I understand what you are saying about applying nicknames to black QBs. Other than that I feel this is the only place paying attention to what is going on with the QB position. We are just seeing an open take over of the QB position. Nothing is objective in the analysis of blacks playing the QB position. Peter King and Florio are both advocating for the rooney rule to make sure that a black coaching spot is created to work directly with the QB position. Florio has openly advocated for more black qbs. No one is advocating for more White athletes at any position. Just the same as last year a black QB playing at a lower level school is being touted as having the most "upside" in the draft and should be the first pick in the draft. I've pointed out many times how the rule changes have allowed black quarterbacks to make inroads at the QB position, the offenses run by black qbs are more simplistic and take advantage of playing in space whereas White QBs are still asked to execute run more complex offenses. We also saw a black GM cast off the best QB a franchise has had in 25-30 years when the Browns got rid of Mayfield for Watson. I will not be surprised Atlanta pick either of the black QBs in this year's draft as they now have a black GM as well. I just feel it's my role to point all of this out and have it documented somewhere.
Jameis Winston has been a mediocre QB his whole career and comes out yesterday saying he is working on his intermediate accuracy. Another QB on the Saints roster - Blake Bortles requests his release. Bortles did not live up to the his draft status but he never threw 30 ints in a season. Winston has a 2 year contract with the Saints, Bortles is now a free agent.
Winston, Tyrod Taylor, Teddy Bridgewater and Jacoby Brissett are all mediocre players. Luckily three of them are now back up QBs. I'd even argue the mental midget Kyler Murray has already achieved the most success he will ever have. Dare I say the same for Lamar Jackson? Jalen Hurts is being treated with kid gloves by the Eagles brass.
I don't disagree with much or any of that. That wasn't the point of any of what I wrote.
To put it another way, if you respond to the lack of objectivity by simply dismissing every single Black QB as a "quota" no matter how successful, many will simply dismiss
you as also lacking objectivity and pushing your own agenda that allows for no deviation, and that's not what you want. Are Mahomes, Wilson, Watson, Jackson, Murray, Prescott and others totally lacking in ability to the point that they are mere "black quarterbacks" about whom nothing good can be said? When you hold to positions like that you are basically the mirror image of those you criticize for pushing the Black QB agenda. You want to establish credibility by being as fair as possible, not by copying the methods of those who lie about everything all the time.
Who are you trying to reach? Are you just trying to reinforce the racial grievances of pissed off young Whites, a relatively small group with no influence when it comes to the Caste System, or are you trying to get scouts, coaches, writers, parents of players, the players themselves and their friends to understand where you're coming from? Do you want Peter King to think of you as "that dedicated and persistent guy who does a good job of exposing the Black QB agenda," or as "that guy who hates Black QBs and can never say anything positive about any of them"?
JerryReb is right that many if not most Black QBs fail in the NFL. That's not news to us. It's a numbers game, just as it is at every other position. Look at how many Black RBs, CBs, DTs, LBs, safeties, and offensive linemen fail, but there's always a dozen more to plug in their place when they do. It's important to point out things like that, but when you can't say anything good about any of them, calling every single one of them a mere black quarterback, in other words not having enough ability to start over any White quarterbacks, you're going to instantly lose most people, including people of potential influence who might otherwise be receptive.
If you're only interested in "preaching to the choir" that's one thing, but I don't think that's your intention. All I'm saying, and again it's just friendly unsolicited advice that you can accept or reject it certainly won't hurt my feelings if you reject it, is take notice of who you're trying to reach and how you're going about it. When it comes to racial topics it's important to be as fair as possible, and again we have so much evidence on our side, real and indirect, that just consistently pointing it out without name-calling or constant derogatory references to an entire group is what's needed and is more effective in persuading open-minded people.
