Wired Mesh

You're a clever man Mesh. A real risk-taker. I love you.

I'm pretty sure you wouldn't in any normal circumstances, but I'm curious if you listened to Limbaugh's explanation of what he meant today in his show (or even saw this defense from Slate). And, if you did listen, I'm curious as to what your opinion of that was, as he spent a lot of time explaining himself in a surprisingly ingratiating manner (for him, at least).

P.S. - I do apologize for leaving such long and absurdly tangential comments on your last post. Bad blogger, bad.

Not to detract from what I think are valid points, but I was wondering about one statement you made:

Until about twenty years ago, there were no black quarterbacks in the NFL. The first I can remember was Doug Williams, and he was in the early '80s. Now, there were plenty of black athletes, but no QBS. Also no black coaches. Why not? Because there was an unspoken assumption that black people, while naturally gifted physically, were too stupid to play the more mental positions in the sport, QB and coaching.

This is one of those moments where I wish I knew more about sports and the broader trends of the last couple of decades. But even without that knowledge, I have a feeling that this is not why there were so few black QBs (or even none) and black coaches until fairly recently.

You have to consider the fact that blacks, in general, have only been making substantial investments in skills since they began to move into higher education several decades ago. It wasn't, for instance, that blacks were highly skilled several decades ago, but systemic racism kept those competent workers from getting jobs - but rather, it may be more plausible that racism kept them from, a priori, being in a position to generate the investments needed to become competent. And so we saw a swath of the population unable to capitalize, because they were not in a position to increase their skills and education in various sectors of the economy.

Isn't it probably related to coaching and quarterbacking, too? I'm not sure, but it seems to me that you might have a story that since blacks lagged in education in general, that that might explain why they were so slow to move into coaching and quarterbacking. That is, because they failed to accumulate substantive investments of human capital, education and skills in general for so long.

For instance, for females, you saw their earnings converge towards male earnings in the 1980s, and I get the impression that there is broad agreement that this happened not because there was necessarily a shift in attitudes towards women working, but because in the past, marriage patterns, fertility decisions and educational investments among women had begun to happen, which had led to them spending more time in the workplace, which led to them expecting to spend more time in the workplace, which in turn led to them spending more time investing in skills that are more costly in the short run, but have higher payoffs in the longrun (like management).

Maybe, too - and I apologize this is so damn long, but I can't quite figure out what precisely I'm trying to say - something like this is happening with blacks. Maybe QB and coaching trends with general attainments in earnings and experience. That is, perhaps twenty years ago, because blacks were entering education much later than white rivals, and possibly even because of how federal funds were distributed to public "blacks only" schools, blacks were slower to accumulate the investments.

Do you see what I mean? It's not that there were - I'm saying - x amount of competent black quarterbacks who were simply able to play, but systemic racism kept them from playing. It might more like the story with inequality in general - that blacks have been relatively slow to invest in education and experience, and as such, there were so few, if any, competently skilled black players for those more skillful positions.

SO it's not that there was widespread belief that blacks were simply not suited for the positions - but rather, it was a function of this lag in investment.

I don't know anything about sports, and only marginally more about economics, but I'm wondering if maybe there's another explanation in there to explain why there were once so few black Qbs.

Scott, while your thoughts are infinitely more profound than my quick generalization, I think they may still be a little off the mark. Ryan Davidson and I spent Monday night watching the Colts/Bucs contest (what a barnburner that was!) and discussing this very question: Why are black QBs still so vastly the minority when black players dominate every other position? Because even if you accept my (unsubstantiated) argument that discimination barred blacks from QBing in the past, few besides Jesse Jackson would argue that the NFL is still a den of racist good ol' boys.

The trouble with your competing theory, however, is that while coaching might require a certain ammount of formal education (although, Brian Crossman aside, few people bother getting graduate degrees in PE), quarterbacking really doesn't. If you have a great arm, a good head for a playbook, and can read defensive schemes quickly, you too can quarterback in the NFL, at least until some 300-pound man-beast sits on your shoulder. So if we don't want to say that the lack of black quarterbacks stems from racism or lack of education, what then shall we say?

Here are the two theories I'm currently toying with:

1) Lack of development. Almost no quarterback makes it to the NFL without first playing QB in high school, then in college. Black athletes, since they are often faster and stronger than their white counterparts, are placed as early as jayvee high school at the "skill" positions like running back, wide receiver, and linebacker. A white boy, who is slower but plays baseball from time to time, is perfect to stand in the pocket and throw the ball to his black buddies. So for the next eight years, that's what he does, and that's what they do. And it's not unthinkable that this trend is exacerbated by a bit of racism: small towns like their "golden boy" high school quarterback, and they like him white.

2) Lack of "leadership culture". This is based entirely upon personal observation, and could be wrong. But I get the impression that white kids, especially those from affluent backgrounds, get a lot more pressure to be young "leaders," to take the leadership role in whatever activities they pursue. In school, they run student council. In football, they quarterback. Call it the Max Fiscer principle: if Rushmore had a football team, Max would QB.

In black communities, meanwhile, it seems the goal isn't to lead so much as to escape, and to do so by individually distinguishing yourself. And you can distinguish yourself best by playing a position where you get to make terrific athletic plays on a regular basis: a position like running back or receiver.

Let's translate this into another context, that of music. The leadership role is played by the conductor, but the position that gets the most individual glory is (I think) the first violin. (Music folks can correct me if I'm mistaken; no doubt they will.) What I'm saying is that black culture produces young men who want to play first violin, while affluent white culture produces boys who think their duty is to conduct.

Let me know if this two-pronged explaination holds any water.

One of my officemates told me that currently, there are 7 black QBs that he can think of (that includes 2 backup QB he can think of). So, blacks have a 22% share of the 32 QB positions available. My officemate also tells me that this is more or less a new phenomenon, and that until seven years ago, there had not been any black QBs to his knowledge. The situation for black coaches is even worse. To his knowledge - and correct me on this, as I don't follow football - there are only 2 black, head coaches, out of 32 possible head coach positions. This is at the NFL level. These numbers, he tells me, are not representative of the situation at the collegiate level, where he says there are many more black QBs.

So, the question is why were blacks underrepresented in the QB position for so long - even though they were represented in the other positions - and secondly, why has that general trend changed recently?

Let me just push this competing theory a bit longer. It's not that the QB position requires greater investments in education. But think of this - if you are a young black male, and you know that the probability of you going to college is low, then what's your probability of playing professional football? Isn't it zero? You have a zero percent chance of making it to the NFL if you don't play college football, but since for so long the black male was not attending college, wouldn't that affect his present decisions about which football position to specialize in?

For instance, women used to spend longer periods of time out of the labor force. They had children, and would in turn leave the labor force to raise them (while the husband worked). Likewise, they expected to remain married for their entire lives, as divorce rates were lower than now. But that changed rather recently, and now it is the case that women have been going to school in larger numbers, and are spending less time out of the labor force. They are marrying later, waiting to have children, or having fewer children, and divorce rates have gone up. How might this affect their present decisions about what jobs to take? If they expect to be in the labor force longer, then now it becomes reasonable for them to think about specializing in jobs that are more costly in the short run, but have a longer pay off in the long run. For instance, in the early 70s, 21% of women got a bachelors in education. Only 3% in something like management. But now that's almost completely reversed, and fewer get nursing or education degrees, and more are getting more costly human capital degrees, like management.

So I'm wondering - maybe there's a similar story in this black quarterback effect. For one, black males have - I think - increased their enrollments in college. Maybe something has happened a while back that has affected young black males in their decisions about which positions to specialize in. Maybe it's college enrollment. Going back to that idea, it's becoming increasingly the case that blacks can attend college. There are still barriers that keep them from it, but there are relatively fewer barriers than say forty years ago.

I don't know if I buy this theory that I'm putting out there, but I tend to think that systemic racism isn't always the answer. Just with the question of gender inequality, for instance, oftentimes there are structural reasons why the gender gap was high at some periods and low in others, and it's not primarily because of attitudes towards women in the workforce. I'm wondering if, since NFL does depend on college success, then more than likely, there's some connection there.

But I've written this comment three times, and I'm still not satisfied with what I'm saying. I could see racism still being the culprit, but I'm just thinking that it's weird that we're seeing all of this hit all at once, roughly seven years ago. There's nothing unique about the 1990s to explain why black QBs would all of a sudden appear then.

Being a music folk who knows next to nothing about the sporting world, I ask for a clarification that will affect my understanding of your analogy. By "first violin," do you mean any one of the violinists sitting to the left of the conductor, or do you mean the specific position of concertmaster (the leader of the first violins)?

Scott, I think you're on the right path. Systemic racism probably has played a factor in it, but there are other factors as well. Lurone Jennings, an African-American minister working in the Chattanooga inner city that I knew at Covenant, has talked before about the ostracism that effectively happened when he left his inner city community for college (on a football scholarship, no less). Leaving for school (and advanced education in general) was seen as betraying your community and identity.

Dinesh D'Souza in The End of Racism also has several long chapters chronicling African-American progress in higher education and the obstacles both within (suspicion of higher education as the white man's tool) and without (systemic racism). One of his points, though, is that there are simply some areas that African-Americans have been more interested than others. Education and social work related fields get more than the requisite 10%, while advanced mathematics and other abstract areas get less. The issue isn't as much systemic racism as simply the immediate needs and desires of the black community. When you grow up in the inner city and want to help your community, its easier to see that as lying in sociology or political science, rather than getting an MBA or PhD in combinatorial mathematics.

I'm not sure how closely that relates to black quarterbacks and coaches. It could be that the QB and coaching position haven't been desired by African-American athletes until recently.

I wish I could tie this all in better, but I really have to get back to studying. arrgg. Read End of Racism.

Not that this competing theory necessarily means what Mesh is saying can't also be true. For instance, I'm not sure why the QB position would be singled out - if educational attainments kept blacks from the NFL, then it seems like all positions would be under-represented, and not just the QB. But I was wondering if maybe there was something unique about the QB position - perhaps racism interacting with other factors kept blacks from specializing in the QB position for so long, and so that is starting to change as blacks perceive the future and realize that that position is now open to them, whereas historically, the probabilities of playing professional football as a QB were so much lower, because of beliefs that a white team could not play under a black QB (or a black coach for that matter).

I did a quick google search on "back quarterbacks history" and, frustratingly enough, couldn't really find anything on why black qb's are such a new thing and what would keep African-Americans from becoming so. I found some good articles describing the current situation (such as this and this), but nothing discussing, from either a "conservative" or "liberal" perspective, what has made the current situation the way it is.

I wonder if the analogy could be made between a football team and a business. If an entire group of people has been prohibited from a business for a long period, it does not seem to be reasonable to expect that, as soon as the business is open to that group, there will be an equitable distribution across all levels of the organizational hierarchy, particularly if that group has had no experience in that business. Instead, it seems more reasonable to expect that group to integrate into that business from the bottom up so that, given enough time for that group to accumulate experience necessary to function at a higher level, there will eventually be an equitable distribution.

Likewise, if a QB or coach is considered higher up in the organizational hierarchy, then it could be reasonable to expect that it would simply be a manner of time before African-Americans integrate into the "higher levels" of that hierarchy.

Just a thought, and I'm probably wrong. But now I'm really curious.

hey mesh, wrecking ball is by emmylou harris, not gillian welch. unless gillian's put out an album i don't know about.

From what I know about football, there are only two factors that seem to figure into the very late inclusion of African-Americans quarterbacks in the NFL: (1) a long dominant playing-style paradigm in the NFL, and (2) racism. We all know how racism works, so I'll concentrate on the first (and primary) reason.

(1) From the time that African-Americans have been allowed to play professional sports at all up until the early to mid nineties, a certain style of offense dominated all other varieties in the NFL. I guess you could call it the "Pro-style" offense. This offense functioned with clearly defined roles for each position: the halfback runs, the fullback blocks, and the quarterback throws, etc. The prototypical pro-style QB was Dan Marino. He's big, tall, and had a cannon for a right arm. His job was to throw when the called play is a pass, and hand-off when the called play is a run. Quarterbacks ran the ball in the Pro-style offense in pretty much only two situations: when it's 3rd and very short (or goal) and even then it's more of a dive than a run, and when they almost certainly were about to be sacked. The Pro-style offense (and the coaches who ran it) discouraged frequently scrambling QBs because they could get hurt more easily away from the protection of the offensive line. And hurt QBs can't fulfill their role of passing the football.

The entrenched pro-style offense mentality kept the focus away from African-American quarterbacks. Mesh is right when he said that African-American culture encourages more flashy, athletic play styles, but wrong when he said that this keeps African-American's (henceforth AA) away from the position of quarterback. Instead, AAs play quarterback in a more flashy, athletic way. Since the NFL was rooted in pro-style methodology, no one wanted a quarterback who was going to run around and get hurt when they were "supposed" to be standing tall in the pocket, chucking the pigskin down the field. I believe it was the very role-based, functionalistic system of the Pro-style offense--and those who preached it--that did more than anything else to keep AAs out of the NFL.

(To preempt possible counterexamples: Randall Cunningham played in a Pro-style offense for the Eagles in the late eighties/early nineties and almost ran for a thousand yards one year—as quarterback! But considering that around this time he was setting NFL records for the most times sacked in a season, I’m inclined to say that a lot of his rushing was due to the lack of protection he was getting (hence the phrase “forced to scramble.”) Also, Warren Moon was putting up huge numbers for Houston at this time, but he played in the (now largely extinct) run-and-shoot offense.)

However, two factors worked to force a paradigm change in the NFL: (1) the success of San Francisco's "West-coast Offense", and (2) the eventually undeniable play-making ability of AA QBs.

Bill Walsh, coach of the San Francisco 49'ers for most of the eighties, devised an offense premised on lots of movement, spreading the field, and timing patterns. Instead of positioning the quarterback firmly in the pocket, he implemented a lot of play action, and gave his QBs more freedom to roam. Joe Montana and Steve Young brought several Super Bowl victories to Walsh and the so-called "West-coast Offense," and this forced other teams--in order to catch up to the niners' success--to tinker with the Pro-style set-ups they were running.

Right about the time the NFL became willing to experiment with their dearly loved Pro-style offense there came a spate of heroic AA quarterbacks playing for conspicuous college football teams. Charlie Ward (FSU, Heisman Trophy, National Championship), Tommy Frazier (Nebraska, Heisman Trophy?, National Championship), Tee Martin (Tennessee, National Championship), and more. I think NFL coaches saw the explosive and athletic power AA QBs like these brought to their teams, and softened their hearts—and their stance on the Pro-style offense. Enter Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb, Michael Vick, etc. By the mid-nineties, the offensive-style paradigm finally changed enough for teams to desire the athleticism and mobility AA QBs typically bring.

Three things:

A. Mesh = Barry Gib
2. Mesh = Zionist
3. Paul Nedelevski: "undenialbe play-making ability of AA QB's" = racist statement
C. Paul Nedelevskovksifz..nevermind = needs to get a blog
and
E. Gosey = Big fan of Leanne Womack

Thank you and goodnight.

Josiah--I think you're joking about the racism of my "unbelievable playmaking ability of AA QBs" comment, but if not, consider the following assertions.

(1) Some peoples' physiological structure better equips them for specific activities (the average height of an NBA player is much higher than the national average for a reason, etc.).
(2) Athleticism supervenes on physiology
(3) There are real genetic physiological differences in the races, just like there are real genetic physiological differences between family groups.
(4) Therefore, it could be the case that there is a difference between the athleticism of black people and white people that is founded simply in genetic physiology.

That's not racism--it's just acknowledging that racial equality doesn't mean racial sameness.

just ignore him, nedilisky. he's just trying get you set up with a blog and attention only encourages him. He also looooooooves ricky martin.

How long is a QB in the making? Doesn't he spend a long time investing in those skills? If so, then it wouldn't seem likely that as the NFL abandoned pro-style styles, you wouldn't see the effect til much later. Or are you saying that these black QBs were waiting, and ready, all that time - just without the opportunity to play, since the establishment had a strategy that made their skills obsolete?

If they always existed (strong black QBs), but were just overlooked because of the pro-style dominance, then why didn't black QBs just adjust? They somehow didn't have the ability to change - even though they knew that the only way to make it as an NFL QB would be to adopt that style? That seems far-fetched to me. I can't imagine that the style you're describing is so difficult or impossible to learn that a black QB is actually handicapped in the NFL.

Here's my question - is anyone saying that during the time in which there were no black QBs playing in the NFL, is it believed that there did exist strong black QBs that were simply being passed over in favor of white ones? Or is it rather that they didn't exist. My sense is that they didn't exist for a long time - not that they were being passed over. If they did exist, where did they go? They just moved to other positions, I gather?

When one's office Internet access is shut down for three days, there is much catching up to do.

Gosey: She did. My musical list refers to individual songs, not albums, and "Wrecking Ball" is the last track on Welch's "Soul Journey." The song bears no relation to Harris' album, except they they are both very good. Gillian Welch, by the way, will be playing in Chattanooga at Rhythm and Brews on Oct. 26. You should come to town and see her. I will buy you a beer.

Kevin: I was thinking of the concertmaster, although my understanding of her job is probably faulty.

Scott: It's probably worth noting that football players often aren't pinned to specific positions until as late as their college careers. If no one was looking for the style of quarterback that black athletes tended toward, they could switch to other positions well before they reached the NFL. Which I suspect they did.

Josiah: I like singing your name: Cruz Bustamante! Cruz Busta-busta-bustamante!

Few More Things:

1. Paul N needs to get a blog

2. If you grant physiological differences between the races, depending on whatever brand of monism you may or may not be smoking, you could argue that "intelligence" is also primarily physiologically rooted, and therefore one "race" may or may not be "naturally" smarter than the other.

3. Josiah does not think that Paul Nedelvskovkintanio is a racist.

4. Gosey = cooler than Crabby but not cooler than Josiah

oh groovy, mesh. I thought it was albums to which you were referring and obviously I don't know the tracks on "Soul Journey." Damn. I really need to get that album 'cos I think everything she's done is fantastic. lemme know if you come down to the Atl show, we can hook up or something.

This is kind of interesting, and relevant to this thread.

"Rush, by the Numbers: The face of 'social concern'? by John R. Lott

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/RushLimbaugh.html

Lott is an economist, formerly housed at the University of Chicago, now resident scholar the American Enterprise Institute. He tries to see whether Rush's statement is at all true - after controlling for all characteristics relevant to the question, Lott wanted to see whether the media gave more positive coverage compared to other QBs. It would, at the very least, get to the heart of whether Rush's statement was factually true or false.

Dennis Green isn't overrated