More whites starting than signing day percentage?

[referendum]

I haven't followed signing day results for very long, but it seems that even teams with a decent number of whites starting (say from 8 or nine and on up) will offer and sign a bigger percentage of blacks every year than actually stay on the team and start down the road. Assuming this is correct, and I'd have to do some research on it, I can think of three reasons. 1) I'm guessing that walk-ons who make the team are disproportionatly white. 2) A black who is signed with a scholarship offer is more likely to be overrated than a white coming out of high school, and when he doesn't get as much playing time as he thought he would, would be more likely to get discouraged and drop out. Meanwhile, an average white player will just appreciate the scholarship and stay in school regardless of his college career. 3)An obvious one here, though it doesn't come up as often as it should: player misconduct, and assorted dysfunctional behaviour will gradually remove far more black players than white players from college rosters. Edited by: referendum

 

[White Power]

Not to mention that blacks don't like to study and most can't pass an exam without studying like the average white can in college that most flunk out in their 1st 2 years of college. Most schools are now cracking down on the affletes who only want to play a sport and not go to school unlike the NBA a college football player has to last until his junior year to be eligible for the draft. Some I'm afaid can't last that long because of poor grades, and other mitigating circumstances. Hence that leads to more white playing take Kentucky as an example of this positive turn around for the white athlete. I only hope it continues to become a bigger factor for whites getting to play in the future.