Blacks' Abundance In Pro Sports: Affirmative Action ?

[IM2]

There is no AA in the NFL. AA has helped whites the most. As you claim to be Hispanic, AA has helped you.

1, You keep saying that "There is no AA in the NFL" while presenting ZERO EVIDENCE to back up your wild claim. Fact is, YOU DON"T KNOW if there is or not.

2. What a preposterous statement to say that >> "AA has helped whites the most." when whites are the victims, blacks are the beneficiaries. So what is this ? Another example of baldfaced lying, by the looney left, to try to influence the airhead segment of the population, who is too dumb to know truth from fiction ? That's what the left does. Pitiful way to go through life.

3. AA has NEVER helped me, because unlike the lowlifes who stoop down to the
sewer to partake in it, I have never filled out an AA questionnaire, and I certainly never would. Total disgrace for those who do.

AA has helped whites the most that's a ******* fact.

There is no AA in the NFL.

 

[SandSquid]

This thread is still looking for an answer to the question if AA might be the reason for the overabundance of black athletes. So far, it appears that it MAY be the cause.

I think there's zero evidence to try and make that claim. If we want to move this to the conspiracy theory thread, I think that would be a smart move since not one person has been able to come up with a policy or practice in place.

In this case with Affirmative Action, we are talking about an ACTIVE EFFORT or policy. Ok what active effort are we talking about? What policy do those sports have you are talking about? It's like saying "Nobody has searched every single plane at takeoff therefore Chemtrails exist" or "since not everyone has jumped off a building you can't prove that people are unable to fly on their own using the power of their minds to save their lives".

Your theory is based on a conspiracy that your lack of evidence is enough.

 

[WinterBorn]

While winning the Super Bowl is the goal of every player and team, it is not going to happen for most.

Whether they have been worthy to win a Super Bowl matters at a team level, not an individual athlete level. That they are worthy to be hired on the basis of their own abilities and merits is what is in question.

But in assessing the worthiness of football players, in the context of an AA discussion, it is notable that the whitest offensive team in the NFL, has been dominating it in recent years.

If nothing else, this shows that the abundance of black players on the losing teams, is not a factor of qualification/merit.

It shows nothing of the kind. The links I posted show a natural reason for the over abundance of black players. The fact that one team, with more white players, has won more games, does not change that. The over abundance of black players is easily explained by the documented physical differences. Without actual evidence of AA, the scientific answer suffices.

 

[WinterBorn]

YOur question in the OP was not about the winners. It was about the numbers. When discussing the numbers, my links provide answers. And since I have seen no actual evidence of AA, they provide solid answers.

No they don't. The biologists don't rate, alongside the record book reporters

Yes, they do. There are physiological differences between the races. Those differences give blacks an advantage. That explains the over abundance of blacks in sports.

The OP was not about winning or holding records. It was about the numbers of blacks at the highest levels of sports. My links explain that.

 

[WinterBorn]

You claim you are not making any statement, and that you are only asking a question.

But your question has changed. And you have done that intentionally.

In the OP you were talking about the numbers of blacks in sports
"It seems to be very common to see NFL football fields and NBA courts with more blacks than all other races combined. There also has been a majority of blacks in professional boxing for many years. How does this come to be ? Since it is common for lesser qualified blacks to be hired to many types of jobs in industry generally, one might wonder if this isn't also the case with pro sports.

This is not the case with Whites, however. In the top 4 pro US sports > baseball, football, basketball, and boxing, whites have proven to be as good or often better than blacks, yet still have smaller numbers there. This is despite the fact that blacks are only 13% of the US population, as compared to whites at 76%. Could affirmative action be at work here, putting blacks ahead of better qualified whites, et al races ?"

And now you ONLY want to talk about who is the champion. YOu want to ignore the numbers. My links provide ample evidence for why blacks are so numerous in sports. Your answer has nothing to do with the OP, but with your claims that individual white athletes are better.

Now, since I have provided scientific evidence, via links, to show why there are greater numbers of blacks, if you want to refute that you have to show actual evidence of AA. Showing white champions does not refute my evidence. It also does not apply to answering the question asked in the OP.

My question has not changed. I have only begun talking about the successes of white athletes, as a reply to the poster who have claimed black athletic superiority as the reason for black abundance in pro sports. Had they not presented that theory, I would never have mentioned anything about white winners and champions.

Your evidence does not refute MINE. If blacks biology was so much better than whites, and this would be a cause of greater hiring, blacks would not be losers in so many sports and events.​

Your links do not answer the question of whether there is AA in the NFL, or other sports, and no more than the hapless posts of other posters. It also does not confirm greater merit to black athletes, since they have been losers so much, in a number of different sports. This thread is still looking for an answer to the question if AA might be the reason for the overabundance of black athletes, So far, it appears that it MAY be the cause.

The proof is on the field, not in a biologist's textbook.

This thread is still looking for an answer to the question if AA might be the reason for the overabundance of black athletes. So far, it appears that it MAY be the cause.

The biology involved explains why there is an over abundance of blacks. That was the point of the OP. With that evidence present, and absolutely zero evidence of AA, the OP question has been answered.

And the answer is No.

 

[MizMolly]

There is no AA in the NFL. AA has helped whites the most. As you claim to be Hispanic, AA has helped you.

1, You keep saying that "There is no AA in the NFL" while presenting ZERO EVIDENCE to back up your wild claim. Fact is, YOU DON"T KNOW if there is or not.

2. What a preposterous statement to say that >> "AA has helped whites the most." when whites are the victims, blacks are the beneficiaries. So what is this ? Another example of baldfaced lying, by the looney left, to try to influence the airhead segment of the population, who is too dumb to know truth from fiction ? That's what the left does. Pitiful way to go through life.

3. AA has NEVER helped me, because unlike the lowlifes who stoop down to the
sewer to partake in it, I have never filled out an AA questionnaire, and I certainly never would. Total disgrace for those who do.

AA has helped whites the most that's a ******* fact.

There is no AA in the NFL.

I don't believe there is AA in the NFL. But whites have not been helped the most by AA. I do not see how you can possibly do a "study" to find out this shit. It is pure speculation.

 

[Correll]

In every other instance I can remember of unequal outcomes, citing merit as a defense of the unequal outcome would not be accepted by people like you.


That is my point. YOur refusal to even acknowledge my point, for what it truly is,


is a sign that on some level, you cannot honestly defend your normal behavior on such issues.

The fact is that you don't have a point that makes sense. How many NFL coaches or players have you ever talked to one on one?

And, you don't know "what kind of person I am".

How would a talk with a NFL coach be relevant to my point?


And your dishonest refusal to even acknowledge my point, shows what kind of person you are.

Are you ******* kidding? Why WOULDN'T a discussion with an NFL coach be relevant?


They have input into who is drafted and who gets to play.
....e.

Because as I have said many times before,



the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.



That is my point. Again.

"Saying it" does not make it a fact
....l.

Nothing in my statement implied that my "saying it" is a supporting argument.


So, that part of your response was a dishonest dodge.


Are you DENYING what I said?

ie, that the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.

 

[Correll]

In every other instance I can remember of unequal outcomes, citing merit as a defense of the unequal outcome would not be accepted by people like you.


That is my point. YOur refusal to even acknowledge my point, for what it truly is,


is a sign that on some level, you cannot honestly defend your normal behavior on such issues.

The fact is that you don't have a point that makes sense. How many NFL coaches or players have you ever talked to one on one?

And, you don't know "what kind of person I am".

How would a talk with a NFL coach be relevant to my point?


And your dishonest refusal to even acknowledge my point, shows what kind of person you are.

Are you ******* kidding? Why WOULDN'T a discussion with an NFL coach be relevant?


They have input into who is drafted and who gets to play.
....e.

Because as I have said many times before,



the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.



That is my point. Again.

That depends on whether it is actually trying to find legit reasons or whether it is just a knee-jerk reaction.

Interesting claim.


In my observations, it does NOT depend on that.


Could you give me an example of when it DID depend on that?

 

[Correll]

Because as I have said many times before,

the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.

That is my point. Again.

A reasonably fair point.

Which none of them will dare to actually address.

 

[WinterBorn]

The fact is that you don't have a point that makes sense. How many NFL coaches or players have you ever talked to one on one?

And, you don't know "what kind of person I am".

How would a talk with a NFL coach be relevant to my point?


And your dishonest refusal to even acknowledge my point, shows what kind of person you are.

Are you ******* kidding? Why WOULDN'T a discussion with an NFL coach be relevant?


They have input into who is drafted and who gets to play.
....e.

Because as I have said many times before,



the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.



That is my point. Again.

That depends on whether it is actually trying to find legit reasons or whether it is just a knee-jerk reaction.

Interesting claim.


In my observations, it does NOT depend on that.


Could you give me an example of when it DID depend on that?

So, in your experience, it does not depend on finding legit reasons? Ok.

This topic is a perfect example. Rather than look to see if there are physiological differences in the races, especially ones than might give one race an advantage, protectionist question whether they had outside help and were, in fact, less qualified. Despite there being no evidence to support the idea that AA was the reason for the number of black athletes succeeding in their sport.

 

[Correll]

How would a talk with a NFL coach be relevant to my point?


And your dishonest refusal to even acknowledge my point, shows what kind of person you are.

Are you ******* kidding? Why WOULDN'T a discussion with an NFL coach be relevant?


They have input into who is drafted and who gets to play.
....e.

Because as I have said many times before,



the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.



That is my point. Again.

That depends on whether it is actually trying to find legit reasons or whether it is just a knee-jerk reaction.

Interesting claim.


In my observations, it does NOT depend on that.


Could you give me an example of when it DID depend on that?

So, in your experience, it does not depend on finding legit reasons? Ok.

This topic is a perfect example. Rather than look to see if there are physiological differences in the races, especially ones than might give one race an advantage, protectionist question whether they had outside help and were, in fact, less qualified. Despite there being no evidence to support the idea that AA was the reason for the number of black athletes succeeding in their sport.

My point has been, that this case, and society's acceptance of the unequal outcome,


is DIFFERENT from just about every other example.



(sorry if I got sloppy my wording, I've been discussing it for many pages, with dishonest people that won't even address the actual issue. Thank you for that btw.)

 

[Paul Essien]

2. Most top running backs have been blacks, but how many great white running backs never got to play at all, because MAYBE, they were screened out by AA ?

All you do is be vague and say "Maybe" "it could be" "It might be" to get you off the hook. That's all you do.

Look. If there was an average white running back (Never mind good) you'd never hear the end of him. Look at Larry Bird. He was an average B-ball player but because of whiteness, you never (To this day) here the end of him.

Also the NFL just approved new penalties for players who don’t stand for the National Anthem. So what happened to freedom of speech and expression? Or does freedom of speech only apply to white people?

NFL (Negros for Lease) This is what happens when you don't collectively stand for something better than your pay check! Now the inmates can't run the asylum. Kapernick ? He took one for the cause and sacrificed his life and career for nothing! 40million dollar slaves forever!

 

[Correll]

How would a talk with a NFL coach be relevant to my point?


And your dishonest refusal to even acknowledge my point, shows what kind of person you are.

Are you ******* kidding? Why WOULDN'T a discussion with an NFL coach be relevant?


They have input into who is drafted and who gets to play.
....e.

Because as I have said many times before,



the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.



That is my point. Again.

"Saying it" does not make it a fact
....l.

Nothing in my statement implied that my "saying it" is a supporting argument.


So, that part of your response was a dishonest dodge.


Are you DENYING what I said?

ie, that the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.

What are you babbling about now? Most of what you "say" doesn't even make sense.

Everyone that is posting in this bullshit thread has for the most part disagreed with the premise that AA is the reason for the players in the NFL being predominately black. And the teams are owned by a nearly 100% group of ultra wealthy white males , most of whom were horn into old money and never even touched a football. So there is FAR from an UNEQUAL OUTCOME in the NFL that is "discriminatory" against white people.

Even some that are extreme rightwingers like you.

The biggest disparity that really should be questioned is that a predominately black player population is being coached by a nearly unanimous population of white head coaches.

Many of whom have never even played a single down of professional football.

There is no Affirmative Action in the NFL, in the players ranks.

Accept the facts, and please stop talking to me.

Yes, as I have repeatedly stated, this case is an exception to the rule, for obvious reasons.


That said, my question stands.


Are you DENYING what I said?

ie, that the standard response in our society to a specific issue of unequal outcome, is to assume discrimination, and to take steps to "fix" it.

And attempt to find legit reasons for the unequal outcome and the person making that attempt is vicious attacked.

 

[protectionist]

It shows nothing of the kind. The links I posted show a natural reason for the over abundance of black players. The fact that one team, with more white players, has won more games, does not change that. The over abundance of black players is easily explained by the documented physical differences. Without actual evidence of AA, the scientific answer suffices.

Your links showed nothing. There's no better proof than performance, as white athletes have done, more than sufficiently.

 

[protectionist]

Yes, they do. There are physiological differences between the races. Those differences give blacks an advantage. That explains the over abundance of blacks in sports.

The OP was not about winning or holding records. It was about the numbers of blacks at the highest levels of sports. My links explain that.

No they don't. The biologists have been proven WRONG, by hundreds of white athletes. You keep posting posts that have ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED & REFUTED. Weird.

 

[protectionist]

The biology involved explains why there is an over abundance of blacks. That was the point of the OP. With that evidence present, and absolutely zero evidence of AA, the OP question has been answered.

And the answer is No.

HA HA HA. What a stupid post. The OP question has NOT been answered, and certainly not by your nincompoop posts about muscles or whatever the hell they were babbling about. If anything, the opposite of what you said might be true. There might BE AA.

The Super Bowl MVP is white. The Super Bowl winning team is heavily white. The World series MVP is white. 8 of 13 undefeated boxers are white. Both high jump gold medalists in the latest Olympics (2016-Rio) are white, Your alleged "case" is a laughingstock.

 

[protectionist]

Except the majorly of the Patriots were not white. Protectionist is suffering from dementia

The majority of the offense is white. The Super Bowl MVP is white. The coach is white. The whole special teams is white. Patriots are the whitest team in the NFL. Also the winningest.

 

[protectionist]

AA has helped whites the most that's a ******* fact.

While people of color, individually and as groups, have been helped by affirmative action in the subsequent years, data and studies suggest women — white women in particular — have benefited disproportionately. According to one study, in 1995, 6 million women, the majority of whom were white, had jobs they wouldn’t have otherwise held but for affirmative action.

Another study shows that women made greater gains in employment at companies that do business with the federal government, which are therefore subject to federal affirmative-action requirements, than in other companies — with female employment rising 15.2% at federal contractors but only 2.2% elsewhere. And the women working for federal-contractor companies also held higher positions and were paid better.

Even in the private sector, the advancements of white women eclipse those of people of color. After IBM established its own affirmative-action program, the numbers of women in management positions more than tripled in less than 10 years. Data from subsequent years show that the number of executives of color at IBM also grew, but not nearly at the same rate.

Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

There is no AA in the NFL.

You have provided no evidence it exists in player selection.

TIME magazine is part of the biased, liberal laughingstock. You should be ashamed to post such a source.

And I've been refuting this long, worn-out women & AA bullcrap line, for years in this forum, and have done so already IN THIS THREAD.

More Tales Of White Supremacy And White Privilege (Post # 1093)

Whenever the forum fixes the Search function which is in a state of shambles right now, I'll be able to post many more examples of my postings of the repudiation of the laughable AA white women line. Come on forum, fix it (and while you're at it, please get rid of the ANNOYING box in the lower right corner.

 

[WinterBorn]

It shows nothing of the kind. The links I posted show a natural reason for the over abundance of black players. The fact that one team, with more white players, has won more games, does not change that. The over abundance of black players is easily explained by the documented physical differences. Without actual evidence of AA, the scientific answer suffices.

Your links showed nothing. There's no better proof than performance, as white athletes have done, more than sufficiently.

My links show an explanation for the numbers of blacks in sports. Which was the question asked in the OP.

 

[protectionist]

My links show an explanation for the numbers of blacks in sports. Which was the question asked in the OP.

FALSE! You don't HAVE a link that addresses the OP.