Homework

P LEASE B OW Y OUR H EAD : P RE -G AME P UBLIC P RAYER AT C OLLEGE F OOTBALL G AMES IN THE S OUTH Landon T. Huffman 1, MS, Tim Mirabito 2, PhD, and Robin Hardin 1, PhD 1University of Tennessee, TN, USA 2Marist College, NY, USA A BSTRACT College football and religion are two prevalent institutions in Southern culture, and the intersection of the two provides a phenomenon worth examining. Evaluating the sociological implications of gameday experiences is essential since gameday experiences are inextricably tied to perceived stakeholder satisfaction. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the intersection of football and religion in the South by analyzing fan perceptions of pre-game public prayer at football games. The data for this study were collected from football ticket purchasers at a large public institution competing in the southern United States. Nearly 170 participants provided open-ended comments relating to pre-game prayer at home football games. This study employed inductive content analysis and Collins’ Interaction Ritual Theory was used to frame the results and guide the discussion. Results revealed four themes regarding public prayer: Importance, Inappropriateness, Christian-emphasis, and Non-denominational. Athletic administrators should consider these sociological implications of ritual, inclusion, and exclusion when managing gameday experiences and stakeholder satisfaction. Keywords: Prayer, college football, Southern culture, religion, Interaction Ritual Theory INTRODUCTION Picture this. You and a small group of friends decide to spend a Saturday afternoon together by attending an American football game between two public schools competing in the southern United States. You are familiar with the festivities surrounding football on weekends so as you park and make your way to the stadium it is common to see excited fans in the parking areas around coolers filled with beer, grilling the food of the day as tens of thousands of fans “tailgate” prior to kickoff. Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 294 You enter the stadium, buy refreshments, and settle at your seats. The teams finish their on-field warm-ups and retreat to their respective locker room before the game officially commences in 15 minutes. Next, the marching band of more than 200 students takes the field playing the home team’s fight song as the crowd roars, cheers, and chants along. The fight song concludes and a few individuals proceed to the middle of the field to present the American flag and honor the country by singing the National Anthem. The crowd begins to draw silent in expectation of the first notes, and the public address (PA) announcer broadcasts to tens of thousands of spectators, “Let us pray …” The aforementioned anecdote reflects a gameday experience of many spectators at football games in the South. The practice of public pre-game prayer hosted at a state institution in 2013 may come as a surprise to some people, if not unsettling, due to the fact that the Supreme Court prohibits pre-game public invocations [1]. Gameday Experience The authors’ primary discourse concerns that of sport management and sport sociology, and thus understanding the gameday experiences of spectators is essential to business operations given the fact that spectators are salient stakeholders [2]. Furthermore, examining the sociological implications of gameday experiences is essential since gameday experiences are inextricably tied to perceived stakeholder satisfaction [3]. Given the fact there are two prominent social institutions of the Southern culture in the United States – college football and religion [4] – the purpose of this study was to assess the intersection of football and religion in the South by analyzing pre-game public prayer at collegiate football games. College Football, Religion, and the South Among the founding ideologies of the United States of America was separation of church and state (i.e., government). However, there are references to God on U.S. currency, stated within the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance, and sacred texts, such as the Bible, are used in courtrooms for sworn testimonies [5]. Therefore, when discussing the intersection of college football, religion, and the culture of the southeastern United States (the South) it is difficult to provide independent context as the three elements are interrelated. Bain-Selbo describes these elements as threads woven into the fabric of Southern culture. It is important to note that the notion of place far exceeds the physical space associated with a town, region, state, or nation – it is also inclusive of the “those living there” and “who they are and what that location means to them [6].” As such, the South is a unique place profoundly shaped by its turbulent history involving the Civil War and its aftermath.

Compared to other regions of the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the South was characterized by an overall aura of inferiority (e.g., poverty, infant mortality, low life expectancy, illiteracy) [7]. As the general popularity of football continued to grow in the United States, Southern society gravitated toward college football as a sense of pride in its young men. In a relatively short time, these core values, beliefs, and ideologies of the “New South” were reflected in college football [8]. Barnhart suggested “nothing is more ingrained in the Southern psyche than the love of Southern college football – not as a game or a mere Please Bow Your Head 295 diversion, but as a way of life [9].” Furthermore, Barnhart elaborated on the time-honored football traditions (e.g., tailgating, marching band, team arriving at the stadium) by describing them as the glue that binds the generations of Southern college football fans to one another and keeps them coming back to their beloved campuses year after year. People in the South take these football traditions very, very seriously. To many fans, the renewal of these traditions each fall provides all the physical and emotional comfort of a warm blanket on a cold winter’s night [10].

Another prominent feature of the Southern culture is adherence to religious beliefs, particularly evangelical Protestantism [11]. Given the nature of these two prominent social institutions in the South, it is logical that religious practices and rituals share certain attributes, specifically “both sport and religion employ intricate rituals which attempt to place events in traditional and orderly view [12].” Specifically, prayer is a common religious expression and has been studied in the sport context primarily as it pertains to athletes and coaches [13].

Additionally, scholars have proceeded to argue there are rituals of the gameday experience (e.g., pre-game, during, and post-game) [14] which qualify it as religion [15]. Bain-Selbo concluded college football fans in the South identify their gameday experience as a fundamental element of their emotional and communal lives. It is this overlay of sport, public prayer, and ritual which will provide unique insights in regards to fandom in the South.

Interaction Ritual Theory Interaction Ritual Theory (IR Theory), first proposed by Collins is utilized to examine every day interaction of self and society [16]. IR Theory posits individual and societal values are thoughts and awareness infused with emotion [17]. Therefore, IR Theory primarily focuses on these societal, ritual, and emotional-based relationships using a microsocial approach, but provides flexibility to be complemented by “macro-level, historical processes [18].” Furthermore, the positive attributes of emotion are emphasized and described as “both the outcome and catalyst” which provides an appropriate lens from which to analyze public prayer and sport fandom [19].

IR Theory posits the key elements which must be present include “ritual ingredients, ritual outcomes, and collective effervescence [20].” Collins described the ritual ingredients as when two or more people physically gather at the same place (e.g., in stadium), there are explicit boundaries separating participants from outsiders (e.g., individuals must have a ticket to enter the stadium), participants have a common point of focus and attention (e.g., the contest), and participants join in sharing a collective or communal emotional experience (e.g., fans cheer in unison) [21].

Instances of ritual outcomes include:

group solidarity – ‘a feeling of membership;’ emotional energy – ‘a feeling of confidence, elation, strength, enthusiasm, and initiative in taking action;’ group symbols; and a sense of morality – ‘the sense of rightness in adhering to the group, respecting its symbols, and defending both against transgressors. [22]’ Finally, “the culmination of outcomes is collective effervescence – ‘a momentary state,’ but one that has lasting impact when it is ‘embodied in sentiments of group solidarity, symbols or sacred objects, and individual emotional energy [23].’” Furthermore, group solidarity is Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 296 heightened when framed within religious connotations and meanings, which extends beyond the football gameday experience [24]. The responses from the sample in the current study indicate ritual outcomes and collective effervescence are indeed present among southern football spectators.

Collins argued sport did not necessarily meet all of the aforementioned criteria to be critiqued according to IR Theory (primarily due to the fact sport is universal and implies weak solidarity), research by Cottingham suggested otherwise and commented sport fandom is appropriate to be examined on the basis of IR Theory [25]. Cottingham added “applying and extending IR Theory to sports fans captures how sports fans, as an informal social group, develop and maintain meaning and solidarity across time and space [26].” Consequently, IR Theory provides a framework which will guide the research and understanding of the behavior of sport spectators in place. The resulting research question guiding this study is – What were the perceptions of public pre-game prayer among spectators at a Division I public institution as an element of the football gameday experience? M ETHODOLOGY The data for this study were collected as a subcomponent of a larger project conducted a large public institution in the South. The questionnaire, which included seven-point rating scale questions as well as several opportunities for open-ended responses, examined satisfaction and importance of gameday activities at home football games at this institution. The researchers specifically inquired about the importance of pre-game prayer at home football games and offered respondents an option to provide comments on all pre-game activities. More than 5,000 questionnaires were completed and nearly 170 respondents provided open-ended comments regarding pre-game prayer at home football games. This study employed the inductive content analysis highlighted by Miles and Huberman to analyze the open-ended responses to the questionnaire [27]. The close-ended quantitative data were used to support those findings.

Similar mixed-method approaches appeared in early volumes of the Sociology of Sport Journal and have been seen increasing in sport sociology scholarship ever since [28]. Procedure Data collection was coordinated through the athletic marketing department and ticket office. An email was sent to all football season ticket and single-game ticket purchasers in mid- September (beginning of the football season) asking for participation in the research project along with a link to an online questionnaire. An incentive of four pre-game sideline passes and skybox tickets were offered to complete the questionnaire. Data collection ceased two days later. The result was 5,102 completed questionnaires.

Responses to the open-ended question regarding pre-game activities were the primary source of data for this study. A keyword search in SPSS Statistical software using the terms “pray” and “prayer” extrapolated 169 responses, which were analyzed using inductive content analysis. The researchers labeled segments with codes which described the content of the comment in accordance with Baptiste’s approach [29]. A second reading of each response allowed the researchers to evaluate the initial codes, amend any of those designations, and Please Bow Your Head 297 group the coded content into categories. Finally, the researchers dissected the categories further into themes, which completed the textual analysis of the responses.

The comments were numbered and divided among researchers for coding in order to address concerns of inter-coder reliability. Researcher 1 coded responses 1-100 and Researcher 2 coded responses 70-169. Independently, each researcher made initial coding decisions based on the tone of the responses and knowledge of the topic. Responses 70-100, which overlapped between coders, were evaluated after the initial phase and the findings were discussed between researchers. This intervention promoted clarity between coders and continuity in process, enhancing the researchers’ ability to make more accurate decisions on the eventual findings.

The researchers re-engaged the data, made final decisions on categories, and collaborated on demarcating the themes.

Additionally, quantitative data was available to support the findings of the content analysis.

Four questions measuring prayer importance, prayer satisfaction, prayer rotation importance, and prayer rotation satisfaction provided contextual data for this study. The areas were measured in terms of satisfaction based upon response to statements anchored by 1 = extremely dissatisfied and 7 = extremely satisfied. The areas were measured in importance based upon response to statements anchored by 1 = extremely unimportant and 7 = extremely important.

The results are presented in the following section. Findings Two themes emerged from the qualitative portion of the data: prayer’s place in sport (place in sport) and the content of the prayer used (prayer content). Each primary theme included supplemental competing dichotomous second-level themes. For place in sport, a dichotomy between importance and inappropriateness of the prayer surfaced, while a division between the preference of Christian-emphasized and non-denominational prayer created a polarized landscape in the content theme. The divisiveness within and between themes was an indication of the politically-charged nature of the topic. However, while the sub-level themes were oppositional thematically, the primary themes had congruence within the realm of the existence of prayer at football games. In other words, the conflicting viewpoints of the prayers’ place in sport contributed in some ways to the acceptance or resistance of the content of the prayer and vice versa. For instance, a respondent wrote, “I do not like the point that during prayer, the Lord Jesus Christ is never mentioned in [the] prayer. That is not honoring God or Christians. If you are going to pray, speak of Christ.” Place in Sport This theme was defined by the existence of pre-game prayer at a football game. The act of reciting a prayer, regardless of denomination, at a public institution in front of thousands of people prior to a football game created polarizing responses. The focal point of this theme centered on the presence of the prayer at a sporting event rather than the nature of the prayer itself. The quantitative results also support this as 74.8% of the respondents responded the prayer was extremely important and the mean score of the item was 6.36. The theme’s dichotomous sub-levels, simply stated, argued that prayer should or should not be a visible part Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 298 of pre-game rituals. Respondents that supported the presence of pre-game prayer responded, “PLEASE keep the prayer,” “Keep the PRAYERS Going!!,” or “Thank you for continuing to have prayer before the game!” Conversely, those opposed stated, “I do not think prayer should be a part of the football experience,” “I don’t like the idea of a led prayer at the stadium,” or “Pre-game prayer should be relegated to those who would like it and not forced upon everyone.” Each argument presented clear distinctions from the counter.

Within the sub-levels of this theme, which opposed the importance of the prayer and its inappropriateness, varying viewpoints and issues were mentioned by respondents.

Overwhelmingly, those who supported the prayer noted the importance of it being present before the games. “With the pre-game, as it is one of the more important elements of the gameday atmosphere, I believe the prayer at the beginning is the most important element period.” Another participant said, “Prayer is so important, regardless of your religion, I hope we always have it!” Similarly, “The band performance both pre-game and halftime are just as important as the football game. We need to continue prayer.” The responses highlighting the importance of prayer also alluded to the role the prayer played in the traditions of pre-game rituals. Traditions like singing the national anthem or having the team run out onto the field with the cheerleaders or mascots are seen throughout the pageantry of college football. This particular institution had several traditions of its own and the prayer was prominently part of that gameday routine. In fact, the national anthem and prayer were often interchangeable as staples of its pre-game rituals. “It doesn’t matter if we have a different person sing the National Anthem or not, just as long as we sing it every game. This is the same with the prayer!” Some simply stated, “Must keep the prayer as part of the pre-game tradition.” Part of the tradition dealt with the cultural aspects of the town, specifically its regionality. “The pre-game prayer is of cultural importance because [the southeastern city] is in the ‘bible belt’.” Another respondent said, “Please don’t change the time for prayer, nor the playing of the National Anthem. These things are who we are in [the southeastern city]” or “It’s so important to start each game with Prayer and National Anthem, just shows respect for Team and State!” The cultural responses extended beyond the regional scope of prayer as tradition and incorporated elements of nationalism as well. In these responses there were acknowledgments of “Christian principles” and core values that tied religion to founding beliefs of the United States and the Constitution. For instance, “Don’t stop prayer or playing/singing the National Anthem. Both activities are extremely important to our national heritage and one of the key foundation to our country; our belief in God.” A closely related response, “A part of being an American citizen is to support our military and we should always be able to have prayer and National Anthem. This is the most important part of getting the game started.” Additionally, “Prayer and the National Anthem are as American as Apple Pie for sports! Keep them.” Finally, “I believe the Prayer and National Anthem set the tone of what we are as Americans. If we stop either one of these I will turn in my tickets.” The findings suggested that prayer was as much a part of the pre-game custom as any other ritual performed at this institution. As previously mentioned, reciting the prayer was seamlessly paired with singing the national anthem or having the team run out onto the field. However, there was opposition to this previously stated argument. The counterpart to the importance sub- level of the place in sport theme was inappropriateness and, like the conflicting argument, there were varying responses as well. “I don’t think prayer should be a part of the football experience,” “Prayer is completely unnecessary and inappropriate,” and “There is no need for Please Bow Your Head 299 prayer, it’s not the right place,” were all responses that defined this theme. Again, the parameters of this sub-level maintained that prayer was not appropriate for sporting events, particularly at a state institution. The primary objection to the prayer was the venue. For instance, a respondent said, “Dispense with the prayer – it’s inappropriate at a state institution.” Another response read, “Prayer has no place at a public university event!” Not only was the venue intolerable for some, but the type of event was also a factor. “End the pre-game prayer. This is not a religious event.” Respondents had difficulty reconciling the coexistence of prayer and sport, specifically football. “The prayer is just odd. Why do we pray before football games? It makes no sense!” Equally, “No need for prayer at a football game – it’s not appropriate.” The previous responses specifically addressed objections to praying at a state-sponsored institution. The responses ranged from the legality to the practice occurring at sporting events.

Those specific responses provided useful feedback as to why prayer should not take place before a football game. There were also responses that plainly stated that the prayer should not occur inside a football stadium. “I don’t think prayer should be part of a public sporting event, it is a private matter,” “Though I am a churchgoing Christian, I object to prayer at games,” and “Enough with the prayers” were all generic responses to this question. Prayer Content The second theme, prayer content, removed the debate of actually performing the prayer and focused primarily on the nature of the prayer itself. This theme was noticeably more polarizing than the place in sport theme and the focal area of contention centered on the denomination of the prayer. The subject institution asked the individuals who delivered the pre- game prayer to desist from aligning the prayer with any particular religious sect, in doing so avoiding the use of the words “Jesus,” “Mohammad,” “Buddha,” or any other overtly faith- based axiom. It is important to note that this institution predominantly aligned with Judeo- Christian beliefs, which enhanced the Christian perspective throughout these findings. This decision garnered significant opposition from respondents, presenting two opposing viewpoints. One faction of the participants favored greater inclusion of all religions in the prayer, “Rotation of prayer and anthem singer is a great thing.” Conversely, the combating side argued that the prayer, due to the removal of notable Christian vernacular, was too generic, “Many times the prayer is so vague it does not mean anything.” Overall, though respondents were satisfied with the prayer as 66.3% indicated they were extremely satisfied with a mean score of 6.29. The notion of being Christian focused also appeared in the quantitative findings as the agreement with prayer rotation among different faith traditions was 5.50.

Supportive responses for inclusive practices delivering the prayer at the institution made note of the importance of rotating the type of prayer. The primary concern was fairness and equality. “The prayer needs to be totally non-denominational (like Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic, etc.) to be equally representative for everyone.” Respondents on both sides identified the Christian influence on the school’s choice of prayer. There were some that responded still in favor of prayer, but would like to see adjustments made to the content: “I don’t mind the prayer, but what if we had a one minute Buddhist prayer? I only want fairness for all religions.” Others did not agree with having prayer and the content had a role in the unfavorable outlook: “I don’t think a pre-game prayer is necessary but if you’re going to do it Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 300 please ensure all faiths are included in the rotation – not just Christianity.” Altogether, there was a self-awareness from this faction that simply called for the school to continue to address the growing diversity of its patrons. “I know I am in the minority, but finding a way to at least acknowledge the diversity of faith that exists both on campus (beyond the various sects of Christianity) and in the state.” While those who favored a more inclusive approach seemed to lack a pronounced affiliation to one particular faith tradition, the Christian contingent was noticeably present among the other responses. The feedback ranged from disappointment in the delivery to frustration that the prayer was not suited to their Christian emphasis. For example, a common response was, “The pre-game ‘prayers’ are so generic as to be almost meaningless (from a Christian perspective).” The more aggressive responses sounded more like the following: “Stop the rotation of the prayer. Let a Christian that is not afraid to say the name of ‘Jesus’ provide an unscripted, true prayer.” Ultimately, the general sentiment of this perspective was summarized by the following response. “I don’t mind different ministries rotating the prayer as long as it is a Christian ministry. We DO NOT want any other religion to be in the mix.” Once again, a dichotomous sub-level brought about further debate whether the prayer should maintain a Christian influence, the religious affiliation of the majority of fans at this institution, or continue to adhere to the institutions attempt at keeping the prayer non- denominational. The focal point from this dichotomy relied on the use, or lack thereof, the phrases “Jesus” and/or “Lord and Savior.” As was seen in the previous responses from the Christian faction, there was some displeasure in the non-denominational approach the school instituted. These are some of the responses: “I gave a medium # [rating] on prayer strictly due to my dissatisfaction in that the person cannot mention Jesus Christ anywhere during the prayer;” “It is obvious that the pastors are told not to invoke Jesus’ name. Without being able to do that, it essentially waters down the prayers and glosses over the Truth that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior;” “I would like a real prayer every time, not some of the stuff we have heard that’s hard to determine if they are praying or not;” and “If the pastor is Christian, ALLOW him to pray in Christ’s name…if this offends your Jewish donors, allow them a rabbi from time to time to lead prayer.” There was also a group of participants that aligned with the aforementioned perspective, but reacted with more aggression. Some even alluded to the conflict the school’s approach created with their personal religious beliefs. For example, someone wrote, “It seems like the person praying is not allowed to pray in Jesus’ name which is wrong. A prayer not prayed in this fashion does not go very high according to the Bible.” Similarly, another person responded, “If you are going to have a prayer, which I think is important; don’t be afraid to offend someone.

Make it a legitimate prayer to Jesus.” One participant mentioned their specific denomination by name, “I prefer a strong tenor singing the national anthem and a Southern Baptist praying in Jesus’ name ONLY.” Infringing on one’s religious beliefs was a sensitive issue for many participants, but so to was the threat of what the respondents viewed as competing religious ideologies. Without prompting or mention, respondents specifically referenced Muslim faith and offered a strong opinion of the possibility of a Muslim prayer. “So help me if [the southeastern institution] ever, ever has a Muslim prayer during pre-game they will never get my support again,” said one participant. Another reaction was, “I hope to never hear any Muslim prayer at a [home] |football game or it will be my last.” This half of the dichotomy in the sub-level was stoutly opinionated. Please Bow Your Head 301 The other half had a distinctly opposite viewpoint and a more subtle approach. Of course, these respondents’ viewpoint of the type of prayer had been shared by the institution. These responses were similar to the following: “The prayer must be non-denominational. It is rude and disrespectful to assume everyone is of Christian faith;” “Prayer needs to be generic, not focused on one belief;” and “I don’t think directed prayer on a property owned by the state is appropriate (or constitutional). Additionally, it is exceptionally discourteous – if not openly hostile – to those not belonging to represented religions (via monotheistic prayer).” Based on the collective responses of participants, the sociological implications of gameday experiences will be discussed as it relates to managing the gameday experience and perceived stakeholder satisfaction. D ISCUSSION The polarized nature of the responses given in this inquiry provided context to the nature of the topic in that the intersection of sport and religion, specifically seen in public prayer, was contentious. As noted in the findings, prayer’s place in sport was debated among participants as both welcomed and inappropriate. Further, the content of the prayers delivered impacted respondents engagement with prayer, while also furthering the conversation about inclusion.

Almost no neutrality seemed to exit in the responses, which indicated the importance of the topic among respondents as well as the demarcated environment surrounding this topic. Prayer seemingly has a place in sport in the South whether one agrees or disagrees with invoking a public prayer in the context of an athletic event. Athletic administrators employed at public universities would be wise to consider the sociological implications associated with managing the religiously-charged gameday experiences and stakeholder satisfaction, particularly in Southern culture.

Athletic administrators can gain an understanding of fan behavior which assists with policy and gameday management by utilizing the framework of IR Theory. IR Theory views patterned behavior, such as football traditions, largely from the lens of emotion [30]. Fans’ emotional energy is the catalyst that fuels traditions as well as the outcome which sustains traditions from year-to-year and generation-to-generation [31]. Therefore, administrators should consider fans’ emotional energy when managing the gameday experience.

At the sublevel of Place in Sport, it is important to note that the quantitative responses revealed more than 74% of respondents felt the public prayer was extremely important and more than 66% of respondents were extremely satisfied with the public prayer. Conversely, approximately 3% of respondents indicated they felt public pre- game prayer was extremely unimportant. Although a small percentage indicated public prayer was extremely unimportant according to the rating scale, their charged comments revealed this minority cannot be ignored. Therefore, athletic administrators must balance this delicate situation by considering the macro-level culture of the South. For instance, the emotion inextricably tied to the practice of public prayer moves this tradition to resemble a ritual potentially worth continuing for the sake of the gameday atmosphere, fan devotion, fan identity, and stakeholder satisfaction [32]. Cottingham elaborated on this notion stating, “The greater the collective focus of attention the more emotional energy exhibited by fans [33].” Consequently, administrators are justified for keeping public prayer as a salient element of the Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 302 gameday experience despite some voiced displeasure from fans as well as legal pressures to discontinue the practice.

The content of the prayer is worthy of discussion as well. Specifically, a point of contention discovered in the comments was whether the public prayer should have a Christian-emphasis or be non-denominational in nature. Fans in the South appear to prefer a Christian-emphasized prayer. These emotionally-charged comments not only stated a strong preference for mentioning Jesus’ name in prayers, but several statements also suggested strong discontent toward the suggestion of invoking a prayer from another faith tradition. On the other hand, a multitude of respondents commented that public prayer should be non-denominational and more inclusive in nature.

The two underlying factors that were seemingly most influential with the positionality of the respondents were culture and history. Culture was explicitly stated in many of the responses, noting the ties to the South and the Judeo-Christian philosophies that were inherent to that part of the country. The history of the prayer, however, was an implied factor that impacted many of the sentiments shared by the participants. The practice of reciting the prayer before the game had been a long established tradition at the school and, along with the solidarity of participating, the routine component seemed extremely important to those who supported pre-game prayer.

As mentioned previously, the prayer had been grouped in with singing the national anthem and the other traditions enacted before games. These considerations were increasingly important in that it possibly rendered an explanation to why such a disparity existed between support and disapproval of pre-game prayer. This provides an interesting overlay for administrators and college football spectators alike from the perspective of IR Theory. Due to the divisiveness regarding the preference for the content of the prayer, group solidarity among fans in the stadium can be challenged and threaten the ritualistic nature of the prayer tradition. If the ritual is threatened then the tradition will not conjure emotional attachment promoting the gameday atmosphere, fan devotion, fan identity, and stakeholder satisfaction [34]. Athletic administrators must assume the challenge of creatively catering to the overwhelming preference for an overtly Christian prayer while not alienating or offending fans of differing faith beliefs – not to mention the legal considerations involved with this specific element. C ONCLUSION College football and religion are woven together in a peculiar way meshing together part of the fabric of the Southern culture. The results of this study paint a clearer picture of the place of religion and sport in the South. Ultimately, traditions have a unique way of promoting the gameday atmosphere, fandom, and stakeholder satisfaction. However, when these traditions, particularly public prayer, move into the realm of ritualistic behavior, unintended consequences may ensue. These ritualistic traditions can be beneficial when they foster emotional attachment, but when left unbridled these emotions can fuel divisive, exclusionary, and alienating behaviors which are detrimental to the sporting experience and society as a whole. It is vital for athletic administrators to utilize this sociological framework when evaluating and managing stakeholder satisfaction across time and space as it pertains to the emotionally-charged institutions of religion and college football in the South.

Please Bow Your Head 303 LIMITATIONS This inquiry took place using one school in the South. The singular perspective was solely based on interpretations gathered from one fan base who identified with both participating in pre-game prayer as well as being in the South. Gaining perspective of this particular pre-game experience was a unique opportunity, fulfilled by the existence of prayer before games. The regional nature of the school also provided limitations on the implications. The school was identified as a southern school with inherent ties to college football and religion. Its existence in the “Bible belt” was a requisite for this examination and limited the connotations of these findings to schools with similar identifications. For example, it could be argued that schools like Brigham Young University (BYU) or Notre Dame, religiously affiliated schools, would encounter different responses to their routines. Finally, the question that provided the construct of this study was not specifically directed at the religiosity of the matter. Respondents were asked to assess their perceptions of the pre- game routines generally and only responses that mentioned prayer were siphoned out for this study. This limitation presented a fascinating dichotomy in that some respondents did not care to mention the existence of prayer, while many respondents, without prompting, singled out this issue specifically because they felt it was important. The volume of the responses, which again were not directly prompted, indicated to the researchers that this was a topic with great social import, furthering the relevance of the study. FUTURE R ESEARCH This mixed-methods study rendered useful findings as they pertained to one institution.

Further examination into other schools based, not only on their pre-game routines, but their regional nature (and culture) would provide greater context to this issue. The debate over the presence of religion in public institutions is not limited to higher education either. It would be useful to examine institutions of secondary education as well to further broaden the topic. High schools have increasingly come under scrutiny for their rituals that have any ties to religion.

These schools often lack the autonomy that colleges and universities have because of the dependency of governmental subsidies. Additionally, football games were the only outlet that the subject institution publicly prayed before. Football has been equated to a religion in itself in the South, which is partly reinforced by these findings. Added research into other sport or extracurricular activities may give wider perspective on the intersection of sport and religion. The methods used to gather the data in this examination incorporated survey research. Focus groups or semi-structured interviews could provide an alternate perspective at an interpersonal level. This could add to the assessment of the interaction with sport and religion, while also investigating specific experiences with greater detail. R EFERENCES [1] Raven Matthews-Pillette, “Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe: Adding a Brick to the Wall of Separation between Church and State,” Southern University Law Review Landon T. Huffman, Tim Mirabito, and Robin Hardin 304 28(1) (2000): 61-78. It is important acknowledge there are legal implications associated with this topic but they are beyond the scope of this article. Information regarding this can be found in P. J. Batista, “Balancing the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses: A Rebutta to Alexander & Alexander,” Journal of Legal Aspects of Sports 12(2) (2002): 87-116 and John J. Miller, Khalil Lee, and Christina L. L Martin, “An Analysis of Interscholastic Athletic Directors’ Religious Values and Practices on Pregame Prayer in the Southeastern United States: A Case Study,” Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport 23 (2013): 91-106.

[2] Cheri Brandish and J. Joseph Cronin, “Corporate Social Responsibility in Sport,” Journal of Sport Management 23(6) (2009): 691-697; and Paul C. Godfrey, “Corporate Social Responsibility in Sport: An Overview and Key Issues,” Journal of Sport Management 23(6) (2009): 698-716.

[3] Coyte G. Copper and Erianne A. Weight, “In pursuit of Satisfaction and Fortification:

Stakeholder Perceptions of NCAA Wrestling Rules and Regulations,” Sport Marketing Quarterly 18(3) (2009): 150-159; J Joseph Cronin, Michael. K. Brady, and G. Tomas. M.

Hult, “Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value, and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Environments,” Journal of Retailing 76(2): 193-218; Chris T. Greenwell, Janet S. Fink, and Donna L. Pastore, “Perceptions of the Service Experience: Using Demographic and Psychographic Variables to Identify Customer Segments,” Sport Marketing Quarterly 11(4) (2002): 698-716; and Gi Yong Koo and Robin Hardin, “Difference in Interrelationship between Spectators’ Motives and Behavioral Intentions Based on Emotional Attachment,” Sport Marketing Quarterly 17(1) (2008): 30-43.

[4] Tim Delaney and Tom Madigan, The Sociology of Sports: An Introduction (Jefferson NC: McFarland & Company, 2009), 259-277.

[5] Delaney and Madigan, The Sociology of Sports: An Introduction, 259-277.

[6] Eric Bain-Selbo, “From Lost Cause to Third-and-Long: College Football, and the Civil Religion of the South. The Journal of Southern Religion 11 (2009): para 2.

[7] William J. Baker, Playing with God: Religion and Modern Sport (Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press, 2007), 85-107.

[8] Bain-Selbo, 2009, para 6; Eric Bain-Selbo, Game Day and God: Football, Faith, and Politics in the American South. (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2012), 1-26.

[9] Tony Barnhart, Southern Fried Football: The History, Passion, and Glory of the Great Southern Game (Chicago, IL: Triumph Books, 2000), 1.

[10] Barnhart, Southern Fried Football: The History, Passion, and Glory of the Great Southern Game, 151.

[11] Association of Religion Data Archives, “ARDA Demographic Map: Religion 2000 – Evangelical Protestant,” 2013. Available at http://www.thearda.com/DemographicMap/ displayRCMSMap.asp?ZipCode= [12] Harold Slusher, “Sport and the Religious,” in Religion and Sport: the Meeting of Sacred and Profane, ed. C. S. Prebish (Wesport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993), 173.

[13] Jay Coakley, Sports in Society: Issues and Controversies (Columbus OH: McGraw-Hill, 2008), xx; and Melissa A. Murray, A. Barry. Joyner, Kevin L. Burke, Matthew J. Wilson, and A .Drew Zwald, “The Relationship between Prayer and Team Cohesion in Collegiate Softball Teams,” Journal of Psychology and Christianity 24(3) (2005): 233-239. Please Bow Your Head 305 [14] Daniel R. Czech, Craig A. Wrisberg, Leslee A. Fisher, Charles L. Thompson, and Gene Hayes, “The experience of Christian Prayer in Sport: An Existential Investigation,” Journal of Psychology and Christianity 23(1) (2004): 3-11.

[15] Eric Bain-Selbo, “Ecstasy, Joy, and Sorrow: The Religious Experience of Southern College Football,” Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, 20 (2008): 2.

[16] Randall Collins, Interaction Ritual Chains (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004), 3-46.

[17] Randal Collins, “Stratification, Emotional Energy, and the Transient Emotions,” in T. D.

Kemper, Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions, (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1990), 27-38.

[18] Marci D. Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” Sociology of Sport Journal 29(2) (2012): 170.

[19] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 170.

[20] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 170.

[21] Collins, Interaction Ritual Chains, 35.

[22] Collins, Interaction Ritual Chains, 49.

[23] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 171.

[24] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 168-185.

[25] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 168-185.

[26] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 169.

[27] Matthew B. Miles and A Michael Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.) (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), 81, 237-238.

[28] Kari Fasting and Mari-Kristin Sisjord, “Gender Roles and Barriers to Participation in Sports,” Sociology of Sport Journal, 2(4), (1985): 346-347; and Artur Poczwardowski, James E. Barrott, and Sophia Lowett, “Diversifying Approaches to Research on Athlete- Coach Relationships,” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7(2) (2006): 127-128.

[29] Ian Baptiste, “Qualitative Data Analysis: Common Phases, Strategic Differences,” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 2(3) (2001): 42 paragraphs, Art. 22, Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0103226.

[30] Collins, “Stratification, Emotional Energy, and the Transient Emotions,” 27-38.

[31] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 168-185.

[32] William Gantz and Lawrence Wenner, “Fanship and the Television Sports Viewing Experience,” Sociology of Sport Journal, 12(1) (1995): 56-74.

[33] Cottingham, “Interaction Ritual Theory and Sports Fans: Emotion, Symbols, and Solidarity,” 177.

[34] Gantz and Wenner, “Fanship and the Television Sports Viewing Experience,” 56-74.

R epro duce d w ith p erm is sio n o f th e c o pyrig ht o w ner. F urth er r e pro ductio n p ro hib ite d w ith out p erm is sio n.