African American Officials in the NCAA Tourney

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I think the OP was saying he was going to post his letter to Mr. Adams without his name. I don't think he meant that he was sending it to Mr. Adams anonymously.

Oh, I see what you are saying. He was going to write Mr. Adams and post that letter here, but sans his name.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Even though the letter specifically addressed the Sweet Sixteen, we will still go with your numbers:

3 games
9 slots (1 Black per game)
1/3

Now where have I heard this 1/3 reasoning before? It wasn’t too fair back then either.

Ok, let's look at those numbers and see how unfair they really are.

What percentage of the FF officials were Black? 33%.

Now, what percentage of the US is Black? 13%.
Now, what percentage of the US is Hispanic? 15%.
Now, what percentage of the US is Asian? 5%.

Looks to me like Blacks are really getting shafted on this one!

If equality were really the goal to be determined by the numbers, two of the Black officials should yield their spots to a Hispanic or Asian.

There are surely individual cases of discrimination but if there are any more than 13% of the nationwide tournament officials that are Black, there is NO basis of any argument that there is a pattern of racial discrimination unless someone wishes to make the claim that Blacks are better officials because they're Black and that they should be overrepresented because of that.

There are plenty of problem areas where inequities are real and need attention. This is not one of them.

It is efforts like this that detract from the fights against true discrimination problems.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Ok, let's look at those numbers and see how unfair they really are.

What percentage of the FF officials were Black? 33%.

Now, what percentage of the US is Black? 13%.
Now, what percentage of the US is Hispanic? 15%.
Now, what percentage of the US is Asian? 5%.

Looks to me like Blacks are really getting shafted on this one!

If we want to go there, what percentage of the players is Black?

If this was only about percentages, why are white officials not only working filling 33% of the slots? You should have a good answer, since this is only about percentages that you brought up.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Unless you or your family has experienced this scenario, you probably have no idea. Get it?

There are plenty of us on the paler side of the equation who would love to have an honest discussion on this issue. I know you don't mean it this way, but sometimes comments like this can lead us to think we're supposed to just sit and listen. That's not a race discussion, it's a lecture.

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Even though the letter specifically addressed the Sweet Sixteen, we will still go with your numbers:

3 games
9 slots (1 Black per game)
1/3

Now where have I heard this 1/3 reasoning before? It wasn’t too fair back then either.

Just for some historical perspective on this.

First of all, it was 3/5ths, not 1/3rd.

Second of all, it was, believe it or not, beneficial to the African Americans at the time. Southern leaders wanted to have the benefits of counting their slaves for census purposes without having to give them the right to vote. Northerners felt that was unfair (there's that stinking word again), since it would essentially increase the value of a southerner's vote for president and the House of Representatives.

To have granted full credit for the census would have tipped the balance of power towards the slave states and the abominable practice would have lasted longer. While it sounds disgusting to all of us to think of any person as having only 3/5 of the value of his neighbor, we should keep in mind the practical effects of this particular clause.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Of course it is all because you say so. I think Larry Rose not only has the credibility (than anyone here) to make such a claim based on his background and his current job. Rose is involved with institutions that deal with African-Americans on a much more intimate level.

The purpose of such groups is simply to represent their constituents in a way to maximize their gain. Equality is not their goal. Any representative group is not doing its job if they don't try to obtain the most representation possible for the people being represented....even if it is beyond equality. The arguments of inequality, at some point, just become a tool to gain even more after the real issue of inequality has been addressed and neutralized.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If we want to go there, what percentage of the players is Black?

Holy cow, you're right!!! Blacks are WAYYYYY over-represented as players!! We should be giving more white players spots on these teams so that blacks AND whites are fairly represented.

That's the point you were trying to make, right?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If we want to go there, what percentage of the players is Black?

So we should base the number of officials of each rase on the break down of players who make the teams? This would only make sense if one of the requirements to be an official was to have played at the level you officiate.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If this was only about percentages, why are white officials not only working filling 33% of the slots? You should have a good answer, since this is only about percentages that you brought up.

Camron's point is that it's hard to find a disparity that justifies aggressive action.

And to answer Tomegun's point about there being plenty of African American (and other minorities) officials who are qualified and not working the Tourney;
I think we'd all concede that.

I would question, however, whether the breakdown of qualified officials who aren't getting their break is skewed towards minorities. IOW, how many quality white officials are not getting their break either.

Look, I'll admit I don't know the numbers here. It may very well be that there's a ceiling for minority officials. It may be that there is not. I don't know of any way to determine this except for statistics and percentages; but what do you compare it to?

If you compare it to the players, then the numbers are obviously inadequate; but I don't think that's fair.

If you compare it to the general population, then the numbers seem to (at the top anyway) actually favor minorities.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The purpose of such groups is simply to represent their constituents in a way to maximize their gain. Equality is not their goal. Any representative group is not doing its job if they don't try to obtain the most representation possible for the people being represented....even if it is beyond equality. The arguments of inequality, at some point, just become a tool to gain even more after the real issue of inequality has been addressed and neutralized.

You brought up the percentages, I did not do that. This was not and is not about percentages. Equality is about giving people an equal opportunity.

What I do love, is the minute people here do not get an opportunity, it is all about politics. That is widely accepted here, but any mention of inequality that cannot be even mentioned. God forbid anyone even talks about that.

Peace

[dsqrddgd909]

How do you define equal opportunity?

As in the other similar thread, my question is what is the best way to promote that opportunity? Something similar to Tiger Woods' First Tee?

Here was an interesting link - which covers the racial and gender background of every possible participant in college sports EXCEPT officiating. I draw no conclusion from that omission - it was just surprising to me. http://www.tidesport.org/RGRC/2008/2008CollegRGRC.pdf

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So we should base the number of officials of each rase on the break down of players who make the teams? This would only make sense if one of the requirements to be an official was to have played at the level you officiate.

I did not say we should do anything. We are not in the position to do anything.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Camron's point is that it's hard to find a disparity that justifies aggressive action.

Wow, writing a letter is an "aggressive action." I hate to find out if someone actually talked to John directly.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And to answer Tomegun's point about there being plenty of African American (and other minorities) officials who are qualified and not working the Tourney;
I think we'd all concede that.

I would question, however, whether the breakdown of qualified officials who aren't getting their break is skewed towards minorities. IOW, how many quality white officials are not getting their break either.

Not necessarily. Then again none of us know the basis for people even raising the issue.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Look, I'll admit I don't know the numbers here. It may very well be that there's a ceiling for minority officials. It may be that there is not. I don't know of any way to determine this except for statistics and percentages; but what do you compare it to?

If you compare it to the players, then the numbers are obviously inadequate; but I don't think that's fair.

Why is it not fair?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If you compare it to the general population, then the numbers seem to (at the top anyway) actually favor minorities.

First of all the general population argument is silly. For one if the product on the court dominates the game, you are saying that those that come from similar background should not be given a chance.

And Larry Rose is in a conference that I am sure that many white officials do not frequently attend his camp based on who the schools are. I am sure guys like Larry are seeing officials from all over the country or region that are just as good as others and likely is not seeing some level of fairness. Now he would know that much more than I would. I am not a supervisor of a D1 conference. And Larry Rose has been there and done that as an official.

Peace

[Welpe]

After reading through this thread and the previous ones, I guess I'm wondering, why does have race matter (in both directions)?

If black, white, hispanic, asian, etc officials are being held back due to their race, then that isn't right and it should be addressed. The officials that do the best should be the ones to advance but obviously, there are many factors that come into play when we look at the preferences and prejudices of supervisors. It is an ideal but why not work towards it?

Me personally, I don't care if my partner is black, white, asian, hispanic, blue or purple...I just care they can do a good job.

It's hard to achieve equality in numbers no matter what profession or sport or whatever you're in. I teach in a field that is predominately female, and for some time, I was the only male faculty, and sometimes the only male in the program at the college. I look to other programs, and you'll see faculty usually reflect the predominance of the field.

What you might be looking at when it comes to the officials might actually be the reflection of what we have in the officiating business. Just because the athletes are predominately one color does not mean we need to have the same number or percentage of officials that color. We can try, but it may never happen. If it does, we've achieved utopia.

And this coming from a guy who was the token white guy on 3-whistle crew at least twice this past season in predominately white towns.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

And this coming from a guy who was the token white guy on 3-whistle crew at least twice this past season in predominately white towns.

Welcome to my world most of the time. I do not have that choice you do.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not say we should do anything. We are not in the position to do anything.

True.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Wow, writing a letter is an "aggressive action." I hate to find out if someone actually talked to John directly.

Good grief, Jeff. Writing a letter is neither agressive nor what I was talking about.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not necessarily. Then again none of us know the basis for people even raising the issue.

Agreed That's what we're asking. Is it an issue? How do we know?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why is it not fair?

First of all the general population argument is silly. For one if the product on the court dominates the game, you are saying that those that come from similar background should not be given a chance.

Show me where I said that?

I think it's obvious that top level players are dominated by African Americans. Basketball officials, though, do not come solely from the top level of former players. Top level basketball officials often were no more than average high school players. The racial breakdown of average high school players is far less skewed towards African Americans than the rest of the population.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And Larry Rose is in a conference that I am sure that many white officials do not frequently attend his camp based on who the schools are. I am sure guys like Larry are seeing officials from all over the country or region that are just as good as others and likely is not seeing some level of fairness. Now he would know that much more than I would. I am not a supervisor of a D1 conference. And Larry Rose has been there and done that as an official.

I confess that before this, I didn't know who Larry Rose was. I'm not saying it's not an issue. I'm only saying that if we're going to discuss this (which is what people here are asking for), one of the questions is, "How do we know it's an issue?"

"Larry Rose says it is" isn't going to be enough for a lot of us.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

True.

Good grief, Jeff. Writing a letter is neither agressive nor what I was talking about.

Then what are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Agreed That's what we're asking. Is it an issue? How do we know?

I do not know, I am not there. I can assume, but it is not based on direct knowledge.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Show me where I said that?

I was not referring directly to you. Someone else made that point and you commented on the issue. I did not say the issue was directly from your words.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think it's obvious that top level players are dominated by African Americans. Basketball officials, though, do not come solely from the top level of former players. Top level basketball officials often were no more than average high school players. The racial breakdown of average high school players is far less skewed towards African Americans than the rest of the population.

Of course. My only point is if there are opportunities at the top level, I would think that some of those individuals would rise in another arena. Similar to coaches, administrators or others that rose through the athletic arena.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I confess that before this, I didn't know who Larry Rose was. I'm not saying it's not an issue. I'm only saying that if we're going to discuss this (which is what people here are asking for), one of the questions is, "How do we know it's an issue?"

"Larry Rose says it is" isn't going to be enough for a lot of us.

A big part of this discussion is who is who is initiating this correspondence to Adams. I am only recognizing that the person that seems to have a concern is in a much more advantageous situation to know things none of us here would ever know, because we are not in his position.

This is why we cannot have these discussions because if you even mention any issue of race, people come running to defend things they know nothing about. I am not asking for you to accept what Rose is saying (and we did not hear him talk about this topic at all BTW), but I find it interesting that people defend the current system without knowing the parties involved. You can accept anything; I find it interesting that you are quick to defend too.

Peace