It isn't just that black names correlate to poor economic background. Research has shown that just having a back name will result in fewer callbacks on the same resume (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/weekinreview/06Luo.html?_r=0). Racial bias and stereotypes dramatically impact the opportunities and chances of blacks, in this case, black QBs. The same thing happens with black athletes and sports positions. This is really how much racism works; it, through the assumptions of the people with decision making power, limits the opportunities of those affected by it. The issue is how racism affects access to proper training and opportunity. We see it even now with the Teddy Bridgewater scouting. Folks keep trying to lump him in with read-option "athletes" and keep regarding what makes Bridgewater a top prospect: his accuracy, decision making, and football intelligence. Bridgewater was just given the proper training to be a QB (http://www.wdrb.com/story/18867328/crawford-a-look-inside-the-u-of-l-quarterbacks-summer-film-study), instead of just another fast/strong guy. Research on race and intelligence suffers from post-facto problems in that the socio-cultural, economic, and opportunity outcomes have already been decided by history. This is before we even define intelligence and how decide to measure it. There are folks who want there to be an intelligence/physicality hierarchy based on genetics, but they have yet to prove it despite well over a century of trying. All that has been measured so far is what one would expect given different starting points in life and exposure to different physical environments and social treatment.
Good post RE tribes. When I saw this topic, I immediately thought of this story: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/A69Z8fCpuAI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
we played the raiders a few weeks ago man.. IIRC kordell stewart did some punting at the end of his career too..
I haven't read the thread, but the QB position is one that requires the least amount of fast-twitch muscles and "athleticism", so the pool of good players should reflect the overall population better. Remember blacks are only 13% of the US. Plus you could argue that the QB position requires the most intelligence, and if you believe test scores are a valid indicator, whites tend to outperform minorities there (except maybe Asian-Americans).
I said this in my initial post, but we have to be mature enough to approach the topic of race from an objective standpoint. You can't stick your head in the sand and ignore obvious relationships which clearly pass the statistically significant threshold. (not listing one-offs, pulling from small sample sizes, or citing anecdotes -- taking good sample sets and actually looking at solid predictive values from regression analysis). The weapon of calling someone a racist can end careers and smear people. As a result, people won't go near sensitive topics such as race and intelligence and race and performance. You then end up with pathetic discussions such as this, where facts and logic are brought to the table to have an informed discussion and then they are shouted down by people screaming 'racist' and calling names. So who is ignorant and who is enlightened? Many people lack the courage to approach racial subjects -- because they feel shame and guilt due to their own internal racism. I feel no such shame because I have no such racist feelings. So I can discuss these topics freely and call a spade a spade, while most of you guys are still pretending to ignore the elephant in the room (raw statistical data that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that race impacts QB success). Two points to ask yourself: 1. Does race impact cornerback success? How can you possibly answer no to this one? If so, then why is it any different for any other position? 2. Is a random sample of students in inner city Flint, Michigan going to be smarter than a random sample of students in Greenwich, Connecticut? The answers to these two questions are known -- they are obvious. If you can answer these two questions, then you can answer the OP's question, which I did.
Are white people genetically good at hockey? Do blacks lack the ice skating gene? You aren't using facts and logic. You are using pseudo-logic and poor understanding of statistics to make an argument for what you already think. Social scientists have been all over this for a long time. The only way you can get a true measure is if you get a population of folks with the same environments while facing the exact same social conditions with the same access to training and privilege. You have to know what you are really measuring when you deal with empirical data. The question social scientists and psychologists understand is: are we measuring race or racism, genetics or classism? From eugenics, phrenology, to modern IQ testing, people generally want to find genetic rationales for the order of the world, but there isn't one found, so far. We do know that history always plays a role. Access to training and culture are important. Instead of asking if race is a factor in quarterbacking, the OP would have been better off asking if culture was a factor. That would be the more logical approach.
...I sure wasn't expecting a debate over "The Bell Curve" when I clicked this topic. Can a mod just delete the topic? I can't see what it really adds to this board.
Are blacks inherently dumber than whites? Are they born with an insufficient brain that, from the moment they take their first breath, makes them less intelligent than their white counterparts? Do you believe that a black person can never be as smart as a white person? If you say no to that, your points are irrelevant. By saying "No," you acknowledge what we're all criticizing you for ignoring: society and experiences shape the brain, culture and personality. Your "random sample" of students is looking to place intelligence metrics squarely on race, thus your question. However, you'd ignore all evidence about quality of schools, life, income, family structure, etc. None of those things are inherent with race; they're social constructs. This thread was destined for the D&D, but let's send it off in style. You're right, declaring somebody a racist can ruin careers. Try saying what you've typed here to the face of a black executive in your company. Let us know how the rest of your day goes, keyboard warrior.
You no it's not "maybe". Asians out preform whites in standardized testing. Why aren't most QBs asian?
Reggie Robie was the first African-American punter in the NFL. Jim Plunkett was the first Asian-American quarterback in the NFL.
Plunkett was born to Mexican American parents with an Irish-German great-grandfather on his paternal side.
Aren't you the same person who wanted to physically fight with a bunch of so-called "libs" you got into an argument with on here? Now you are speaking about maturity. Seriously?
Asian-White gap in IQ is something like ~3-5 points (i.e. whites are standardized at 100, asians will be 103-106 or so, standard deviation of ~15). Asians are also shorter on average, less likely to care about football, and (most importantly) they only make up like 5% of the population. There's a very tiny pool of asians to draw from with prototypical NFL height, athleticism, and intelligence.
People are silly racism does still exist in society, but the NFL is a business first and foremost. The only race that matters is the color green.
I do think that racism still plays a part, in almost the same way height can play a part, or a small frame. Coaches, GM's, and even the players, know that if they aren't the "right race" or the "right height" or have the "right frame", that they may not be given the same amount of time, effort, and resources to succeed as someone who DOES have those things. But to say that Black QB's don't succeed because they are genetically less intelligent, and that White QB's succeed because they are genetically more intelligent is just downright ignorant.
Santiago is destroying people in this thread. He's actually trying to have a mature dialogue, but there are those who are unwilling to do just that because it threatens their ability to unilaterally stop conversations with their typical race card hurling.
