• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the NFL do more to recruit non-Blacks as players?

Should the NFL be doing more to recruit non-Blacks as players?

  • They should have quotas to properly represent each ethnic group

    Votes: 1 3.3%

  • They need a specific affirmative action program for non-Blacks

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • They should make more effort to recruit non-Blacks

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • 70% does seem out of balance, are they giving Blacks preferential treatment?

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • If Blacks are better at football, so be it. The best player should play

    Votes: 25 83.3%

  • They need more Black coaches and less Black players

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    30
Ethereal said:
There's a reason why the vast majority of NFL and NBA players are black. I don't think there's anything wrong with pointing it out.
Click to expand...
or that's where they focus their abilities.
 
liblady said:
no, i mean like the third grader who doesn't have text books.......

i don't believe i can argue with a person who believes economics is irrelevant. again, did you grow up poor?
Click to expand...

Public schools with no text books? LOL!!! Maybe in the 1920's...
 
liblady said:
no, i mean like the third grader who doesn't have text books.......
Click to expand...

I grew up next to Ford Heights. Look it up. It is the poorest community in the US.

The schools did not lack books, they lacked discipline. HUGE difference.

liblady said:
i don't believe i can argue with a person who believes economics is irrelevant. again, did you grow up poor?
Click to expand...

This is not about economics, it is about institutionalized racism that you and people like you support.
 
Blackdog said:
I grew up next to Ford Heights. Look it up. It is the poorest community in the US.

The schools did not lack books, they lacked discipline. HUGE difference.



This is not about economics, it is about institutionalized racism that you and people like you support.
Click to expand...
we disagree, but can we be finished with this particular conversation?
 
liblady said:
we disagree, but can we be finished with this particular conversation?
Click to expand...

Until affirmative action and racist institutions cease to exist in government, no. ;)
 
Ikari said:
Damn you Tucker! Pointing out my mistakes!
*shakes fist*
Click to expand...

:rofl I read that and I was like "Rob Johnson? WTF?"

I knew you meant Brad, though, but I had to mention that the statistical comparisons actually favor McNabb.

If we think about what Limbaugh said, I believe he wanted to make it seem like he knew more about football than he really did, but to do it in a controversial way.

If anything, McNabb has totally proven Limbaugh wrong. McNabb's stats this year are almost gaudy now that he apparently has 3 legit weapons to throw to (Brent Celek, DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin.) He's going to eclipse 30,000 total yards within two weeks barring injury, which is no small feat. He's currently 33rd all-time in passing yards.
 
Here's what I don't get about the whole "its economics" thing.

If its economics, why isn't affirmative action things for schools based on income levels or locals rather than race?

If its economics, why would a middle class black person fit into the situation due to affirmative action but a lower class white person wouldn't?

As far as the obvious baiting thread question at the start. Absolutely not. People should be in the NFL based on their merit.

They should however be paid by Daniel Snyder based on their name value.

I hate you Dan Snyder (Obligitory dan snyder hate in a football thread)
 
Zyphlin said:
Here's what I don't get about the whole "its economics" thing.

If its economics, why isn't affirmative action things for schools based on income levels or locals rather than race?

If its economics, why would a middle class black person fit into the situation due to affirmative action but a lower class white person wouldn't?

As far as the obvious baiting thread question at the start. Absolutely not. People should be in the NFL based on their merit.

They should however be paid by Daniel Snyder based on their name value.

I hate you Dan Snyder (Obligitory dan snyder hate in a football thread)
Click to expand...
my point was it should be economic based. it's about opportunity.
 
Blackdog said:
Until affirmative action and racist institutions cease to exist in government, no. ;)
Click to expand...

Holy **** man, you're one of my new heroes.
 
Tucker Case said:
:rofl I read that and I was like "Rob Johnson? WTF?"

I knew you meant Brad, though, but I had to mention that the statistical comparisons actually favor McNabb.

If we think about what Limbaugh said, I believe he wanted to make it seem like he knew more about football than he really did, but to do it in a controversial way.

If anything, McNabb has totally proven Limbaugh wrong. McNabb's stats this year are almost gaudy now that he apparently has 3 legit weapons to throw to (Brent Celek, DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin.) He's going to eclipse 30,000 total yards within two weeks barring injury, which is no small feat. He's currently 33rd all-time in passing yards.
Click to expand...

:Cough: 30,000 yards? :cough:

And actually, his actions today don't really prove Limbaugh wrong for at the time. I ran the stats for the 2003 season.

Completion percentage, TD's, QB rating, yards....McNabb was around 14th-19th in the league in all those stats. Hardly the place for an "elite" QB without any history of being continually elite (ala the current Brady. He may be having a slightly down year, but its hard to discount the guy with 3 rings)
 
liblady said:
my point was it should be economic based. it's about opportunity.
Click to expand...

"i don't believe i can argue with a person who believes economics is irrelevant." - liblady

You seem to think that economics equals the only opportunity's. If this were the case, I know allot of successful blacks that are in for a surprise.
 
Last edited:
liblady said:
can students who attend sub par schools receiving a sub par education compete for the same university spots as those students attending superior schools?
Click to expand...
If you went to a subpar school and got a ****ty education wouldn't that mean that you are not that smart? Are you suggesting that universities lower their standards to let in dumber people?
 
liblady said:
white people have the same chance already. black men are inherently physically superior? really? are you angling for an MNF job?
Click to expand...

More athletic perhaps... Since Black people are more prone to hypertension, diabetes type 2, heart disease, etc and so forth, I'd say there's no evidence of 'superiority'.

Is athleticism hereditary? Most likely.
 
Blackdog said:
The idiots who support racism via government. Let my brothers and sisters stand up on their own. We don't need the ****ing "white mans" charity.
Click to expand...


AA may well be at the end of its time, but I'm sure you know many people who benefited greatly by it and the opportunities it provided, and the racist policies and thinking that it helped end in the business world.
 
Last edited:
liblady said:
can students who attend sub par schools receiving a sub par education compete for the same university spots as those students attending superior schools?
Click to expand...

Sure they can, assuming they're not Caucasian. Isn't that what Affirmative Action is all about?
 
Joe1991 said:
AA may well be at the end of it's time, but I'm sure you know many people who benefited greatly by by the opportunities it provided and the racist policies and thinking that it helped end in the business world.
Click to expand...

Yes it did, I agree. But it has outlived it's usefulness by about 28 years.

All it does now is create a larger racial divide along partisan political lines no less.
 
Joe1991 said:
AA may well be at the end of its time, but I'm sure you know many people who benefited greatly by it and the opportunities it provided, and the racist policies and thinking that it helped end in the business world.
Click to expand...

It didn't help end ****, at the end of the day those hiring managers are still racist and stupid.

All it did was alienate more people from the government and encourage racism as law / government policy.
 
stevenb said:
It didn't help end ****, at the end of the day those hiring managers are still racist and stupid.

All it did was alienate more people from the government and encourage racism as law / government policy.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. I think initially it was needed to get the foot in the door so to speak. But it ends at that point.

As I said it has long outlived it's usefulness.

PS I do agree it did not end a damn thing or do anything about racism.
 
Blackdog said:
"i don't believe i can argue with a person who believes economics is irrelevant." - liblady

You seem to think that economics equals the only opportunity's. If this were the case, I know allot of successful blacks that are in for a surprise.
Click to expand...
not only, but it's certainly important.
 
Blackdog said:
I don't agree. I think initially it was needed to get the foot in the door so to speak. But it ends at that point.

As I said it has long outlived it's usefulness.

PS I do agree it did not end a damn thing or do anything about racism.
Click to expand...

Racism will exist eternally.. as long as fear / jealousy / anger exists.

It's a human condition... if it's not white on black, black on white, brown on white, etc... it will be some other reason.... left handed people on right handed people.

It's unfortunate, that's the way humans are.
 
liblady said:
not only, but it's certainly important.
Click to expand...

Actually if this was a third world country I would agree, but it's not. Anyone can go to school here, period. Anyone can get an education no matter the background.

Affirmative action and programs like it need to die.
 
Zyphlin said:
:Cough: 30,000 yards? :cough:
Click to expand...

Correction: Total passing yards. He's already surpassed 30K total yards when rushing yards are included.

You do realize I mean in his career, right? I mean, it's not like he's remotely close to hitting 30K this season. :2razz:;)


And actually, his actions today don't really prove Limbaugh wrong for at the time. I ran the stats for the 2003 season.

Completion percentage, TD's, QB rating, yards....McNabb was around 14th-19th in the league in all those stats. Hardly the place for an "elite" QB without any history of being continually elite (ala the current Brady. He may be having a slightly down year, but its hard to discount the guy with 3 rings)
Click to expand...

While you were doing your research, did you happen to take a glance at his top receivers from that season? Todd Pinkston and James Thrash (and I know you know exactly how much he sucks) were the top two receivers each with about 570 total yards.

When you take that into account, I'd say his numbers were very impressive and idicative of an elite QB.

The thing is, Rush was making claims about McNabb without considering the severe suckage that McNabb had to deal with at his WR positions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom