dismissive before you read one word so this is my last entry for you.

>so, teams have no right to test your abilities when you are
>about to enter a league with a play level that is many fold
>higher than the one you are accustomed to?

If this was necessary, the NFL would have had it in place pre-1982. Explain why it wasn't necessary when the league was mostly white and I might concede this point...but you can't and won't.

>let me put it this way. why write sat's or mcat's if your
>school history dictates that you already earned good grades in
>previous years?

>obviously because the level of competition continues to rise.
>
>your history got you to the try out, and now it's up to you to
>pass the exam to get to the next level.

If schools were allowing students into their schools sans sat's or mcat's when 98% of the students were white but then all of sudden started to require them when their enrollment started to move to a more diverse mix of people, it would be called into question also (and lets not act like standardized testing doesn't have a bevvy of flaws and discriminatory practices).

>but many don't. so we should create special rules for some
>because certain people are offended that they need to enter
>another try out? football is predominantly a physical game.
>what else is there to test but physical attributes? are the
>athletes forced to be there against their will? are they
>forced to stay there against their will? did they choose to be
>there?

Why not just do away with the combine completely? Especially if the measures at the combine haven't been statistically analyzed for future success. There's no 'formula' for what makes a player successful at the pro level because each team is it's own culture. You want physical info, no prob. You want to track my speed, agility, ability? Watch film. Simple.


>this one is purely logical and there is no conspiracy.
>statistically, black athletes make better football players.
>how do you choose the best from the best with a sudden influx
>of black athletes? you run try outs.

This isn't logic...it's a convenient excuse, levied with a backhanded compliment. This is how I know you're not trying. "Statistically" LMAO...you gotta be a white guy.

>history is ugly, and humanity is making progress. there are
>plenty of shitty people out there, but that does not mean
>sports organizations are guilty of engaging in slave
>practices. the players choose to be there, they are
>compensated, they can leave. this cannot be overlooked to make
>a radical point.

What a contradictory statement! History is ugly (yes), humanity is making progress (yet, my examples included two very recent examples of them perpetuating historical ugliness in the face of an opportunity to show progress). Sports orgs aren't guilty of engaging in slave practices (I LITERALLY listed a slaves account of how they put them through a combine for selling them and how the same exact tasks are being instituted to measure athletes for draft to EARN MONEY FOR RICH MEN!)

Then, he makes 'em hop = 20-yard shuttle, Three-cone drill, 60-yard shuttle.

he makes 'em trot = 40-yard dash | Splits are also recorded at 10 and 20 yards to measure acceleration.

he makes 'em jump = Vertical jump, Broad jump.

Then the bidders makes offers accordin' to size and build = Physical measurements | Height, weight, arm & hand length, body fat percentage, Bench Press

"How much," he yells, "for this buck? A thousand? Eleven hundred? Twelve hundred dollars?" = Picking traditionally poor black men in a draft, giving them financial security while making profit off of their physical abilities.

Ok, bro...you can't be indignant just because you want to be right. It's clear as day this is transitional. Just because they get $ instead of room/board/feed doesn't make this portion of the process less similar.

>nothing they do is similar to a slave auction. nothing.

Yeah, you just confirmed my initial consideration. Even if you think the players are being sensitive, anyone with a brain can see the similarities I just aligned.

>what you are suggesting, is that, every black athlete until
>the end of time, can never be tested for their physical
>attributes, even if they willingly chose to put their their
>physical attributes to a test against other willing
>participants to enter an organization, or it will immediately
>be thought of as slavery. that means, all professional teams,
>whose success is based on physical attributes, can no longer
>hold try outs of any kind, or test any athlete, unless they
>risk offending you. this is ludicrous and pure radicalism.

Only a fool thinks that someone not wanting be subjected to an insensitive process is radicalism. Players should be able to opt out of the combine without it hurting their consideration for the job. NFL teams should then rely on individual scouting...you know, the same way they did it in the 1960's and 1970's, pre-merger.


>^ looks to me like a good way to test a players physical
>attributes where they will need to do those things over and
>over again to guarantee their own and the team's success, for
>which they will be paid.

You mean the same things they've done for over half their lives at that point? You mean the same things they've been recorded doing up until that point? You mean the same things that they've done with statistical analysis to review their acumen in?

Those things? Right.

>already addressed that above. the only conspiracy here is the
>radical one in your mind.

No one said anything about a conspiracy triggered guy. There are similarities and players have a right to make the comparison. And I wouldn't side with the NFL (a league that has a history of discriminatory practices) when it comes to racial sensitivity recognition. It's always funny to see conservatives (who like to keep things the way they were) cape for progression when people say 'let's go back to the way it was when it was for mostly whites'.

Good day, Mr. Denial.