Doug Williams comment about QBs and race

[airtime143]

Seems like lots of black QBs are recruited to college to play QB...at least that's how it happens in my NCAA 07 dynasty mode.

I wouldnt know about that... what I do know is that it is ridiculous how many family ties there are in the NFL.

In a country with 327 million people, a league with less than 2000 players, a ridiculous amount of them come from legacy families.
Training advantages with an experienced player and family genetics are a big part... but it does seem you need to be super special to break in as a nobody... and you really have no chance if you happen to be at a school where a legacy player is attending.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Remember when the Giants had a starting guard who was married to Coughlin's daughter? Talk about pressure.

Yeah, I would guess that you would have to be super special to break in as a nobody. That's kind of the whole point of the NFL, tho.

 

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

That is a bad equivalency- I am sure many black couples would struggle the way your parents would struggle due to their genetic makeup.


As for the topic at hand, I think it is fair to say the world class athletes are to a degree genetic freaks- physical and/or mental.

When you get to the QB position, It is way easier to be a genetic freak mentally and succeed with mundane physical skills than it is to be a physical freak with mundane mental skills.

By all physical standards, P. Manning and Rivers should never have made college QB. but both guys are outstanding at reading and reacting quickly as well as instant recall of past film sessions while ducking monsters.

On the other hand, scores of physical freaks of nature bomb out of the league every year at QB because they just dont have the mind for it.


As for Williams point, I dont know the numbers, nor do I know the players getting short-changed.... but he may very well have a point if you look at it from the above perspective.

Both of Archie mannings boys were sub-par athletes, both likely played with high talent players that were massively physically superior to them, and if they didnt have an NFL QB as a dad, there is a big chance they never would have had the opportunity to develop- they would have been bounced for stronger, faster guys.
Rivers' dad was a coach... and I bet he started over some better athletes.

From that standpoint, it becomes more who you know than what color you are.
The above examples had double blessings. An in house mentor and someone in power to assure they get the opportunity to succeed.
Someone who can pay for every camp, introduce them to every college coach, open every door and support them as they learn.

At that point it seems family money and notoriety beats color hands down.
WIlliams may have a point that the system being what it is, there may be a ton of black players with the tools to do the job but nobody in power to assure they get a fair development period, nor people that understand how to hone their skills.
Lets be honest, public school coaches can only do so much. they can only mentor so many people.
It seems the lions share of NFL QBs have a laundry list of special camps beginning at youth through college recruitment, and it is few and far between that you get some schlub white or black that *only* did pop warner and high school.

But Rivers and the Mannings are legit good to great QBs. I think you are reaching when you use family ties to invoke nepotism keeping opportunities away from black players trying out to be QB.

I am not denying nepotism (Jarrett Payton doesn't get picked up as UDFA by the Bears without his family name sure), but J. Payton didn't earn the privilege to play in the NFL. Rivers and the Mannings did (I pass on the Eli debate while NOT HOF imo)

Your whole point about smart vs. athletic in a QB is true for everyone. And while coaches may favor some due to a famous last name in HS or college, we know that no one in the history of the NFL became an All-Pro due to a last name.

Some nepotism in lower levels aside, NFL is merit-based and so is NCAA where schools have walk-on tryouts. Any exceptions fly in the face of the spirit of the regulations of the game itself.

You CAn find some coaches blindly holding on to a lower talent QB (UNC coach held onto starting Marquise Williams too long over Mitch Trubisky in the view of many UNC sportswriters),

but how do you prove malicious intent over incompetence?

 

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

I wouldnt know about that... what I do know is that it is ridiculous how many family ties there are in the NFL.

In a country with 327 million people, a league with less than 2000 players, a ridiculous amount of them come from legacy families.
Training advantages with an experienced player and family genetics are a big part... but it does seem you need to be super special to break in as a nobody... and you really have no chance if you happen to be at a school where a legacy player is attending.

I am all for equal opportunity, but I think it would be weird to solve the "legacy problem" with anything other than a merit-based game across all levels where you keep the privilege of playing based on how you perform regardless of last name.

I have not seen contradictory evidence to suggest there is a national problem there?

TL;DR - Yes, Steve Young's son had better coaching than my son did, but that is nowhere near the primary reason why my son will not make it in NCAA Division I let alone the NFL.

 

[reggie_love]

Yeah but this thread is about BACKUP black QBs.

which is why its Special person

 

[run and shoot]

But Rivers and the Mannings are legit good to great QBs. I think you are reaching when you use family ties to invoke nepotism keeping opportunities away from black players trying out to be QB.

I am not denying nepotism (Jarrett Payton doesn't get picked up as UDFA by the Bears without his family name sure), but J. Payton didn't earn the privilege to play in the NFL. Rivers and the Mannings did (I pass on the Eli debate while NOT HOF imo)

Your whole point about smart vs. athletic in a QB is true for everyone. And while coaches may favor some due to a famous last name in HS or college, we know that no one in the history of the NFL became an All-Pro due to a last name.

Some nepotism in lower levels aside, NFL is merit-based and so is NCAA where schools have walk-on tryouts. Any exceptions fly in the face of the spirit of the regulations of the game itself.

You CAn find some coaches blindly holding on to a lower talent QB (UNC coach held onto starting Marquise Williams too long over Mitch Trubisky in the view of many UNC sportswriters),

but how do you prove malicious intent over incompetence?

You CAn find some coaches blindly holding on to a lower talent QB (UNC coach held onto starting Marquise Williams too long over Mitch Trubisky in the view of many UNC sportswriters),

At the risk of stereotyping a southern school, if Trubs was markedly better than Williams, Trubs wouda' started at UNC.

 

[run and shoot]

Thought this was funny....almost as funny as the guy who, in multiple threads, is stumping for Vince Evans being good.

Here's all I said: "When Evans had deep threat....WR James Scott (we were dangerous on "O")....we lead the league in pass yrds. per play.
Then our management / ownership was to cheap to re-sign Scott and he left the team. "

So that in no way says he was "good". I'm saying he had some success when he had a decent Wr.
But we'll never know ( how "good" he could've been) since he didn't get all or some of the tools he needed. Now what I will say is Evans shouda' applied himself more i.e. like a Brady or a Wilson. I don't think he went balls out to improve as a Qb, as much as he should've.
Plus, he didn't good coaches ( and lets not put to much emphasis on this).

 

[Sculpt]

Thought this was interesting...
Doug Williams: "The other problem is guys don't get a chance very often to come in as backups, to maybe get a chance to learn holding a clipboard. Backup QB is still, more often than not, a white position. There are exceptions, but not many."

Good thing Lamar Jackson and Pat Mahomes are white. Otherwise people might think what Doug Williams said was one big racist lie.

PrimeTime, Can one suggest there's a skin color bias, somewhere specific, without it being "a racist statement"? Or for you is it, you mention it in anyway, it's 'racist'?

Williams' statement is not well defined. What's the context?

Is Williams calling the Backup QB position a "white position"? No. I think it's fairly obvious Williams is saying some QBs are being overlooked for the clipboard-holding Backup QB position because of the darkness of their skin. He must be talking about a systemic issue, as it addresses a thousand decisions make by a few hundred coaches/GMs over many years. Could he be correct?

Would Williams know what he's talking about?
He was backup to Jay Schroeder in the 1986 year, played some games where Schroeder was hurt, and ultimately won the position to start the playoffs, went on to become the MVP of 86 Superbowl. He went on to coach college football, and has worked as a personnel exe for the Skins since 2013.

Could Williams have said, in his experience, and from what he's seen, football personnel tend to overlook darker skinned QBs for the clipboard-holding Backup QB position? Or would that still be 'racist' or 'a lie'?

The quote is from the book Quarterback: Inside the Most Important Position in the National Football League' by John Feinstein. Here's the spot/context in the book:

 

[run and shoot]

So you are assigning that to being black when what it was really about Jackson's mental acuity testing and grasp of o in interviews. I personally don't take any shade of dumb at QB in one.


You mean the guy that spent another 9 seasons in the league with other teams after the Bear and only threw for 1000 yards one more time
and had a 63 career rating? Must be race.
I've got 2 words for this, Bobby Douglass. Rocket arm, mobile, great runner but should have played TE.

Keep this in mind when Evans went to Oakland ( it was mostly in a back-up role....kinda' ironic). Plus, he didn't play in many games.
---------
On Douglass, I liked him. No he wasn't a "good" Qb. But he is another one who had mediocre coaching and no wr's. So we'll never know what he could've been

 

[Sculpt]

Tell Doug to stfu and get out of America if he doesn't like it! I bet he kneels for the anthem like a coward too!

That's obviously sarcasm. Comon Peps!

 

[Sculpt]

Is there a link or some context somewhere?

The quote is from the book Quarterback: Inside the Most Important Position in the National Football League' by John Feinstein. Here's the spot/context in the book:

 

[remydat]

You CAn find some coaches blindly holding on to a lower talent QB (UNC coach held onto starting Marquise Williams too long over Mitch Trubisky in the view of many UNC sportswriters),

Williams had a better record as a starter than Trubs so not sure how Fedora blindly held onto anyone. Williams was a better college QB (passing and running) while Trubs was the better NFL prospect. Not unheard of as the college game is different and values running QBs more than the NFL does and limited passers can succeed in college because the windows are much larger.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/marquise-williams-1.html

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/mitch-trubisky-1.html

Williams was more of a threat on the ground but combined their stats are really not that far off. Both hard around 4k combined yards and 37 TDs or so. Entirely reasonable for him to stick with Williams as they were competing for the ACC crown with Clemson.

 

[remydat]

As for Williams comments, I think the point he was making is that a black QB that hasn't been drafted as the eventual starter (rules out guys like Mahommes and Jackson who are first round picks) are less likely to become back-up QBs and develop. I think anecdotally there is some truth to that because in a lot of cases, that black QB is athletic enough to play another position so more than likely if the coaching staff isn't immediately convinced the dude is a QB, they are likely to ask him to change positions to get that athleticism on the field. Often times then, it is left to the black QB to decide how hard he wants to push being a QB and perhaps risk being accused of not being a team player vs taking one for the time and trying to help the team immediately.

Not sure it is a racial thing so much as it is an athleticism thing. It just so happens that black QBs are more athletic on average than their white counterparts so likely asked to move more often than a white QB. Although we saw this with Tebow where some thought he fit better at FB or TE.

 

[Sculpt]

As for Williams comments, I think the point he was making is that a black QB that hasn't been drafted as the eventual starter (rules out guys like Mahommes and Jackson who are first round picks) are less likely to become back-up QBs and develop. I think anecdotally there is some truth to that because in a lot of cases, that black QB is athletic enough to play another position so more than likely if the coaching staff isn't immediately convinced the dude is a QB, they are likely to ask him to change positions to get that athleticism on the field. Often times then, it is left to the black QB to decide how hard he wants to push being a QB and perhaps risk being accused of not being a team player vs taking one for the time and trying to help the team immediately.

Not sure it is a racial thing so much as it is an athleticism thing. It just so happens that black QBs are more athletic on average than their white counterparts so likely asked to move more often than a white QB. Although we saw this with Tebow where some thought he fit better at FB or TE.

Plus, I think using the words black and white is probably a poor choice of words. Not only is there a significant 'mixed race' population who are not 'black' or 'white', genetic testing shows the world population is basically 100% 'mixed', despite any outward appearances. Might be better to simply refer to shade of skin when it's absolutely necessary.

 

[run and shoot]

I've heard the "athleticism" mantra. And the "sit-in-the-pocket" mantra. What I've found is "damned if ya' do, damned if ya' don't". Case in point, when Byron Leftwich came into the league, the knock, by some was........"not mobile enough".

Oh here's another one, "don't rely on your speed or legs". Well, when at the combine University of Oregon Qb Darron Thomas ran a 40 YARD DASH: 4.80 Sec.the knock, by some was........"not fast enough".

 

[Xuder O'Clam]

I've heard the "athleticism" mantra. And the "sit-in-the-pocket" mantra. What I've found is "damned if ya' do, damned if ya' don't". Case in point, when Byron Leftwich came into the league, the knock, by some was........"not mobile enough".

Oh here's another one, "don't rely on your speed or legs". Well, when at the combine University of Oregon Qb Darron Thomas ran a 40 YARD DASH: 4.80 Sec.the knock, by some was........"not fast enough".

You have to ask the question then, "Were they lying?"

 

[run and shoot]

run and shoot said:


I've heard the "athleticism" mantra. And the "sit-in-the-pocket" mantra. What I've found is"damned if ya' do, damned if ya' don't" . Case in point, when Byron Leftwich came into the league, the knock, by some was........"not mobile enough".

Oh here's another one, "don't rely on your speed or legs". Well, when at the combine University of Oregon Qb Darron Thomas ran a 40 YARD DASH: 4.80 Sec.the knock, by some was........"not fast enough".

You have to ask the question then, "Were they lying?"

"damned if ya' do, damned if ya' don't"

Read this: post #113 as a reference point

post #113

Doug Williams comment about QBs and race

Seems like lots of black QBs are recruited to college to play QB...at least that's how it happens in my NCAA 07 dynasty mode. I wouldnt know about that... what I do know is that it is ridiculous how many family ties there are in the NFL. In a country with 327 million people, a league with...

www.chicitysports.com

 

[TN-Bear83]

Exactly this is 2019, not 1959 so the black man has nothing to complain about in society either while most still try to play the race card at every opportunity

This is 2019. The white man has no place to complain about their place in society. Steve Nash would never complain about such a thing. That is a ridiculous suggestion.
[/QUO

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Exactly this is 2019, not 1959 so the black man has nothing to complain about in society either while most still try to play the race card at every opportunity

@EVERYONE

It's the newest #CCSRACIST... only signed up to post his hatred for people that don't look like him.

Wow... I can't believe that the hatred and darkness/despair in your heart compelled you to sign up for a CHICAGO BEARS FOOTBALL message board to spread your RACIST

 

[botfly10]

It's not about genetic variation. It's genetic tendencies. And with regard to those racial genetic tendencies factoring into success, particularly in athletics, of course they do.

As for your wikipedia dig...pfffft.

Here are three NIH studies.
1)ACTN3 Genotype Is Associated with Human Elite Athletic Performance
2)The many advantages to the ACTN "speed gene"
3)Non-hispanic blacks have greater % of type II( fast twitch) skeletal muscle.

All three outline the truth that blacks as a race tend to have significantly greater amount of type II fast twitch muscle and that muscle is proven to superior in performance, almost necessary for high level success at burst sports.

the fuck is all this. you're not even having the same conversation anymore. I can't tell if you are being willfully obtuse to fuck with me or if you genuinely missed the point about how grouping people by race is meaningless from a genetics standpoint. Just can't tell.

If you actually care, ask the right question with your google sleuthing. Look up how race is not a thing, from a genetics perspective.

To me it looks more like you have an ingrained belief that there are some inherent biological differences (genetic) that separate humans into naturally occurring groups that we recognize those as races. Which is just not real.

Again, if you were to blindly run the DNA of every human on earth and separate them into groups based on degree of genetic similarity, the groupings would not correlate to races.

Races groups is a nearly entirely cultural construct. It has almost not basis in biology. What genetic differences do occur can be erased in a single generation of breeding. From a genetics standpoint, racial grouping is almost entirely arbitrary.

So you can run all the stats you want and try to correlate genetics to your grouping, but those correlations are fucking meaningless when the grouping is arbitrary to begin with.

But fuck, I have already said this like 5 times. If you are fucking with me, then you got me. But if you really are so desperate to cling to the idea that there is some inherent biological difference between the races, well that is fucked up and thats on you and you should probably reflect on why that belief is so important to you.