# How race unlevelled US playing fields



## Vin (Jun 5, 2018)

“If you were a white team they wouldn’t ask you for addresses,” he says. “I don’t think the white teams have to pay upfront.”


https://amp.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jun/04/white-teams-dont-pay-upfront-race-us-soccer-fields-seattle?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true


----------



## Vin (Jun 5, 2018)

Part 2

*Soccer in America: why aren't more black kids playing the world's game?*

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jun/05/soccer-in-america-why-arent-more-black-kids-playing-the-worlds-game


----------



## Vin (Jun 5, 2018)

Part 3

*Common goal: how soccer healed a gang and riot-hit area of LA*

*https://amp.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jun/06/common-goal-how-soccer-healed-a-gang-and-riot-hit-la-community?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true*


----------



## Rev234 (Jun 6, 2018)

Thanks for the post.  Those were some good reads.


----------



## reno114 (Jun 6, 2018)

Several factors that need to change US Soccer's mediocrity on the International stage; 

Breaking the pay to play mentality as the only way to achieve success in soccer. 

Accessibilty to fields. Start building more fields in the impoverished communities.

Convincing youth players from diverse communities to play at a young age and developing them with knowledgeable, quality coaches.

From my perspective,  Blacks do not have much interest in soccer because there is no money at the professional level, as compared to football or basketball.

 For the amount of Hispanic kids that are playing in leagues not sanctioned by USSF, it is a shame they are underrepresented on the national team.


----------



## coachsamy (Jun 6, 2018)

reno114 said:


> Several factors that need to change US Soccer's mediocrity on the International stage;
> 
> Breaking the pay to play mentality as the only way to achieve success in soccer.
> 
> ...


Well said! 

Adding on to your points is that USSF and MLS wants to make the most money with the least amount of investment and to be honest they blew it during the elections for a new president.

- USSF needs to use and glamorize their FREE venue to get people playing soccer which is High School Soccer (Clubs will hate it!)

- Understand why each demographic top athletes are playing other sports! Top white athletes are not playing soccer at the professional level either.

- MLS to pay a sustainable salary to non-star players. Baseball, basketball and hockey scrubs get pay 5-10x the salary of their soccer counterparts. Where is all the profit from MLS going? You can't just dissapear a free $150-200 million dollars new teams are paying to go into a league.

- USSF gets a very good cut of the profits when the MX plays in the US, invest it in the poor communities that are not subject to gentrification.

- As long money talks the US will continue to be mediocre in the international stage of soccer.


----------



## reno114 (Jun 6, 2018)

The question that needs to be asked; Is there a Messi, Ronaldo, Pele, Maradona
somewhere in the U.S. that hasn't been discovered yet? or Can there ever be?



coachsamy said:


> Well said!
> 
> Adding on to your points is that USSF and MLS wants to make the most money with the least amount of investment and to be honest they blew it during the elections for a new president.
> 
> ...


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 6, 2018)

Meh.  At tournaments these last 2 weekends (both as a ref and spectator) I saw a ton of '08 (and '07 and '09) teams playing bootball a year after the buildout line is removed.  Didn't matter if they were mega club teams, or local small clubs.  The Hispanic clubs did it, as did the white majority clubs.  The pay to pay clubs did it, and the Extras teams did it. 

There are a lot of minority clubs in the San Fernando and Oxnard areas.  Some of the coaches don't take salaries putting them on par with Extras fees.  The bigger problem for these clubs, as I've written before, is transport to and from practice.  One of the clubs my son tried out for was minority-majority....great group of players, some with real talent that had been playing since they were 3...practices though were constantly getting cancelled because of rides and car breakdowns.  Fields are a close second, particularly when lighted fields are needed in the late fall/early spring.

But ultimately after much though I come down that we have 3 big problems: our soccer culture (there isn't much of it, we don't have a lot of qualified rec volunteers, and what we have of it is very win oriented at the early ages), the college system (which has limited soccer training, limited scholarships for boys, and much of the scholarship money is tied to grades which can be difficult for boys coming from inner city schools...America has one of the top education systems in the world if you only take our suburban schools), and the MLS (whose salaries aren't competitive enough to draw top local talent away from the college system).  Until those 3 get fixed, the US will never be a soccer powerhouse.  There are other problems too, but those are the big 3 reasons IMHO.


----------



## Socal United (Jun 6, 2018)

- USSF needs to use and glamorize their FREE venue to get people playing soccer which is High School Soccer (Clubs will hate it!)

Free?  Maybe in your neighborhood it is but in ours it is closing in on club fees.  School districts keep cutting and cutting.  No longer paying for uniforms, busses, anything outside of the coaching stipend(which is about .45c an hour).


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 6, 2018)

Socal United said:


> - USSF needs to use and glamorize their FREE venue to get people playing soccer which is High School Soccer (Clubs will hate it!)
> 
> Free?  Maybe in your neighborhood it is but in ours it is closing in on club fees.  School districts keep cutting and cutting.  No longer paying for uniforms, busses, anything outside of the coaching stipend(which is about .45c an hour).


California also increasingly has a free rider problem with school activities.  In California, the spend on these activities are increasingly being crowded out because of pension and required education spends.  Under California law, schools and support orgs cannot require parents to pay a fee to support a team or club...all kids need to have access regardless of whether they pay or not.  The school or support org can ask for donations, but those donations must be entirely voluntary.  So you have a problem that if you have a band of 40 kids, and 25 families are not paying, why should you pay even more to cover the costs for those 25 families.  It's not a problem in well off areas where maybe only a handful of families won't/can't fork up the voluntary donation, and a local business might sponsor and support to make up the difference.  But it's becoming really hard in the urban schools because after a certain proportion says they have to opt out, the organizers tend to lift there hands up and say maybe it's not worth it, and rely entirely on the school's budgeted support (which as you note is sometimes just the coaching stipend).


----------



## coachsamy (Jun 6, 2018)

Socal United said:


> - USSF needs to use and glamorize their FREE venue to get people playing soccer which is High School Soccer (Clubs will hate it!)
> 
> Free?  Maybe in your neighborhood it is but in ours it is closing in on club fees.  School districts keep cutting and cutting.  No longer paying for uniforms, busses, anything outside of the coaching stipend(which is about .45c an hour).


Sounds like poor leadership from the school district. Our school kids conduct fundraisers for some of these expenses, plus the AD does a good job taking care of the none big sports as much as he can. The point is that USSF has many venues to properly invest in the youth, but rather take the easy money to be made.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

@coachsamy,

There is no oversight (control) of "High School soccer" by the U.S. Federation.  So when you say "USSF needs to use and glamorize their FREE venue to get people playing soccer which is High School Soccer (Clubs will hate it!)" you are making a factual  assumption that is untrue.   The US Federation has oversight of club soccer through its Youth Affiliates (US Youth Soccer/State Associations (i.e. Cal South), US Club Soccer, AYSO, etc.) but High School soccer has no connection (whatsoever) to the USSF.  As such, the USSF has no influence over high school soccer stadiums and high school soccer for that matter.

If the argument is that the USSF needs to wrestle control of High School soccer from the hands of the NFHS (National Federation of State High School Associations) and the NCAA at the college level ... then that is a whole different discussion.

@reno114,  

When you write "Breaking the pay to play mentality as the only way to achieve success in soccer."  I want you to consider that in every European and Latin American country "soccer" is a pay to play sport.  The difference is the people paying are the fans and supporters of the clubs and ultimately the players themselves and not just the parents.  While parents do pay nominal amounts for training youth accepted to various academies, these players are viewed as investments that will be monetized by the clubs at a later date through solidarity and training fees.

The U.S. Federation at the urging of the players (idiots) have stripped Article 19 - Solidarity and Training fees from the U.S. model.  Read this: http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/solidarity-and-training-payments-and-the-pay-to-play-scapegoat.4920/

@Grace T. - I agree, especially with the comment regarding no soccer culture and limited scholarships.

For any kid that finds themselves impoverished and genetically disadvantaged (i.e. unlikely to be a H.S. football or basketball star), soccer represents a potential path to college.

@coachsamy, as far as the MLS goes its not ready for primetime yet and is a break even venture at this stage.  Its purely a long term investment and a bad investment given the short term risk factors in my opinion.  I believe the structure of the MLS will ultimately result in its downfall, especially when the new TV contract is negotiated IF the USSF decides to abandon the joint MLS/USSF rights.  Those new team entry fees are the only thing keeping some teams in the black.  Explode their salaries by paying the average players more and you might just kill the league.  See, https://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2017/8/29/16088402/mls-money-owners-sum-major-league-soccer-marketing-usa-mexico-canada


----------



## FernandoFromNationalCity (Jun 6, 2018)

reno114 said:


> The question that needs to be asked; Is there a Messi, Ronaldo, Pele, Maradona
> somewhere in the U.S. that hasn't been discovered yet? or Can there ever be?


Look up this kid on Instagram 
Alex Alcala... he can be the future of us soccer..


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Jun 6, 2018)

FernandoFromNationalCity said:


> Look up this kid on Instagram
> Alex Alcala... he can be the future of us soccer..


Future for what country?...Mexico?


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

Just for the record, I abhor this concept of "race."   Race is nothing more than a social construct.  There is an insignificant genetic disparity between the so-called races and virtually all disparities and societal reactions are based upon socioeconomic factors.  We do a disservice to ourselves and any discussion by dumping populations into buckets based on the amount of melanin produced by that individual or group.

That said ... I get it, its easy (albeit incredibly lazy) to ignore the socioeconomic factors that motivate certain actions and conditions and just slap the race label on it.

With regard to the article cited by @Vin, the author/reporter himself breaks the cardinal rule of reporting by doing nothing to verify the statement “If you were a white team they wouldn’t ask you for addresses,” he says. “I don’t think the white teams have to pay upfront.”  Really?  How do we know this is true?  I'm not saying it isn't, but the lack of confirmation is disappointing.


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> as far as the MLS goes its not ready for primetime yet and is a break even venture at this stage.  Its purely a long term investment and a bad investment given the short term risk factors in my opinion.  I believe the structure of the MLS will ultimately result in its downfall, especially when the new TV contract is negotiated IF the USSF decides to abandon the joint MLS/USSF rights.  Those new team entry fees are the only thing keeping some teams in the black.  Explode their salaries by paying the average players more and you might just kill the league.  See, https://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2017/8/29/16088402/mls-money-owners-sum-major-league-soccer-marketing-usa-mexico-canada


I agree with your assessment of the current MLS, and that's a great article.  I disagree, though, that removing the salary caps will cause the league to collapse.  The salary caps act as a way to keep parity in the league...because each team is limited to 3 DPs, no team is every going to excessively overpower another.  We can't have a Real, a Barcelona, or even a Liverpool here because teams simply can't pay enough to gather that type of talent.  The only reason past-his-prime Zlatan is even with the Galaxy is because of his exit fee from the PL and the funny business with the Galaxy TAM money.  If you remove the caps, you give some interested owners the chance to build really a world-class dominant team by importing European talent to play with the American talent.  And if you have players the caliber of Ronaldo or Messi playing for US based teams, the European (not to mention the American) interest will follow. 

As with everything, there is a price to be paid.  It would mean a handful of teams will dominate the MLS year after year, like they do in the PL, La Liga, the Bundesliga.  For the others, we'd need a system of relegation to give the games interest (and an official secondary league).  We simply don't have any good American teams and never really will....3 DPs is not enough to build a really good squad.  So we'll continue to have games like the Quakes-Galaxy game my son and I went to, where the keepers just engaged in a big game of boot ball knocking the ball with punts and long goalkicks into 50/50 situations and that's what the coaches and kids will imitate.  The only other way forward is pushing the kids to go to Europe (not England)...and that's hard given the immigration laws, our tax laws, and the more alluring safe choices of college.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I agree with your assessment of the current MLS, and that's a great article.  I disagree, though, that removing the salary caps will cause the league to collapse.  The salary caps act as a way to keep parity in the league...because each team is limited to 3 DPs, no team is every going to excessively overpower another.  We can't have a Real, a Barcelona, or even a Liverpool here because teams simply can't pay enough to gather that type of talent.  The only reason past-his-prime Zlatan is even with the Galaxy is because of his exit fee from the PL and the funny business with the Galaxy TAM money.  If you remove the caps, you give some interested owners the chance to build really a world-class dominant team by importing European talent to play with the American talent.  And if you have players the caliber of Ronaldo or Messi playing for US based teams, the European (not to mention the American) interest will follow.
> 
> As with everything, there is a price to be paid.  It would mean a handful of teams will dominate the MLS year after year, like they do in the PL, La Liga, the Bundesliga.  For the others, we'd need a system of relegation to give the games interest (and an official secondary league).  We simply don't have any good American teams and never really will....3 DPs is not enough to build a really good squad.  So we'll continue to have games like the Quakes-Galaxy game my son and I went to, where the keepers just engaged in a big game of boot ball knocking the ball with punts and long goalkicks into 50/50 situations and that's what the coaches and kids will imitate.  The only other way forward is pushing the kids to go to Europe (not England)...and that's hard given the immigration laws, our tax laws, and the more alluring safe choices of college.


@Grace T., I don't disagree in principal, but it will be years before the MLS puts out a product that is worth watching.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> Just for the record, I abhor this concept of "race."   Race is nothing more than a social construct.  There is an insignificant genetic disparity between the so-called races and virtually all disparities and societal reactions are based upon socioeconomic factors.  We do a disservice to ourselves and any discussion by dumping populations into buckets based on the amount of melanin produced by that individual or group.
> 
> That said ... I get it, its easy (albeit incredibly lazy) to ignore the socioeconomic factors that motivate certain actions and conditions and just slap the race label on it.
> 
> With regard to the article cited by @Vin, the author/reporter himself breaks the cardinal rule of reporting by doing nothing to verify the statement “If you were a white team they wouldn’t ask you for addresses,” he says. “I don’t think the white teams have to pay upfront.”  Really?  How do we know this is true?  I'm not saying it isn't, but the lack of confirmation is disappointing.


Race, or whatever else you want to call it today, can easily be identified by genetic markers.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Race, or whatever else you want to call it today, can easily be identified by genetic markers.


Yes and no.  What I'm saying is better articulated by the team of scientists in Philadelphia and New York that argue there is no such thing as race from a biologically genetic standpoint.   Read this: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed

Ultimately, the "human race" (homo sapiens) succeeded in supplanting the neanderthals as the dominate homo species.  All of us sprang from the original homo sapiens in Africa about 195,000 years ago (which means technically we are all "African-Americans" assuming one lives in America).  What we typically define as "race" is nothing more than subjectively picking a few diverse phenotypes and calling it good.  The subjective picking is flawed and has little to no scientific relevance.  Biologically, the species to too genetically diverse to categorize ourselves into meaningful racial buckets.


----------



## ultimate20 (Jun 6, 2018)

reno114 said:


> Several factors that need to change US Soccer's mediocrity on the International stage;
> 
> Breaking the pay to play mentality as the only way to achieve success in soccer.
> 
> ...



Do you have a plan to accomplish any one of these ideas?  Let's review:  1."Breaking the pay mentality..."  Who's going to pay for coaches, field rentals, uniforms, league game fields, travel, on and on....
2.  "Start building more fields"... Who's going to build these fields?  How will they buy the land? Pay for the construction?  manage the fields?  Some benevolent soccer God is going to do all of this?  
3.  "Convincing young players..."  Parents tell most kids what to do, and where to sign up, parents are also 99% responsible for who they play for, the basic knowledge they attain while young,.  So in other words clueless parents, are going to "convince" their children of something?  And who's going to pay a qualified coach without a payment plan in place?   
4.  There's no $ in soccer in the US for any ethnicity.  High dollar contracts are going to foreign players.  Every professional sport in the US pays SIGNIFICANTLY more than all US soccer leagues.  
5.  This is the only point that makes any sense.  
Pipe dreams, rainbows and unicorn wishes wont change anything, and it's easy to point out problems.  Finding solutions are the hard part of any real world endeavor.


----------



## reno114 (Jun 6, 2018)

Do you feel better, I know I don't have the means or ability to change decades of built-in mediocrity, but thanks for pointing that out, besides I'll be rooting for Argentina and Spain.



ultimate20 said:


> Do you have a plan to accomplish any one of these ideas?  Let's review:  1."Breaking the pay mentality..."  Who's going to pay for coaches, field rentals, uniforms, league game fields, travel, on and on....
> 2.  "Start building more fields"... Who's going to build these fields?  How will they buy the land? Pay for the construction?  manage the fields?  Some benevolent soccer God is going to do all of this?
> 3.  "Convincing young players..."  Parents tell most kids what to do, and where to sign up, parents are also 99% responsible for who they play for, the basic knowledge they attain while young,.  So in other words clueless parents, are going to "convince" their children of something?  And who's going to pay a qualified coach without a payment plan in place?
> 4.  There's no $ in soccer in the US for any ethnicity.  High dollar contracts are going to foreign players.  Every professional sport in the US pays SIGNIFICANTLY more than all US soccer leagues.
> ...


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> Yes and no.  What I'm saying is better articulated by the team of scientists in Philadelphia and New York that argue there is no such thing as race from a biologically genetic standpoint.   Read this: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed
> 
> Ultimately, the "human race" (homo sapiens) succeeded in supplanting the neanderthals as the dominate homo species.  All of us sprang from the original homo sapiens in Africa about 195,000 years ago (which means technically we are all "African-Americans" assuming one lives in America).  What we typically define as "race" is nothing more than subjectively picking a few diverse phenotypes and calling it good.  The subjective picking is flawed and has little to no scientific relevance.  Biologically, the species to too genetically diverse to categorize ourselves into meaningful racial buckets.


Saying there is no "race" because we are all the "human race" is a 60's copout.  I didn't say any particular racial feature is "good" or "better" than the corresponding feature from another race - it is, however, unarguably different.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Saying there is no "race" because we are all the "human race" is a 60's copout.  I didn't say any particular racial feature is "good" or "better" than the corresponding feature from another race - it is, however, unarguably different.


That isn't exactly what I said.  I said that genetic researchers (guy's with doctorate degrees) have concluded that race is merely a social construct and not genetic (i.e. biologically relevant).  I agree.  I also pointed you to an article that reviewed the research paper, here it is again: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed

The summary of the underlying article states (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6273/564):

*Summary*
In the wake of the sequencing of the human genome in the early 2000s, genome pioneers and social scientists alike called for an end to the use of race as a variable in genetic research (_1_, _2_). Unfortunately, by some measures, the use of race as a biological category has increased in the postgenomic age (_3_). Although inconsistent definition and use has been a chief problem with the race concept, it has historically been used as a taxonomic categorization based on common hereditary traits (such as skin color) to elucidate the relationship between our ancestry and our genes. We believe the use of biological concepts of race in human genetic research—so disputed and so mired in confusion—is problematic at best and harmful at worst. It is time for biologists to find a better way.​In other words, holding onto notions of race from a biological research point of view is an *1160's (or earlier) copout.*  Its a social construct that has no scientific merit and once we get past this we will start to view societal problems through the proper "socioeconomic" lens, rather, than referring to people and communities by the same names that Crayola uses in their box of crayons.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> That isn't exactly what I said.  I said that genetic researchers (guy's with doctorate degrees) have concluded that race is merely a social construct and not genetic (i.e. biologically relevant).  I agree.  I also pointed you to an article that reviewed the research paper, here it is again: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed
> 
> The summary of the underlying article states (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6273/564):
> 
> ...


Race is exactly genetic.  There is no other source for the obvious differences between races.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Race is exactly genetic.  There is no other source for the obvious differences between races.


What do you mean by "obvious differences?" Can you give me a few examples.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> What do you mean by "obvious differences?" Can you give me a few examples.


What game are you playing?


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> What do you mean by "obvious differences?" Can you give me a few examples.



You both right and both wrong.  Let's look at the example of our best friends, the dogs.  Are dogs a distinct species?  Yes, we might race to answer...hey but wait but what about the wolf?  The African dog? The hyena?  They are all genetically close, yet different.

Well, there are distinct breeds.  Clearly a corgi is different than German shepherd and different than a lab....and those differences are rooted in genetics.  But we also know there are dogs that are mixed, dogs which have no breeds, and dogs which one person might label a corgi another one won't.  And what we consider to be a corgi and what not to be a corgi is a social construct...rules made by humans that label one animal one thing and another something different.  For example, are the English lab and the American lab one breed or two?  Yet, there's no denying there are obvious differences between the dogs, that those differences are genetic (a corgi is not a lab), and that the more different they are it's easier to distinguish them.

If dogs are this complicated, well with humans....


----------



## Dos Equis (Jun 6, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> So we'll continue to have games like the Quakes-Galaxy game my son and I went to, where the keepers just engaged in a big game of boot ball knocking the ball with punts and long goalkicks into 50/50 situations and that's what the coaches and kids will imitate.


  Go to an LAFC game -- I expect the number of punts that goalie has performed all year could be counted on one hand.  I am pleasantly surprised by the style of soccer Bob Bradley has them playing.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> That isn't exactly what I said.  I said that genetic researchers (guy's with doctorate degrees) have concluded that race is merely a social construct and not genetic (i.e. biologically relevant).  I agree.  I also pointed you to an article that reviewed the research paper, here it is again: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed
> 
> The summary of the underlying article states (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6273/564):
> 
> ...


White people can't jump.
Black people can't swim.
Asian people can't drive.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> You both right and both wrong.  Let's look at the example of our best friends, the dogs.  Are dogs a distinct species?  Yes, we might race to answer...hey but wait but what about the wolf?  The African dog? The hyena?  They are all genetically close, yet different.
> 
> Well, there are distinct breeds.  Clearly a corgi is different than German shepherd and different than a lab....and those differences are rooted in genetics.  But we also know there are dogs that are mixed, dogs which have no breeds, and dogs which one person might label a corgi another one won't.  And what we consider to be a corgi and what not to be a corgi is a social construct...rules made by humans that label one animal one thing and another something different.  For example, are the English lab and the American lab one breed or two?  Yet, there's no denying there are obvious differences between the dogs, that those differences are genetic (a corgi is not a lab), and that the more different they are it's easier to distinguish them.
> 
> If dogs are this complicated, well with humans....


I don't know how to give you half a "like", since you said about half of what I was going to write.


----------



## nosubs (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> White people can't jump.
> Black people can't swim.
> Asian people can't drive.


...Racist people can't see.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

nosubs said:


> ...Racist people can't see.


Forgot one.
Hispanics who can't afford to play club soccer, go play rec.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> What game are you playing?


I think we have had enough interactions for you to appreciate that my discussion/debate style will be respectful and I will never engage in ad hominem attacks.  I truly don't know what you mean by "obvious differences."  Is it just color of skin?  Is it eye shape?  Just a few factors or many.  In my experience, in order to have meaningful discussions, we need to make sure we are using the same definitions.

For example, @Sheriff Joe wrote:
White people can't jump.
Black people can't swim.
Asian people can't drive.​
What defines a "white person" genetically speaking, or a "black person."  The "Asian people" comment is a little more confusing because we are breaking from melanin levels and going to a geographic region.  As far as the "can't ..." this seems to be not a genetic difference but a stereotype.  

So, what are the obvious differences.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> I think we have had enough interactions for you to appreciate that my discussion/debate style will be respectful and I will never engage in ad hominem attacks.  I truly don't know what you mean by "obvious differences."  Is it just color of skin?  Is it eye shape?  Just a few factors or many.  In my experience, in order to have meaningful discussions, we need to make sure we are using the same definitions.
> 
> For example, @Sheriff Joe wrote:
> White people can't jump.
> ...


Are you comparing me to loser joe?


----------



## LASTMAN14 (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> I think we have had enough interactions for you to appreciate that my discussion/debate style will be respectful and I will never engage in ad hominem attacks.  I truly don't know what you mean by "obvious differences."  Is it just color of skin?  Is it eye shape?  Just a few factors or many.  In my experience, in order to have meaningful discussions, we need to make sure we are using the same definitions.
> 
> For example, @Sheriff Joe wrote:
> White people can't jump.
> ...


I suggest ignoring E. He likes to go in circles and give you a headache. MWN always good info and feedback.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> I think we have had enough interactions for you to appreciate that my discussion/debate style will be respectful and I will never engage in ad hominem attacks.  I truly don't know what you mean by "obvious differences."  Is it just color of skin?  Is it eye shape?  Just a few factors or many.  In my experience, in order to have meaningful discussions, we need to make sure we are using the same definitions.
> 
> For example, @Sheriff Joe wrote:
> White people can't jump.
> ...


It is a joke, that is it. You people need to lighten up, no pun intended.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Are you comparing me to loser joe?


You are way worse than I, you are serious and I am having some fun.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

LASTMAN14 said:


> I suggest ignoring E. He likes to go in circles and give you a headache. MWN always good info and feedback.


Circles?  Not me.  I like to get past the bs and quickly to the facts.


----------



## broshark (Jun 6, 2018)

reno114 said:


> The question that needs to be asked; Is there a Messi, Ronaldo, Pele, Maradona
> somewhere in the U.S. that hasn't been discovered yet? or Can there ever be?



A group of 2009 kids from SD went to Spain a month or so back and beat some of the best clubs there.  There's no question America has the talent base to beat the Euros - getting that base excited to stick with soccer is the problem.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are way worse than I, you are serious and I am having some fun.


Seems that you know you are a loser.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Seems that you know you are a loser.


So you enjoyed that they put us together?
That just made my day, I have always known you were racist, I am just happy other see it as well.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So you enjoyed that they put us together?
> That just made my day, I have always known you were racist, I am just happy other see it as well.


And now you are admitting that you are a racist?.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> And now you are admitting that you are a racist?.


No, but we all know and everyone agrees that you are, now let these people have there thread back, you old racist asshole.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

broshark said:


> A group of 2009 kids from SD went to Spain a month or so back and beat some of the best clubs there.  There's no question America has the talent base to beat the Euros - getting that base excited to stick with soccer is the problem.


We took some 17-19-year-olds to Gothia Cup in 2007, and played teams from Sweden, Germany, and Norway.  They won their group without a loss, then got bumped after a 0-0 draw when they could only hit the goal frame 3 times while the Swedes scored 3 PKs.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> No, but we all know and everyone agrees that you are, now let these people have there thread back, you old racist asshole.


Show me.


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 6, 2018)

broshark said:


> A group of 2009 kids from SD went to Spain a month or so back and beat some of the best clubs there.  There's no question America has the talent base to beat the Euros - getting that base excited to stick with soccer is the problem.



Well, this isn't necessarily a good thing either.  As long as we are all being racist and stereotyping, I'll say that I've noticed a distinct type of play in 5 groups of youngers (8/9/10 year olds) I've seen play games.  Granted, it's my very small sample and it's all stereotyping, and it's mostly boys (haven't seen enough of the younger girls to compare from different countries) but here's the jist.

-Americans: When I see them play at the club level, particularly the less experienced teams from the suburbs, there's something frantic about them as if they are willing for the ball to get into the opposite goal.  It's all about scoring.  You hear it on the side lines too..."shoot"...as if just willing the ball inside will upend the laws of physics and magically get it past the blocking defenders and the goalkeeper.

-Mexicans: It's all about getting through the opponent and moving up the field.  Can lead to some more physical play as a result than the suburban Americans, and tactics "by the rules" people might look at and say that's not soccer.

-British: It's all about clearing the ball away from your own goal.  Almost as much bootball as the Americans.  For example, see: 




-Spanish: It's about playing keep away.  They care less about getting it to goal, more about keeping the ball away from the other side, like (for those of us that grew up in the 80s/90s) our schoolyard game of "keep away"

-Italians (my smallest sample size...seen the fewest games): Not that different from the Spanish but it's more defensive than pass oriented.


----------



## reno114 (Jun 6, 2018)

The path to the U.S. winning the World Cup--- it doesn't start with ' more talent. It starts with developing the talent that we already have, in the right way. Quote from Christian Pulisic




Grace T. said:


> Well, this isn't necessarily a good thing either.  As long as we are all being racist and stereotyping, I'll say that I've noticed a distinct type of play in 5 groups of youngers (8/9/10 year olds) I've seen play games.  Granted, it's my very small sample and it's all stereotyping, and it's mostly boys (haven't seen enough of the younger girls to compare from different countries) but here's the jist.
> 
> -Americans: When I see them play at the club level, particularly the less experienced teams from the suburbs, there's something frantic about them as if they are willing for the ball to get into the opposite goal.  It's all about scoring.  You hear it on the side lines too..."shoot"...as if just willing the ball inside will upend the laws of physics and magically get it past the blocking defenders and the goalkeeper.
> 
> ...


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> You both right and both wrong.  Let's look at the example of our best friends, the dogs.  Are dogs a distinct species?  Yes, we might race to answer...hey but wait but what about the wolf?  The African dog? The hyena?  They are all genetically close, yet different.
> 
> Well, there are distinct breeds.  Clearly a corgi is different than German shepherd and different than a lab....and those differences are rooted in genetics.  But we also know there are dogs that are mixed, dogs which have no breeds, and dogs which one person might label a corgi another one won't.  And what we consider to be a corgi and what not to be a corgi is a social construct...rules made by humans that label one animal one thing and another something different.  For example, are the English lab and the American lab one breed or two?  Yet, there's no denying there are obvious differences between the dogs, that those differences are genetic (a corgi is not a lab), and that the more different they are it's easier to distinguish them.
> 
> If dogs are this complicated, well with humans....


@Grace T., your analogy is that within the homo sapien species "races" are akin to canine "breeds." I see where you are trying to go, but the problem is one of genetic diversity resulting from "selective breeding" versus natural selection.  Breeds are scientifically identifiable based on

From a pure genetic standpoint, the genetic difference between humans is small and the genetic diversity between dog breeds is on the order of 5x higher than the human population.  Generally speaking we identify human population groups based on allele frequencies.  Allele frequencies can help us genetically pinpoint a population group to a geographic region, but beyond that ... its inconsequential.  We can have two persons from Mexico City be white (red headed) and nearly black (very dark skinned) and they will share more genetic similarities (alleles) than two individuals from East and West Africa. In sum, "races" aren't scientifically useful because we only looking at a couple of phenotypic markers and these phenotypes don't connect to underlying genetics and don't usefully model the underlying populations.

Dog breeds on the other hand were selectively breed to ensure consistent phenotypic markers and connect very well to underlying genetics.  See, http://www.scirp.org/(S(i43dyn45teexjx455qlt3d2q))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1139728

If we were truly interested in understanding the why's and how's of various social issues ... which is the thread title:
*How race unlevelled US playing fields*​
Then we would understand that it isn't a "race" thing (whatever the f that is), but its a socioeconomic thing that implicates a variety of issues from education, to ethnic background to income levels.

In short, the author of this article is a lazy reporter that is likely sitting in some coffee shop in Washington writing about shit he barely understands and not doing any research to confirm his implicit biases.

The title to the article would be better stated:

*Wealthy teams in economically advantaged areas find it easier 
to obtain fields from cash strapped municipalities.*

or​
*Socioeconomically disadvantaged youth soccer clubs/leagues
don't get the same benefit of the doubt as the wealthy.*​


----------



## Bubba (Jun 6, 2018)

broshark said:


> A group of 2009 kids from SD went to Spain a month or so back and beat some of the best clubs there.  There's no question America has the talent base to beat the Euros - getting that base excited to stick with soccer is the problem.


That has happened before , if you go back in time on this forum there is always these U-10 or 12  and under all-stars teams that do great in European tournaments . The problem is at 15 and older where the rest of the world does a better job.


----------



## Justafan (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> @Grace T., your analogy is that within the homo sapien species "races" are akin to canine "breeds." I see where you are trying to go, but the problem is one of genetic diversity resulting from "selective breeding" versus natural selection.  Breeds are scientifically identifiable based on
> 
> From a pure genetic standpoint, the genetic difference between humans is small and the genetic diversity between dog breeds is on the order of 5x higher than the human population.  Generally speaking we identify human population groups based on allele frequencies.  Allele frequencies can help us genetically pinpoint a population group to a geographic region, but beyond that ... its inconsequential.  We can have two persons from Mexico City be white (red headed) and nearly black (very dark skinned) and they will share more genetic similarities (alleles) than two individuals from East and West Africa. In sum, "races" aren't scientifically useful because we only looking at a couple of phenotypic markers and these phenotypes don't connect to underlying genetics and don't usefully model the underlying populations.
> 
> ...


Assuming genetic diversity is indeed 5x higher in canines, this makes total sense.


----------



## MWN (Jun 7, 2018)

Justafan said:


> Assuming genetic diversity is indeed 5x higher in canines, this makes total sense.


Let me explain it slightly differently:

*Humans*: If we were to take the raw DNA sequence of a human it would amount to roughly 3 billion base pairs (in 23 pairs of chromosomes).  The string of letters (A,C,G & T) would be about 715 megabytes of data (a CD Rom’s worth of data).  Take another human and do the same thing.  Now do a difference compare to both 715 MB files and you would see a difference of about 3 million variants (mutations).  3,000,000 / 3,000,000,000 = .001, restated .1% or one-tenth of one percent. (See, https://medium.com/precision-medicine/how-big-is-the-human-genome-e90caa3409b0)

Modern Humans are all roughly the same shape, have the same bone density, same skull shape, hair structure, femur shape, etc.  In fact, strip off the meat and lay 100 human skeletons side by side and you are going to have a very difficult time categorizing them beyond sex.

*Dogs*: Take the raw DNA sequence of a dog, it amounts to roughly 2.8 billion base pairs (in 39 chromosomes).  The string of letters would be about a 710 MB file.  Take two different dog breeds, compare the files and you will have about 14 Million variants.  14,000,000/2,800,000,000=.005 or .5% or ½ of one percent.

Dogs, unlike modern humans, because they have been selectively breed by humans have different sizes (toy poodle and standard poodle) skull shapes (Irish Wolfhound v. Bull Dog), bone density, hair structures (fur v. hair).  Strip off the meat and you can easily categorize 100 skeletons based on the different shape of the skull, femur, vertebrae, etc. into breeds.

*The Problem With Race Classification*:  Unlike dogs, humans breed with whomever they want.  Thus, a population of humans will have DNA from all parts of the region and world and there is a spectrum of mutations between those populations that doesn’t create neat little boxes/breeds.  If we were to think of Humans as cat breeds then we are a single breed of cat that “alley cat,” we are all roughly the same size and shape with different colored coats.  The genetic differences are inconsequential and we will find similar features between individuals of one population of alley cat in Los Angeles to another population of alley cat in London or Tokyo or Mexico City, etc.  There may be trends of similarities between populations, but we will find tan cats in each region, cats with large eyes, cats with small eyes, bigger and smaller cats in each city, etc.

Which brings us to the fundamental problem with the concept of “race” in human populations as discussed in the paper:
_Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations_ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/)

Accordingly, Risch _et al._ (2002, p. 2007.5) state that “two Caucasians are more similar to each other genetically than a Caucasian and an Asian.” However, in a reanalysis of data from 377 microsatellite loci typed in 1056 individuals, Europeans proved to be more similar to Asians than to other Europeans 38% of the time (Bamshad _et al._ 2004; population definitions and data from Rosenberg _et al._ 2002).​
The authors conclude:

The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes.​Restated, genetically speaking the concept of "race" has no scientific validity.  Because gene mutations occur all the time, dormant or recessed genes pop up, its stupid to classify people based on skin color, eye color, hair color, etc.  Just ask Ben Ihegboro and Angela Ihegboro, pictured her with their light skinned, blue eyed, blonde haired (non albino) baby daughter:


----------



## younothat (Jun 7, 2018)

This might gross some people out but your brain, spinal cord, and nervous system is what you are. We're all pretty much similar;   the body is just a house or vessel protecting/holding all of that.   Deep down where all the same!







Sports should united us not divide and race should have no part


----------



## LASTMAN14 (Jun 7, 2018)

espola said:


> Circles?  Not me.  I like to get past the bs and quickly to the facts.


Fine, circle 8's then.


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Jun 7, 2018)

younothat said:


> This might gross some people out but your brain, spinal cord, and nervous system is what you are. We're all pretty much similar;   the body is just a house or vessel protecting/holding all of that.   Deep down where all the same!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just to clarify, Espola you're missing the long thing connected to the brain.


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 7, 2018)

MWN said:


> Let me explain it slightly differently:
> 
> *Humans*: If we were to take the raw DNA sequence of a human it would amount to roughly 3 billion base pairs (in 23 pairs of chromosomes).  The string of letters (A,C,G & T) would be about 715 megabytes of data (a CD Rom’s worth of data).  Take another human and do the same thing.  Now do a difference compare to both 715 MB files and you would see a difference of about 3 million variants (mutations).  3,000,000 / 3,000,000,000 = .001, restated .1% or one-tenth of one percent. (See, https://medium.com/precision-medicine/how-big-is-the-human-genome-e90caa3409b0)
> 
> ...


Err....think you are falling down the rabbit hole a bit far (hey as long as we've brought dogs and cats into it....why not rabbits!...we don't want to be speciest by excluding them)  Well, assume arguendo you are correct (and I have no reason to suppose you aren't) that dog breeds are more genetically diverse than human differences...you still get arguments over whether something is even a "breed"...such as the American lab v. British lab or the Cardigan v. Welsh Corgi.  They are just human constructs...and if there is more genetic diversity in dogs, well that just goes to show humans are an even more difficult case, because we can't even agree on what's a dog breed....how can we ever hope to establish what is a race.  On the other hand, the picture you show proves the exact opposite point....there is a genetic difference...we all see it....saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it go away because it still exists.  Then you raise a 3 assumption which is neither about a societal construct (what we choose to label things whether species, fruit, pens, gender or people knowing there will be outliers from any category we construct that don't quite fit the definition) or genetic differences (which is a scientific question of whether the particular differences does or doesn't exist) which is a value judgement: whether there is any value (scientific or otherwise) in human being making judgments and classifying people (or other things).  I won't go there, because that third question is a morals judgments.


----------



## Keepermom2 (Jun 7, 2018)

MWN said:


> Let me explain it slightly differently:
> 
> *Humans*: If we were to take the raw DNA sequence of a human it would amount to roughly 3 billion base pairs (in 23 pairs of chromosomes).  The string of letters (A,C,G & T) would be about 715 megabytes of data (a CD Rom’s worth of data).  Take another human and do the same thing.  Now do a difference compare to both 715 MB files and you would see a difference of about 3 million variants (mutations).  3,000,000 / 3,000,000,000 = .001, restated .1% or one-tenth of one percent. (See, https://medium.com/precision-medicine/how-big-is-the-human-genome-e90caa3409b0)
> 
> ...


I always love reading your posts even if at times they go over my head.  I always think I am smart until I read and reread your posts.  Having said that, I am not sure how the information I am about to share fits the author's conclusion in totality but it does seem to fit one part of the conclusion.....

I am an AML Leukemia survivor.  16 years ago my doctors had to act quick and the course of treatment at that time included 1 of 2 treatment options: A. An Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (use of my own stem cells that were free of Leukemia cells after Chemo killed them) or B. An Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant (Use of a donor's stem cells).  Prior to making the decision, they went to my brother to see if he was enough of a genetic match and he was not so they went to the worldwide donor bank and found over 500 initial matches (I am White) (If this was the path taken, I would have ended up with the donor's DNA).  Through my advocacy of getting people registered on the donor bank, I learned there definitely appeared to be a "race"element (biological) to finding a match because there were many from various ethnic backgrounds that did not have a match on the Donor bank (I was initially advocating for the Asian community but later found out that the African American community and the Latin American Community had the same challenges).  As quoted from the Donor Bank, "When it comes to matching human leukocyte antigen (HLA) types, a patient’s ethnic background is important in predicting the likelihood of finding a match. This is because HLA markers used in matching are inherited. Some ethnic groups have more complex tissue types than others. So a person’s best chance of finding a donor may be with someone of the same ethnic background." 

Therefore, it seems to me that there is distinguishing biology between various ethnic groups.  Why am I wrong?  Truly interested and not for argument's sake.


----------



## MWN (Jun 7, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Err....think you are falling down the rabbit hole a bit far (hey as long as we've brought dogs and cats into it....why not rabbits!...we don't want to be speciest by excluding them)  Well, assume arguendo you are correct (and I have no reason to suppose you aren't) that dog breeds are more genetically diverse than human differences...you still get arguments over whether something is even a "breed"...such as the American lab v. British lab or the Cardigan v. Welsh Corgi.  They are just human constructs...and if there is more genetic diversity in dogs, well that just goes to show humans are an even more difficult case, because we can't even agree on what's a dog breed....how can we ever hope to establish what is a race.  On the other hand, the picture you show proves the exact opposite point....there is a genetic difference...we all see it....saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it go away because it still exists.  Then you raise a 3 assumption which is neither about a societal construct (what we choose to label things whether species, fruit, pens, gender or people knowing there will be outliers from any category we construct that don't quite fit the definition) or genetic differences (which is a scientific question of whether the particular differences does or doesn't exist) which is a value judgement: whether there is any value (scientific or otherwise) in human being making judgments and classifying people (or other things).  I won't go there, because that third question is a morals judgments.


Here is the part missing, while there is more genetic diversity between breeds (5x), there is little genetic diversity within breeds.  Thus, we can identify defined genetic markers as belonging to a particular breed (corgi) that are the same within all individuals within that breed and will not be present within another breed (husky).  With humans within a given population we are too diverse and often share similar genes with other populations.


----------



## PaytoplayinLancaster? (Jun 7, 2018)

The best part about sports is that the ball doesn’t care what color you are, what language you speak, who your Dad was, who you know, or how much money you paid to kick it.  Best kids win period.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Jun 7, 2018)

Bubba said:


> That has happened before , if you go back in time on this forum there is always these U-10 or 12  and under all-stars teams that do great in European tournaments . The problem is at 15 and older where the rest of the world does a better job.


I came across this article a while back about the Barca academy in the US:
http://www.espn.com/soccer/club/barcelona/83/blog/post/3434655/welcome-to-barcaland-how-barcelona-deliver-their-global-message
You can certainly argue they're here to get their share of the youth sports $, but I found it refreshing that they don't suggest/promise "pathway" to anything.  When asked if there is a path for US Barca academy kids to go to Barca, they candidly answered: "We are not there to scout players,"................"It's unlikely we will find them." ............"if you saw the La Masia [real Barca academy in Spain] U-14s against ours, you would understand very quickly why they're not bringing them over."


----------



## MWN (Jun 7, 2018)

Keepermom2 said:


> ...This is because HLA markers used in matching are inherited...


You just answered your question.  First, the match you were looking for had nothing to do with race as your condition occurs in all of the so-called races.  Second, there is no dispute that a population within a limited geographic area tends to have more genetic similarities due to inherited traits.  These inherited traits follow random rules and become diverse and/or similar.  The closer we are to cousins, the more likely traits will be randomly similar.

HLA markers are complex, half come from each parent.  Thus, a brother and sister have a 25% chance of being close enough.  The HLA markers let your body know that the cells are yours v. foreign.  The match simply needs to be close enough for your body to accept the cells, if not close enough your body says "Wooooaaaa, who the f' are you ... die, die, die!!!" to the new cells.

Unlike bloodtypes where there are 4 major types, and we simply fall into one of the buckets.  HLA is far more complex HLA-A,HLA-B and HLA-DR. There are many different specific* HLA* proteins within each of these three groups. (For example, there are 59 different HLA-A proteins, 118 different HLA-B and 124 different HLA-DR).  The potential combinations are great 59 x 118 x 124 = 863,288, but fortunately we don't need exact matches.

Because these combinations are inherited there is simply a greater chance of finding close enough matches within a biologically related family because we are dealing with fewer combinations from the larger pool.  The farther we move out from siblings the more diverse set of proteins we have.  But ... we can find HLA matches within different geographic/ethnic groups just the same.


----------



## jpeter (Jun 7, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> I came across this article a while back about the Barca academy in the US:
> http://www.espn.com/soccer/club/barcelona/83/blog/post/3434655/welcome-to-barcaland-how-barcelona-deliver-their-global-message
> You can certainly argue they're here to get their share of the youth sports $, but I found it refreshing that they don't suggest/promise "pathway" to anything.  When asked if there is a path for US Barca academy kids to go to Barca, they candidly answered: "We are not there to scout players,"................"It's unlikely we will find them." ............"if you saw the La Masia [real Barca academy in Spain] U-14s against ours, you would understand very quickly why they're not bringing them over."


Nice article but too bad in their us "academy"  like residential program they parntered with at casa grande is - 70-80k annually pay to play program for the very wealthy.
https://www.barcaacademy.com


----------



## Grace T. (Jun 7, 2018)

jpeter said:


> Nice article but too bad in their us "academy"  like residential program they parntered with at casa grande is - 70-80k annually pay to play program for the very wealthy.
> https://www.barcaacademy.com



I know that part of Arizona well.  We go to a ranch near there every other spring.  I'm wondering what the summer camp is like....by mid summer we can't even take out the horses for a ride after 9 am because it would be too cruel on the horses.   (hey horses needed a mention too!)


----------



## MWN (Jun 7, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I know that part of Arizona well.  We go to a ranch near there every other spring.  I'm wondering what the summer camp is like....by mid summer we can't even take out the horses for a ride after 9 am because it would be too cruel on the horses.   (hey horses needed a mention too!)


The genetic diversity from horse to horse is ... ohh nevermind.


----------



## jose (Jun 7, 2018)

how do the kids in brazil that play on the streets and not on fields get so good?  ----same argument for baseball.  kids here say the white kids can afford new gloves and bats etal.  you feel sorry for them until you see the amount of dominicans (who are so much poorer) make their own gloves out of milk carton make it in  MLB

pay to play?  gas, grass or ass nobody rides for free

most places have you  pay up front, you are not special


----------



## Keepermom2 (Jun 7, 2018)

MWN said:


> You just answered your question.  First, the match you were looking for had nothing to do with race as your condition occurs in all of the so-called races.  Second, there is no dispute that a population within a limited geographic area tends to have more genetic similarities due to inherited traits.  These inherited traits follow random rules and become diverse and/or similar.  The closer we are to cousins, the more likely traits will be randomly similar.
> 
> HLA markers are complex, half come from each parent.  Thus, a brother and sister have a 25% chance of being close enough.  The HLA markers let your body know that the cells are yours v. foreign.  The match simply needs to be close enough for your body to accept the cells, if not close enough your body says "Wooooaaaa, who the f' are you ... die, die, die!!!" to the new cells.
> 
> ...


There must be some sort of confusion:

Regarding your first statement:  The match of stem cells has nothing to do with AML Leukemia or any other disease that a stem cell transplant is used to treat and I wasn't trying to make that link.

As stated on the Donor Bank website, you are more likely to find a close enough match from someone with your ethnic background.  That seems to go against your point that "inherited traits follow random rules".  Why would finding an appropriate match be more likely within your ethnic background if inherited traits follow random rules?  For me and my friend, the close enough match was outside of the family.  The likelihood of finding a match within your family is 30% because you received different combinations of your parent's ethnic backgrounds.  I guess that would follow the random rule but at the core it would appear "race" (or biological element) plays a role.

While you are correct you can find an HLA match within different geographic/ethnic groups the likelihood of finding a good match within different geographic/ethnic groups is not that high.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1311707 The study shows rates of finding suitably HLA-matched grafts in the NMDP adult-donor registry, with donor availability taken into consideration as follows:

"Most patients will have a 7/8 or 8/8 HLA-matched unrelated adult donor available in the registry. The likelihood of finding an available 8/8 HLA-matched donor is 75% for white patients of European descent (hereafter referred to as white Europeans) but only 46% for white patients of Middle Eastern or North African descent. The likelihood of finding an 8/8 HLA-matched adult donor for other groups is lower and varies with racial and ethnic background. For black Americans of all ethnic backgrounds, the probabilities are 16 to 19%; for Hispanics, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans, they range between 27% and 52%."

At the core it would appear "race" (or biological element) plays a role.

This is a good opportunity for me to encourage folks (especially folks of various ethnic groups) to register to be a donor.  A simple blood test can put you on the bank and if you get a call, it takes a few days and you can save a person's life.  While I had my stem cells harvested, I did my taxes.  It isn't that hard!  https://bethematch.org/support-the-cause/donate-bone-marrow/join-the-marrow-registry/


----------



## coachsamy (Jun 7, 2018)

@MWN I appreciated your input and observation in such a delicate topic as "race". A few years ago I remember during Jackie Robinson day ESPN goons talking about how baseball doesn't do enough in the inner cities and blah blah blah, and that the sport is so prevalent for whites. Never mind that white people are a minority in baseball which a combine amounts of dominicans, venezuelans, cubans and puertoricans have more players than white there. But then that's just mainstream media and their liberal agenda. Same thing I see here, blaming the failures into the "lack of effort" into the inner cities. Which it might be true or not, but that's not USSF biggest problem or if a problem at all. 

In response to the HS Free venue. The NFL and mostly MLB takes advantage of these platform to freely recruit/scout players and manage to glamorize them in the background. Same thing for the NBA with NCAA. Notice that none of these leagues own, control nor affiliate to these scholar entities, however they exploit their value, which USSF rather get their cut from club soccer instead of glamorizing High School play. 

Switching to MLS. Their business model which was great 10-15 years ago in the pre-Beckham era, is not today. The game has grown, more high quality athletes are expose or have play soccer at one point, but money drives them away from soccer. Why would anybody wants to play soccer professionally for less than a 100k/yr, when in another sports minimum is somewhere triple that. MLS execs are banking 8-9 figures salaries and that's the problem. Greed at the top, and disregarding the product.

Just imagine that players that Pulisic would had play a year with Philadelphia Union and they flip him for 10-20 millions to Dortmund and this would be the norm among top youth players coming into the league. MLS would had found the solution to have the means to pay for better rosters and create an incentive to players to start in MLS. Strategic thinking has to be done right, not all money is good money!


----------



## jrcaesar (Jun 7, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Never mind that *white people are a minority in baseball* which a combine amounts of dominicans, venezuelans, cubans and puertoricans have more players than white there.


Fact check. According to the Major League Baseball Racial & Gender Report Card (RGRC): _With 42.5 percent of all players being of color, Major League Baseball has reached an all-time high among player diversity. However, there is a concern around baseball about the relatively small and declining number of African-American players which was only 7.7 percent on Opening Day 2017._

Link: http://www.tidesport.org/mlb-rgrc.html


----------



## MWN (Jun 8, 2018)

Keepermom2 said:


> There must be some sort of confusion:
> 
> Regarding your first statement:  The match of stem cells has nothing to do with AML Leukemia or any other disease that a stem cell transplant is used to treat and I wasn't trying to make that link.
> 
> ...


I'm not clear on your first comment, but I think I understand where the confusion is.

I was not referring to HLA in the sole context of stem cell replacement.  As you know, HLA matching refers to the antigens of the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) system and presents a major barrier to acceptance of transplants.   The medical community is still figuring out which parts of the HLA system can be ignored and which are critical to acceptance of foreign cells from another living organism.  In the beginning, the assumption was that each mismatch for HLA antigens had equal weight.  Research in the context kidney transplants has shown that we can pretty much ignore HLA-A, that HLA-B is important, but HLA-DR is critical and responsible for most rejections.  

Depending on the transplant procedure, we can get away with greater mismatch.  To complicate this, blood transfusions (and multiple pregnancies) are known to create HLA sensitivites when recipients have developed antibodies to several HLA molecules, making finding matches even that more difficult because the matches need to be almost perfect.  When it comes to stem cell transplantation the margin for error is much less, than say transplanting a kidney.  The gold standard is an HLA identical donor, but finding donors with a single-allele mismatch has worked pretty well.

Finally, I do want to clarify that there are many more combinations than I wrote above (I over simplified it).  When you refer to 7/8 or 8/8 you are referring to matching HLA -A, -B, -C, and DRB1 between donors.  When we are referring to 9/10 or 10/10 we are adding HLA -DQB1 to the mix. 

*Race v. Ethnicity v. Family*
Based on what you wrote, I assumed we all understood that Race is not the same as ethnicity.  My statement, Race has no scientific validity given the lack of genetic diversity between 1 individual and another from a different so-called race and merely a social construct attacks the concept that Race is an anachronism from days when we all believed the earth was flat.  White/Caucasian, Black/Negro, Brown/Hispanic, Red/Native-American, Yellow/Asian are too imprecise and too broad of categories that do more harm than good and we (_folks that understand the earth is a sphere and can put humans into space_) should replace the concept with more precise definitions that are driven by socioeconomic considerations when referring to social and political issues.

Ethnicity is much more precise and takes into consideration "culture" of people in a specific geographic region, including their language, heritage, religion and customs.  Members of ethnic groups tend to conform to many of the same practices.  The biology of ethnicity does have a scientifically valid role in both biological research and societal issues.

Family is a finite subset of ethnicity, but can implicate multiple ethnic groups as a result of cross-breeding between ethnic groups, thus, it deserves its own status in both science and social research.

The concept of "socioeconomics" to define groups takes into account social factors, such as, ethnicity and community participation and economics.   Economic status is actually pretty darn important and it get's virtually ignored when we get lazy and use terms like White, Black, Asian.  When we view various social issues through a socioeconomic lens we strip away irrelevant factors and are in a much better position to properly analyze the problem.  The failure of the author/reporter/editorializer of the original article cited didn't do this, which is why I said his article lacked research and was lazy reporting.

*Ethnicity, Family and HLA*
Coming full circle, yes there is a biological significance to finding HLA matches starting at the family and then moving up the ethnic chain as various ethnic groups will have related family connections and greater chances that HLA factors will have recombined into the needed combination for the individual in need. So, I second what you wrote:

_This is a good opportunity for me to encourage folks (especially folks of various ethnic groups) to register to be a donor.  A simple blood test can put you on the bank and if you get a call, it takes a few days and you can save a person's life.  While I had my stem cells harvested, I did my taxes.  It isn't that hard! https://bethematch.org/support-the-cause/donate-bone-marrow/join-the-marrow-registry/_​


----------



## MWN (Jun 8, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> @MWN I appreciated your input and observation in such a delicate topic as "race". A few years ago I remember during Jackie Robinson day ESPN goons talking about how baseball doesn't do enough in the inner cities and blah blah blah, and that the sport is so prevalent for whites. Never mind that white people are a minority in baseball which a combine amounts of dominicans, venezuelans, cubans and puertoricans have more players than white there. But then that's just mainstream media and their liberal agenda. Same thing I see here, blaming the failures into the "lack of effort" into the inner cities. Which it might be true or not, but that's not USSF biggest problem or if a problem at all.
> 
> In response to the HS Free venue. The NFL and mostly MLB takes advantage of these platform to freely recruit/scout players and manage to glamorize them in the background. Same thing for the NBA with NCAA. Notice that none of these leagues own, control nor affiliate to these scholar entities, however they exploit their value, which USSF rather get their cut from club soccer instead of glamorizing High School play.
> 
> ...


I have to say your comment is a bit of a dichotomy (railing against liberal media and then greed of MLS owners/execs).  Taking it all together, we probably agree on the fundamentals but disagree on how to get there.  My perspective is:

Money and profit are the drivers for all entertainment in the U.S.  Viewing soccer or sports for that matter as immune from basic capitalism takes a person down the wrong path.  Attempting to put any entertainment vehicle (music, sports, movies, or stripping for that matter) into a non-profit motivated endeavor will result in ultimate failure if the goal is growth.

With regard to *HS soccer*.  Its unprofitable because no viable market exists at this time and won't given the international market.  

Colleges rarely are able to self-fund soccer programs through ticket sales and there is no viable TV market for college soccer, thus, no media buys/sells.  Growing the college game is a bad investment.  To make matters worse, the market place for athletes to play soccer at the college level is much more consolidated and fertile at the "club" level.  A college coach can make a single trip to a college showcase and acquire an entire recruiting class from a single trip.  H.S. soccer game do not afford the same opportunity.  As such, investors (i.e. colleges) should ignore HS soccer.    


In addition, athletes that excel at the sport typically receive 1/2 scholarships to play at the college level.  The bigger problem is that from a professional perspective, college soccer is viewed as detrimental to professional development.  The NCAA enforced limits on training retard development, especially when compared to international players of similar ages.  Top level professional teams and leagues (International) target talent at a much earlier age (12-15) for acceptance into their academy programs.
With regard to *HS football* and *HS basketball*.  These sports are profitable for two reasons.  

The next level for HS football and basketball players is college.  Colleges actually make money selling tickets and TV rights to college football and basketball games.  While "club" basketball exists, "club" football does not, thus, H.S. football is really the only viable pool of talent.  Moreover, the physically violent nature of football games means that its nearly impossible for players to play year round without breaking down.  HS football and basketball remain viable investments and colleges (the actual consumer of these athletes) should continue to monitor, foster and develop this incubator of talent.  High performing athletes are compensated typically with full scholarships to play both sports.


The NFL recruits from the ranks of college athletes, thus, HS athletes wishing to play in college find their most profitable path through college.  Moreover, given the billions of dollars generated by the sport, pay is excellent for athletes making it to this level.  
With regard to the MLS, I simply disagree with your assessment that it has matured to the point of being ready to compete for high-level soccer talent.  The MLS's business model is that of base survival.  It has abandoned market driven economics by adopting a single entity "pyramid scheme" operating model.  It funds profitability through license fees.  The salaries of execs and owners are a drop in the bucket and inconsequential to improving player salaries.   Once MLS teams begin filling stadiums with 50,000 to 60,000 people regularly and have annual media sells of $500M or more (currently its at $60M), then it will be ready to compete on the international stage.  Until that time, its nothing more than a semi-pro league.

If the goal is to improve the National Team then the USSF should focus on moving club players overseas for higher level training and play as quickly as possible.  Let the MLS figure out its own formula.  Empower the 2nd level (USL) to adopt a business model that works, but the USSF is simply the regulatory body, it has no direct say in how the MLS (a for profit entity) will operate and it should not.  If the USSF were to make any changes to the structure of professional soccer it starts with the USSF getting off its ass and agreeing to administer the FIFA Training and Solidarity fees.  Without these fees going to clubs, investors should avoid soccer in the U.S. as nothing more than a novelty.


----------



## Keepermom2 (Jun 8, 2018)

MWN said:


> Thanks for the detailed information.  I went on a research bender yesterday and realized that I was very naive to what I was embarking on and the sensitivity of the "race" debate.  Having said that, I learned a ton and recognize that it is best to keep my thoughts and questions to myself.


----------



## JJP (Jun 9, 2018)

MWN said:


> Ultimately, the "human race" (homo sapiens) succeeded in supplanting the neanderthals as the dominate homo species.  All of us sprang from the original homo sapiens in Africa about 195,000 years ago (which means technically we are all "African-Americans" assuming one lives in America).  What we typically define as "race" is nothing more than subjectively picking a few diverse phenotypes and calling it good.  The subjective picking is flawed and has little to no scientific relevance.  Biologically, the species to too genetically diverse to categorize ourselves into meaningful racial buckets.


C’mon that’s PC BS.  The Olympic 100m final is some black dude from Jamaica vs some black dude from America vs some black dude from Trinidad vs black dude from England vs some black dude from France.

The ping pong was some Chinese immigrant from Germany vs. Chinese immigrant from Netherlands vs. Chinese dude from Singapore vs Chinese dude from China.

Spelling bee is some Indian kid from India vs Indian kid from Michigan vs Indian kid from New Jersey vs Indian kid from Louisiana, etc.

The marathon is a bunch of Kenyans vs Kenyan immigrant to England vs Kenyan immigrant to USA.

There’s tons of other examples.


----------

