Are football teams better off hiring white QB's? People are hounding the NFL for having a majority of whites at the QB position, wouldn't a study similar to this, be able to prove this position right or wrong? It seems, as if, the only time these studies are done, is in a situation where the people doing the study already know what the outcome will be. These methods should be used in more than one type of sport or league, to see. If the NFL is considered race neutral, the question has to be, why would they ignore the QB position? its not likely that they would, could it be, that since statistically speaking more blacks are naturally at wide reciever and running back positions, that more whites are at the QB position, because its something they may statistically be better at rather than racist? They don't want to do a study, because they are afraid they'll find out that racism is not a factor, and that scares people.

"more whites are at the QB position, because its something they may statistically be better at rather than racist? They don't want to do a study, because they are afraid they'll find out that racism is not a factor, and that scares people. "

Total nonsense. You didn't even think that through before your wrote it did you? Consider this, an NFL quarterback was chosen and trained to be a quarterback at the college level, high school level, and usually at Pop Warner as well. At every point on that scale the athletic white kid was encouraged to be the quarterback while the athletic black kid was encouraged to play a "skill position" often because he was strong, faster, and more talented. That doesn't mean the NFL is racist, they are just part of a whole process that directs players to the roles we are preconditioned to expect them to play.

Ok, so you would argue the same thing about the running back position then? Its not that blacks are better at it, its that whites are not trained to be running backs? or does that only apply to the QB position? See, thats where it gets tricky doesn't it? Why should we 'encourage' more diversity at the QB position, and not at the WR or Running back position? Its a silly concept, the people that are best at each positon play that position, you are right to some degree about doing what your youngest level coach told you to do. Be it high school or younger. Thats every sport, always, the coach looks at you and takes a guess at what you would be good at. They don't have time to honestly let every player try every position. So, to some extent somebody that was good at a position might be overlooked, or put in the wrong position, but overall the best at each position are there.

See this is where the "structural advantages" of existing racism play out.

Jerry Rice was born to a brick mason in the early 1960s - when not only states like Georgia eliminated their public school systems to avoid integrating them, but when a black man had NO CHANCE at being a HS Football coach, much less a collegiate coach

John Elway - born roughly at the same time, was born to a football coach

Elway talks of how his dad prepped him to play football. Something that Rice's dad could not because of racism.

Rice developed his natural athletic talents as a runner, but only was drafted into playing football in HS, where he was slotted into a role that his talent made him easiest to train for - running back.

And the rest is just the momentum of being slotted and rolling forwards.

This is a quintessential example of how structural racism of 40 years ago manifested itself into differentiated outcomes some 20-30 years later. And that in turn sets up the "preconceived notions" of who is good at what.

Note that "preconceived ideas" are really just another way of describing "prejudgements" - which is a more polite way of saying prejudice.

Now remember, the guys who are coaches today, are often the players who came up in the Rice/Elway generation. So their "preconceived ideas" are going to color who they recommend to try out for what positions. And sure there will be exceptions who fight that and who try out for other positions and shine - but the Warren Moon's prove by the extra work they have to do that there IS a racial component to those "preconcieved ideas".

Now you may try to argue that over time, the HS coaches are going to let go of their pre-conceived ideas in the quest to win - but remember, most HS coaches see their roles more as educators than has having a mandate to win. And they see new kids every year, most do NOT have "programs". Thus their "preconceived ideas" which are part and parcel of the "values" they teach, get perpetuated forwards for a long time.

That means that while the racism isn't as strong as that which precluded Rice's dad from being a coach, it still exists. And just as that overt legal racism took 20-30 years to manifest its outcome, so too the "preconceived ideas" of today's HS coaches will perpetuate for 20-30 years as well.

BTW, the reason NFL roles tend not to be studies is because they are so specialized you really need to go back and run a prospective study starting at the youungest levels and looking at a cross section of the whole population. That sort of study is extremely complex and expensive - not one likely to get funded.

and what about the NBA?

Basketball is a "poor persons" sport - like soccer. Because all you need is something resembling a ball, and a circlet of something and someplace tall to nail it up (soccer requires something round and two stones for a goal).

So you would expect that a sport like basketball would be populated largely by members from the lower-socioeconomic rungs with average salaries lower than the other pro sports and prior to the salary cap, this was the case if you normalized for team sizes. (well ok NHL had lower salaries but they are a much smaller sport).

what a load..just admit it, there are more blacks earning more money than whites in the nba..see any whites crying discrimination?

Actually I have run into folks claiming it is due to reverse discrimination

like affirmative action?

Only racists claim affirmative action is reverse discrimination

and only idiots refuse to see that it is....

So you are saying that only idiots believe that racism is pervasive in society?

no, im saying your too stupid to understand the definition of the word "discrimination"

Well actually I think the problem here is that you don't understand the word "reverse". Something can only be the "reverse" of something else if the effects are the opposite of the original.

In the case of Affirmative Action, all we have is the neutralization of Racial Discrimination against minorities. So it cannot be the REVERSE of it.

Were Affirmative Action the "REVERSE" of the pattern of racial discrimination you would see white males making up only about 7% of college admissions (Black males were about 1/10th of their general population in colleges prior to Affirmative Action).

But I suspect you are going to have a tough time finding data to support that heavy a cutback in White attendence.

So I recommend you look up the word Reverse

bad dodge, to you, the sun is black, the moon is cheese....and your still too stupid to know the definition of discrimination, but then you are a perfect example of our equally incompetent public schools, so I'm not surprised...