Ryan Clark has a different POV on why Cam is hated.

[Raskle]

45 minutes ago, SportsCrazie4172 said:

The Godfather was made years ago..

Thug is the new code word for N word used by white americans.. I'm telling you as an AA person that if you direct this at someone black then you basically calling that person the N word..If you use this word going forward after hearing what its new meaning is used for and harp the Godfather's excuse then you just part of the problem..Be about change instead..

And the irony continues.... white americans? really?? Can you not see the own racial bias in your own posts? You could have just said some racists use that word, some people use that word, etc to make your point, without generalizing and condemning an entire section of folks as having used a term you feel is negative. Aren't you doing the exact same thing that you find so wrong? 

Sorry, but I cannot disassociate the word thug from a criminal type, and the dictionary backs that up. I jokingly made the comment earlier, but I really don't link it to any race or creed. If you associate it with being African American, that's on you. I don't believe I've used the term in the past 10 years or so, so I will acquiesce and continue to not use it, as I truly don't want anyone offended by it. To me, a criminal is a criminal... and the only determining factor is.. they're a criminal. Anything past that is not relevant.

[Raskle]

12 minutes ago, Nomad82 said:

Thug is a code word for the n-bomb for SOME white people nowadays. That can't be denied.

 

7 minutes ago, d-dave said:

I can agree to that.  It's just an easy way to identify someone.  The truth of the word is lost, and instead an easy descriptor used to put someone else down.

Now when I think of thugs, I still see people who intimidate others through the threat of violence.  Man, we truly are a country full of thugs...

I definitely agree with these statements. Some folks use it negatively to describe their racist tendencies, which is a shame on them.

[jasonluckydog]

I watched Straight Out of Compton so I feel that I'm an expert on black culture now. I'm the Suge Knight of the huddle. Cam is my Dr.Dre

[PhillyB]

a couple years back during the early periods of cam's crucifixion in the media, back when people were tossing the "he's not well-spoken" trope around like candy, i wrote an article that i considered including in my book but omitted as a last-second editorial decision. I think it's relevant here, as it links race, language, and culture as inextricably apart of one another. for ryan clark to attempt to divorce one from any of the other two betrays a complete lack of understanding of the contingency of each of these factors on one another.

here read:

 

It's a slow shift at the bar except for the couple of idiots tipping 6% on hundreds of dollars worth of rounds (including a couple of shots I gave away) so now I'm going to be a shitty bartender and ignore them while I write this post. And it may take me a while.

This thread is about how concepts of leadership are often actually misconceptions based on archaic methodologies of how we view language and communication as they relate to race. Bear with me here and let's jump in our DeLorean and floor it. When you get to 88mph the DeLorean is suddenly surrounded with swirly poo and the flux capacitor makes some noise and suddenly you're crashing through a barn in the year 2010. The 2010 you is sitting on a couch watching football. The Panthers suck absolute balls. Remember those days? We subsequently tanked and got the number one pick and faced a major decision on who to draft.

Ok you're caught up. For the last two and a half years – ever since Jimmy “checkdown god” Clausen started fouling up this offense – the Huddle has endured a constant spate of race-based posting. From the outset, leading up to draft, speculation about Cam’s viability as a good draft choice was based on his leadership ability, on his intangibles. This speculation has been widespread, and the first two years of his career have been plagued, on the internet side of things in particular, by deeper probing questions of long-term ability; that essential ability to be the glue that holds a team together. Physical questions relating to accuracy have been displaced by questions of articulation in interviews. Criticism of Cam’s ability to read defenses has switched to criticism of his demeanor on the sidelines. Racial potshots usually result (often rightfully so) and otherwise constructive and inquisitive threads devolve into trenchant sniping and the otherwise innocuous spread of archaic paradigms. Then people get banned and Kurb stays busy locking stupid threads.

Before we try to break this all down, let’s jump back in the DeLorean and zip to a different time real quick and adjust our methodologies. Reading and understanding this part of the thread is the difference between seeing a light coming on and typing TLDR LOLOLOL as your response to this thread.

Early 20th century German sociologist Franz Boas was heavily critical of examinations of other cultures because they were all viewed through the lens of aristocratic western European context; he argued that a people could only be understood within the context of their own cultural structure, as any questions and research points would be derived from an ultimately Euro-centric point of view. In layman’s terms, it is a bad idea to view, say, racial/cultural features from the perspective of a different culture entirely. You’ll never truly understand it.

Many modern sociologists would suggest this is where a great deal of misunderstanding and racial tension comes from. Take Ebonics, for example. How often have you heard the sentiment “why can’t they just speak proper English” expressed by white people who genuinely cannot understand the symbiosis between ethnicity and linguistic expression as a method of cultural identity? There’s a fundamental disconnect, and I believe it’s the key to understanding misconceptions on what “leadership” and “intangibles” mean in the context of the NFL.

Now that we’ve established this, let’s take a look at the NFL.

 

Caucasian players have, by and large, demographically dominated what are generally deemed as the intellectual roles.

• 86% of professional administrators are white
• 81% of general managers are white
• 78% of head coaches are white
• 31% of players on rosters are white
• 79% of quarterbacks on rosters are white or Hispanic

There is a clear imbalance here. But we’re not going to get into the causes for that – that’s a KT vs. Mr. TD cage match for another time and place. Instead let’s take a look at how intangibles are perceived in this context.

Intangibles are possibly the most overused and simultaneously ambiguous terms thrown around in draft circles, but it’s clear they – whatever they are perceived to be – are important. Here’s some quotes from draft experts and scouting personnel:

 

Quote

“Anyone can recognize talent. I'm most interested in identifying players who, along with that talent, possess the maturity, intelligence and work ethic to become NFL stars. If I was building a team from scratch with only the current draft class to choose from, this is the order in which I'd select them.”

 

Quote

“College coaches are under a lot of pressure to bring in good, solid recruits. Physical talents and skills are a huge part of the equation, but coaches are looking for the entire package in the young men they bring to campus. Often, the intangibles determine the true success of an individual and of a team.”

 

Quote

“Coaches and recruiters are looking for a QB that can be the face of the team and program . . . a true leader [gets] a group of people to work together as a group to achieve a goal.”

 

It’s pretty clear that “intangibles” tends to mostly lean towards qualities of leadership, and clearly the most essential quality of leadership in a football context is the ability to communicate with teammates. And then there’s the aspect of the putting-on of a good face for the franchise. That’s commutative too. Press conferences, interviews, post-game reports… how a leader comes across on camera is the only way the average viewer will know them (as the average fan never gets to truly know a player.)

And here we get to what I believe is the root of the problem.

 

For the most part, African-Americans communicate differently as a language community than do Caucasians. Let me explain.

 

All one has to do is watch critiques of Cam Newton’s interviews versus RGIII’s. What do you hear the critics saying? “Not well-spoken at all,” they say about Newton. “Struggles to communicate. Inarticulate.” RGIII? “An extremely well-spoken young me, oozes intelligence and leadership.”

Leadership, it seems, is intrinsically tied to the ability to lead (at least in the minds of those in the football world.) Simply put, if you cannot (or do not) communicate in a linguistic style representative of the majority of individuals, it is considered a detrimental trait. As NYU’s Research Center for Leadership in Action so deftly states:

 

Quote

"… non-white leaders must be biculturally fluent – leading in ways that resonate with their own racial group or sense of self while also connecting with the dominant ways of working in a white-dominated environment.”

 

Source:  http://wagner.nyu.ed...Review12.10.pdf

 

 

This dynamic tends to work itself out on the field well enough. I don’t know of any documented instances where a football player acted “too white” on the field to get along with his black teammates, or a teammate that acted “too black” to get along with his white teammates. (This is probably due to the fact that most NFL players have been in pads since middle school and have long ago integrated these leadership styles into their play.) For the general viewing public, however, and for NFL executives and front office personnel and scouts and everyone else who helps perceptions diffuse across the general public, it is very easy to miss these dynamics.

This post is getting exhaustively long at this point, so I’ll close with an example. Read the following transcripts and decide which one you instinctively consider to be the best communicative leader:

 

Quote

“Ow wee mayne.”

 

Quote

“That’s probably what you miss the most, being in the huddle, being with the guys. What I learned about myself is that I could handle that type of football adversity. It was difficult because of the scenario of the team struggling so bad, but I think the same year that probably the greatest physical gift that the Lord gave me was taken away from me, I was blessed with the greatest gift any of us could have with two beautiful children… I take that trade every day of the week.”

 

99% of us will take the second one (and perhaps rightfully so, because Brandon LaFell and Peyton Manning play two entirely different positions in football with different dynamics.) But most of us will take the second one because we consider it to be eloquent, articulate, communicative – the embodiment of leadership, manifested into a microphone.

Basically this is the long way of saying that what you hear criticism-wise about Cam Newton’s intangibles – as a speaker, as a leader, as a man – are based on what are essentially ethnocentric misunderstandings. Between the media’s innate tendency to sensationalize the trivial and the NFL establishment’s good-ol’-boy mentality representative of an ethnic majority that is set in the ways of cultural absolutism we have seen the Andrew Lucks and RGIIIs hailed for their articulation and charismatic prowess and the Cam Newtons disparaged for their lack of it.

What I am saying is on the field – in the trenches, on the sidelines, in the locker room where it really matters – none of things hold any weight with the players. None of these affect the team. None of these affect the ability to win a championship. So next time some braindead drooling cretin from New Orleans or Atlanta or portly body-odor-having loudmouth Pittsburgh transplant tells you Cam Newton is a terrible leader, teach them some of the anthropological principles you just learned and then punch them in the fuging throat.

Good night and remember to tip your bartender.

 

[PhillyB]

that was in 2012 so i don't necessarily endorse everything i said there (not cause it's wrong but because i could say it much better now) but you get the idea. race, language, and culture are parts of the same whole and the are mutually affective, acting on each other. ryan clark is wrong and everyone who's praising him is subconsciously doing so partially out of relief that a black man validated their belief that racism isn't a thing they're a part of, actively or passively, and that this whole race thing really is overblown after all, and, most importantly, we can dismiss the volatile and constituent political and social questions that arise when it's granted validity.

 

[pstall]

[nickzz]

not sure how this POV is any different.

[SixMileDrive]

2 hours ago, Raskle said:

And the irony continues.... white americans? really?? Can you not see the own racial bias in your own posts? You could have just said some racists use that word, some people use that word, etc to make your point, without generalizing and condemning an entire section of folks as having used a term you feel is negative. Aren't you doing the exact same thing that you find so wrong? 

Sorry, but I cannot disassociate the word thug from a criminal type, and the dictionary backs that up. I jokingly made the comment earlier, but I really don't link it to any race or creed. If you associate it with being African American, that's on you. I don't believe I've used the term in the past 10 years or so, so I will acquiesce and continue to not use it, as I truly don't want anyone offended by it. To me, a criminal is a criminal... and the only determining factor is.. they're a criminal. Anything past that is not relevant.

Found the Trump supporter! Seriously though, if you can't recognize that racism, though it's been alive and well for a long time, is making a major comeback in this country and that a lot of people use "thug" as a replacement for the n-word, then I don't know what to tell you. You either aren't paying attention or are willfully ignorant. That cringe-worthy "reverse racism" type comment in your post, however, says a whole lot about what type of person you are.

[SixMileDrive]

53 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

that was in 2012 so i don't necessarily endorse everything i said there (not cause it's wrong but because i could say it much better now) but you get the idea. race, language, and culture are parts of the same whole and the are mutually affective, acting on each other. ryan clark is wrong and everyone who's praising him is subconsciously doing so partially out of relief that a black man validated their belief that racism isn't a thing they're a part of, actively or passively, and that this whole race thing really is overblown after all, and, most importantly, we can dismiss the volatile and constituent political and social questions that arise when it's granted validity.

 

My Russian born fiancee made a really interesting point to me the other day. She said that white males (ie: me) have this habit of completely dismissing the life experiences of people who aren't like them with statements like: "I don't see racism, so it must not exist", or "I haven't noticed sexism in the workplace, so I don't know what you are complaining about". 

It really made me think and made me realize that I do exactly that pretty often. We're at the top of the food chain and don't have to deal with the crap that women and minorities do on a daily basis so we think those problems don't really exist or aren't a big deal.

[Raskle]

3 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

Found the Trump supporter! Seriously though, if you can't recognize that racism, though it's been alive and well for a long time, is making a major comeback in this country and that a lot of people use "thug" as a replacement for the n-word, then I don't know what to tell you. You either aren't paying attention or are willfully ignorant. That first "reverse racism" type comment in your post, however, tells me a lot about what type of person you are.

Actually, I'm a Libertarian. You really don't know me for poo, but keep trying, as I hope to change that.

 

I do recognize that racism exists, and am not naiive enough to feel differently. Up until recently, no, I had no idea thug was utilized as a racist comment, as I have always associated it with a criminal instead. I generally don't associate with people who are racists, myself, and I don't know what it's like to be the subject, but I'm sure it sucks to an extremely high degree. The point I was trying to make, is that it exists on both sides, and if folks want to change things, they have to let those ideas go. How many times were "White Americans" referenced? Or "White Media"? Or whatever... we're all Americans, we all hate the media for shitting on our Panthers up until recently. I can't stand Peter King and think he's a giant douchebag, but I don't say that white journalist, I just say that journalist. I don't comment that Stephen A Smith is a black journalist, just that he's a journalist who I enjoy watching roast Skip Bayless over and over again.

 

Take what you want from this post, I won't be able to stop you if you decide to perceive me as you do. But I do hope that you realize that I harbor no ill will towards anyone making comments in here. I understand that I don't understand what it feels like to be subjected to what an African American deals with on a daily basis. I also understand that no amount of words of mine will convince some folks that I want a change, or that by speaking these things out, I hope we all gain better understanding of the problem, and that one day, we all can work towards a fix.

 

Ok, I'm done. Sorry for the soapbox guys.

[ErgentSeth]

Ryan Clark is one of the best analysts on TV period. speaks the truth and always makes solid points. 

[Cookie Lyon]

1 hour ago, PhillyB said:

that was in 2012 so i don't necessarily endorse everything i said there (not cause it's wrong but because i could say it much better now) but you get the idea. race, language, and culture are parts of the same whole and the are mutually affective, acting on each other. ryan clark is wrong and everyone who's praising him is subconsciously doing so partially out of relief that a black man validated their belief that racism isn't a thing they're a part of, actively or passively, and that this whole race thing really is overblown after all, and, most importantly, we can dismiss the volatile and constituent political and social questions that arise when it's granted validity.

 

This.

[PhillyB]

29 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

It really made me think and made me realize that I do exactly that pretty often. We're at the top of the food chain and don't have to deal with the crap that women and minorities do on a daily basis so we think those problems don't really exist or aren't a big deal.

right, it's the little things you take for granted.

i had a couple girls at my bar not long ago, evidently all part of a black journalism society from NC A&T. we talked about journalism for a little bit and then i let them get back to chatting with each other. it was a slow night so i kinda just hung out in the corner and worked on some writing.

i am a bar anthropologist, so i pay attention to things people say and how they say them. speaking together, the girls employed what is commonly referred to as african-american english. it's a dialect. we've all heard it (though of course there are many variations of "it.") it's the kind of language that many deride as somehow inferior, or inarticulate, the type of language that would lead someone who didn't know better to be shocked that these girls were so articulate! as though they were somehow expected not to be.

anyway this white dude came up and got a couple beers from me. he was cool. he asked the girls what they were doing there.

"we're part of a journalism meeting," one of them said.

"oh yeah? tell me about that."

so they told him about it, but they immediately code-switched to standard (read: white) american english. they didn't skip a beat. the instant they were asked to talk about something perceived by the dominant race/class structure as important, they had to change their dialectical mode of talking just so they wouldn't be judged as dumb or otherwise inferior to journalists who spoke "proper" english.

as a white dude i don't have to code switch. i don't have to talk about my anthropological meetings to my friends in one language and then instantly switch to a "proper" mode of speaking once someone asks me about it. obviously this isn't a humungous, earth-shattering deal, but again it's one of those things you take for granted as a white guy. nobody is going to judge you as inferior for your default mode of speech.

it is, in fact, white privilege.

[PhillyB]

10 minutes ago, GOOGLE JIM BOB COOTER said:

expand this into a book imo. the cultural expectations of the quarterback in the nfl, the shift in the media narrative as cam asserted his dominance, the gulf between how nfl players identify leadership and how commentators and fans believe leaders should lead, the revolutionary impact of a qb who as i think bomani jones put it is "black in a way that you cannot ignore", the daily contradictions that persist in a league that is driven by black athletes but owned and operated by white suits; this stuff is interesting and no one is really talking about it on that level that i can see.

i have two more books launching this year and a superproject launching probably in 2017, but i've heavily considered it. i'm not sure i could get a full book's length worth of material out of it though and i'd have to find a way to interview players to give it some real meat and substance, which would be difficult