« Why, Yes, I am An Asshole | Main | Staying Over »
Race War
Is this for real? Survivor to segregate teams by race. This reminds me of my longstanding awesome-but-never-gonna-happen plan to eliminate the lame Eastern Conference versus Western Conference concept in the NBA All-Star Game. Instead, you field the Black Team and the Other Team. Sure, it sounds a little absurd, but Yao Ming, Dirk Nowitzki, Andrei Kirlenko, Manu Ginobili, and Steve Nash is a solid starting squad for Team Other.
Sadly, this is a kind of offensive concept and probably can't be brought off the ground. But since there are no Americans on my proposed non-black starting lineup, and I don't think any foreigners would crack the all-black starting five you could reconfigure this around the less-inflammatory USA versus World concept. Does the switch make a big difference? I think it only matters at point guard where white American Kirk Hinrich is a backup on a non-black team but not an all-American team, and black Frenchman Tony Parker is a backup on an all-foreign team but not an all-black team.
August 23, 2006 | Permalink
Comments
but Yao Ming, Dirk Nowitzki, Andrei Kirlenko, Manu Ginobili, and Steve Nash is a solid starting squad for Team Other should read but Yao Ming, Dirk Nowitzki, Andrei Kirlenko, Manu Ginobili, and Steve Nash is a solid starting squad for the Washington Generals.
Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Aug 23, 2006 6:45:20 PM
Kind of offensive...exactly what would you define as completely offensive?
I assume this wasn't intended to be as bad as it sounds? Based on your defense of Bill Bennett's comments months ago, I am starting to wonder...
You have a right to say what you please, it is your blog after all, but I am just trying to point out that your statement could be easily misconstrued.
Posted by: justmy2 | Aug 23, 2006 6:49:14 PM
black Frenchman Tony Parker is a backup on an all-foreign team but not an all-black team
Tony Parker is biracial, I believe (black father, white mother). So who does he play for, again? Same for Jason Kidd and Mike Bibby, IIRC.
Posted by: Al | Aug 23, 2006 6:50:39 PM
Al -
Dave Chapelle will MC the racial draft and figure it all out.
Posted by: Quarterican | Aug 23, 2006 6:57:14 PM
Brad Miller?
Posted by: Noah | Aug 23, 2006 7:20:19 PM
justmy2 shows us that some people really need to lighten up. The black/white situation in the NBA is a perfect illustration of racial progress, because no one can seriously claim to be at any disadvantage because of their race. It's a meritocracy. Yes, the best players are mostly black, but who cares?
Anyway, the black/white thing is whole reason we'll never see a U.S. vs. World All-Star Game, awesome though it would be. David Stern couldn't stomach seeing a team full of honkies play a team full of brothers, and I don't think the networks would be crazy about it either.
Posted by: Steve | Aug 23, 2006 7:22:28 PM
This kind of discussion really points out what a nebulous and pointless concept race is. Who is black? Who is white? The whole discussion is pointless and absurd.
Not to mention that the Survivor producers didn't have the balls to make once of the teams First Nations. I'm sure that that team would have somebody who could figure out how to build a freakin' fire.
Posted by: Chuchundra | Aug 23, 2006 7:25:46 PM
David Stern couldn't stomach seeing a team full of honkies play a team full of brothers
The Utah Jazz are in the league, aren't they? So I don't know why you say we couldn't have a team full of honkies.
Posted by: Al | Aug 23, 2006 7:28:55 PM
I actually had an all-white team in a fantasy league for 2000-2001. It won. Another guy had a team of made up of high-scorers (players with the most children). It finished last.
Posted by: Chris | Aug 23, 2006 7:52:48 PM
Yes, the best players are mostly black, but who cares?
Apparently those who want to see separate but equal teams.
Posted by: pebird | Aug 23, 2006 8:06:11 PM
I won my fantasy league 2 years ago that had, I think, 8 white guys. I came out of the draft with like 4, so I decided to go with it. It wasn't a bad strategy, because the Europeans are good fantasy players (no defense, good percentages).
Posted by: Steve | Aug 23, 2006 8:49:26 PM
er... "won my fantasy league with a team that had 8 white guys"
Posted by: Steve | Aug 23, 2006 8:50:33 PM
The NHL had a "North America v. World" All-Star game...
Posted by: Scott Lemieux | Aug 24, 2006 12:32:00 AM
This pretty fun...Dirk!!!
--RC of strangeculture.blogspot.com
Posted by: RC of strangeculture | Aug 24, 2006 1:38:53 AM
justmy2 shows us that some people really need to lighten up. The black/white situation in the NBA is a perfect illustration of racial progress, because no one can seriously claim to be at any disadvantage because of their race. It's a meritocracy. Yes, the best players are mostly black, but who cares?
Steve
Huh...what does meritocracy have to do with whether or not the thought of playing a "black folks" against the "white folks" game is offensive or not. Nice strawman.
I made no reference to who would win or not, I simply stated the fact that Matt said it would be "kind of" offensive strikes me as in poor taste.
Are you saying that you agree that if this game would only be "kind of" offensive if it took place? I hope you are kidding. I thought we were past the point of pitting races against each other, but I guess I could stil be surprised.
To be clear, my point is to deem a black vs. white all star game as mildly appropriate in this day and age could easily be construed as being very insensitive. No other arbitrary separation of people by race or creed would be acceptable, but somehow this passes as only being "kind of" offensive.
So if I separated contestants on the Apprentice based on some arbitrary race, creed, or religion, do you think people would take offense.
I could go on and but I think it is unnecessary.
As I was watching the Spain vs. Germany game this weekend, I thought to myself, "how great is it that this Bell Curve, Fast-Twitch muscle nonsense is being dispelled by the fact that all countries, regardless of racial composition, are becoming competitive now that there is a focus on a sport. It makes people who would think there is some inherent talent bias based on race as opposed to hard work and focus look silly."
I guess it is all in the eye of the beholder.
Posted by: justmy2 | Aug 24, 2006 2:33:03 AM
"USA versus World"
I watched USA versus Italy last night. I'm a little worried about USA versus Argentina.
Posted by: ostap | Aug 24, 2006 8:34:40 AM
No other arbitrary separation of people by race or creed would be acceptable, but somehow this passes as only being "kind of" offensive.
Why is pitting teams against each other by race more offensive than pitting them against each other by sex? Okay, so it's not gonna work all that well in Matt's basketball example, but that's one of pretty few areas where the biological differences are such to make that the case. And it's an extremely common tool on reality shows to pit the sexes against one another. No one flipped out when Survivor did men vs. women teams fairly early on. So, what, exactly is the difference?
I thought we were past the point of pitting races against each other, but I guess I could stil be surprised.
I guess I'd like to believe that we'll some day get to the point where splitting teams by race would be no more emotionally laden or offensive than, say, your local cops vs. firefighters basketball game charity fundraiser--that it would just a fairly simple way to separate the teams and one that would have an added benefit of eliminating the need for jerseys. But certainly we're not there yet.
Posted by: flippantangel | Aug 24, 2006 9:32:29 AM
My point with the "NBA is a meritocracy" comment was that there's no reason to be uptight about race. Seeing a teamful of white guys wouldn't be offensive, it would just be sort of funny. But then, that's my sense of humor, and I'm pretty hard to offend.
Posted by: Steve | Aug 24, 2006 11:03:24 AM
With you, justmy2 It's an offensive idea. Thinking of it is excusable, but sharing it with one's readership is tonedeaf and stupid.
Posted by: tps12 | Aug 24, 2006 11:37:39 AM
And the Survivor shit is awful as well.
Posted by: tps12 | Aug 24, 2006 11:47:30 AM
Hey, Matt, don't listen to these clowns. Please keep sharing all of your borderline-offensive ideas. Save the boring shit for TPM.
Posted by: Steve | Aug 24, 2006 11:57:51 AM
Why is pitting teams against each other by race more offensive than pitting them against each other by sex?
An interesting questionthat is, I feel more offended by one, and I wonder why this is.
I think it could be that racial discrimination in large part takes (and has taken) the form of actual spatial segregation. Seeing two race-segregated teams invokes that. There aren't men's neighborhoods and women's neighborhoods, so sex segregation doesn't evoke the same horrors. Still, an interesting question.
(I kind of figured "kind of offensive" was an understatement.)
Posted by: Matt Weiner | Aug 24, 2006 2:06:09 PM
Tony Parker would start ahead of Ginobili. Parker was the MVP of his team last year.
And what if Morrison is the new Larry Bird?
Posted by: cedichou | Aug 24, 2006 2:34:50 PM
How about an all-time all-white team? Here's mine: guards -- Cousy and West; forwards -- Pettit and Bird; center -- Walton (when healthy) or Mikan. And all of them Americans, too.
Posted by: CJColucci | Aug 24, 2006 6:42:23 PM
I forgot to mention that my mother had a crush on the Cooz when they were in high school together (she says he had great legs), but he wasn't the star of his team. A pair of 6'5" or 6'6" twins were. My grandfather told her, though, that Cooz would be something special. He didn't think Elvis would amount to much, though, so his prediction record is only 50%.
Posted by: CJColucci | Aug 24, 2006 6:45:56 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
