|
|
Post by Yash on Mar 31, 2008 16:33:31 GMT -6
I know that is not what he is asking. He stated that he watched a video that genetics doesn't make black athletes better. The video was wrong. That doesn't discount individuals who have made it. The ones who have made it worked their tails off, but they had some genetic advantage to begin with. We have to agree that genes play a role in athletes. If you don't believe that, then you take fifty sons of college professors and make a team, and I will take fifty sons from former NFL players and make a team, and let's see which team is better. I agree with you that genes play a role in sports, but the argument is that genes aren't spread across a whole race. Yes sons of football players are probably good athletes but what about a son of a black professor? Hes still black, but that doesn't guarantee him to be athletic. See what i mean? YOu can't just say sons of athletes because we are saying everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 31, 2008 17:29:29 GMT -6
I know that is not what he is asking. He stated that he watched a video that genetics doesn't make black athletes better. The video was wrong. That doesn't discount individuals who have made it. The ones who have made it worked their tails off, but they had some genetic advantage to begin with. We have to agree that genes play a role in athletes. If you don't believe that, then you take fifty sons of college professors and make a team, and I will take fifty sons from former NFL players and make a team, and let's see which team is better. I agree with you that genes play a role in sports, but the argument is that genes aren't spread across a whole race. Yes sons of football players are probably good athletes but what about a son of a black professor? Hes still black, but that doesn't guarantee him to be athletic. See what i mean? YOu can't just say sons of athletes because we are saying everyone. Of course being black doesn't make you athletic. No one thinks that. But you can't deny the stats and honestly think that genes are not a major reason if not the major reason for the disparity between the number of white athletes and black athletes at the rb, wr, db in the NFL. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 31, 2008 17:42:55 GMT -6
I think that access, opportunity, and societal expectations have a lot more to do with it than DNA. If blacks are such better athletes, where are all of the black hockey, baseball, and tennis players, golfers, swimmers, gymnasts, etc, etc...? I coach at a racially diverse, low income high school and the BEST male athlete in the school, heck, in the entire conference, is a white kid. Are you seriously asking that question?  No, I'm not. That's why I said that the differences have everything to do with access, opportunity, and societal expectations. I felt that was pretty obvious. Apparently not. |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 31, 2008 18:27:39 GMT -6
But you can't deny the stats and honestly think that genes are not a major reason if not the major reason for the disparity between the number of white athletes and black athletes at the rb, wr, db in the NFL. I can... ;D As a Black man, whatever that means... thanks for bringing that to light Bro... its never been clarified... there are dark skinned people from many continents... Kinky hair... not just a Black trait... Thick lips and noses... What about dark skinned with stringy hair? Dominicans? Indians? Black was nothing more than a by product of the irrational concpet of race. You can't speak rationally about race, because its an irratinal construct... Its like defining dogs by color... sure... there are different breeds... but color is never the definitive attribute. I say that, to say this. I was an Athletic Black guy... "was" being the key term... yet, I was never fast enough, or jumped high enough, to meet the lofty expectations placed upon me, when I entered a room... Great hands, superior moves, but I'd get caught from behind, every time... by white guys no less... I remember in 8th grade... I was the stud kid at a High school football camp, Varsity coaches were licking their lips, clearly impressed with my on field performance... that is, until they timed us in the 40. I look fast, but really I was just quick... ran a 5.5 in 8th grade... they made me run it 5 times, because they couldn't believe how slow I was... Instantly fell of their radar, until we put the pads on... but that's another story. My point... is that all the Black athletes you see at the higher levels, belong their, but they were also put there above and beyond, white athletes, who equally belonged there, but didn't fit the prejudices of the people deciding who gets to play what, and whom gets to play where. Every year, in every state, there are fast white kids winning track events, studding out in football and basketball. However, college recruiters have their prejudices... and if you didn't look the part, you didn't get a chance to play the part. One of the coldest RB's I've ever seen, kid named John Dergo... fast, strong, competitve, single handidly lead his team to a state championship on offense and defense, RB/SS/LB... couldn't get a look in football at the d1. Was also a hell of wrestler and got a full ride at the U of IL... but its truly a shame a kid as talented as himself, didn't get a full ride to wear the pads... I'm sure he's not the only one. Prejudice runs deep. And often it runs unnoticed in many instances where its not really deemed harmful. The prevailing thought has always been... Black guys are naturally athletic, while white guys are hard workers, students of the game, great competitiors... when in actuality... they are great athletes also, but the victim of a prejudice. I laugh, when I hear conversations about why Blacks are the best athletes... Our prejudice runs so deep that we completely ignore the multitude of Black guys that are horrible athletes... they just don't fit the prejudice, so they don't exists... the Black guys are athletes... similarly, Asians are smart, and Latinos work hard... Nothing but prejudices and generalizations... and when we see something that differs from our prejudices, its quickly dismissed and considered the exception, and not the rule, when in actuality... race can never define the rule... there are a bunch of Asians not smart... bunch of Latino's not hard working... we just don't see them... because they are back in Asia and mexico, with the other dummies... we see their best and brightest... similar to the African American athletes... you see our best and brightest... and quickly neglect the multitude of others that are not. Similarly... its a real shame, when some very talent white boys are refused the opportunity to run the ball, play the corner, or coninue in the game beyond HS. Final thought... Those who determine whom gets to play what, and compete where... are victims of prejudice... our country has an infamous history with the racial construct... nothing good has ever come from it... it has done its job... it has divided and created irrational thought based on the color of ones skin. Race is a misnomer... there's only one race... the human race... the rest has to do with the region a people matured, and the adaptations their bodies made to sustain in such region. IMHO |
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Mar 31, 2008 19:14:16 GMT -6
Thank you for your opinion khalife. I'm very happy to hear from someone who is african american (well your the first to state that you were, so there could have been others) on the topic. So basically you are saying that the divide in the NFL lies at the level of college recruiting? I can accept that to a point, i think. I don't know if its 100% the reason, but I could see it being a big part of the reason. Heres an interesting tidbit of info regarding this issue. This would go along with Khalifes recruiting theory. The NCAA leading rushers (non div 1) Danny Woodhead (Div 2 chadron state, All time leading rusher) RJ Bowers, Grove City Div 3, 2nd all time) and Justin Beaver (UWW was active leader in rushing this year) are all white. Maybe that plays into D1 talented kids not getting the chance at the D1 level. Who knows. I thank you all very much for the input, its helping out a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by schultbear74 on Mar 31, 2008 19:15:13 GMT -6
Race is a misnomer... there's only one race... the human race...
Khalfie-- that is exactly the way I teach it
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 31, 2008 19:19:10 GMT -6
Our QB has a white dad and a black mom. He is a heck of a good athlete.
Who gets the credit? Mom or Dad? Would he have been a better athlete if Dad had been a black man? Would he have been a lesser athlete if Mom was a white woman?
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 31, 2008 19:53:18 GMT -6
You can give me all the individual stories you want. I have plenty also.
Had a 6' 4" receiver with 67 catches and 1085 yards and 13 TD's receiving. No one gave him an offer. No one.
Had another 6'4" receiver with 56 catches 882 yards and 5 TD's and an SEC school offered him as a junior.
The first guy was a much much better receiver, but the second guy was maybe a little bit more explosive athlete.
Guess which one was black and which one was white?
The guy who didn't get the offer was black and the guy who did was white. Never could understand it, not because of race, I just thought that the first guy was a lot better.
There was a guy a few years back who was the Alabama state player of the year at the biggest school in the state. They won state and he led the state in yards rushing, and TD's. Didn't get an offer from Auburn or Alabama. He was black. Race had nothing to do with it. He came back and torched Auburn later.
There is no way you can blame this on college recruiting. There are plenty of white college DB's. If they were the best, then the NFL would draft them. Even if some white DB's aren't getting offers when they should, the best of them are still getting offers.
I do believe that there is some bias in college recruiting, but there can't be that much because those guys jobs depend on it.
By the way, I will never understand college recruiting.
It is the individual that matters. This is the great thing about the whole discussion. Whether blacks on average jump higher or whatever, it still doesn't matter. We are going to try and put the best man in the best position for the team. It doesn't matter the color or even sex. If I had a girl that could play, I would play her.
Again, I agree there are factors, economics, bias, expectations, playing with older kids, running all the time, college recruiting, etc.
But,
Whites outnumber blacks roughly 5 times to 1.
By just that stat, there should be 222 whites to 44 blacks at rb,db,and wr.
But it is 5-261 in favor of blacks.
Genes aren't a factor. GET REAL.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 31, 2008 20:23:12 GMT -6
so what MADE those 'black' athletes better (what equipped them to jump / run)? Yash will be writing a very boring and uninformed study if all he is doing is pointing out that there are more "black" athletes in the NFL than "white". That isn't what he is asking. Forget boring. Or controversial. Tell what you believe to be the truth. I would write that there are many factors, but that there is no way that you can ignore genetics. But, Yash needs to write what he believes. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 31, 2008 20:23:46 GMT -6
Whites outnumber blacks roughly 5 times to 1. By just that stat, there should be 222 whites to 44 blacks at rb,db,and wr. But it is 5-261 in favor of blacks. Genes aren't a factor. GET REAL. Perhaps not. All those stats show is that BEING BLACK is a factor. That is all those stats show. With regards to recruiting, there is a bias, and it does favor the black athlete..because of the stereotypes that Khalfie mentioned. As a coach...if you bring in the white guy at WR/DB/RB...and he doesnt pan out... eh. Just isn't a good stigmatism. It is wrong, but it exists. This does indeed roll into the NFL because in the NFL, if you take the non prime time stars...and they don't pan out......see above. |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 31, 2008 21:49:01 GMT -6
There is no way you can blame this on college recruiting. There are plenty of white college DB's. If they were the best, then the NFL would draft them. Even if some white DB's aren't getting offers when they should, the best of them are still getting offers. I do believe that there is some bias in college recruiting, but there can't be that much because those guys jobs depend on it. By the way, I will never understand college recruiting. Again, I agree there are factors, economics, bias, expectations, playing with older kids, running all the time, college recruiting, etc. But, Whites outnumber blacks roughly 5 times to 1. By just that stat, there should be 222 whites to 44 blacks at rb,db,and wr. But it is 5-261 in favor of blacks. Genes aren't a factor. GET REAL. Hill larry us... Sure... genes are a factor... show me a kids daddy... his mothers brothers, and I'll show you some potential. However, what gene are you talking about? The Black gene? You do realize, more than 90% of Blacks in America are mixed with something not derivative from Africa? Native American, European, Asian, Latino... we truly are the mut, of the American people... but who isn't. Yes, its about genes, athletic momma, meets athletic daddy... athletic kids... happens for all people... maybe Blacks are a little more selective about their mates... You know what... within the stereotypes... white men like skinny, boney women... not too athletic. Black men, on the other hand, like the big hind quarters... a little thickness around the frame...  Even when venturing with different nationalities, the things Blacks find attractive aren't the same thing Whites find attractive. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin... The selection of mates makes more sense... then the Black gene... Silky... its not the genes... its whats in the jeans...  |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 1, 2008 7:16:58 GMT -6
I wondered all night what the NFL gene was. The ONLY argument being made in this discussion (realistically) is not if genetics plays a factor in people being 'athletically superior', but to what degree. Yash is posing a suggested hypothesis that is trying to grossly oversimplify the causation of an effect. He is questioning whether it is as Nickelodeonly simple as just saying, "black folks jes' run faster, thats it". But when pressing for specifics to support that assertion, you run into a brick wall of vaguaries. How do you define what sets one apart from another? That is like saying a business man is "powerful" simply because "he has money". Without citing education, networking, marketability, personality, life goals / value, moral ethics, religious beliefs, marital status, etc........ FYI - the books mentioned discuss at length racism and societal influences that go both ways that contribute to the numbers.  My son is the product of a long line of Irish Catholic football linemen.......and his mother's long line of 400m / high hurdle track stars. Who gets the "credit"? |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 1, 2008 8:09:51 GMT -6
I wondered all night what the NFL gene was. The ONLY argument being made in this discussion (realistically) is not if genetics plays a factor in people being 'athletically superior', but to what degree. Yash is posing a suggested hypothesis that is trying to grossly oversimplify the causation of an effect. He is questioning whether it is as Nickelodeonly simple as just saying, "black folks jes' run faster, thats it". But when pressing for specifics to support that assertion, you run into a brick wall of vaguaries. How do you define what sets one apart from another? That is like saying a business man is "powerful" simply because "he has money". Without citing education, networking, marketability, personality, life goals / value, moral ethics, religious beliefs, marital status, etc........ FYI - the books mentioned discuss at length racism and societal influences that go both ways that contribute to the numbers. My son is the product of a long line of Irish Catholic football linemen.......and his mother's long line of 400m / high hurdle track stars. Who gets the "credit"? Wow... Huh? You learn something new everyday... I need to hear the rest of that story... where's Paul Harvey when you need him! (Regarding the Don Cheadle video... of course) |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 1, 2008 9:18:50 GMT -6
Why not do a study on the polynesian bloodlines drafted at the linemen positions through that time spectrum?
|
|
nannother
Sophomore Member
GREATEST RB EVER
Posts: 122
|
Post by nannother on Apr 1, 2008 9:24:07 GMT -6
I think this is getting a little out of context. Saying you have a Black Dog that should make a great athlete because it is black, is on the borderline insulting. When in fact it's just hair color and has nothing to do with race. Beyond all the stats (that really don't prove anything) we're all forgetting the Science has proven that we're all related.
To answer Wildcat's question about black hockey, golf, tennis players, it all goes back to MONEY. Earl Woods fitted Tiger, with new clubs, every six months as he was growing to make sure he didn't alter his swing. It doesn't take a lot to pick up a basketball and go to the free gym.
This thread is getting a little to personal for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by scoresalot on Apr 1, 2008 10:34:12 GMT -6
nannother:
I think DC was being sarcastic, not serious; At least that's how I took it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Apr 1, 2008 11:04:06 GMT -6
Remember guys, the question wasn't "Why are black people better athletes" The question was what factors have created a 261 to 5 difference in speed positions drafted in the first 2 rounds over the last 10 years. I personally think that it ends up coming down to environment raised in and money in a lot of situations.
If anyone saw the story on ESPN a few weeks back about the florida boys who chase rabbits, the guy said, people who live by the ocean can swim better than those who don't and those who chase rabbits are faster than those who don't. It comes down to something like that I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 1, 2008 11:12:18 GMT -6
Well, also look at the other factors involved.....(it becomes MORE than just the color of your skin). The vast majority of your NFL players (elite football talent) are coming from; 1) Florida 2) Texas 3) Louisiana 4) California 5) Virginia 6) Mississippi 7) Alabama ...........How many NFL elite players are coming from Oregon and Wisconsin? What is the demographics of these "NFL talent producing" states? White Lutherans? I don't think so. The "North vs South" thread discussed this a while back (search)....there are a LOT of factors invovled..... some of the reasons include rural environments, societal culture, favorable climates, population subsidizing through military bases, immigration, etc....... Good luck with the report, though. NCAA schools producing talent by positionStates producing the most football recruitsthen....the one thing that can really skew the stats are 1) players counted as being drafted 2) players counted as being on the team3) players who actually START (contributing players)*** *** I could say I have 4 girls on our football team, but the TRUTH is, none of them actually play, but it LOOKS good. |
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Apr 1, 2008 11:43:08 GMT -6
We have an interesting racial demographic profile that impacts our program. Close to 25% of our school population is Asian. Yet in our football program we have only one Asian out of 140 kids (9th -12th). We have a very large participation from the Asian student population in Tennis and Golf, but nearly zero participation in football.
Because somewhere between 20-25% of our student body will not consider turning out for football it impacts our available pool of athletes. We've done a lot of outreach to recruit athletes but it has not been successful. Many of the Asian student population are involved in after school academic program that take priority over athletics for their parents.
I know that if we had ten percent less students enrolled we would be in a lower classification.
I know every school has it's own set of demographics that impact their athletic profile. Ours is unique compared to some of our surrounding schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 1, 2008 12:25:05 GMT -6
Obviously there are many schools in the Pacific NW that have relatively high densities of Asian students. (I've lived and worked in the Seattle area) I would expect a number of your competitors have the same issue. Here in Nebraska there are several schools that have high % of ESL students, who rarely go out for football. There is even one HS here that is high in ESL and also high in Special ED. So many schools have their own disadvantages as well. Last year when I detailed how little old Single Wing Menominee HS in Michigan (550 students) not only won a State title with no DI kids, but blew out Minnesotas defending State champ in largest class with more than 3300 students. I was told student population didnt mean anything by a whole bunch of guys I don't buy that BTW. |
|
|
|
Post by gacoach on Apr 1, 2008 12:40:00 GMT -6
Two questions.
When was the last time an all-white team won the state championshp in football, in your state?
And, "White Men Can't Jump" was fiction?
|
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Apr 1, 2008 12:44:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Apr 1, 2008 13:07:27 GMT -6
Obviously there are many schools in the Pacific NW that have relatively high densities of Asian students. (I've lived and worked in the Seattle area) I would expect a number of your competitors have the same issue. Here in Nebraska there are several schools that have high % of ESL students, who rarely go out for football. There is even one HS here that is high in ESL and also high in Special ED. So many schools have their own disadvantages as well. Last year when I detailed how little old Single Wing Menominee HS in Michigan (550 students) not only won a State title with no DI kids, but blew out Minnesotas defending State champ in largest class with more than 3300 students. I was told student population didnt mean anything by a whole bunch of guys I don't buy that BTW. Dave, I didn't know you had Northwest ties. You'd go nuts out here. It's either the Spread or Wing-t, even at youth level. You'd have fun in the Eastside Youth league. It's feeder system city - very competive youth stuff. Totally over the top. 28 -30 kids per team - kids can't go both way. Big time. In terms of demographics; It's more common for other schools to have a 7% - 10% asian population - we are very high at 24%. Higher than any other HS school in our league area. Bellevue has similar demographics and we all know their success. They also have benifted from open enrollment , players moving their to play, and unlimited resources. Did I mention great coaching; that too. |
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 1, 2008 13:17:30 GMT -6
In Kirkland. My grandma lived directly accross the street from Bosworth and his LOUD dogs. Bos built a house on a vacant lot that had a great berry patch that my grandpa used to make wine out of Im looking forward to doing a clinic in Issaquah on 5/31. ALways fun to see how various areas of the country do youth football. We have a number of Pop Warner guys coming and a bunch from the Bellevue program (4-8) some even from BC, Portland, Spokane and Montana. Now I just have to figure out what to do with that 12th player for the Canadians Figured with Bellevue it would be a lot of Wing T and Spread for the rest. I like the Wing T BTW  |
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Apr 1, 2008 14:29:47 GMT -6
Just read this entire thread.
Geez, it's genetics.
We get 150 kids coming out for football. 20 of them are black. Of all the kids, 100 of the white kids, and 19 of the black kids come from broken families, or low incoming families, or the inner city.
Of the 10 fastest kids on the team, 9 are black.
Lets not kid ourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 1, 2008 15:13:36 GMT -6
Just read this entire thread. yeah, good advice........ no one is debating 'genetics' make an athlete. |
|
|
|
Post by coache67 on Apr 1, 2008 15:59:48 GMT -6
Kind of late to the argument here, but just my two cents (and a disclaimer that what I say may not even apply).
First and foremost genetics play a role in whatever endeavor you undertake - be it athletic or academic. Each of us have a predetermined ceiling we can reach based on our DNA - think about your classrooms (for you teachers) and your coworkers (for you non teachers). I hate to say it, but the world needs ditchdiggers too. We can work, improve and hone our skills, but the reality is we can only go so far (naturally of course).
But, everything genetically being equal, it comes down to emphasis and opportunity.
The school I was at before, Upper middle/to upper class - high emphasis and priority on college and the "real world" after college. From the minute these kids walk in the door guidance counselors are on them about thinking toward not the next four years, but where they will be after four years. True story, I had a kid whose folks made him quit football his second year of college b/c his DI scholarship was putting too much strain on his academics!
This school has had 18-20 kids go DI from there they ran the gamut of the positions - except RB. WR, QB, LB, OL/DL, and DB - but not one RB. Even though our RB's were better/faster/more agile etc they couldn't get a look b/c of their skin color.
While these kids have every opportunity, the majority of their folks could care less about college athletics or pro opportunities. The emphasis is on academics in these households.
Right down the road is a pretty large urban district and even though they have more athletic kids, very few get the opportunity to play DI sports either - bc of the expectations placed on them at home. The emphasis is to go out and work at McDonald's b/c they need to help out with the family. This emphasis is placed above education as well b/c school didn't do much for a lot of the adults in their eyes. Some families recognize that they may have something special in the next bedroom and the emphasis then becomes, how can you help the family even more (and as with most of these families regardless of skin color, unrealistic expectations) as a pro?
A lot of emphasis is placed on RB WR and DB being black - at the recruting and drafting levels -and I have even seen it to some extent at the HS level. As someone earlier stated, if you bring in a white guy at these positions and it doesn't work out, everyone will say, "Told you so." But, how many black athletes have been brought in and failed at those same positions and nothing is said about it? Prejudice, certainly, but unfortunately that is the way it is.
Personally, I am past the white/black thing - if the best LB on our team is Chinese, he's playing. Until those in the primetime arenas start getting past this prejudice (as many have done with the QB position) none of this is going to change b/c that is what the media sells us.
You want to write a good paper - go down to the science department and learn as much as you can about the Genome Project, DNA and genetic engineering and the super athlete of the future - mostly speculation, but it will make a more compelling read than a paper based on perception.
Here's a better one for you - why are a ton of athletes gravitating toward nontraditional or X type sports? The best athlete at the above mentioned school - 5'11 175 - sick crossover, beat everyone off the dribble, could dunk and played hard defense - all in INTRAMURAL basketball and on the park courts. His sport - freaking snowboarding. I had him in English class, tried to get him out for football and basketball. His response, "Coach E, I just can't handle the way coaches try to get in my face. On the hill it's all about me and my board."
Couldn't really argue with that . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Apr 1, 2008 16:23:28 GMT -6
"..all about me..."? Sums up X sports completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by coache67 on Apr 1, 2008 17:51:16 GMT -6
I'm not disputing that - the purpose was to illustrate that he is an athlete whose opportunity allowed him to emphasize another sport to showcase his ability.
|
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Apr 2, 2008 7:00:23 GMT -6
This question is going to sound flippant but, I don't mean it to be. Why does anyone even care about the race/ethnicity of an athlete?
|
|
Even when venturing with different nationalities, the things Blacks find attractive aren't the same thing Whites find attractive.
