fans are colorblind and unconcerned about the nationalities and bloodlines of those they are paying to see perform.

I don't know what Bird was thinking and I even had to stop and consider the most basic tenet of his argument: Is the NBA really suffering through a shortage of white superstars?

If it is, it has escaped me and it has escaped the 18,997 who packed the Staples Center for two games earlier in the NBA Finals and the 22,076 who have twice filled the Palace of Auburn Hills and who will fill it again for tonight's Game 5.