As for demographics: you're not building a team based on the demographics of your region. If that was the case then USC and UCLA would have a Los in front of their name. It would also mean that half of Washington's population is Poly.
Except for you are building a team based off of this in many instances...
What the fuck does that even mean? Are you trying to say college football teams build their roster based on the demographics of their region?
The rosters are highly impacted by demographics within their recruiting footprint, yes. How is this a hot take? Why does Florida's roster not have any Polynesians or Chinese or whatever? Why do the SEC teams have more black players in general?
Demographics matter when you're not allowed to venture more than a day's drive from your campus.
The sample size is too small to be very meaningful, but since you mentioned Florida:
Florida white recruits signed 2018+2019: 7
Oregon white recruits signed 2018+2019: 8
Florida population % white: 57%
Oregon population % white: 78%
Washington white recruits signed: 2018+19: 11
Washington population % white: 71%
I'm not going to waste too much time on this, but a quick look shows that SEC scholarship players and Pac-12 scholarship players are demographically similar. In some cases your guess that SEC teams have more black players is wrong - Alabama has signed more white players, at a higher percentage, than Oregon over the past couple of cycles. Alabama is the state with the 6th highest percentage of black people, while Oregon is 41st.
There are going to be regional differences, like the Poly population being in the Pac-12 footprint. Demographics do play a role, especially with walk-ons, but in a world with Hudl and airplanes they aren't a limiting factor.
But I think you're entirely missing the point: it's not just about Washinton's roster make-up. The issue is what people are talking about, accurate or not, and that's not confined to this shit show.
Look at the percentage of black people in wa versus florida...
3.6% in WA
17% in Florida
26.5% in Alabama
37.5% Mississippi
This is a shocking development. States that had slavery have a higher percentage of black people?
Except we're not talking about the population percentages of a state, we're talking about the demographics of a football team not needing to be reflective of their region. But I'm going to dip out of this conversation, I can see we've reached maximum sewage wallowing levels.
As for demographics: you're not building a team based on the demographics of your region. If that was the case then USC and UCLA would have a Los in front of their name. It would also mean that half of Washington's population is Poly.
Except for you are building a team based off of this in many instances...
What the fuck does that even mean? Are you trying to say college football teams build their roster based on the demographics of their region?
The rosters are highly impacted by demographics within their recruiting footprint, yes. How is this a hot take? Why does Florida's roster not have any Polynesians or Chinese or whatever? Why do the SEC teams have more black players in general?
Demographics matter when you're not allowed to venture more than a day's drive from your campus.
The sample size is too small to be very meaningful, but since you mentioned Florida:
Florida white recruits signed 2018+2019: 7
Oregon white recruits signed 2018+2019: 8
Florida population % white: 57%
Oregon population % white: 78%
Washington white recruits signed: 2018+19: 11
Washington population % white: 71%
I'm not going to waste too much time on this, but a quick look shows that SEC scholarship players and Pac-12 scholarship players are demographically similar. In some cases your guess that SEC teams have more black players is wrong - Alabama has signed more white players, at a higher percentage, than Oregon over the past couple of cycles. Alabama is the state with the 6th highest percentage of black people, while Oregon is 41st.
There are going to be regional differences, like the Poly population being in the Pac-12 footprint. Demographics do play a role, especially with walk-ons, but in a world with Hudl and airplanes they aren't a limiting factor.
But I think you're entirely missing the point: it's not just about Washinton's roster make-up. The issue is what people are talking about, accurate or not, and that's not confined to this shit show.
Look at the percentage of black people in wa versus florida...
3.6% in WA
17% in Florida
26.5% in Alabama
37.5% Mississippi
This is a shocking development. States that had slavery have a higher percentage of black people?
Except we're not talking about the population percentages of a state, we're talking about the demographics of a football team not needing to be reflective of their region. But I'm going to dip out of this conversation, I can see we've reached maximum sewage wallowing levels.
No one is saying the football team is going to mirror the state demographics. But the demographics are sure as shit going to have an impact.
Is the argument that Peterson has high standards for character, discipline and teamwork and those standards keep out black players? If you think that, I’d suggest you’re a racist.
Counted 34 white faces for our Dawgs... Who's the racist now?!?!?!?!!?!!
This is seriously embarrassing shit.
Walk ons.
If you guys want to live in a world where UW didn't pivot to recruting more Poly and to a lesser degree white dudes and far less black dudes in the last two classes then have fun.
We are in a post-fact world anyway.
The Poly pivot was the right fucking move, I can't see how anyone would disagree with that. I'd argue it's the best fucking thing we have done in recruiting in the Pete era with the possible exception of hiring Jimmy Lake.
I agree it makes us less black. It makes us less white too.
Most importantly it makes us a better, more talented football team.
Counted 34 white faces for our Dawgs... Who's the racist now?!?!?!?!!?!!
This is seriously embarrassing shit.
Walk ons.
If you guys want to live in a world where UW didn't pivot to recruting more Poly and to a lesser degree white dudes and far less black dudes in the last two classes then have fun.
We are in a post-fact world anyway.
The Poly pivot was the right fucking move, I can't see how anyone would disagree with that. I'd argue it's the best fucking thing we have done in recruiting in the Pete era with the possible exception of hiring Jimmy Lake.
I agree it makes us less black. It makes us less white too.
Most importantly it makes us a better, more talented football team.
This.
If Iran started producing the best football athletes in the world and we signed 10 middle eastern 5 star players, I WOULD BE FUCKING ECSTATIC.
Our best recruiter is a Polynesian alumni from Hawaii who happens to relate well to other Polynesian high school kids. There is nothing wrong with that! Our coaching staff is incredibly diverse.
Counted 34 white faces for our Dawgs... Who's the racist now?!?!?!?!!?!!
This is seriously embarrassing shit.
Walk ons.
If you guys want to live in a world where UW didn't pivot to recruting more Poly and to a lesser degree white dudes and far less black dudes in the last two classes then have fun.
We are in a post-fact world anyway.
The Poly pivot was the right fucking move, I can't see how anyone would disagree with that. I'd argue it's the best fucking thing we have done in recruiting in the Pete era with the possible exception of hiring Jimmy Lake.
I agree it makes us less black. It makes us less white too.
Most importantly it makes us a better, more talented football team.
I didn't say it wasn't the right move.
I said there were tradeoffs.
PGOS wants it both ways- benefiting from emphasis on poly community with no fallout from signing less black players.
And the sample size is small but no evidence of becoming less white if anything its the opposite compared to historical UW recruiting.
Counted 34 white faces for our Dawgs... Who's the racist now?!?!?!?!!?!!
This is seriously embarrassing shit.
Walk ons.
If you guys want to live in a world where UW didn't pivot to recruting more Poly and to a lesser degree white dudes and far less black dudes in the last two classes then have fun.
We are in a post-fact world anyway.
The Poly pivot was the right fucking move, I can't see how anyone would disagree with that. I'd argue it's the best fucking thing we have done in recruiting in the Pete era with the possible exception of hiring Jimmy Lake.
I agree it makes us less black. It makes us less white too.
Most importantly it makes us a better, more talented football team.
I didn't say it wasn't the right move.
I said there were tradeoffs.
PGOS wants it both ways- benefiting from emphasis on poly community with no fallout from signing less black players.
And the sample size is small but no evidence of becoming less white if anything its the opposite compared to historical UW recruiting.
Is the argument that Peterson has high standards for character, discipline and teamwork and those standards keep out black players? If you think that, I’d suggest you’re a racist.
Is the argument that Peterson has high standards for character, discipline and teamwork and those standards keep out black players? If you think that, I’d suggest you’re a racist.
God, you're so fucking close to making sense. You're like 99% of the way there...
I predict this will be the outrage subject on this site for the next 4-6 months. Then Smalls will commit to UW and we'll forget about it and move on to the next thing to hate about the program
Counted 34 white faces for our Dawgs... Who's the racist now?!?!?!?!!?!!
This is seriously embarrassing shit.
Walk ons.
If you guys want to live in a world where UW didn't pivot to recruting more Poly and to a lesser degree white dudes and far less black dudes in the last two classes then have fun.
We are in a post-fact world anyway.
Talk about fucking goal post moving. Should he have analyzed the shade of skin color for players with African descent? UW is fine for shades x, y, and z, but is really racist towards darker shade w people. But not African last name shade w, thats different.
The entire premise is fucking insane.
You have quickly become my least favorite poaster on here. So congrats on that.
I love white people saying that all black people are essentially the same.
I love how a white guy pretending to be a black guy gets to decide which players are and aren't black enough to fit his woke narrative that Pete is racist.
Is the argument that Peterson has high standards for character, discipline and teamwork and those standards keep out black players? If you think that, I’d suggest you’re a racist.
God, you're so fucking close to making sense. You're like 99% of the way there...
Is the argument that Peterson has high standards for character, discipline and teamwork and those standards keep out black players? If you think that, I’d suggest you’re a racist.
God, you're so fucking close to making sense. You're like 99% of the way there...
Comments
Except we're not talking about the population percentages of a state, we're talking about the demographics of a football team not needing to be reflective of their region. But I'm going to dip out of this conversation, I can see we've reached maximum sewage wallowing levels.
I agree it makes us less black. It makes us less white too.
Most importantly it makes us a better, more talented football team.
If Iran started producing the best football athletes in the world and we signed 10 middle eastern 5 star players, I WOULD BE FUCKING ECSTATIC.
Our best recruiter is a Polynesian alumni from Hawaii who happens to relate well to other Polynesian high school kids. There is nothing wrong with that! Our coaching staff is incredibly diverse.
I said there were tradeoffs.
PGOS wants it both ways- benefiting from emphasis on poly community with no fallout from signing less black players.
And the sample size is small but no evidence of becoming less white if anything its the opposite compared to historical UW recruiting.
Are we? arguing that UW isn't black enough and it's because Pete is uncomfortable with black culture? Is that it?
Some want the discussion to end (PGOS).
All you have to do is stop commenting on the topic.
Yes, I had to edit this.
Disagree