If things were fair
- Thread starter P-NutLane
- Start date
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
I'd say about 65-70% white (the current white U.S census numbers are 66% white); 20-25% black; 7-9% Mestizo/East Asian/Middle Easterner/Other due to smaller stature on average and/or less interest in playing football traditionally; and maybe 2-3% Pacific Islander. Just my best estimate.
The only reason I have blacks at 1.5 to almost 2 times their ratio in the populous for NFL numbers is b/c of their slight advantage typically speaking for the CB position b/c of a slight speed edge; let's say it could be almost 60% black realistically for that position if just between white and black.
Also, although blacks don't have any noticable advantage overall at RB over whites IMO; whites and blacks tend to vary slightly in RB styles tendency wise. So in order for NFL team's to better diversify their running game there would be an increased black proportion demographically at RB: lets say as much as 40% black: For Split-end WR; the "speed burner" WR. Lets say also as high as 40% black.
So I vote 70% white overall.Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
The only reason I have blacks at 1.5 to almost 2 times their ratio in the populous for NFL numbers is b/c of their slight advantage typically speaking for the CB position b/c of a slight speed edge; let's say it could be almost 60% black realistically for that position if just between white and black.
Also, although blacks don't have any noticable advantage overall at RB over whites IMO; whites and blacks tend to vary slightly in RB styles tendency wise. So in order for NFL team's to better diversify their running game there would be an increased black proportion demographically at RB: lets say as much as 40% black: For Split-end WR; the "speed burner" WR. Lets say also as high as 40% black.
So I vote 70% white overall.Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
I'd like to do a position by position breakdown as well at some point for just the white numbers. In fact I may do that tomorrow. I would break the WR groups up into Split-End, Flanker and Slot when I do the poll. If just between black and white I'd say in order it should be 60% white for Split-End, 70% white flanker and 80% white-Slot.
Then I would break the tailbacks down into Power-backs lets say about 75 white; and Scat-backs lets say 50% white:
Overall around 60-65% white at tailback. Also in my offense to keep em' guessing the FBs would occasionally get carries and that would be about a 85% white position.
Then I would break the tailbacks down into Power-backs lets say about 75 white; and Scat-backs lets say 50% white:
Overall around 60-65% white at tailback. Also in my offense to keep em' guessing the FBs would occasionally get carries and that would be about a 85% white position.
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
I sense a troll on the 40% vote; that isn't so much better than it is now! 50% is also too low; but I wouldn't call someone who votes that a troll.
What is the NFL now like 25% white 30% tops?
We are only supposedly a 66% white country now so 80% personally seems a bit high to me for today.
What is the NFL now like 25% white 30% tops?
We are only supposedly a 66% white country now so 80% personally seems a bit high to me for today.
I was one of the votes for 50%. I was low balling it on that one, i think it should be about 50-60%. My problem with discrimination in the NFL is not so much that whites only make up 30% of the league, but that they are completely excluded from certain positions. In the nba, whites still have the opportunity to play all positions once they get the chance.
Colonel_Reb
Hall of Famer
The NFL right now is less than 30% white.
G
Guest
Guest
I say 80%. In a merit based system, Whites would be represented at every position in numbers, at least, commensurate with their share of the population while certain positions (i.e. QB, Linebacker, Lineman) would be almost all White.
Jimmy Chitwood
Hall of Famer
as i documented in the Arkansas High School post on the front page of Caste Football (and in also the thread), out of 6 possible football State Champions, 5 of the championship teams were all-white. that is 83%.
i'm speculating here, but i would suspect that at the high school level across the country a similar percentage plays itself out. it is very likely that 83% of the nation's various state champion football teams are all-white.
so, if at the high school level where white kids are given a more fair chance at competing with blacks, we see that the white kids/teams dominate (despite possible disadvantages to later physical maturity as has been suggested), why then would the numbers alter in favor of black athletes at higher levels of football?
seems to me, facts beat fictions. and if someone has contrary evidence, i'd love to see it. other than the Caste System, i can't think of a legitimate reason why whites wouldn't make up a similar percentage in both college and professional football.
i'm speculating here, but i would suspect that at the high school level across the country a similar percentage plays itself out. it is very likely that 83% of the nation's various state champion football teams are all-white.
so, if at the high school level where white kids are given a more fair chance at competing with blacks, we see that the white kids/teams dominate (despite possible disadvantages to later physical maturity as has been suggested), why then would the numbers alter in favor of black athletes at higher levels of football?
seems to me, facts beat fictions. and if someone has contrary evidence, i'd love to see it. other than the Caste System, i can't think of a legitimate reason why whites wouldn't make up a similar percentage in both college and professional football.
foreverfree
Mentor
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Messages
- 902
I voted 70%, mainly to allow for black "characters" (NOT the criminal variety).
Don't mind white characters either.
I was thinking as I voted of a post I saw some time ago on Stormfront saying something like "blacks would 'nature's jesters' - if they weren't so threatening."
I *would* like to see more white feature backs and cornerbacks. I imagine Jason Sehorn will be the NFL's last Caucasian corner.
John
I was thinking as I voted of a post I saw some time ago on Stormfront saying something like "blacks would 'nature's jesters' - if they weren't so threatening."
I *would* like to see more white feature backs and cornerbacks. I imagine Jason Sehorn will be the NFL's last Caucasian corner.
John
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
Jimmy Chitwood said:
Solid point; but isn't Arkansas a pretty white state overall; especially for the south. I think that in lots of states the best football teams are majority white with a few blacks mixed in here and there too. The H.S near me is like that and their best year recently they still started a dominant white HB who is now playing LB unfortunately in the FBS.
And I understand this argument is used by our opponents a lot, including one of my friends whose definitely a caste whore; but it does have some merit sometimes. The poor urban neighborhood schools sometimes aren't well coached, at least as far as play calling. However, I'd have to agree that that doesn't explain the top majority black teams that are certainly well coached getting beat by a team like South-lake Carroll in Texas that in fact has all those "white speed demons". Or Booker T. Washington (in Florida isn't it?) getting beat by top nationally ranked vast majority white teams certain years.
In our 66% white country I would find a 70% white NFL pretty fair and to my liking. A 80% white NFL would seem to cut down on some of the racial comparisons and racial competition if you ask me. The fans would start to say; "well maybe white players are getting favored again and aren't that good", if there were indeed few blacks to compare them to. In an only 66% white country now a 65-70% white NFL sounds pretty fair to me; and I think that's close to what it was in the first few Super Bowls.
The thing that's most important is to end the ban of whites at certain positions (even if we could get 3 or 4 starting white NFL RBs or CBs, they'd have to be freakish to break through the system, it would change things dramatically) b/c then when we perform the caste system will be exposed and the league will start to whiten a bit at other positions too IMO. The tight hipped/ overachiever Tom Luginbill type propaganda will start to fade.
Jimmy Chitwood said:
I voted 50%. Whites have so many opportunities that stand a better chance of success and monetary gain than do professional sports. A business degree and a job starting at $50,000 look pretty good when you've just injured your knee and are not certain that you are good enough even if your rehabilitation goes well. And then there is minor league baseball and 4 am bus traveling.
Caucasians are 74%(?) of the population, but maybe something like 65% of the under-30 crowd. Whites are often tall and strong, but I would not expect a working-class people to be represented at a high percentage in professional sports. It helps to be a bit desperate when pursuing something where the odds are not favorable.Edited by: Observer
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
I heard directly from Fox News that the latest 2008 census lists the white population in the U.S at 66%. Now they are probably listing some "mostly" white Hispanics as Hispanic instead of white; so it could be more. I thought it was listed as white Hispanic and non-white Hispanic on the latest census though if I recall, I could be wrong.
But I'd have to respectfully disagree Observer on your career theory. There are a lot of white elite college football players; only in their early 20s who would take the risk to try to cash in on a future million dollar contract in the NFL rather than go directly to work. This is especially so when white men love the game so much.
Even Tre Smith (who was completely shunned by the NFL b/c he's not only white, but a RB; despite dominating and outperforming the black RBs in the Brown's mini-camp) has decided to put off a potential $80,000+ or so career with his computer Networking degree to play in the CFL. His CFL contract if I recall was only starting at about $45,000 a year topping off at around $60,000 in the 3rd year.
Believe me it would be a better life for him financially and stability wise to stay in America where his family is and get his computer job starting at probably almost $70,000 per year. But Tre clearly loves football and is willing to take a risk.
I think 80% is definitely too high and I would possibly even call it unfair to other races, but somewhere from 65-70% sounds about right. I voted 70%.
But I'd have to respectfully disagree Observer on your career theory. There are a lot of white elite college football players; only in their early 20s who would take the risk to try to cash in on a future million dollar contract in the NFL rather than go directly to work. This is especially so when white men love the game so much.
Even Tre Smith (who was completely shunned by the NFL b/c he's not only white, but a RB; despite dominating and outperforming the black RBs in the Brown's mini-camp) has decided to put off a potential $80,000+ or so career with his computer Networking degree to play in the CFL. His CFL contract if I recall was only starting at about $45,000 a year topping off at around $60,000 in the 3rd year.
Believe me it would be a better life for him financially and stability wise to stay in America where his family is and get his computer job starting at probably almost $70,000 per year. But Tre clearly loves football and is willing to take a risk.
I think 80% is definitely too high and I would possibly even call it unfair to other races, but somewhere from 65-70% sounds about right. I voted 70%.
I think it's more of a close to pure black-white breakdown. Hispanics and Asians have miniscule representation in the NFL, and it's not because the Caste System works against them; they just aren't good at football. So the universe in the U.S. is the respective black and white populations. Whites are roughly five times as numerous as blacks. Also, a far higher number of young black males are killed or end up early on in the prison system.
This country's ghettos should eliminate most blacks from the pool because few emerge with the type of character traits needed to succeed in team sports. But not counting that factor my estimate is that the NFL should beat least75 percent or more White. I don't see a single advantage blacks have over whites as football players except for a slight advantage on average in straight-line speed, which is minor in the overall scheme of what makes a successful football player; and a slight advantage on average in swivel and elusiveness, which is an advantage mostly at running back and kick returner. Take any other measure of athleticism -- intelligence, work ethic, strength, stamina, unselfishness, coachability, concentration, consistency, hand-eye coordination, and others, and the advantage on average is with whites, in some cases to a considerable degree.
Football is a lot like baseball in that all types of athletic skills are utilized. But the black "speed advantage" doesn't equate to black dominance in baseball, just an over-representation at stealing bases and in outfielders. But straight line speed is just one of many factors in determining an outfielder, not the least of which is hitting ability; likewise many good base stealers are not good all-around baseball players.
In MLB, American blacks are outnumbered by American Whites by about a 7:1 ratio despite everything possible being done to increase the number of blacks; blacks have more "interest" in football, but so do Whites for that matter. Make it a level playing field and the NFL would revert to the kind of racial balance it had 45 years ago after a decade of integration in the league, which was roughly 4:1 white. Edited by: Don Wassall
This country's ghettos should eliminate most blacks from the pool because few emerge with the type of character traits needed to succeed in team sports. But not counting that factor my estimate is that the NFL should beat least75 percent or more White. I don't see a single advantage blacks have over whites as football players except for a slight advantage on average in straight-line speed, which is minor in the overall scheme of what makes a successful football player; and a slight advantage on average in swivel and elusiveness, which is an advantage mostly at running back and kick returner. Take any other measure of athleticism -- intelligence, work ethic, strength, stamina, unselfishness, coachability, concentration, consistency, hand-eye coordination, and others, and the advantage on average is with whites, in some cases to a considerable degree.
Football is a lot like baseball in that all types of athletic skills are utilized. But the black "speed advantage" doesn't equate to black dominance in baseball, just an over-representation at stealing bases and in outfielders. But straight line speed is just one of many factors in determining an outfielder, not the least of which is hitting ability; likewise many good base stealers are not good all-around baseball players.
In MLB, American blacks are outnumbered by American Whites by about a 7:1 ratio despite everything possible being done to increase the number of blacks; blacks have more "interest" in football, but so do Whites for that matter. Make it a level playing field and the NFL would revert to the kind of racial balance it had 45 years ago after a decade of integration in the league, which was roughly 4:1 white. Edited by: Don Wassall
Jimmy Chitwood
Hall of Famer
ToughJ.Riggins said:Solid point; but isn't Arkansas a pretty white state overall; especially for the south. I think that in lots of states the best football teams are majority white with a few blacks mixed in here and there too. The H.S near me is like that and their best year recently they still started a dominant white HB who is now playing LB unfortunately in the FBS.
And I understand this argument is used by our opponents a lot, including one of my friends whose definitely a caste whore; but it does have some merit sometimes. The poor urban neighborhood schools sometimes aren't well coached, at least as far as play calling. However, I'd have to agree that that doesn't explain the top majority black teams that are certainly well coached getting beat by a team like South-lake Carroll in Texas that in fact has all those "white speed demons". Or Booker T. Washington (in Florida isn't it?) getting beat by top nationally ranked vast majority white teams certain years.
In our 66% white country I would find a 70% white NFL pretty fair and to my liking. A 80% white NFL would seem to cut down on some of the racial comparisons and racial competition if you ask me. The fans would start to say; "well maybe white players are getting favored again and aren't that good", if there were indeed few blacks to compare them to. In an only 66% white country now a 65-70% white NFL sounds pretty fair to me; and I think that's close to what it was in the first few Super Bowls.
The thing that's most important is to end the ban of whites at certain positions (even if we could get 3 or 4 starting white NFL RBs or CBs, they'd have to be freakish to break through the system, it would change things dramatically) b/c then when we perform the caste system will be exposed and the league will start to whiten a bit at other positions too IMO. The tight hipped/ overachiever Tom Luginbill type propaganda will start to fade.
first of all, Tough, by now i would think you'd give me the benefit of the doubt about posts i make. i back up every one of them with facts. including the one you were responding to.
so you need to check yourself before belittling my fact-filled posts with another one of your guesses or thoughts or estimates or speculations or whatever you want to call them.
Colonel Reb pointed out that the white teams that i documented in the Arkansas High School Football thread are dominating despite having a higher percentage of black students in the state than the national average. do i need to refresh your memory? or did you not even bother to read it before you so arrogantly dismissed my reasonable speculations?
here are the quotes you apparently missed:
Colonel_Reb said:
and in his second post on this subject:
Colonel_Reb said:
i agree completely with your comment that the white ban from cornerback and running back needs to end. however, i stand by my earlier statement. the whole "well maybe white players are getting favored again and aren't that good" bit is happening right now, as you yourself noted in the Rex Burkhead thread.
so, i'm not back peddling at all. whites have shown on the field that they deserve MUCH better representation in both college and the NFL. and only the Caste System and self-loathing white losers believe any different.
The white teams seem to dominate Illinois high school football also. I don't believe a single Chicago Public League team has ever won a football state championship.Mt Carmel in Chicago has won many state titles but they are a Catholic school with mostly whites on their team. East St. Louis Sr is about the only black team that has won state titles.
Mt Carmel Picture
Illinois State Champs--Notice where the teams are from
I would vote at least 70%.
Mt Carmel Picture
Illinois State Champs--Notice where the teams are from
I would vote at least 70%.
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
First of all JC. I called Arkansas a "pretty white" state "overall"; especially for the "south" if you read it. 68% white; if the numbers reported on the latest census on Fox News were correct would make Arkansas 2% more white than the national average.
Hispanics have flooded our country and are now the largest minority group; almost 14%, and I believe the latest black numbers were 12.8% if I recall. 66% white is probably pretty accurate for this country although I realize that some "mostly white" Hispanics may declare themselves non-white Hispanic and such; maybe for AA reasons.
Just caught it Colonel Reb stated the H.S population being 68% white; so that is probably a "slight" increase from the general population b/c of black drop outs.
But I still stand by my overall point that some urban black H.Ss don't have as good coaching/play-calling. Many of the best H.S coaches wouldn't want to coach in those neighborhoods and would look for the suburb jobs.
Personally I try to get a clear picture by studying individual players and seeing how under-ranked they are when they are white; and yes I took note of a few of the awesome white H.S players you listed in your thread.
When you start to get a good sample of white vs. black players and compare their stats and highlights, you find out there are more legit white FBS prospects You can then guess on what a logical percentage of black vs. white the FBS should be. I also notice tendencies sometimes on white vs. black prospects styles.
Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
Hispanics have flooded our country and are now the largest minority group; almost 14%, and I believe the latest black numbers were 12.8% if I recall. 66% white is probably pretty accurate for this country although I realize that some "mostly white" Hispanics may declare themselves non-white Hispanic and such; maybe for AA reasons.
Just caught it Colonel Reb stated the H.S population being 68% white; so that is probably a "slight" increase from the general population b/c of black drop outs.
But I still stand by my overall point that some urban black H.Ss don't have as good coaching/play-calling. Many of the best H.S coaches wouldn't want to coach in those neighborhoods and would look for the suburb jobs.
Personally I try to get a clear picture by studying individual players and seeing how under-ranked they are when they are white; and yes I took note of a few of the awesome white H.S players you listed in your thread.
When you start to get a good sample of white vs. black players and compare their stats and highlights, you find out there are more legit white FBS prospects You can then guess on what a logical percentage of black vs. white the FBS should be. I also notice tendencies sometimes on white vs. black prospects styles.
Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
I agree with Don almost entirely on what he said; but I think if blacks have a "VERY SLIGHT" edge in swivel and elusiveness; it is only for eluding in very tight spaces (the darting/jump-cutting type). I've seen a lot of white H.S RBs and the elite white ones probably surpass the black ones tendency wise in 10 yard burst and "slashing" agility to make that first cut and attack the hole which is a very underrated skill.
And we measure up fine if not surpass blacks in game-smarts and I see no difference in vision of runners. Also, amongst the elites whites tend to break tackles better and be better all-purpose threats at catching the ball.
And with the huge pool of white talent to pull from their are true white scat backs like Rex Burkhead, Sam McGuffie, Ben Bowen, John Howell and Danny Woodhead who have that "freakish" swivel too.
And we measure up fine if not surpass blacks in game-smarts and I see no difference in vision of runners. Also, amongst the elites whites tend to break tackles better and be better all-purpose threats at catching the ball.
And with the huge pool of white talent to pull from their are true white scat backs like Rex Burkhead, Sam McGuffie, Ben Bowen, John Howell and Danny Woodhead who have that "freakish" swivel too.
ToughJ.Riggins
Hall of Famer
Again I admit I should probably look this stuff up before making a guess. But I had heard a couple times in conversations that Arkansas was fairly white, but now that I recall I think the people who said it were comparing it to other southern states in that area.
Jimmy Chitwood
Hall of Famer
ToughJ.Riggins said:
yeah, you should look it up. that, or respect and read posts by those who know more about the situation than you.
as i posted, Colonel Reb showed an official census link that illustrated that Arkansas' schools have a 23.8% black population. that's nearly twice the national percentage. so, again, i stand by my earlier statements. the facts do, too.
mayhap you'll quit speculating/guessing/whatever it is you do in order to dismiss what other (less liberal) posters have to say at some point. especially when you so obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Tough, your analysis of individual high school players who have been screwed provides very important documentation that is priceless. however, using numbers that explain the Caste System from a larger perspective is also important. your dismissal of facts and figures because they don't fit your assumptions ignores that.
mayhap, you should consider the value of other folks' knowledge and research.