Bac, I don't think it's a real issue. I'd be very surprised if our ratios of non-black players are any different from the schools that are our peers or superiors. I would think that's just because the overwhelming majority of good basketball players are black.
OT: lack of diversity
- Thread starter theRU
- Start date
Just a few years ago, the two leading players were both Latino (Rosario and Echinique). You obviously don't know anything about Rutgers basketball, and your "observations" are meaningless
There was a brief period where we were better than UConn or at least on that level in Wbb in the mid-late 2000s. The issue is since then, we have really slipped. I don't think UConn or Tennessee really fear us these days, and that is a big difference from then. IIRC, we were UConn's only loss one year, and of course we were in the title game during that time. These days, even SHU is not worried about us, and that is very bad.
The problem may not be one of race,but one of money:The basketball camps.
Do these camps encourage teaching and looking for kids with a certain style of play?
Look at the NBA,where the white big stars are almost entirely foreign born.
My mind is far from made up on this issue.I'd like to hear others on this.
Do these camps encourage teaching and looking for kids with a certain style of play?
Look at the NBA,where the white big stars are almost entirely foreign born.
My mind is far from made up on this issue.I'd like to hear others on this.
64% of Power Conference basketball players are african-american according to a UPenn study.
As for WBB, 51% are african-american and 34% are white.
Last edited:
To answer your question there were many star white players on RU WBB. Sue Wicks, June Olkowski, Chris Daly (Asst Head Coach @ UConn), the Malouf twins, the Coyle Twins, Patty Delahanty, and many many more. All of them where when Grentz was the head coach.
My guess is that, for the last 2-3 decades, we are below - possibly well below - the average D1 % for white players on both the men's and women's side. Does it matter to me? Absolutely not, however, it has been noticeable IMHO.
EDIT: I found latest numbers from NCAA. It is roughly 51-34 pctwise.
Last edited:
My guess is that the same thing was true back in the early sixties and the fifties. Lots of teams back then had 100% whites....and we had Gene Armstead.
Thanks for being dismissive. This is why we can not have intelligent discussions on the board.
thanks for being open minded and not afraid to debate/discuss difficult questions and issues.
So the times have certainly changed, but it seems at Rutgers the shift has been much more dramatic than at other schools.
Exactly... it only matters to me IF we're missing out on talent that would elevate the program. And i would assume that there are some very good players that we do miss out on. So how do we get some of those players???
Because usually the people who want to talk the most and loudest about it are the least informed. It's hard to have civil discussions.
Its a shame. I get a harsh initial reaction from many posters, but in the end my observations seem to be accurate when you look at statistics.
Again, I only care because i want our programs to do well. If we're missing out on ANY demographic that might help us win, we should ask WHY and try to find solutions.
My guess would be as follows:
- there are NOT a lot of P5 caliber white kids, yearly, in NJ and...
- those that are P5 likely play at prep or parochial schools, so...
- those kids want to play at Notre Dame, Duke, Stanford, Nova, etc., with maybe an exception here or there...
....and it would take A LOT to change that IMHO.
Last edited:
Bottom line: I want the team to be a lot better! Does not matter if the team is white, black, or purple.
But we need to start finding ways to change it. Its the same thing that hurts our FB recruiting IMO when it comes to the prep schools
i agree, but i want more of the prep/ parochial football kids, and i feel the problems are both related.
Big problem is that the parents of these kids think Rutgers is a shitty school and I'm not kidding. They literally think that ND is about 100x better, academically, than RU. Some of them even think this way about Penn State over Rutgers (in other sports as well...). They simply have ZERO respect for Rutgers and no factual evidence you can show them will ever change their minds, SO, we've GOT to win first. Win, win some more, and win some more, before it begins to change.
What does religion have to do with anything?
I posted this topic on the MBB bird a while back. We had a pretty good discussion. However, I started the OP with specific citing of economic class and geography rather than strictly race.
The fact is, players from certain economic backgrounds or geographic areas (or cultures stemming from the same) i.e. Cities, suburbs, Europe, etc, tend to develop distinct playing styles and philosophies on how to approach the game. Sometimes race gets made the focal point just because the percentage of population in those areas or economic level.
Last edited:
How about percentage of starting five. There are a bunch of white GPA boosting practice players on the end of most P5 benches. From what P5 games I see on TV, I'd guess that African-Americans make up north of 90% of starting 5 players. Men. Let the best players play. Exception being a Utah State-Utah-BYU game. Looks like 1955 except for the long shorts and the 3-point line.
As for where are the pool of white players? I think LAX, and to a lesser extent soccer, have pulled white kids away from hoops. LAX race numbers are a 180 when compared with hoops. Participation in LAX has hone through the roof here in NC over the last twenty years.
Last edited:
Veiox, would you forgive a really stupid question? When you talk about the power conferences in basketball, do you mean just the conferences that dominate football, like the B1G and the SEC. Does that include teams like Temple, for instance? My guess is that at schools in urban areas llke Rutgers, the % of black players is much higher than the numbers you cite. In addition, I wonder what the percentages are for players who see a lot of minutes.
My comment wasn't directed in any way towards you.
MBB doesn't have a problem with coaches recruiting based on race. It has a problem with white kids not wanting to come here to play. It's not terribly hard to understand. Along the way we somehow became a "black" team. Young white suburban kids who have never been in a situation where they are in the very small minority, surrounded by inner city Blacks and Latinos, are often intimidated by this.
I mentioned it in my earlier post, Gary Waters struggled unsuccessfully to get suburban and Midwestern kids, black or white, interested in coming here. Or better said, he'd get them interested in RU but when the kids and their parents would come for official visits they'd get scared off by the behaviors of the then current players. Those comments came directly from Waters. I guess things haven't changed since then.
The information came from a study a few years back that referenced Six Power MBB Conferences. I would assume at that time they were: ACC, Big Ten. Big 12, Pac 12, SEC and Big East.
On reflection, "dominated" was an overstatement, but from 2005-6 to 2007-8, RU had a winning record against Connecticut in Big East play, and RU had wins against the Huskies in 4 consecutive years. Not a lot of teams could say that.
interesting thoughts I tend to agree....RU and SHU are very urban campuses compared to a lot of schools in the Midwest and RU is probably the most diverse or top 5 in the entire country. I think some not all kids might gravitate toward schools where they are more familiar with a certain demographic. We take it for granted here that its a diverse country but really in the Midwest its not. The best white players will always be snatched up by the usual suspects like Duke, UNC and Notre Dame or they play for state U which is a big deal in the Midwest. But again the pool of white players has shrunk so after the big names get their share, many of the others gravitate toward low majors. In womens there seems to be more white players...they are often known for their 3 point shooting....and the womens board hates the reference to calling them ponytails but that's what they are ...white girls who aren't particular athletic but can drain the 3. Villanova womens hoops was full of them. A lot of schools like Iowa, Iowa State, Nebraska are known for their ponytails.
I don't think there is a concerted effort to recruit anyone be race or exclude. I just think some tend to fit certain styles better and that's why you will see more whites at one school say a Michigan than you would at Kentucky
Ask "what does religion have to do with anything" to the parents of kids who choose church-affiliated universities. They are not interested in religious diversity. Perhaps racial diversity, but not religious.
It was even noticeable with the offensive linemen from NJ. Most white offensive linemen from NJ go to Boston College or Penn State. The two we have are from Penn. I noticed a couple of years ago, about Weiss period, that Notre Dame got an excessive number of whit recruits but when Kelly because HC, they started getting more black players and their level of play increased significantly.
Ancient history: Back when I was a frosh, there were no black players on the team (66/67 team just honored). I think the current men's hoops team has more blacks on it than the total number enrolled in RU-NB. (My entire 4 years I only had 4 black guys in classes with me - an two of them were international African students.
Similar threads
