Super Bowl LII

Westside

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
7,703
Location
So Cal

Heretic

Master
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
3,261
Eagles have a weapon that could very well spell the difference in the big game. I don't believe the Patriots will be able to cover him. See below!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...om&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial
So do the Patriots in Gronkowski, assuming he's fit to play. I think the Pats chances of winning the SB depend on him being healthy and playing. It forces Philly's D to account for him at all times and puts the pressure on them instead of on the Pats.
 

link

Newbie
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
49
Love that we have 2 white QB's and 2 white TE that will decide the game. And if their is no Gronk it will be Amendola all the way.
 

chris371

Mentor
Joined
Dec 1, 2006
Messages
715
Cant believe the pats are in it again. Unbelievable. I Hope Burkhead and Gronk are healthy and have a Bit game. So happy to see amendola get his respect Too
 

Shadowlight

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,882
I hesitate to use the phrase "you've come a long way baby" but I looked back at the rosters of the 2005 SB matchup between these two teams that the Pats won 24-21 and it was simply more caste. The one glaring exception was the excellent Mike Vrabel, the hybrid DE/OLB who also on occasion played TE when the Pats were near the goal line.

Other than him though it was strictly a caste affair. Brady of course was the QB but there were ZERO skill players. Even the starting TE's were black. And apart from Vrabel there were zero white defensive starters. Ted Bruschi is half Italian half Filipino.

Unfortunately the caste theme dominates both of these defenses today. The lone exception is DE Chris Long but he is not a starter.

This matchup will feature two elite white TE's who could very well be the key players when it is all said and done. And of course the Pats have two white WR's and a back up white RB.

I wouldn't read anything into it as far as a long term trends but in pure caste terms this NEW SB matchup between these two teams is decidedly better in anti caste terms.
 

Westside

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
7,703
Location
So Cal
Great piece on Playoff Dola on BSPN site. From DAL=>PHIL=>St Louis=>NE.
 

Ambrose

Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,630
Location
New York
I have no facts, but I'd guess Belichick allows for an all-black defense for black morale. Because the offensive glory goes mostly to the white players, to keep the black players on the team happy and motivated the blacks have their own team within the team. Brady too knows this and is rightfully quick to congratulate the defense after a win. Black confidence these days can sometimes be a very fragile vase, take one flower out of it and the bouquet wilts.
 

Ambrose

Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,630
Location
New York
Here's a good question what was the whitest super bowl ever ?

Super Bowl I team roster photos:

Packers (winners 35-10)
1966_Green_Bay_Packers.jpg


Chiefs
1967-Chiefs.jpg



Don't know for certain if it was the whitest, but certainly one of the most.
 

Carolina Speed

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
5,760
Super Bowl I team roster photos:

Packers (winners 35-10)
1966_Green_Bay_Packers.jpg


Chiefs
1967-Chiefs.jpg



Don't know for certain if it was the whitest, but certainly one of the most.

A point of interest was KC Chiefs number 23 Bert Coan . Coan was 6'4, 215 lbs. HB and reportedly ran a 9.4 100 yard dash! Amazingly his best season he ran for 521 yards on 96 carries and led the league with 5.4 yards per rushing attempt.
Makes you wonder where all these big fast white players went. I guess we got slower over the years.
Green Bay's Jim Taylor was no slouch either, rushing for over 8,000 yards in his career and a member of the NFL HOF. Taylor led the league in rushing one season and had a career long 84 yard TD run!
Again, all the fast white RB's just suddenly disappeared.
 
Last edited:

Ambrose

Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,630
Location
New York
A point of interest was KC Chiefs number 23 Bert Coan . Coan was 6'4, 215 lbs. HB and reportedly ran a 9.4 100 yard dash! Amazingly his best season he ran for 521 yards on 96 carries and led the league with 5.4 yards per rushing attempt.
Makes you wonder where all these big fast white players went. I guess we got slower over the years.
Green Bay's Jim Taylor was no slouch either, rushing for over 8,000 yards in his career and a member of the NFL HOF. Taylor led the league in rushing one season and had a career long 84 yard TD run!
Again, all the fast white RB's just suddenly disappeared.

Those are some sharp facts there Carolina. For decades now, millions of white Americans have been led to believe that "only the best players are selected" to work as professional footballers. Many of those millions don't even know that they don't know how white players are not employed even when they are better than their black peers.
 

link

Newbie
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
49
That's a dope find. Can you imagine a team with this racial profile today ? they would take so much heat everyone would call them racist. I remember the Eagles 3 or 4 years ago had the whitest team in the league they had an even split of whites to blacks everyone was calling them racist even though it was only one of 32 teams with that profile .

On the speed of whites I think if you want to be the absolute fastest and be a track star blacks have the upper hand reaching that top 1%. But in terms of being fast for the NFL whites can easily match even the fastest blacks Edelman, Swoope are good examples. Being able to run a 100m sprint in 10 to 10.3 is pretty common plenty of failed running backs who were white would hit this mark. The slot reciever success of recent white receivers also makes me think if you had a 100m sprint with lots of curves and twists we may be able to compete in terms of raw speed at a higher level. Think about welker losing his man time and time again who probablywould of had more raw speed.
 

MrPoon

Mentor
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
635
It's just so interesting that 40 time became the be all end all of criteria for quickness. But 10 and 20 times are ignored? Most Whites have Faster 10 and 20 times as well as cone drills, but the one category that is harped on is 40 time. Makes absolutely no sense since most plays are much less than 40 yards. When did 40 time become the standard?
 

Heretic

Master
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
3,261
It's just so interesting that 40 time became the be all end all of criteria for quickness. But 10 and 20 times are ignored? Most Whites have Faster 10 and 20 times as well as cone drills, but the one category that is harped on is 40 time. Makes absolutely no sense since most plays are much less than 40 yards. When did 40 time become the standard?
My guess is about the same time things started to become Caste, in the mid 80's. I agree that 10-20 yard times are much more important, outside of wide-outs and CB.

If the "Moneyball" approach was actually applied in the NFL, 10-20 yard times would be one of the major criteria for whom to choose to play a position, but that would probably result in more White players so it will never happen, and that's why it's not being done. Former Clemson RB CJ Spiller is a prime example of a player that ran like a 4.3 or 4.4, was drafted very high, getting a very lucrative contract, and then ended up having a mediocre career, at best. His production certainly didn't justify his salary. The money could have been much better spent, thus the need for a "Moneyball" approach. The NFL has been littered with players like that and they are all very wealthy, or at least were, at one point in time.
 
Last edited:

FootballDad

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
5,493
Location
Somewhere near Kansas City, MO
It's just so interesting that 40 time became the be all end all of criteria for quickness. But 10 and 20 times are ignored? Most Whites have Faster 10 and 20 times as well as cone drills, but the one category that is harped on is 40 time. Makes absolutely no sense since most plays are much less than 40 yards. When did 40 time become the standard?
Another thing is that the combine and pro day 40 times are run in shorts and shirts. It is quite another thing to run a 40 with pads and a helmet. I would posit that the times would be significantly different if they were run this way. How many times have you seen a "slow white guy" outrun the 40 yard dash track stars to the end zone?
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
A lot of the fastest 40 time guys are small and/or skinny and tend not to hold up in the NFL. WR John Ross, he of the record breaking 40 time at the '17 Combine is a great example. RGIII is another. And there's always a slew of slow black safeties and CBs who are drafted high anyway, the idiot safety on the Saints who allowed the Vikings to score the winning touchdown being a great example of that.

The relatively few legitimately very fast black guys is shown when they get in the open field and put distance between themselves and their pursuers. Almost all White players can hang very well with the great bulk of black players who play the same position speed-wise on the playing field, and of course there's some legitimately very fast Whites too, and on average more quick ones.

Another curiosity I've noticed is that when you look at the 40 times of linemen, tight ends, linebackers and quarterbacks, it isn't noticeably black-heavy at the top; there are Whites and blacks mixed pretty well from the top to the bottom. So if Whites are just as fast at those positions, why all of a sudden is it that they aren't as fast on average at receiver, cornerback and running back? It goes back to the lack of White participation in sprinting and the way White kids are racially slotted in football beginning at an early age away from the speed positions, and the tendency of many fast White kids to take up sports like lacrosse, baseball, hockey and others seen as not being black dominated, all the reasons and more we've discussed over the years.
 

Extra Point

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
6,289
It's just so interesting that 40 time became the be all end all of criteria for quickness. But 10 and 20 times are ignored? Most Whites have Faster 10 and 20 times as well as cone drills, but the one category that is harped on is 40 time. Makes absolutely no sense since most plays are much less than 40 yards. When did 40 time become the standard?

I don't know when it happened but I read somewhere that 40 yards was chosen as a test because someone calculated that a special teams player ran about 40 yards when covering kickoffs. So someone thought that would be good measurement for football players.

I don't remember who came up with this. I want to say someone in the Cowboys organization but that could be wrong.

That's the why but it really doesn't answer your question of when.
 

Carolina Speed

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
5,760
I don't know when it happened but I read somewhere that 40 yards was chosen as a test because someone calculated that a special teams player ran about 40 yards when covering kickoffs. So someone thought that would be good measurement for football players.

I don't remember who came up with this. I want to say someone in the Cowboys organization but that could be wrong.

That's the why but it really doesn't answer your question of when.

That was probably Gil Brandt. VP of player personnel for the Dallas Cowboys from 1960-1988. He helped create the NFL Scouting Combine.
 

MrPoon

Mentor
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
635
I think the 40 time is questionable in its value and is probably the single biggest weapon the system uses to caste whites. No how blow fan ever references a player's 10 or 20 time. If they did, it actually just might change a whole lot of assumptions about what athleticism means in football. That may be the one thing that needs to be attacked to make the biggest impact in changing this system.
 

celticdb15

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
8,469
I do agree 40yd dash is overrated and blacks usually have a slight edge in it but Even when a white guy runs a fast 40 it gets swept under the rug!
 

Leonardfan

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
24,372
I have followed the NFL draft since 2004. The 40 is essentially a dog and pony show to prove the "athleticism" of blacks. No hard evidence or data is ever presented to put the 40 time in perspective and how it equates to success in the NFL. Perhaps one of these fast 40 time runners is able to blow past the coverage once or twice a season resulting in a "big play". No one goes back to look at how the player does as a route runner, how many dropped balls that player has, how many YPC the player would average if not for a big run here or there.
 

Ambrose

Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,630
Location
New York
Joined
Dec 18, 2004
Messages
2,986
I don't know when it happened but I read somewhere that 40 yards was chosen as a test because someone calculated that a special teams player ran about 40 yards when covering kickoffs. So someone thought that would be good measurement for football players.

I don't remember who came up with this. I want to say someone in the Cowboys organization but that could be wrong.

That's the why but it really doesn't answer your question of when.

The 40 as a test for speed was Paul Brown's idea some 70 years ago as coach of the Cleveland Browns.
 
Top