Context Matters: The Grambling-Bethune Brawl and the Narrative Around HBCUs
A brawl between Grambling State and Bethune-Cookman sparked warranted disciplinary action but also exposed how isolated incidents at HBCUs are often unfairly generalized to all Black institutions.
- Glenn Catubig
- 4 min read
Saturday’s game between Grambling State and Bethune-Cookman promised to be a showcase of two strong SWAC programs aiming to elevate their profiles. Instead, it became overshadowed by a violent on-field skirmish that led to nine player ejections and the subsequent suspension of 27 athletes by the Southwestern Athletic Conference. Both institutions also faced significant fines, underscoring the SWAC’s swift and decisive response.
While the punishment was appropriate, the conversation that followed quickly strayed into problematic territory. Rather than treating the incident as an isolated event, some commentators framed it as evidence of systemic issues at HBCUs or among Black athletes more broadly. This type of discourse is both unfair and misleading.
Similar patterns have emerged in past incidents, such as last month’s skirmish between Fort Valley State and Central State University. Misinformation connected that fight to the suspension of Fort Valley State’s marching band, creating the impression of institutional dysfunction, even though the suspension was later lifted and Fort Valley State maintained strong national recognition among HBCUs.
The coverage surrounding the Grambling-Bethune fight reflects a familiar dynamic. Division I FCS institutions are held to a different standard, with isolated incidents amplified into supposed indictments of entire programs or HBCUs as a whole. High-profile figures like Cam Newton and DeSean Jackson contributed to this narrative, framing the fight as a setback for Black college football.
1. The Overshadowing Narrative
Cam Newton’s comments on his 4th & 1 podcast exemplify how isolated events are mischaracterized. He described the fight as a “civil war over a football game” and suggested it set HBCUs back, implying that the institutions themselves were regressing. Newton’s framing ignored context: the brawl was rare in an otherwise standard weekend of HBCU football. It was not a systemic issue but a singular incident during a highly competitive environment. Yet, his comments positioned the fight as emblematic of broader instability, painting an unnecessarily negative picture. DeSean Jackson’s remarks on his House of Action podcast went further, drawing parallels between the fight and gang-related violence he witnessed growing up. He used terms like “ghetto” to describe Black athletes and suggested the incident could harm opportunities for players, coaches, and programs. These statements extend beyond criticism of behavior—they reinforce stereotypes that unfairly stigmatize Black institutions. By framing an isolated conflict as representative of all HBCUs, they minimize the broader achievements and positive narratives within these programs.
2. Isolated Incident, Not Systemic Failure
It is important to distinguish between unacceptable on-field behavior and institutional dysfunction. While the Grambling-Bethune fight required disciplinary action, it should not be viewed as a reflection of HBCU football as a whole. Comparable incidents in FBS football, such as the 2024 Ohio State-Michigan brawl, were treated as rivalry-related conflicts rather than evidence of systemic issues. Both programs faced fines, but the media coverage did not frame the incident as a failing of the institutions or their athletes. The double standard is evident: negative incidents at HBCUs are often extrapolated to an entire network of institutions, while similar behavior at predominantly white institutions is contextualized as isolated events. This bias skews perception and contributes to a limited understanding of HBCU football and Black student-athletes. Acknowledging mistakes is necessary, but the broader discourse should avoid sweeping generalizations. Punishment for the players involved was appropriate, but conflating one game with institutional failure undermines the accomplishments and progress of these programs.
3. Respectful Coverage and Contextual Understanding
HBCU alumni and advocates consistently call for coverage that respects context and nuance. Isolated incidents can and should be criticized, but commentary should not reduce an entire institution or group of programs to the worst moment of a single game. The Grambling-Bethune fight provides an opportunity to highlight accountability without perpetuating damaging stereotypes. Figures like Newton and Jackson wield influence and should use it to provide informed, contextual perspectives rather than hyperbolic generalizations. Constructive discussion of HBCU football includes celebrating achievements, acknowledging isolated missteps, and maintaining a balanced lens. Doing so allows Black institutions to grow while avoiding unnecessary stigmatization based on one incident. Ultimately, the goal is to hold athletes accountable while treating HBCUs fairly—ensuring that isolated events do not overshadow the broader accomplishments and contributions of these programs.