# Should the NFL enact Affirmative Action (hire more white players) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 22, 2016, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913 "2016-01-22T22:01:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2016, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/221 "2016-02-11T22:49:20Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Your strawman writes, Brickbacon! > > Common to a group? No. Differences in distribution and quality of outliers? Yes. Again, please quote someone saying arguing for zero genetic impact? The quoted poster says the opposite in fact. > [@octopus](#): > > And regardless of being adopted into a Sherpa tribe, if the Sherpas altitude tolerance is genetic, the adopted, if they lack that genetic adaptation won’t fare as well on average at altitude. Do you honestly think there is no one who could adapt to that lifestyle given the time? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2016, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/222 "2016-02-11T23:44:52Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Your absolute certainty is unconvincing (especially when you talk about muscles and strength in response to a post about how Iranians dominate weightlifting!). It’s entirely possible that white and Asian kids are less likely to see a future in basketball or football or sprinting (and more likely to see a future in other careers), and therefore are less likely to focus on these sports, and it’s entirely possible that black kids are less likely to see a future in other careers and more likely to see one in athletics, and thus focus on athletics. > > It’s entirely possible that black kids are less likely to see a future in professional hockey or tennis, and so don’t put as much focus on those sports. > > All of these things are possible, and may play a role. There’s no reason to believe, based on evidence so far, that African-Americans with more African ancestry are more likely to excel in these sports than African Americans with more European ancestry, and this wouldn’t even be that difficult of a study to do. Without this evidence (or data on all the genes responsible for various types of athletic prowess), it’s not reasonable to conclude _with absolute certainty_ that genetic differences are responsible for these disparities. Noone is saying it’s 100% genetics. Your group is claiming the genetics group is erecting and battling a strawman and here you are with a strawman of your own. Football is a prime example. The fact that there is positional segregation, especially in the speed positions of wide receiver, running back, and especially cornerback is extremely strong evidence that at the top echelon of speed sports (as if the Olympics and World games don’t count) black’s prevail. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > So do you believe we could find 200,000 non-Sherpas in the world who can adapt to high altitude as well as Sherpas? You obviously don’t understand distributions if you ask that. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Again, please quote someone saying arguing for zero genetic impact? The quoted poster says the opposite in fact. Actually, no he doesn’t. Reread it. These aren’t hard words to understand. > [@Inbred mm domesticus](#): > > . So for me at least, it’s not politics that informs my deep suspicion of the notion that genetics plays a role in the dominance of athletes in a sport from one culture versus another. It’s just one argument has been so pathetically unconvincing that \*\*I’ve adopted the belief that it really is just culture or some other combination of the environment. \*\* Deny it all you want, still sounds like politics. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Do you honestly think there is no one who could adapt to that lifestyle given the time? What part of “on average” is complicated? You guys seemingly choose to misinterpret simple phrases that refer to distributions. Noone is saying all blacks or all blacks from a particular tribe are faster than all whites. People are saying that the distribution, especially in the top 0.01% of certain sports are extraordinarily disproportionately represented by certain groups. This isn’t in esoteric sports or expensive sports. This is running. Lets take every arbitrary tribe and ethnicity in the world. Don’t you think it would be more unlikely that every aspect of physique determined by genetics would have the exact same distribution? That takes a deliberate suspension of disbelief akin to thinking Ronda Rousey could beat Floyd Mayweather. People may deny it, but it’s highly likely it’s cognitive dissonance to fit observation into a political paradigm. It’s worse than the anti global warming crowd. Pygmies, Eskimos, Sherpas, and Aboriginies are going to have the same outliers, the same means, the same distribution in performance in swimming, jumping, climbing, running? You honestly believe that? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/223 "2016-02-12T00:42:34Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Noone is saying it’s 100% genetics. Your group is claiming the genetics group is erecting and battling a strawman and here you are with a strawman of your own. > > Football is a prime example. The fact that there is positional segregation, especially in the speed positions of wide receiver, running back, and especially cornerback is extremely strong evidence that at the top echelon of speed sports (as if the Olympics and World games don’t count) black’s prevail. Disparities don’t tell you why they exist. What bias is there in coaching, in terms of what positions they encourage people to play? What do the kids believe they must do to be successful? If some sports have cultural reasons for disparities, like perhaps hockey and tennis, why is it not possible that basketball and football do too? Maybe genetics are involved, but then maybe they aren’t. Maybe cultural factors are still hugely important. Or maybe genetics are involved, but not in the way we think… Maybe a mix of African and European genes give an advantage, but not either on their own. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/224 "2016-02-12T00:45:41Z")
**octopus** , running is not expensive or esoteric huh? I wonder how expensive it is to fly all over the world, participate in all kinds of marathons, deal with the subsequent health problems that will follow this competitiveness, eat the diet needed to maintain a healthy weight and strength, plus whatever else I didn’t consider? I mean it must be like $2. It’s just running after all. It’s not like its expensive to compete effectively on the world stage. I bet every other Kenyan villager has a little spare change to compete in the commonplace and inexpensive hobby of marathon running at a little over the 2 hour mark. Or maybe it’s just easier for poor governments to finance runners when they want to make a mark on the world stage. So it’s outliers when it suits you, it’s cheap or commonplace when it suits you, it’s on average when it suits you. I guess that means you’re just being selective and carefully analytical. Or maybe you’re just telling a story with a lot of holes. I am just saying that I haven’t seen too much in the way of convincing evidence that genetics plays any important role in the patterns we see of ethnic participation at the elite level in sports. That means I am being political. I can be convinced that Sherpas have some relative prevalence of a gene that makes life at altitude easier. I can be convinced that Pygmy stature in the rain forests of Africa is due to the relative prevalence of some gene or genes. I can be convinced that there are genes that might make running in the highlands of Ethiopia easier and these might be more commonplace there. What I don’t see is how this necessarily translates to dominance at the elite level of X or Y sport. Outside of these populations there are billions of people and the relative prevalence of alleles in a population is still just a relative prevalence. There are just as many rare things among millions as there are common things among thousands. Do you have a well documented example or something? Something I can wrap politically muddled my mind around? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/225 "2016-02-12T01:47:10Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > **octopus** , running is not expensive or esoteric huh? > > I wonder how expensive it is to fly all over the world, participate in all kinds of marathons, deal with the subsequent health problems that will follow this competitiveness, eat the diet needed to maintain a healthy weight and strength, plus whatever else I didn’t consider? I mean it must be like $2. It’s just running after all. It’s not like its expensive to compete effectively on the world stage. I bet every other Kenyan villager has a little spare change to compete in the commonplace and inexpensive hobby of marathon running at a little over the 2 hour mark. Or maybe it’s just easier for poor governments to finance runners when they want to make a mark on the world stage. > > So it’s outliers when it suits you, it’s cheap or commonplace when it suits you, it’s on average when it suits you. I guess that means you’re just being selective and carefully analytical. Or maybe you’re just telling a story with a lot of holes. I am just saying that I haven’t seen too much in the way of convincing evidence that genetics plays any important role in the patterns we see of ethnic participation at the elite level in sports. That means I am being political. > > I can be convinced that Sherpas have some relative prevalence of a gene that makes life at altitude easier. I can be convinced that Pygmy stature in the rain forests of Africa is due to the relative prevalence of some gene or genes. I can be convinced that there are genes that might make running in the highlands of Ethiopia easier and these might be more commonplace there. > > What I don’t see is how this necessarily translates to dominance at the elite level of X or Y sport. Outside of these populations there are billions of people and the relative prevalence of alleles in a population is still just a relative prevalence. There are just as many rare things among millions as there are common things among thousands. > > Do you have a well documented example or something? Something I can wrap politically muddled my mind around? Watch sprinting in the summer olympics and draw your own conclusions. And how do you explain the complete domination of speed positions in the nfl? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/226 "2016-02-12T01:59:18Z")
> **[What Makes a Great Olympian? Sometimes It’s Genetics](https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-makes-a-great-olympian-sometimes-its-genetics)** > > This year’s record-breaking group of sprinters has undoubtedly been aided by superior DNA, writes Jon Entine—and it shouldn’t be taboo to say so. And a quick Google search will return tons more. Funny this article mentions the fear of the PC brigade as a hindrance in research. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/227 "2016-02-12T03:33:37Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Football is a prime example. The fact that there is positional segregation, especially in the speed positions of wide receiver, running back, and especially cornerback is extremely strong evidence that at the top echelon of speed sports (as if the Olympics and World games don’t count) black’s prevail. How long has “positional segregation” lasted, and why do you think what you see now is the way it will always be? > [@octopus](#): > > Actually, no he doesn’t. Reread it. > > These aren’t hard words to understand. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > And by the way, I fully support the notion that genetics plays a role in individual differences in athletic performance. It’s silly to believe otherwise. > [@octopus](#): > > Lets take every arbitrary tribe and ethnicity in the world. Don’t you think it would be more unlikely that every aspect of physique determined by genetics would have the exact same distribution? That takes a deliberate suspension of disbelief akin to thinking Ronda Rousey could beat Floyd Mayweather. People may deny it, but it’s highly likely it’s cognitive dissonance to fit observation into a political paradigm. It’s worse than the anti global warming crowd. > > Pygmies, Eskimos, Sherpas, and Aboriginies are going to have the same outliers, the same means, the same distribution in performance in swimming, jumping, climbing, running? You honestly believe that? Dude, you are the one who is missing the point. The issue is not that small genetic subsets must all have the same attributes or potentials. The issue is you are taking a large diverse group (eg. Black people), and presuming our domination of a few positions in a few select sports at the current moment MUST be explained by genetics when there are a thousands of counter examples revolving around gender, religion, nationality, etc., that point to culture or environment being a more likely factor. That’s the issue. You see 32 starting Black cornerbacks and assume they are there in large part because of there race, yet ignore that fact that it wasn’t long ago when all the QBs were White, or the fact that every NHL goalie currently is White. Notice how you rarely see people on your side making the supposition that “White genes” are why White people dominate sports like tennis, hockey, soccer, and baseball? Notice how few people argue Japanese genes make them good at baseball, Canadian and Russian genes make them good at hockey, or that Black genes used to be good enough to be great at baseball but then they got worse all of a sudden. Suddenly your side has a bunch of mealy mouth excuses about how opportunity or money or whatever are the factors in those cases, but not the others where the demographics conform to your presupposed notion. The question is why you see the need to explain African American dominance in a sport as superior group genes beginning to predominate, but don’t feel the need to explain Canadian dominance, or White dominance, or Asian dominance in a given sport? ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/228 "2016-02-12T03:50:01Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > [What Makes a Great Olympian? Sometimes It’s Genetics](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/11/what-makes-a-great-olympian-sometimes-it-s-genetics.html) > > And a quick Google search will return tons more. Funny this article mentions the fear of the PC brigade as a hindrance in research. This is truly disappointing. I typed in earnest on this very page of the discussion that Google scholar will net you many peer-reviewed studies on the topic of genetics and athleticism, specifically West Africans and running, to try to dissuade you from your belief that there might be some conspiracy afoot. Yet here I am typing it again. There’s no conspiracy; just no tidy story to work with. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/229 "2016-02-12T06:43:42Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > How long has “positional segregation” lasted, and why do you think what you see now is the way it will always be? > > Dude, you are the one who is missing the point. The issue is not that small genetic subsets must all have the same attributes or potentials. The issue is you are taking a large diverse group (eg. Black people), and presuming our domination of a few positions in a few select sports at the current moment MUST be explained by genetics when there are a thousands of counter examples revolving around gender, religion, nationality, etc., that point to culture or environment being a more likely factor. That’s the issue. You see 32 starting Black cornerbacks and assume they are there in large part because of there race, yet ignore that fact that it wasn’t long ago when all the QBs were White, or the fact that every NHL goalie currently is White. Notice how you rarely see people on your side making the supposition that “White genes” are why White people dominate sports like tennis, hockey, soccer, and baseball? Notice how few people argue Japanese genes make them good at baseball, Canadian and Russian genes make them good at hockey, or that Black genes used to be good enough to be great at baseball but then they got worse all of a sudden. Suddenly your side has a bunch of mealy mouth excuses about how opportunity or money or whatever are the factors in those cases, but not the others where the demographics conform to your presupposed notion. > > The question is why you see the need to explain African American dominance in a sport as superior group genes beginning to predominate, but don’t feel the need to explain Canadian dominance, or White dominance, or Asian dominance in a given sport? I honestly don’t care which group or which sport demonstrates the idea that genetics plays a role in athletic outcome. I don’t care if it’s dwarves and being tossed or giants and reaching for apples. All I care about is that the idea that different groups have different distributions of physical traits stops being a taboo topic. But why East Africans and long distance and West Africans and sprints? Because those are the simplest sports that I can think of. Anyways if you acknowledge there is a genetic component we don’t have any disagreement. And it’s 64 starting cornerbacks. Look up the top 500 100m times. 99%+ West African. That’s not 100% culture. Unless you think that a Jamaican, a Canadian, an American, and someone from the UK all with West African ancestry have more culture in common that ancestry. Here’s a list of links that have discussion on this very topic. > **[The Story Behind the Amazing Success of Black Athletes, by Jon Entine](http://run-down.com/guests/je_black_athletes_p2.php)** > > Jon Entine explains away the myths of the socially taboo topic of black domination in sports. Part Two. > **[Why are Jamaicans so good at sprinting? | Michael Brooks](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/21/jamaicans-sprinting-athletics-commonwealth-games)** > > Michael Brooks: Several factors feed in to Jamaica’s flair for speed but there is a good reason to dig deeper, and it has nothing to do with athletics > **[The DNA Olympics -- Jamaicans Win Sprinting 'genetic Lottery' -- and Why We...](https://www.aei.org/articles/the-dna-olympics-jamaicans-win-sprinting-genetic-lottery-and-why-we-should-all-care/)** > > Jon Entine, author of Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We’re Afraid to Talk About It,” takes stock of the DNA London Olympics–where, as usual, African-descended athletes swept the running events while whites and Asians dominated in... > **[The science of sprinting](https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/athletics/the-science-of-sprinting-8005992.html)** > > What is it about Usain Bolt – who begins the defence of his Olympic title today – that gives him an edge over his stockier, more powerful rivals? Steve Connor investigates > **[Is it wrong to note 100m winners are always black?](https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14679657)** > > The conclusions that are drawn from black athletes dominating the 100m final go a long way to explaining attitudes in wider society, argues Matthew Syed. And here’s something that claims that whites have an advantage in swimming. > **[Centre of gravity theory for dominance of black sprinters and white swimmers](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7884135/Centre-of-gravity-theory-for-dominance-of-black-sprinters-and-white-swimmers.html)** > > Scientists have tackled one of the taboos of modern sport and believe they have explained why black athletes sweep the medals in sprinting events, while white swimmers dominate in the pool. Anyways, the labeling of disparate groups as “black”, “white”, “Asian”, etc. seems to be problematic. But I don’t know anyone claiming that performance is mostly genetic. Nor that anyone from an arbitrary group has an advantage over everyone from a different arbitrary group. Noone is making that claim. However, 100m Mens and NFL cornerback are two examples of a relatively simple endeavor that doesn’t require ridiculous apparatus to excel in and they are dominated by one particular group. And the dominance is not even close. And coaches and owners in the NFL have every incentive to scout and play the absolute best in each position they can find. 0 out of 64 cornerbacks is damning evidence. Regardless of the reason for disparity in numbers, should the League take steps to alleviate the shortage of white, Hispanic, and Asians at certain positions? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/230 "2016-02-12T11:59:21Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > And it’s 64 starting cornerbacks. Look up the top 500 100m times. 99%+ West African. That’s not 100% culture. Unless you think that a Jamaican, a Canadian, an American, and someone from the UK all with West African ancestry have more culture in common that ancestry. Society and culture calls these guys black, but it’s very unlikely that they all have anything close to 99% West African ancestry. Most of them probably have significant portions of European ancestry, and possibly other types as well. If we only called people with 100% African ancestry “black”, and anyone with mixed ancestry “grey”, then this thread would be about how greys dominate certain sports. Hell, if conventions about race were reversed, and anyone with just a little European ancestry was called “white”, then this thread would be about white domination of most sports. Cultural and societal conventions have a huge impact on these kinds of issues. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/231 "2016-02-12T12:00:54Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Regardless of the reason for disparity in numbers, should the League take steps to alleviate the shortage of white, Hispanic, and Asians at certain positions? Is this disparity the result of discrimination against these people based upon their membership in these groups? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/232 "2016-02-12T20:58:54Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Society and culture calls these guys black, but it’s very unlikely that they all have anything close to 99% West African ancestry. Most of them probably have significant portions of European ancestry, and possibly other types as well. > > If we only called people with 100% African ancestry “black”, and anyone with mixed ancestry “grey”, then this thread would be about how greys dominate certain sports. Hell, if conventions about race were reversed, and anyone with just a little European ancestry was called “white”, then this thread would be about white domination of most sports. > > Cultural and societal conventions have a huge impact on these kinds of issues. Good point. But what they are called is irrelevant imo. What matters is that Group “A” has a different genetic distribution than Group “B” and that results in a difference in outcome distribution. The labeling is not the issue. It’s the willful denial, not saying you, that humans aren’t a function of physics and biology. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Is this disparity the result of discrimination against these people based upon their membership in these groups? What’s that matter? Shouldn’t representation be proportional? Is there no value in diversity for diversity’s sake? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2016, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/233 "2016-02-12T22:27:56Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Good point. But what they are called is irrelevant imo. What matters is that Group “A” has a different genetic distribution than Group “B” and that results in a difference in outcome distribution. > > The labeling is not the issue. It’s the willful denial, not saying you, that humans aren’t a function of physics and biology. It’s very possible that genetics are involved – I just don’t see why the rush to certainty. Throughout history, disparities like this were generally explained by some aspect of culture and society – and we’ll probably all agree that this is true for certain sports even now (tennis, hockey, among others). If it’s true for some sports, isn’t it possible that it’s true for others? Not certain – I’m not certain what the cause of these disparities is – but possible? ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/234 "2016-02-13T00:30:59Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > What’s that matter? Shouldn’t representation be proportional? Is there no value in diversity for diversity’s sake? It matters because it’s the basis of affirmative action as a policy. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/235 "2016-02-13T03:31:37Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > But why East Africans and long distance and West Africans and sprints? Because those are the simplest sports that I can think of. But as pointed out to you, they are NOT simple at an elite level. > [@octopus](#): > > And it’s 64 starting cornerbacks. Look up the top 500 100m times. 99%+ West African. That’s not 100% culture. Unless you think that a Jamaican, a Canadian, an American, and someone from the UK all with West African ancestry have more culture in common that ancestry. Actually, I do think they have more relevant culture in common than you seem to acknowledge. Particularly a common belief that Blacks are innately faster than White, and a love of running. Either way, why are 64 Black starting cornerbacks more surprising and indicative of the dominance of group genes than 64 White starting kickers and punters, or 30 White NHL starting goal keepers, or 124 of the 125 highest season batting averages having been attained by White men, or a Black man not having won a tennis grand slam in about 40 years? It’s also not as if White guys cannot play cornerback. Julian Edelman played DB when the Pats had injuries pretty recently, so it’s not as if not White men lack the skill set to play the position. Why are random factoids so illustrative of genes to you when there are many more logical explanations? More importantly, what would you have said if asked this question when Jews dominated basketball? Ironically, people at the time said things like the [following](http://jewishcurrents.org/jews-in-american-sports-7402): > [@](#): > > n 1929, as Jews began to enter basketball in large numbers, the Forverts described it as a “Jewish sport,” in which “brains, nimble thinking and speedy coordination between mind and muscle are more effective than mere physical brawn and power.” When Jewish domination of the sport became apparent in the 1930s, a Daily News columnist, Paul Gallico, wrote that basketball “appeals to the Hebrew because the game places a premium on an alert scheming mind, flashy trickiness, artful dodging, and general smart-alecness.” Neither the philo- nor anti-Semitic assertions were helpful, of course, but they reflected how Jews dominated “Jew ball,” as basketball was colloquially known, during the 1930s and ’40s. What would you have predicted in 1981 when Black participation in MLB was 18.7% and was steadily trending upwards? Would you have assumed that number would dwindle to 7.8% by 2015? This has happened despite salaries and prestige skyrocketing during that time period. What genetic changes would have happened in such a short period of time? If the trend had gone in the opposite direction, and the participation rate was around 30% today, people of your ilk would almost assuredly note that the trend was just Blacks fulfilling their genetic potential. Even now, you see articles questioning why there aren’t more Blacks in MLB as if it’s a given that Blacks must dominate every sport. Now before you respond by just regurgitating the same line about cornerbacks like a Marco Rubio clone, please explain to me why White dominance of sports for decades upon decades wasn’t typically thought to be due to genetics, but recent, and sometimes fleeting, Black dominance of some sports is a clear sign that genes are of primary importance? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/236 "2016-02-13T05:47:49Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > But as pointed out to you, they are NOT simple at an elite level. > > Actually, I do think they have more relevant culture in common than you seem to acknowledge. Particularly a common belief that Blacks are innately faster than White, and a love of running. Either way, why are 64 Black starting cornerbacks more surprising and indicative of the dominance of group genes than 64 White starting kickers and punters, or 30 White NHL starting goal keepers, or 124 of the 125 highest season batting averages having been attained by White men, or a Black man not having won a tennis grand slam in about 40 years? > > It’s also not as if White guys cannot play cornerback. Julian Edelman played DB when the Pats had injuries pretty recently, so it’s not as if not White men lack the skill set to play the position. Why are random factoids so illustrative of genes to you when there are many more logical explanations? More importantly, what would you have said if asked this question when Jews dominated basketball? Ironically, people at the time said things like the [following](http://jewishcurrents.org/jews-in-american-sports-7402): > > What would you have predicted in 1981 when Black participation in MLB was 18.7% and was steadily trending upwards? Would you have assumed that number would dwindle to 7.8% by 2015? This has happened despite salaries and prestige skyrocketing during that time period. What genetic changes would have happened in such a short period of time? > > If the trend had gone in the opposite direction, and the participation rate was around 30% today, people of your ilk would almost assuredly note that the trend was just Blacks fulfilling their genetic potential. Even now, you see articles questioning why there aren’t more Blacks in MLB as if it’s a given that Blacks must dominate every sport. > > Now before you respond by just regurgitating the same line about cornerbacks like a Marco Rubio clone, please explain to me why White dominance of sports for decades upon decades wasn’t typically thought to be due to genetics, but recent, and sometimes fleeting, Black dominance of some sports is a clear sign that genes are of primary importance? Cmon now! You honestly aren’t going back to segregated days to prove Jewish athletic supremacy in basketball! There is obviously cultural aspects. I have never denied that. I just refuse to believe that every subgroup has an identical distribution of genes. And who said anything about blacks dominating every sport? I know I have never made that claim. And with regards to swimming whites might have a genetic advantage. I would be surprised if they didn’t even though the wealth disparity which leads to swimming disparity is also a factor. But if we had water football for example and the water line was 90% white and the water dbs were 90% black I’d be curious as to why. With regards to baseball if running speed were a huge advantage like it is for cornerback I’d expect to see the numbers reflect that in baseball. However, baseball requires many different skills and it’s harder to correlate. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/237 "2016-02-13T11:34:32Z")
I am constantly amused. Here are the indisputable facts: 1. Self-identified US blacks have a different average gene pool for power muscles, bone strength, androgen levels, muscle mass and armspan/height ratios–all in the direction of advantage for blacks. 2. There are sports where those traits are highly significant for success. 3. Professional roles in those sports are the pinnacle of a career success ladder, offering fame, fortune, and pretty girls. 4. Whites and asians have an enormous average advantage for every single nurturing influence should they desire to chase professional success. 5. Prior to the time in history when blacks were allowed to compete, white culture chased that success vigorously because it was a pinnacle career, preferred over all options. 6. When the playing field was leveled for participation, black athletes replaced whites. Conclusion: Culture has changed. Otherwise equally talented whites decided they prefer academia as the road to success, plus blacks work harder in these sports. Perhaps genes play some kind of role, but let’s not forget about culture. Also, the Hebrew League in the '20s. Also, there’s no such thing as a pure race. LOL ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/238 "2016-02-13T13:28:27Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I am constantly amused. > > Here are the indisputable facts: > > 1. Self-identified US blacks have a different average gene pool for power muscles, bone strength, androgen levels, muscle mass and armspan/height ratios–all in the direction of advantage for blacks. > 2. There are sports where those traits are highly significant for success. > 3. Professional roles in those sports are the pinnacle of a career success ladder, offering fame, fortune, and pretty girls. > 4. Whites and asians have an enormous average advantage for every single nurturing influence should they desire to chase professional success. > 5. Prior to the time in history when blacks were allowed to compete, white culture chased that success vigorously because it was a pinnacle career, preferred over all options. > 6. When the playing field was leveled for participation, black athletes replaced whites. > > Conclusion: > Culture has changed. Otherwise equally talented whites decided they prefer academia as the road to success, plus blacks work harder in these sports. Perhaps genes play some kind of role, but let’s not forget about culture. Also, the Hebrew League in the '20s. Also, there’s no such thing as a pure race. > > LOL Once again, the source of the differing opinions are confirmed: I disagree that all those points are indisputably true except for maybe 2 and 3. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2016, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/239 "2016-02-13T18:37:53Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Cmon now! You honestly aren’t going back to segregated days to prove Jewish athletic supremacy in basketball! What do you mean? Jewish athletic supremacy in basketball was a fact at that time. My point was that that demographic over-representation obviously changed over time. Even if we were just comparing Jews to Gentiles, what may have seemed like a genetic advantage due to the numbers is a laughable idea in the current day due to the absolute dearth of Jews in the NBA. The point is that sporting dominance is nearly impossible to predict, and the basis for that dominance is hard to pinpoint when just looking at a static picture at a given time. That’s why people in that time truly thought Jews were great athletes based on some innate attributes. In short, it’s why you should be FAR less confident in your current opinion than you see to be. It’s also why you should be looking at the factors common to different dominant groups (and lagging groups) rather than what connects dominant individuals on a superficial basis. For example, the things that tie African-Americans today, Jews in the early period of Basketball, Yugoslavian/Serbs/Croats in the late 80’s is that they are/were oppressed groups with relatively fewer opportunities living in urban environments where basketball was popular and respected. Addressing the other side, the reason why American men today suck at tennis, why African-Americans play baseball far less often, and why Jews today generally are not playing pro sports is those groups have better options. It’s not genes that made American men relatively bad at tennis, or what generally makes African-American men great at playing cornerback. It’s almost always external environmental and cultural factors. > [@octopus](#): > > There is obviously cultural aspects. I have never denied that. I just refuse to believe that every subgroup has an identical distribution of genes. You don’t have to believe otherwise to think sporting dominance of a self-identified group isn’t genetic. We are talking about maybe a couple thousand people across all major sports. Even if you think certain sporting genes are far more common in Blacks, the fact that they are still present in Whites, and that there are billions of White people, means finding a few hundred of them who have the potential to excel in sports is very possible. We don’t see them not because they don’t exist, but because they are doing other stuff. > [@octopus](#): > > And with regards to swimming whites might have a genetic advantage. What about other sports where speed matters like tennis, soccer, lacrosse, and rugby? > [@octopus](#): > > With regards to baseball if running speed were a huge advantage like it is for cornerback I’d expect to see the numbers reflect that in baseball. However, baseball requires many different skills and it’s harder to correlate. Running speed probably matters more in baseball than it does in basketball, yet basketball has a far higher percentage of Blacks. Why is that? Why did the percentage of Black in baseball drop so dramatically? Why do Blacks dominate US football, but not rugby, a very similar sport? Even in countries with sufficient diversity, you don’t see it (eg. S. Africa). Why not? Why do group genes only matter when you want them to? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2016, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913/240 "2016-02-14T08:50:01Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > What do you mean? Jewish athletic supremacy in basketball was a fact at that time. My point was that that demographic over-representation obviously changed over time. Even if we were just comparing Jews to Gentiles, what may have seemed like a genetic advantage due to the numbers is a laughable idea in the current day due to the absolute dearth of Jews in the NBA. The point is that sporting dominance is nearly impossible to predict, and the basis for that dominance is hard to pinpoint when just looking at a static picture at a given time. That’s why people in that time truly thought Jews were great athletes based on some innate attributes. In short, it’s why you should be FAR less confident in your current opinion than you see to be. It’s also why you should be looking at the factors common to different dominant groups (and lagging groups) rather than what connects dominant individuals on a superficial basis. > > For example, the things that tie African-Americans today, Jews in the early period of Basketball, Yugoslavian/Serbs/Croats in the late 80’s is that they are/were oppressed groups with relatively fewer opportunities living in urban environments where basketball was popular and respected. Addressing the other side, the reason why American men today suck at tennis, why African-Americans play baseball far less often, and why Jews today generally are not playing pro sports is those groups have better options. It’s not genes that made American men relatively bad at tennis, or what generally makes African-American men great at playing cornerback. It’s almost always external environmental and cultural factors. > > You don’t have to believe otherwise to think sporting dominance of a self-identified group isn’t genetic. We are talking about maybe a couple thousand people across all major sports. Even if you think certain sporting genes are far more common in Blacks, the fact that they are still present in Whites, and that there are billions of White people, means finding a few hundred of them who have the potential to excel in sports is very possible. We don’t see them not because they don’t exist, but because they are doing other stuff. > > What about other sports where speed matters like tennis, soccer, lacrosse, and rugby? > > Running speed probably matters more in baseball than it does in basketball, yet basketball has a far higher percentage of Blacks. Why is that? Why did the percentage of Black in baseball drop so dramatically? Why do Blacks dominate US football, but not rugby, a very similar sport? Even in countries with sufficient diversity, you don’t see it (eg. S. Africa). Why not? Why do group genes only matter when you want them to? You think it’s important in my life that group A has slightly better genes for arbitrary action B? No. It’s interesting that the topic is taboo and that people deliberately adopt a false point of view. All I advocate is that there is _some_ genetic component. That’s all. Now the idea of NFL players playing rugby has me intrigued. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-nfl-enact-affirmative-action-hire-more-white-players/743913.md?page=13)