# Football and race **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 7, 2006, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324 "2006-02-07T00:59:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![copperwindow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4af34b/32.png) [@copperwindow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/copperwindow)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/1 "2006-02-07T00:59:37Z")
In the NFL, why are there so few non-white quarterbacks and non-black halfbacks? Is there a reason for this? ---
**Author:** ![Burrido](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@Burrido](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Burrido)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/2 "2006-02-07T01:08:22Z")
Probably for the same reason there aren’t many African-Americans that play hockey. Not out of lack of skill, but rather how the environment sets them up. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/3 "2006-02-07T01:14:42Z")
This is really a Great Debate. Part of the answer is that some black kids that would make good quarterbacks get moved to another position early in their football careers. The stereotype is that quarterbacking requires strong mental acuity and other positions like wide receiver require raw speed. Those match those up fairly well with the black/white stereotypes and some coaches may not even know they are biased when they make decisions. Everyone, including the black players, are used to seeing white quarterbacks so that has a tendency to influence positioning even today. Some black players may shy away from quarterback positions early on because it goes against stereotype for them as well. ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/4 "2006-02-07T01:19:17Z")
A lot of it has to do with the perceptions built up over time by predominantly white owners, managers and coaches. The QB situation has begun a slow change of recognition that non-whites can do that task as well as, if not better than, their white counterparts. The RB and WR situation doesn’t seem to be making the shift as quickly. The Tennessee Titans have a black QB and a white WR. The RB’s are black. Warren Moon was a QB for the franchise when it was the Houton Oilers. He’s the first black QB in the Hall of Fame. Steve McNair is sure to follow eventually. I really hope the Titans will draft Vince Young with their position in the draft, although Reggie Bush would add to the team as well. I’d rather we got Young than Leinert even though Norm Chow coached Leinert at USC. Young is more of a Titans player. ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/5 "2006-02-07T02:38:53Z")
If Steve McNair gets inducted into Canton, I will be eating food that is in the form of a hat. The NFL has its positions pretty well segregated. Notice how few black placekickers there are. There have been a couple of black punters (Greg Coleman and Reggie Roby come to mind). ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/6 "2006-02-07T03:46:50Z")
> [@copperwindow](#): > > In the NFL, why are there so few non-white quarterbacks and non-black halfbacks? Is there a reason for this? On the running backs, I suggest you might want to read Jon Entine. On the quarterbacks, may I suggest you examine the basis for your expectations? The premise of your question is just not true. The colour ratio of black vs white quarterbacks is roughly the same if not higher as the colour ratio of the general US population. Read [http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/chapman200310020955.asp](http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/chapman200310020955.asp) > [@](#): > > In some quarters, it’s considered naive to acknowledge racial progress. But when you look at the faces on NFL sidelines every week, it is plainly ludicrous to think racism is depriving black quarterbacks of the chance to show what they can do. The ruthlessly meritocratic pressures of professional football have turned a sport that was once overwhelmingly white into a fully integrated endeavor, and the meritocracy doesn’t suddenly stop functioning when it comes to the most important position on the roster. Once upon a time, blacks were regarded as inadequate to that job. But these days, in the eyes of the people who do the hiring and firing in the NFL, there are no white quarterbacks or black quarterbacks. There are just good ones and bad ones. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/7 "2006-02-07T03:50:29Z")
Reminds me of the claim in the 50’s that blacks were genetically unsuited to play basketball. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/8 "2006-02-07T03:59:47Z")
> [@The Flying Dutchman](#): > > The colour ratio of black vs white quarterbacks is roughly the same if not higher as the colour ratio of the general US population. > > Read [http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/chapman200310020955.asp](http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/chapman200310020955.asp) Maybe, but I don’t think looking at the percentage of the U.S. population is the best comparsion. [This article](http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/441/Black_contributions_to_American_professional_football_are_many__) says that 67 percent of NFL players are black. That makes the question much more complicated. There is a massive overreprentation of blacks in other positions but it isn’t as strong at QB. Why is that? I am sure the answer can fill several books. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/9 "2006-02-07T04:08:17Z")
Might there be a genetic component to all of this? That is, could certain races have a genetic predisposition to certain traits that are best suited for certain sports? It’s probably a factor rather than being the factor but it’s certainly one worth exploring and not just dismissing outright. ---
**Author:** ![Queuing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/90ced4/32.png) [@Queuing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Queuing)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/10 "2006-02-07T04:09:39Z")
One reason could be the way some members of the black community treat black QBs. See Donovan McNabb and that NAACP guy in philly. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/11 "2006-02-07T04:13:10Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > Maybe, but I don’t think looking at the percentage of the U.S. population is the best comparsion. [This article](http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/441/Black_contributions_to_American_professional_football_are_many__) says that 67 percent of NFL players are black. > > That makes the question much more complicated. There is a massive overreprentation of blacks in other positions but it isn’t as strong at QB. > > Why is that? I am sure the answer can fill several books. No, it’s not like you just pick your quarterback form the general football population. Many of the players are simply not the right physical type, and never will be. Just like I, at well over 6’ tall, will never be a jokey. Blacks are about 12% of the population. Anything right around 1 in 10 Q-backs being Black is about “right”. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/12 "2006-02-07T04:19:20Z")
> [@Lochdale](#): > > Might there be a genetic component to all of this? That is, could certain races have a genetic predisposition to certain traits that are best suited for certain sports? > > It’s probably a factor rather than being the factor but it’s certainly one worth exploring and not just dismissing outright. It is certainly a possibility. We have had these huge debates about that on these boards. People tend to get really defensive and say that there is no such thing as “race”.That is, there are no clear lines you can draw to seperate groups of people into neat little groups. That is true but it isn’t necessary for the effect to happen. There are such things as human populations (like pygmies for example) that tend to have certain traits more than other groups. People swear up and down that the Kenyans and other African groups don’t have an inherant genetic or developmental advantage for marathon running. Yet, I watch the Boston marathon and I just can’t reconcile thousands of Americans and other groups chasing behind them year after year to think there might be something to it. That effect wouldn’t require that all “blacks” be excellent marathon runners. It would just mean that a small geographic area produces people that are exceptional at it through body type and other traits. I see nothing in that to dismiss it outright. It is more problematic with football. The types of blacks that excel at it are varied and come from a wide range of backgrounds. A successful genetic argument there would basically require going back to slavery and finding some common causes. Expect a fight if you want to argue that one but some of the common arguments against it are smokescreens. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/13 "2006-02-07T04:20:56Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > No, it’s not like you just pick your quarterback form the general football population. Many of the players are simply not the right physical type, and never will be. Just like I, at well over 6’ tall, will never be a jokey. > > Blacks are about 12% of the population. Anything right around 1 in 10 Q-backs being Black is about “right”. But look at the stat in what you quoted–if you claim that the proportion of black QBs is OK because it matches the general population, then you have the burden of explaining why blacks are dramatically over-represented in the rest of the positions. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/14 "2006-02-07T04:23:07Z")
> [@Lochdale](#): > > Might there be a genetic component to all of this? That is, could certain races have a genetic predisposition to certain traits that are best suited for certain sports? It might be that all black people are disguised space aliens and that epxlains why they are so good at football gneerally but not so good at quarterback. Both these theories are equally scientifically valid. Neither theory has any evidence to support it. Neither theory has any plausible mechanism by which it could occur. Both theories are contradicted by all the scientific evidence we do have. Both theories are aguments from ignorance. They rely entirely on a claim that since they can’t be disproved they must be accepted. > [@](#): > > It’s probably a factor rather than being the factor but it’s certainly one worth exploring and not just dismissing outright. Yes, it is worth dismissing outright. Until we have some evidence or even a plausible mechanism by which the phenomenon you describe could occur it is well worth dismising outright. Or would you suggest that my alien theory is also well worth exploring? ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/15 "2006-02-07T04:27:33Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > . . .People tend to get really defensive and say that there is no such thing as “race”.That is, there are no clear lines you can draw to seperate groups of people into neat little groups. That is true but it isn’t necessary for the effect to happen. There are such things as human populations (like pygmies for example) that tend to have certain traits more than other groups. I try to avoid “me too” posts but I have to here. You can agree that there are no true racial boundaries but you can never deny that traits are passed genetically and many traits tend to clump geographically. Unrelated to sports there was/is an area in Italy where people have been studied because of their amazingly low cholesterol, for example. They aren’t a race, they are a bunch of people with the same trait. So it is certainly plausible that whatever gene gives you the physical characteristics needed to excel at a given sport, that a group of people with that trait could be clumped together geographically in some culture. Nothing racist about that. IANA biologist, anthropologist, or even much of a sports fan. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/16 "2006-02-07T04:29:28Z")
> [@CookingWithGas](#): > > …if you claim that the proportion of black QBs is OK because it matches the general population, then you have the burden of explaining why blacks are dramatically over-represented in the rest of the positions. No, he has no such burden at all. He may acceptthat burden if he wishes, but he is under no obligation to do so scientifically or logically. He has debunked the initial implication, ie that blacks are underepresented as quarterbacks. That was his sole intention and he has succeeded. They are not underrepresented, that is a fact. Or do you think that perhaps they are statistically underrepresented as quarterbacks simply because they are overrepresented as halfbacks? If so then you are mistaken. Those are two difefrent samples and quite unrelated. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/17 "2006-02-07T04:34:58Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > No, he has no such burden at all. He may acceptthat burden if he wishes, but he is under no obligation to do so scientifically or logically. > > He has debunked the initial implication, ie that blacks are underepresented as quarterbacks. That was his sole intention and he has succeeded. They are not underrepresented, that is a fact. > > Or do you think that perhaps they are statistically underrepresented as quarterbacks simply because they are overrepresented as halfbacks? If so then you are mistaken. Those are two difefrent samples and quite unrelated. All of that is true but you a still left with some extremely strong effects at the top levels of a major sport. A person of science should at least acknowledge unknowns and open questions rather than just wave them off as disturbing. They have some answer and it may be controversial. I doubt we can answer these questions here but they are still out there and I see no reason to rule out multiple factors that are very interesting, not just for football, but society and science at large. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/18 "2006-02-07T04:48:04Z")
Well this is going straight to GD. > [@CookingWithGasYou](#): > > …you can never deny that traits are passed genetically and many traits tend to clump geographically. This is a textbook fallacy of composition. You can never deny that traits are passed genetically and many traits tend to clump geographically…. Therefore much genetics must clump geographically. To show why this is logically invalid look at the same wording with an alternative subject. You can never deny that iron sheets sink in water, and many ships are made out of iron sheets …… Therefore many ships must sink in water. It doesn’t work like that. You are ascribing the property of the parts to the whole. Traits are passed on genetically and traits do tend to clump geographically but that doesn’t allow you to conclude that genetics has to clump geographically. The trait could have clumped as a result of multiple different genes for that trait becoming concentrated geographically. The trait still gets passed on genetically but there is no geographic clumping of genes. The very existence of ‘blackness’ in AFrica is a perfect example of exactly this. The trait of black skin is geographically clumped in Africa, and the trait of black skin is passed on genetically. But there are no black skin genes that are clumped in Africa. Black skin in Africa is caused by many different genes and gene alleles. > [@](#): > > unrelated to sports there was/is an area in Italy where people have been studied because of their amazingly low cholesterol, for example. They aren’t a race, they are a bunch of people with the same trait. Yes, and was this trait caused by one gene allele, or multiple alleles? And how big was this population? And how closely related? Because if the trait was the result of just one allele or the population was less than 20, 00 or so or the people were closely interrelated it has no bearing on the argument whatsoever. Why? Because black skin isn’t the result of one allele. Because black people don’t come from a gene pool of lees than 20, 000 individuals and because Black people are not closely related. > [@](#): > > So it is certainly plausible that whatever gene gives you the physical characteristics needed to excel at a given sport, that a group of people with that trait could be clumped together geographically in some culture. Yes, it is plausible that they are advanced aliens from outer space too. But that doesn’t make the hypothesis credible. The whole thing is an argument form ignorance. You are claiming that solely on the grounds that it is plausible (ie I can’t _prove_ it to be wrong) it must be admitted. That is a classic argument from ignorance. > [@](#): > > Nothing racist about that. Maybe not, but there is unfortunately nothing logical or educated about it either. > [@](#): > > IANA biologist, anthropologist, or even much of a sports fan. The first one shows. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/19 "2006-02-07T04:50:22Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > That effect wouldn’t require that all “blacks” be excellent marathon runners. It would just mean that a small geographic area produces people that are exceptional at it through body type and other traits. I see nothing in that to dismiss it outright. Possibly so, when one is speaking of small relatively homogeneous populations. Tutsis might well have an advantage in playing basketball. But of course, pygmies would not, so to allege that there is a _racial_ advantage in certain sports is absurdly simplistic. > [@](#): > > It is more problematic with football. The types of blacks that excel at it are varied and come from a wide range of backgrounds. A successful genetic argument there would basically require going back to slavery and finding some common causes. If you are speculating that some kind of selection during slavery might have had led to a predisposition for US blacks to excel at certain sports, that is extremely unlikely, because any selection would not have gone on long enough, nor have been sufficiently intense, to have produced sufficient genetic change in the overall population. In addition, US blacks originated over a wide area in West Africa, and besides that have a substantial degree of European and Native American ancestry. Because “race” in the US is in large part a social construct, many US “blacks” are less than 50% sub-Saharan African in ancestry. US blacks are far too heterogeneous a population to make the existence of a genetic advantage for certain sports plausible. > [@](#): > > Expect a fight if you want to argue that one but some of the common arguments against it are smokescreens. I’m not sure what you consider to be a “smokescreen,” but since as **Blake** says, there is no evidence whatsoever in favor of it, and no plausible reason for it to be true, there is no reason to take the supposition seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2006, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324/20 "2006-02-07T04:57:21Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > All of that is true but you a still left with some extremely strong effects at the top levels of a major sport What does that even mean? > [@](#): > > A person of science should at least acknowledge unknowns and open questions rather than just wave them off as disturbing. No they shouldn’t! Wherever did you get that crazy idea from? Should a person of science also acknowledge the unknowns and open questions raised by the Time Cube guy? A scientist is only obliged to consider questions raised by the _evidence_, not every question raised by a semi-educated nutter (and I refer here to the Time Cube guy, not any SDMB particapants. We are all fully educated nutters). When someone shows me some evidence that suports this theory then we will have some quetsions. So far all the evidence I am aware of conflicts totally with this theory. There is simply no genetic commonality amongst African Americans footballers. Nor is there even a plausible mechanism by which it could arise. > [@](#): > > They have some answer and it may be controversial. Who are they? Scully and Mulder? The Freemasons? > [@](#): > > I doubt we can answer these questions here but they are still out there and I see no reason to rule out multiple factors that are very interesting, not just for football, but society and science at large. Well you would surely agree that Black people being space aliens would be very interesting for football, society and science. So by this standard we shouldn’t rule it out. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/football-and-race/343324.md?page=2)