white starters up slightly for 2009

[referendum]

I did a survey of all NFL teams and came up with about 181 white starters total, a little up from last years 175. There were some judgement calls I made, such as not counting Kreutz in Chicago or Vazquez in SD white. I also didn't count Mcgraw in KC as a starter though he is listed as one. For the Rams I counted Grant and Vobora as starters, but only one white O-lineman as a starter (two are listed but I believe a rookie sumo is about to take over). I counted Chris Gocong as white, kept Posluzny in Buffalo in the count as he'll be back in two months, hopefully, and counted a sixth Raven white starter as one of their white backup safetys will probably see alot of action this year.
Also, I didn't count Trevor Scott as a starter as Seymour is now listed ahead of him in Oakland. I'm also assuming Hillenmeyer takes over for Urlacher in Chicago.
For the Broncos I counted Hillis as a starting fullback as he will unfortunatly see much action there, and I also count three Packers starting on defense instead of the two I saw listed at CBS sportsline.
I also count Chase Blackburn of the Giants as a starter because he seems to always be filling in for one of the affletes who are either suspended or injured.
I guess you could call the 181 number a little high, and the high 170's would also be close to accurate, but either way at least white starters are holding their own.
I'll list the numbers with teams later.

 

[backrow]

Scott is a starter, Seymour played both DE and DT but it was a healthy rotation with Scott playing more snaps than the other DE, so at the very least he's a semi starter.

PS this number would be higher, as quite a few white starters ended up on IR: Dvoracek, Meier, Adam Terry, Carriker, Bingham (almost a starter with Chargers) and a few more.

 

[referendum]

Backrow, glad to hear about Scott. Potentially the Raiders could get up to 7 white starters if Damarcus would ever be benched, but I don't know how likely that is. I did notice alot of white starters going on IR this year, more than their percentage of starters. Lets hope that most of them can come back healthy next year.Edited by: referendum

 

[jaxvid]

I think the term "starter" is misleading. A lot of guys are rotated in and see lots of action. The starter is merely a cermonial title and will almost always be given to a black player over a white one. Too bad there wasn't a way to track minutes played like in basketball. That's the true measure of a players value to a team.

I notice when I watch some games there are more white guys out there then I expect. Especially at linebacker there are many white players rotated in during the game.

 

[Don Wassall]

I think the term "starter" is misleading. A lot of guys are rotated in and see lots of action. The starter is merely a cermonial title and will almost always be given to a black player over a white one. Too bad there wasn't a way to track minutes played like in basketball. That's the true measure of a players value to a team.

I notice when I watch some games there are more white guys out there then I expect. Especially at linebacker there are many white players rotated in during the game.

Very true. Many, many times I've tuned in a college or NFL game and didn't see a white player I expected to see when the starters were shown, but then there he was from the beginning of the game or shortly thereafter, for all intents and purposes being the actual starter rather than the ceremonial black starter. Can't recall the reverse ever happening; it's another of the not-so-subtle ways blacks are pandered to and discriminated in favor of.

 

[whiteathlete33]

The main thing to look at is the total white players in the league. That number is down this year. While we are seeing a small increase in white linebackers, that increase is being offset by the increase in sumos.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

I think the term "starter" is misleading. A lot of guys are rotated in and see lots of action. The starter is merely a cermonial title and will almost always be given to a black player over a white one. Too bad there wasn't a way to track minutes played like in basketball. That's the true measure of a players value to a team.

I notice when I watch some games there are more white guys out there then I expect. Especially at linebacker there are many white players rotated in during the game.

<div></div>
<div>Very true. Many, many times I've tuned in a college or NFL game and didn't see a white player I expected to see when the starters were shown, but then there he was from the beginning of the game or shortly thereafter, for all intents and purposes being the actual starter rather than the ceremonial black starter. Can't recall the reverse ever happening; it's another of the not-so-subtle ways blacks are pandered to and discriminated in favor of. </div>

It is very frustrating to see that kind of political correctness and cowardice/discrimination on the part of the coaches. Although there is often change between the end of spring practice and the first game that benefits whites, it is rare to see whites moving into true starting roles (from play 1) once the season begins. Just one of many nonsensical characteristics of the BS CS.

 

[dwid]

Yes the starter title is misleading, because they simply list who is out there on the first drive, every team has different packages that utilize different players. Some dwfs dont realize this, one was freaking out to see Chris Reis (a White Safety) out there during a Saints game, thinking one of his favorite affletes got injured and we were stuck with "an unaffletic Reis" Well apparently Greg Williams thinks Reis is a good enough safety to be utilized in various packages, so I would consider him a starter, technically. Just like Jeff Charleston is rotated in at DE.

I think there was an article about teams with the most Whites on a roster usually being the best, not White "starters" but White players, whether it be starters or backups. I think this is because Whites, even if they are good enough to start, accept the role of less playing time, yet there is usually no drop off in production when they are rotated in or when they have to start due to an affletes injury (or even an increase in production).

Its been mentioned before on here, but it just keeps making me mad the way College Football players are listed at the top of the screen, and they have pictures for 3 "impact" players, rarely a White face.

 

[white is right]

Also I recall the Bills under Levy having the basic 2 back offense listing either Carwell Gardner or Tim Tindale as the starter, yet they hardly ever lined up in that formation on second or third down. Edited by: white is right

 

[Colonel_Reb]

I'm amazed that the NFL didn't start doing the "impact player" charade years ago. Actually, I have seen some old NFL and college games from the 60s or early 70s that were like this, but this was before the full bore Caste era. Anyway, I have noticed that the other networks besides ABC/ESPN are now going to this "star player" crap. It is disgusting. Seriously, how long does it take to put their pictures and names up at the bottom of the screen? No longer than it takes them to run through their newest cultural marxist invention. Having been a lineman in high school, I am even more incensed by this development, because now you can go through a whole game and never know the names of half the players on the field. It is utter anti-white nonsense!

 

[jaxvid]

I'm amazed that the NFL didn't start doing the "impact player" charade years ago. Actually, I have seen some old NFL and college games from the 60s or early 70s that were like this, but this was before the full bore Caste era. Anyway, I have noticed that the other networks besides ABC/ESPN are now going to this "star player" crap. It is disgusting. Seriously, how long does it take to put their pictures and names up at the bottom of the screen? No longer than it takes them to run through their newest cultural marxist invention. Having been a lineman in high school, I am even more incensed by this development, because now you can go through a whole game and never know the names of half the players on the field. It is utter anti-white nonsense!

I hate it too. I think it's dumbed dowm coverage to pander to the fantasy football crowd that only cares about the two or three guys that are going to rack up points for them. All the rest are just supporting cast.

 

[referendum]

I agree that often who is starting is not that important, however, in the areas where white starters are so prevalent, Offensive line, QB, and tight end, who is starting is very significant. Offensive linemen and QB's aren't rotated at all, usually, and on most teams a starting tight end is going to be in on most plays.
Here is the list of teams and their white starters.
49ers, 6
Bears, 3 (if Hillenmeyer takes over for Urlacher and not counting Kreutz as white)
Bengals,3
Bills 10,
Broncos 6, counting Hillis as starting fullback and Stokely as a starter as WR
Browns 4,
Bucs, 4 or 5 is Sean Mahan takes over as starting center
Cards 4,
San Diego 7, not counting Louis Vazquez as white as he looks pretty mestizo to me.
Chiefs 6 or 7, depending if John Mcgraw actually starts as reports were saying he was going to before week one.
Colts 7,
Cowboys 6, would love to get this number higher, best chance would be if some of the backup O-linemen could take over some positions.
Dolphins 6,
Eagles 4, this includes injured Herremens, and counts Gocong as white though he is mixed race.
Falcons 5, this doens't included Bierman on defense though he played alot in week one, nor Finneran who will see alot of action hopefully.
Giants 8, I'm including Chase Blackburn as starter as he is on the field alot.
Jags 3, this is one team where I expect a gain over the next few years.
Jets 4,
Lions 6, amazing what a nearly all white line will do for overall numbers.
Packers 10, I'm counting 3 defensive starters.
Panthers 7,
Pats, 7 this number doesn't count Mike Wright as starter though he is in the defensive line rotation and sees a lot of action.
Raiders 6, I'm including Trevor Scott for a solid (by NFL's horrific standards) two white defensive starters.
Rams 7, right now looks like a whopping four white starters on defense with Gibson, Long, Laurinaitas and Vobora. Wow.
Ravens 5,
Redskins 2,
Saints 6,
Seahawks, 5
Steelers, 5
Texans 8,
Titans 5,
Vikings 6,Edited by: referendum

 

[Liverlips]

Good listing, referendum. I think the best way to count starters is to see who they picture during the opening lineups. That is how most DWFs gauge the starters as they are munching thier chips and guzzling beer.

Some networks don't show pics of the starters anymore (I wonder if this is because they think it will drive away non-blacks who will notice the racist composition of many teams). In which case, I try to count the starters manually.

 

[Liverlips]

Oh, and I also was very surprised to see a slight bump in starters this year. Seems as though injuries hurt our guys more than anyone so could have been even higher.

 

[Deadlift]

Linebacker is officially a Caste position again in the NFL.

The NFL will find a way to screw some incredible White 'backers that are in college right now.

 

[backrow]

ref, Larry Grant is not white... Rams would have Carriker starting had he not gotten injured, but for now it's just Animal, Vobora and Long. Dahl might get in the starting line up just as he did with Giants before his injury and Chamberlain might get to play as well, but for now, it's 3 on D.

 

[Electric Slide]

Good listing, referendum. I think the best way to count starters is to see who they picture during the opening lineups. That is how most DWFs gauge the starters as they are munching thier chips and guzzling beer.

LOL! I always get a great laugh at the descriptions of the DWFs! Mostly because they are very accurate, but also very funny to think about! Hahaha. Edited by: Electric Slide

 

[referendum]

Backrow, thanks for heads up on Grant, he's one of those tough to tell guys. Too bad about Carriker.

 

[Don Wassall]

The Rams have a fourth white starter on defense in tackle Gary Gibson. Ties them with the Bills with the most but withBuffalo losing Posluszny and his backup DiGregorio to injury the Billsonly have 3 white starters currently on D, all on the line. I also count 4 white starters on the Rams offense going by the team'sdepth chart-- Bulger, Karney, Goldberg and Incognito, giving them 8 altogether.

 

[referendum]

Don, good catch, I was thinking of Gary Gibson, but posted Grant. Too many G's and R's involved. Also, CBS sportsline is showing just Incognito starting on the Rams offensive line. with Goldberg supplanted by yet a new Sumo. They've had pretty accurate depth charts, and have direct links to photos of players on the chart. The distribution of white players on the Rams is similar to the Bills of 2006-2007.

 

[Don Wassall]

You're right Referendum, the Rams are almost a carbon copy of recent Bills teams. I wasn't sure about Goldberg as I had read that they were going all sumo except for Incognito. The Rams arepretty much an unwatchable team on TV as far as I'm concerned. Poor Marc Bulgermay bejust about washed up thanks to the pounding he's taken the last few years.

 

[backrow]

i didn't have a clue Gibson was white! good find!