Top 144 Countdown

[Dave]

Prop48 does identify not meeting min academic and test guidelines. So that is pretty straight forward.

But I don't understand the juco bias.

[TheHall]

Prop48 does identify not meeting min academic and test guidelines. So that is pretty straight forward.

But I don't understand the juco bias.

The term Prop 48 player just like the term JUCO are terms in college bball that both carry stigmas related to the race of the people most effected by it. Both terms represented perceived "less than desirable" alternative paths to playing cbb that predominantly involved black players. Only a small % of JC transfers or Prop 48 players were/are non-black.

[Dave]

Prop48 does identify not meeting min academic and test guidelines. So that is pretty straight forward.

But I don't understand the juco bias.

The term Prop 48 player just like the term JUCO are terms in college bball that both carry stigmas related to the race of the people most effected by it. Both terms represented perceived "less than desirable" alternative paths to playing cbb that predominantly involved black players. Only a small % of JC transfers or Prop 48 players were/are non-black.

I guess racial bias is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see either term through a racial perspective. But without regard to race, there are academic standards that are beyond a Prop48. A juco, however, might be a good student with good test scores. Same for a "prep" student.

[TheHall]

Prop48 does identify not meeting min academic and test guidelines. So that is pretty straight forward.

But I don't understand the juco bias.

The term Prop 48 player just like the term JUCO are terms in college bball that both carry stigmas related to the race of the people most effected by it. Both terms represented perceived "less than desirable" alternative paths to playing cbb that predominantly involved black players. Only a small % of JC transfers or Prop 48 players were/are non-black.

I guess racial bias is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see either term through a racial perspective. But without regard to race, there are academic standards that are beyond a Prop48. A juco, however, might be a good student with good test scores. Same for a "prep" student.

Agreed that's usually the case, like with the Washington Redskins.

[MUSeashells&Balloons]

Agreed that's usually the case, like with the Washington Redskins.

Hey Hall, you know the rules no football talk in here!!

[TheHall]

Agreed that's usually the case, like with the Washington Redskins.

Hey Hall, you know the rules no football talk in here!!

To that I say

[Bluejay]

Prop48 does identify not meeting min academic and test guidelines. So that is pretty straight forward.

But I don't understand the juco bias.

The term Prop 48 player just like the term JUCO are terms in college bball that both carry stigmas related to the race of the people most effected by it. Both terms represented perceived "less than desirable" alternative paths to playing cbb that predominantly involved black players. Only a small % of JC transfers or Prop 48 players were/are non-black.

First of all, I believe that the NCAA did away with Proposition 48 quite some time ago.

Secondly, I can't buy into the rest of your statement. Kids that go to junior college are not always there because of academic issues. Some kids just did not receive college offers, or at least offer from top tier schools that appealed to them, so they enrolled at a junior college to keep playing in the hope that they could receive such offers in the future. That is why some kids can transfer from a junior college after only one year, while other have to get their associate's degree first (which generally takes two years).

I have never, never, never, heard the term "Juco" used as a synonym for a player's race. For what its worth, I would also tell you that Creighton has had white junior college transfer players in the past as well. The only stereotype that I've heard related to JUCO kids is that at the JUCO level there is very little defense played.

[TheHall]

First of all, I believe that the NCAA did away with Proposition 48 quite some time ago.

Secondly, the rest of your statement is crap. Kids that go to junior college are not always there because of academic issues. Some kids just did not receive college offers, or at least offer from top tier schools that appealed to them, so they enrolled at a junior college to keep playing in the hope that they could receive such offers in the future. That is why some kids can transfer from a junior college after only one year, while other have to get their associate's degree first (which generally takes two years).

I have never, never, never, heard the term "Juco" used as a synonym for a player's race. For what its worth, I would also tell you that Creighton has had white junior college transfer players in the past as well. The only stereotype that I've heard related to JUCO kids is that at the JUCO level there is very little defense played.

I think you missed my point. First, we were talking about stigmas, which by definition are not usually accurate, like sterotypes. Hardly any hs baller's who can play at the D1 level would choose to go JC if they had a choice. So while there are many reasons bball players have gone the JC route (as you point out), the usual case is that it's because of intellect, ie.. grades or test scores, which feeds the stereotype. Standardized academic testing has always demonstrated racial/economical bias & been viewed as controversial, which makes using them to determine player eligibility a part of the stigma as well.

As for prop 48, I didn't say it was still being used, but if you are old enough to remember that era you should know that that rule was viewed as being racially biased and became a label that players were always identified by, just like the JUCO label is today (even as far back as Larry Johnson) The the legendary JT Jr. became an icon when he walked off the court during a game in 1989 to protest:

When Georgetown's coach, John Thompson, walked off the court Saturday night before a game with Boston College, he added another dimension to the increasingly complex debate over Proposal 42. The new rule, which tightens restrictions on athletic scholarships, goes into effect in 1991, but intensive debate has already begun among college presidents, athletic directors and coaches. The issue has been complicated by ethnicity, economics and self-interest, but it essentially centers on the question of who can and cannot obtain an athletic scholarship. The new rule, which was approved at the National Collegiate Athletic Association convention last week, strengthens the N.C.A.A. bylaw known as Proposition 48, which allows prospective freshmen who did not meet all academic requirements to receive an athletic scholarship while losing their eligibility in their first year.

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/16/sports/big-east-thompson-s-protest-intensifies-debate.html

Btw just because you never heard something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. One test of discrimination/bias under the law is if a particular group is overly singled out by a law (rule in this case), so while we all are aware of some non-black JC transfers, that doesn't change the fact that there is a disproportional percentage of these players who are black at the highest level of cbb.

I respect your point of view but to claim I'm full of crap because you never heard of something is bush league...Racial bias in sports has never been as simple to assess as you seem to make it. I have much more respect for Dave's post where he acknowledged that the eye of the beholder plays a role in this conversation, rather than playing the demagogue role.

[Bill Marsh]

Villanova came in over the weekend at #27, a #7 seed and #2 in the big East, which is higher than they've been getting ranked in some other lists. For once I agree with College Sports Madness. I think that generally speaking the Wildcats are being undervalued. This pick means that CSM is picking Marquette for the top spot in the conference.

[MUSeashells&Balloons]

Agreed that's usually the case, like with the Washington Redskins.

Hey Hall, you know the rules no football talk in here!!

To that I say

haha