Do white guys get discriminated against at skill positions???

[typ3kal]

Five years ago, My Brother's Wife kept insisting that my nephew wasn't getting any offers because he was White...Still sorta is last time I looked.

 

He was a two year starter at IB, took turns with the QB (Also Honky) as the fastest on his team at the largest school in AZ...Got some Honorable mention? when the local papers rated the top 10 RB's in the state his Sr year, and missed 1000 (by 60?) yds. partly because he also started on Defense the 2nd half of the season due to injuries at LB.

 

My Brother told me he was running low to mid 4.3 forty's, but tanked his vertical jump at UNL's football camp his last Summer there.

 

He fumbled once in two seasons..after running for over 200 yds in their Homecoming game and ran back two (or 3) kickoffs for TD's durring his Sr, season...Punted (badly)..Carried a ~3.8 GPA..

 

 

But something bothered me about his running style.

I couldn't quite put my finger on it...Even though he was faster than almost any defender he played against, he always seemed to enjoy contact..and would almost seem to pursue the pile...And after seeing Burkhead..I'm almost reminded of my Nephew..Except Burkhead seems to hit the hole much faster.

 

I even traded emails with a cousin that used to start at UNL..who also had a son graduating HS that year..Said something about the new staff not even going after some prolific (white) runner from North Platte? (Forget his name but I think he was cut this season from the Jets?..My Cousin's twins (Son and Daughter) went to Kansas on Track Scholarships.

 

I think my Nephew got a couple of offers from Brown and some other Ivy league school, but went to a Div.11 school in Oregon (Redshirted his Fr. year while they won the natl. championship).

 

He graduates from ASU in four months (EE) but still misses Football sometimes so we still take turns chasing cars.

 

The guy you're thinking of was Danny Woodhead. Except he didn't get offers not because he wasn't fast or white, but because he was 5'7/8.

[hskerholic]

I had a college history professor tell us a story about a guess speaker in one of his history classes. This lady was a cival war slavery historian(black lady). And she told the class where the Term MOTHER FAUCKER came from. she said that the biggest and strongest male slaves would breed with the women slaves so they could have bigger and stronger slaves. Pretty much the same idea about the horses up above. After years of this the slaves became in todays term Athletic. She said the white slave owners pretty much bread their slaves to be super athletes. That is why today we see so many black players in all the sports but hockey. these are not my words thery are the words of someone else and this thread just reminded me of the story.

[typ3kal]

I had a college history professor tell us a story about a guess speaker in one of his history classes. This lady was a cival war slavery historian(black lady). And she told the class where the Term MOTHER FAUCKER came from. she said that the biggest and strongest male slaves would breed with the women slaves so they could have bigger and stronger slaves. Pretty much the same idea about the horses up above. After years of this the slaves became in todays term Athletic. She said the white slave owners pretty much bread their slaves to be super athletes. That is why today we see so many black players in all the sports but hockey. these are not my words thery are the words of someone else and this thread just reminded me of the story.

 

 

Modern science would prove you wrong that the former slave populations could have bred out genetic variation enough to produce superior athletes. Not to mention that if you calculate the N generations of slaves that could have been bred + the influx of new slaves + account for genetic variation among differing African American nationalities and mixing of other races such as Hispanic and Caucasian that has occurred that view has no weight. I believe a more telling statistic is education levels in large urban areas like Dallas / Houston etc. In those areas many kids spend a lot more time in athletics than they would in Nebraska on books. If kids in Nebraska spent as much time playing sports as some kids do in certain cut throat, destitute areas in the south we would produce a slough of Div1 athletes. Fact of the matter is, people here prize an education and a solid job as a means to climb the social ladder- not sports. Even our black president has said that kids in the ghetto need to put away the basketball, turn off the TV and pick up a book. Over the long run, valuing education > valuing athletics. We live in a post-industrial world, not that of the Neanderthals.

[WCHusker]

They exist for a reason until they're offensive and then people blow up about it. It's cool to say blacks are faster than whites, which I do think overall they are, but if I said some way whites were superior to blacks (which I won't because I'm sure I'll get a lecture from a mod, a warning, or a ban) I'd be a racist.

 

Actually, I believe that they've proven(at least someone did) that whites are generally smarter than blacks and that Asians top both. I wish I had the reference, but it was some kind of standardized testing-probably limited to within the US.

 

Generally speaking, it's not really a reach to say that whites do tend to be smarter than blacks and that Asians really are more intelligent. If you really want to get deep, the overpopulated hell hole of India is producing geniuses by the truckload, but I'm yet to see one of them who can play football worth a chit.

[TheCheshireCat]

Yeah, Asians tend to have 4-5 points higher on IQ tests than whites, who have something like 10-15 points higher on IQ tests than blacks. Of course, Ashkanazi Jews have some 15 points higher than either Asians or other whites, so it's hard to say. Asians aren't stupid, but you also get into the cultural push toward education. I've known a lot of Asians from Asia and from 3rd generation homes, and there is a HUGE difference between their effort/success in school. And it's not just Asian cultures - foreigners in general tend to push for education and thus their children do better in school. Hard to draw the line between intelligence and hard work in a lot of cases. Also, how well do IQ tests really measure intelligence?

 

I don't tend to use IQ to back my arguments up because I really don't think they accurately measure intelligence, but Watson has said on numerous occasions that blacks are genetically inferior when it comes to intelligence and he's drawn a lot of heat for it. Kind of hard to argue with the man who co-discovered the double helix and pioneered genetics though. I think in the end hard work and practice makes up for a lot of natural ability though no matter what factor you're looking at.

[Landlord]

They exist for a reason until they're offensive and then people blow up about it. It's cool to say blacks are faster than whites, which I do think overall they are, but if I said some way whites were superior to blacks (which I won't because I'm sure I'll get a lecture from a mod, a warning, or a ban) I'd be a racist.

 

Actually, I believe that they've proven(at least someone did) that whites are generally smarter than blacks and that Asians top both. I wish I had the reference, but it was some kind of standardized testing-probably limited to within the US.

 

Generally speaking, it's not really a reach to say that whites do tend to be smarter than blacks and that Asians really are more intelligent. If you really want to get deep, the overpopulated hell hole of India is producing geniuses by the truckload, but I'm yet to see one of them who can play football worth a chit.

 

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with race (being the genetics of a human being) but 100% to do with societal influence.

 

 

These kind of questions are impossible to get a true, clear-cut answer to.

[ESPY]

And right there is how a discussion like this blows up, when words like "inferior", "superior", "better", "smarter", "more athletic", etc. start entering the discussion. In spite of all the studies & science performed on this issue, it's most important to realize we are human, and in the end, not one of us is better than the next. Everything in this world is performance-based. It's all a big competition to see who is better than the next guy/gal, and until that changes, there will always be stereotypes & racism. But, I contest that life is defined by the choices we make & the quality of our character. That goes for anything and everything - sports, business, community.

[WCHusker]

They exist for a reason until they're offensive and then people blow up about it. It's cool to say blacks are faster than whites, which I do think overall they are, but if I said some way whites were superior to blacks (which I won't because I'm sure I'll get a lecture from a mod, a warning, or a ban) I'd be a racist.

 

Actually, I believe that they've proven(at least someone did) that whites are generally smarter than blacks and that Asians top both. I wish I had the reference, but it was some kind of standardized testing-probably limited to within the US.

 

Generally speaking, it's not really a reach to say that whites do tend to be smarter than blacks and that Asians really are more intelligent. If you really want to get deep, the overpopulated hell hole of India is producing geniuses by the truckload, but I'm yet to see one of them who can play football worth a chit.

 

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with race (being the genetics of a human being) but 100% to do with societal influence.

 

 

These kind of questions are impossible to get a true, clear-cut answer to.

 

Nothing to do with genetics? Really? You might want to think about that one a bit.

[Captain K]

When I heard O'Hanlon didn't get invited to the combine I started thinking about this...it seems like Coaches/Scouts have an idea what an ideal athlete for a certain position should be and part of that equation is color. Look at the numbers Rex put up in high school and yet he wasn't recruited very hard by Texas. I know it's not really discrimination but more like some subconscious rule, all RB's, DB's and WR's have to be black, all kickers and hockey players have to be white. I know most of the time its strictly a talent issue but sometimes i wonder...

 

Just bored thoughts...time to re-watch the Holiday Bowl.

Now look what you did!

[Enhance]

We should probably get this thrown in the BS forum.

[HUSKER 37]

Sorry to interupt this racy banter...

 

 

The guy you're thinking of was Danny Woodhead. Except he didn't get offers not because he wasn't fast or white, but because he was 5'7/8.

 

Barry Sanders..5'8" 200#

 

Cory Ross (Porkchop)..5"6" 201#

 

Danny Woodhead...5'8" 200#

[Vuren]

I envision this thread blowing up real fast.

 

I don't see why-it's not like there's any kind of argument. Racist or not, blacks are faster than whites and therefore occupy more of the skill positions.

 

If anyone really believes that this is actually disrimination needs to have their heads examined.

mmm...you are in error, blacks tend to have certain...evolutionary traits that lend to the ability to be faster on the whole, but to say such a blanket statement that "blacks are faster then whites and therefore occupy more of the skill positions" is completely bs, and unethical.

 

and actually yes it is infact descrimination if the only reason he didn't get invited(or whites only get compared to riggans or what have you) is because he is white, that is the definiation of discrimination. i think clerks 2 said it best "what your saying i can't say <insert racial term> because i'm white? look who's discriminating now dante"

[huskerswrkhavoc]

My freakin Blacks in American Politics teacher would have a freakin hay day with this thread.... he wasted 3/4 of class today on affirmative action because someone suggested the difference between whites and blacks with the coaching side of things and how blacks have no chances and bc whites are all racist... i'd just love to see what he'd turn this one into....

[Touchdown Tommie]

There is no such thing as "reverse discrimination." It's an inherently bigoted phrase, although people who typically use it don't mean it that way (as I'm certain it's not meant here in this thread). But it is, because it implies that racism, the impression of inherent superiority based on skin color, occurs when Whites discriminate against non-Whites.

 

The fact of the matter is that Whites are being victimized by racism more and more as this country grows more and more diverse. As other ethnicities gain footholds into management positions, their decisions are made, like those of their White predecessors, based on their level of comfort, and all too often we're seeing that their level of comfort is with those they are familiar with; those of their own race, or color, or national origin.

 

I have seen this occur more often than most people would realize. It's simply discrimination, and anyone can be a victim, no matter the color of their skin, their gender, their age, their nation of origin, or whatever group you want to associate yourself with.

 

Most victims of discrimination in Nebraska are White females. Think about that the next time your mom or wife or sister or daughter goes to work, or tries to get a loan, or tries to eat dinner out somewhere.

 

Anyone can be a victim of discrimination. Even you.

 

Well said! It is obvious there has been a shift and I think white people will continue to complain about "reverse racism" and never, ever win b/c of what happened in the past. I feel this type of behavior will never go away no matter who is being discriminated against.

[NoDoubt]

Woah. I wasn't trying to start a controversy or imply that there was any racism going on - I was just saying that I think when you think of a running back you typically do not think of a white guy, so when a freak talent like burkhead does come along I feel like they have more to prove before they are accepted as part of the elite.