Forum Replies Created
-
Rams see a role for previously underused Lance Dunbar
Alden Gonzalez
LOS ANGELES — Sean McVay’s words resonated with Lance Dunbar.
The free-agent running back was in Southern California for a visit last week and sat down with McVay, the Los Angeles Rams’ rookie head coach, who walked Dunbar through his potential role in the offense. McVay wound up describing the way Dunbar always saw himself while buried in the Dallas Cowboys’ depth chart. He illustrated Dunbar’s traits the way Dunbar himself would recount them to someone else.
“He had me going,” Dunbar said. “He had me ready to play.”
Dunbar ultimately signed with the Rams on a one-year contract that could pay him up to $3 million. He will be the Rams’ change-of-pace running back, a complement for the power game of Todd Gurley, and he will also be an option in the passing game. The name “Chris Thompson” came up during Dunbar’s meeting with McVay, which makes sense.
Over the past two years, while McVay called plays as the Washington Redskins’ offensive coordinator, Thompson found a way to be productive despite finding himself behind backs such as Alfred Morris, Robert Kelley and Matt Jones in rushing attempts. From 2015 to 2016, Thompson rushed for 572 yards on 103 attempts and caught for 589 yards on 84 catches.
Thompson, like Dunbar, boasts blazing speed, so the Redskins frequently ran him to the outside. Like on the play below, out of the pistol formation against the Detroit Lions, when Thompson ultimately got around the edge for a 16-yard gain:
Sometimes, the Redskins would also spread the field out wide and have him run up the middle on shotgun sets, like on this delayed handoff against the Cowboys, which resulted in a 6-yard gain:
But just as big a weapon were quick passes that got Thompson the ball in open space. Below is the beginning of a play that has Thompson run out to the flat. Redskins quarterback Kirk Cousins picked up a blitz and got rid of it quickly to Thompson, who picked up 11 yards before getting pushed out of bounds:
And here, once again against the Cowboys, Thompson didn’t have anybody to block, so he eventually ran to the outside and picked up 9 yards through the air:
“We were in the same division, so I’ve seen those guys [the Redskins] play, and I’ve seen Chris play,” Dunbar said. “We are very similar. I catch the ball in the backfield. I can run routes. I can run the ball. To see him do those things gave me a little bit more confidence and more belief in [McVay], that he will allow me to do those things.”
Dunbar made the Cowboys’ roster as an undrafted free agent in 2012. He had a breakout game against the Oakland Raiders late in 2013, rushing for 82 yards on 12 carries, but also sustained a knee injury that forced him to miss the final four games. He was on his way toward carving out a role in 2015, with 21 receptions for 215 yards through the first three games, but he tore his ACL, MCL and patellar tendon on a kickoff return.
“It was really hard,” Dunbar said. “Just throughout my career, every time I got an opportunity — and I made the best of it — something bad goes wrong.”
Dunbar was ready to go by the start of the 2016 season, returning a lot sooner than expected, but he never felt right. He admitted to rushing his way back and said he didn’t really feel right until about midway through the season. By then, Ezekiel Elliott was well on his way toward a dominant rookie season and the Cowboys’ offense was rolling without him. Dunbar never had a chance, and now he’s starting fresh.
He believes his style can complement Gurley.
“My style is different than his,” Dunbar said. “I’m more of a slasher, making guys miss, catching the ball out of the backfield. We have two different styles. If you mix my style with his style, it brings a lot to the table. It’s hard for people to keep switching up, switching up, because it’s very different. In-game, when I come in, you’re going to have to adjust. And it’s kind of hard to adjust in-game.”
enh.
Seems like a big waste of money. I think they could draft somebody in the 5th round who would produce as much. In fact, I like what they already have on their roster better.
As per stuff in this thread, I think that Dunbar gives McVay an option that reproduces what he did in Washington with Chris Thompson. That would be an experienced change of pace back who can catch and has real open field moves, as opposed to BC, who was a decent third down back but was much more of just a north/south runner and didn’t have the same kind of open field chops. It means on third down for example you have a guy who can maybe create some open field action rather than (like Cunnningham) just simply get the down without the big play possibilities.
They can still draft a back lower, but it would probably be a different kind of back, not a veteran 3rd down jitterbug like Thompson was in Washington and Dunbar is supposed to be in LA.
Dunbar:
Bootstrap myth exposed: White inheritance key driver in racial wealth gap
Blacks/Latinos/non-whites don’t value education like whites do. They don’t work as hard as whites do. They spend more than whites do on junk,” says your standard white guy at the end of the bar dissecting the large racial wealth gap in the United States. “They just need to get off their butts and bootstrap it up like I did!”
However, the old tried-and-true American bootstrap lore took a big hit this month with a study that shows most families living with the material comfort and range of opportunities normally associated with middle-class status have obtained them the old-fashioned way: inheritance. The racial and wealth gap in the United States is as large as ever and “The Asset Value of Whiteness: Understanding the Racial Wealth Gap,” shows that inheritance plays a huge factor in that gap.
“For centuries, white households enjoyed wealth-building opportunities that were systematically denied to people of color. Today our policies continue to impede efforts by African-American and Latino households to obtain equal access to economic security,” Amy Traub, report co-author and associate director of policy and research at Demos said in a statement. “When research shows that racial privilege now outweighs a fundamental key to economic mobility, like higher education, we must demand our policymakers acknowledge this problem and create policies that address structural inequity.”
In short, the study found that white people inherit stuff and have inherited stuff for generations. And that gives them a supreme advantage. The report shows that typical markers of success in white households – and the chosen interventions in the lives of others – are not translating into lasting wealth and security in households of color.
From the report:
“Research probing the causes of the racial wealth gap has traced its origins to historic injustices, from slavery to segregation to redlining. The great expansion of wealth in the years after World War II was fueled by public policies such as the GI Bill, which mostly helped white veterans attend college and purchase homes with guaranteed mortgages, building the foundations of an American middle class that largely excluded people of color. The outcomes of past injustice are carried forward as wealth is handed down across generations and are reinforced by ostensibly “color-blind” practices and policies in effect today. Yet many popular explanations for racial economic inequality overlook these deep roots, asserting that wealth disparities must be solely the result of individual life choices and personal achievements. The misconception that personal responsibility accounts for the racial wealth gap is an obstacle to the policies that could effectively address racial disparities.”
Professor Thomas Shapiro, who directs the Institute on Assets and Social Policy and is the Pokross Professor of Law and Social Policy at The Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University, has been studying this topic since the early 1990s. He was one of the co-authors of the study.
“We know, with a lot of empirical rigor, why the racial wealth gap exists in the United States,” Shapiro told Madison365. “We’ve got the dimensions down. We know that looking at different national databases that whites have about eight times as much financial wealth as African-American families and about eight times as much as the typical Hispanic family has, as well. And we know what the drivers of those things are.
“We know that it is the wealth that is produced through home ownership. We know it’s about the kind of work that people have that ties them into wealth escalators that is a robust pension benefit scheme,” he said. “In this piece, we were trying to say: Let’s take some of the so-called popular explanations and explore them.”
The report found, specifically, that:
◆ Attending college does not close the racial wealth gap.
◆ Raising children in a two-parent household does not close the racial wealth gap.
◆ Working full time does not close the racial wealth gap.
◆ Spending less does not close the racial wealth gap.
“The data says that African Americans and Hispanic families have the same amount of wealth as white families that are high school dropouts,” Shapiro said. “The racial wealth gap – that huge marker of racial inequality – cannot be closed by college going and college degree rates.”
Shapiro co-authored the report along with Laura Sullivan and Tatjana Meschede of Brandeis University and Traub of public policy nonprofit Devos. Issues of racial inequity are increasingly at the forefront of America’s public debate and probing the causes of the racial wealth gap has been becoming increasingly important.
“A lot of what drives the racial wealth gap is inheritance and the transmission of finances between generations,” Shapiro said. “Whites inherit five times more often than blacks and Hispanics. When money gets passed along to whites, it’s about 10 times as much.”
The term “racial wealth gap” is used to describe the difference in accumulated wealth that white households enjoy versus their counterparts of color. Researchers have long tried to attribute the contemporary differences — which are rooted in discriminatory legacies from slavery to housing segregation — to so-called life choices, including education and single parenthood. But this new study says that “individual choices are not sufficient to erase a century of accumulated wealth: structural racism trumps personal responsibility.”
“We hear that the racial wealth gap from people online and in comment sections who say ‘those people have children before they are married. If only, African Americans and Hispanics would have two-parent families, a lot of inequality will go away,’” he said. “How much wealth does a single-parent white family with children have compared to a two-parent family with children either African American or Hispanic? The answer is the white single-parent family has more wealth.”
So then the study looked at work and the narrative that African American and Latinos are lazy. “If only they would buckle down, as people sometimes say, racial equality would be greatly reduced,” Shapiro said. “Here’s what the data tells us: Whites working part-time under the age of 55 or unemployed have more wealth at the medium than African-Americans and Hispanics working full time, that’s 40 or more hours a week.”
The report looked at the last complaint: “If only ‘they’ would be thriftier and not waste money on clothes and sneakers….” And drawing on data from the 2013 and 2014 Consumer Expenditure Surveys, they found that the average white household actually spends 1.3 times more than the average black household of the same income group.
But don’t misinterpret the report, Shapiro said. Education does pay off. It just won’t come close to closing a racial wealth gap that is a century or two in the making.
“Having said this, there’s an important qualifier. For everybody, the lifetime earnings of a college-educated person versus a high school dropout is tremendous,” Shapiro said. “From an individual and ability point of view, it’s longstanding good advice to get the kind of education that will allow you to get the skills that will pay off in higher lifetime earnings.”
Still, white adults who drop out before finishing high school, have children out of wedlock and work part-time jobs have greater wealth (defined as assets minus debt) than black and Latino adults who completed more schooling, raise their families in a two-parent home and work full time.
“If we were trying to deconstruct ‘lift yourself up by your bootstraps,’ it’s really bedrock to the American ideology. That’s part of what we were trying to interrogate with this study,” Shapiro said. “At the end of the day, people who get an education do better, people who work two jobs do better than somebody working one job or part-time, being thrifty leaves more resources in the bank today. That person or family is undoubtedly better off than they would have been had they not done these things.”
But….
“But, while they are individually better off, it does not come close to closing the racial wealth gap,” Shapiro said. “The racial wealth gap goes back centuries and is reinforced by policies. It’s maintained by attitudes. There’s a lot about racial inequality that is in the picture here.”
So, that bootstrap we talk about is not the same bootstrap for people color at all.
“God, no. It’s not. There’s a study done by close colleagues of ours called, ‘Umbrellas don’t make it rain’ and in a different way they hit some of the same themes that we do in this narrative brief, as well,” Shapiro said.
To be sure, when we talk of inheritance, we are not always talking about huge sums of money. Even modest gifts at opportune moments can be huge – going to college, buying a first home, enrolling a child in private school. The previous generations have used the fruits of their own life’s work to safeguard a middle-class existence for offspring who have not yet earned it on their own.
Shapiro has a book coming out next month called “Toxic Inequality” that he hopes will break new ground as it follows a set of nearly 200 families between 1998 and 2011, following the kids from kindergarten to high school graduation. “About half black, half white. Half middle class, half working class, half urban and half suburban …. And seeing what happens to them over these 12 years,” Shapiro said. “There’s a lot of those stories that I will pull out in the book ‘Toxic Inequality.’”
What would Shapiro recommend for the city of Madison, a city dealing with a large racial wealth gap of its own? (Note: Originally from southern California, Shapiro is an alumnus of UW-Madison. “I was a buddy of Mayor Soglin when he was still a graduate student,” he laughs.)
“I think on a local, regional, and state level, there are different levers that we have to work with. I think on a local level, housing markets are the real key. I think attempting to break down racial segregation as much as possible in a community really serves the sustainable long-term interests,” Shapiro said. “It’s residential segregation that really drives the way that housing equity is color-coded and it’s abundantly clear from any study that’s ever looked at data.”
The study closes with a push for policymakers to evaluate proposed policies for their potential to shrink the wealth gap between races in America. Shapiro said he is optimistic about the progress he has seen recently.
“Five years ago, there were five people in the world that when you said ‘racial wealth gap’ that they would know what you meant,” said Shapiro, admitting that he might be going over the top a little bit with his numbers. “That’s no longer the case. There’s been a lot of empirical work about what the racial wealth gap is. There are a lot of folks who are working on it, studies on it. I dare say that the phrase ‘racial wealth gap’ has been sort of branded, at least in some of the public’s mind. They know what it is already.
“There was a certain symbolic value when at the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington for Justice and Freedom, President Obama got up there and said, ‘We know a gap between African Americans and whites exist,’” Shapiro said. “You can’t say that unless there is enough consciousness and pressure and staff knowing about it. While I’m not going to say it came from one of our studies, it certainly came from a study of people working in the same circle I am. Several universities and advocates of grassroots organizations across the country have been involved in a movement called ‘The Initiative to Close the Racial Wealth Gap.’ So that was kind of cool that the president said that.”
===
THE ASSET VALUE OF WHITENESS: UNDERSTANDING THE RACIAL WEALTH GAP
http://www.demos.org/publication/asset-value-whiteness-understanding-racial-wealth-gap
Issues of racial inequity are increasingly at the forefront of America’s public debate. In addition to urgent concerns about racial bias in law enforcement and the criminal justice system, activists highlight deeply connected issues of economic exclusion and inequality. No metric more powerfully captures the persistence and growth of economic inequality along racial and ethnic lines than the racial wealth gap. According to data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the median white household possessed $13 in net wealth for every dollar held by the median black household in 2013. That same year, median white households possessed $10 for each dollar held by the median Latino/a household.
Research probing the causes of the racial wealth gap has traced its origins to historic injustices, from slavery to segregation to redlining.1 The great expansion of wealth in the years after World War II was fueled by public policies such as the GI Bill, which mostly helped white veterans attend college and purchase homes with guaranteed mortgages, building the foundations of an American middle class that largely excluded people of color. The outcomes of past injustice are carried forward as wealth is handed down across generations and are reinforced by ostensibly “color-blind” practices and policies in effect today. Yet many popular explanations forracial economic inequality overlook these deep roots, asserting that wealth disparities must be solely the result of individual life choices and personal achievements. The misconception that personal responsibility accounts for the racial wealth gap is an obstacle to the policies that could effectively address racial disparities.
This paper explores a number of these popular explanations for the racial wealth gap, looking at individual differences in education, family structure, full- or part-time employment, and consumption habits. In each case, we find that individual choices are not sufficient to erase a century of accumulated wealth: structural racism trumps personal responsibility. Drawing on data from the 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances, we find that white adults who don’t graduate high school, don’t get married before having children, and don’t work full time still have much greater wealth at the median than comparable black and Latino adults—and often have more wealth than black and Latino households that have married, completed more education, or work longer hours. Differences in consumption habits also cannot explain the wealth gap; we look at academic research finding that white households spend more than black households of comparable incomes, yet still have more wealth.
The racial wealth gap matters because of the central role wealth plays in enabling families to both handle current financial challenges and make investments in their future. Families that have accumulated some wealth are better equipped to manage unanticipated expenses like an emergency medical bill, or disruptions in household income such as a layoff, without falling into debt or poverty. Over the longer term, wealth can expand the prospects of the next generation, helping to pay for college, provide a down payment for a first home, or capitalize a new business. As long as a substantial racial wealth gap persists, white households will continue to enjoy greater advantages than their black and Latino neighbors in meeting the financial challenges of everyday life and will be able to make greater investments in their children, passing economic advantages on. We can only create a more equitable future by confronting the racial wealth gap and the public policies that continue to fuel and exacerbate it.
This report analyzes data on white, black, and Latino households. The terms black and white are used to refer to the representative respondents of a household who identified as non-Latino black or white in the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF).2 Latinos include everyone who identified as Hispanic or Latino and may be of any race.
Throughout this report, we use the term “racial wealth gap” to refer to the absolute differences in wealth (assets minus debt) between the median black and white households as well as between the median Latino and white households. All dollar figures are in 2013 dollars.
Attending college does not close the racial wealth gap.
Higher education is associated with greater household wealth for Americans of every race and ethnicity, yet going to college isn’t enough to overcome racial disparities in wealth.3 Among households under age 55, the median white high school dropout has similar wealth to the median black adult who graduated high school and attended at least some college, according to data from the Survey of Consumer Finances.4 Similarly, the median Latino adult who attended college has similar wealth to the median white high school dropout.
In effect, to gain wealth comparable to white high school dropouts, black and Latino students must not only complete high school, but also attend college.5 Higher education is valuable—but when it comes to wealth, white privilege is equally, if not more valuable.
Attending college is associated with wealth in a number of ways. A college education has long been heralded as a ladder of social mobility: graduates who earn a bachelor’s degree or other college certification are more likely to be employed and generally have higher earning power than high school graduates or dropouts; they can use their higher incomes to build savings and wealth.
Indeed, research consistently finds that college graduates of every race and ethnicity have greater income and wealth than their counterparts who did not graduate college.6 Yet wealth also plays a role in determining who attends college in the first place, and how much debt students must take on to get a degree.7 In effect, education can generate a “wealth feedback loop,” as parents’ level of education and wealth significantly predicts the level of education their children will complete.8 Thus, the educational and wealth-building opportunities directly denied to people of color in past generations continue to reverberate in the lives of their children, even those whose educational achievements open up opportunities for well-paid employment opportunities.
Having left high school without a diploma and never pursued further education, white dropouts do not gain the wealth-building opportunities offered by a college education. Yet, advantages such as greater access to gifts and inheritances offer white households more opportunities to gain and build wealth, even when they have completed less education. Because white families accumulated more wealth over a history in which black and Latino families were excluded from many wealth-building opportunities through discriminatory policies in housing, banking, education and other areas, white families today have, in general, greater resources to pass on to their offspring. As a result, white families are 5 times more likely than black or Latino families to receive large gifts and inheritances, and the amounts they receive are far greater.9 An analysis of data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics finds that white recipients collect $5,013 more than black families on average over a two-year period.10 Not only do these funds add up to a substantial amount over time, but they can also be used to jump-start further wealth accumulation, for example, by enabling white families to buy homes and begin acquiring equity earlier in their lives and to make larger down payments on a first home, reducing interest rates and lending costs.11
For black and Latino households with at least some college education, the high cost of college is another reason why pursuing higher education—and even attaining a degree—is not more effective at reducing the racial wealth gap. Our earlier research finds that even if black and Latino students graduated college at the same rate as white students, the reduction in the racial wealth gap would be modest: cut by just 1 to 3 percent at the median.12 Because of the existing racial wealth gap, white college students disproportionately come from wealthier family backgrounds than black and Latino students. As a result, the research finds that black students borrow at much higher rates, and in higher amounts, to receive the same college degrees as their white counterparts.13 The higher rate of borrowing may in turn contribute to other disparities, including college dropout and completion rates. With less student loan debt to pay off over their working years, the typical white college graduate has a head start on building wealth compared to their black peers. The picture is different for Latino households, which attend and graduate from college at lower rates than both black and white households. Evidence suggests that Latino students may be more averse to taking on student loans even when they face substantial financial need for school.14
The result is that whites with little formal education still benefit disproportionately from social networks that help them to attain jobs, and inheritances and gifts that help them to build wealth. Black and Latino households that have pursued higher education often lack access to these networks and resources, but black college- goers in particular carry a disproportionate burden of student loan debt that saps their resources and diminishes their ability to build wealth. While attending and graduating college is associated with greater wealth for all American households and is a boost to lifetime earnings and wealth, it’s not enough to overcome historic and accumulated white advantages in building wealth. An individual’s striving to get a degree is not sufficient to close the racial wealth gap.
Raising children in a two-parent household does not close the racial wealth gap.
Raising children is expensive. The high cost of child care and difficulty of supporting a family on a single income make it particularly difficult for single parents to get by, much less build wealth. Not surprisingly, single parent households have much higher poverty rates and significantly lower wealth than two-parent households. Yet, raising children in a two-parent household isn’t enough to overcome racial disparities in wealth. According to data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the median white single parent has 2.2 times more wealth than the median black two-parent household and 1.9 times more wealth than the median Latino two-parent household.
In 1965, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, attributed racial inequality as well as poverty and crime in the black community to family structure, particularly the prevalence of families headed by single mothers.16 Not only did research at the time cast doubt on this causality, but evidence over the last the 50 years demonstrates that rates of child poverty, educational attainment, and crime do not track rates of single parenthood.17 Thus, even though the share of children living with a single mother rose for all racial and ethnic groups through the mid-1990s and has remained high since then, school completion and youth arrests for violent crimes have declined significantly, while poverty rates have fluctuated according to economic conditions. Family structure does not drive racial inequity, and racial inequity persists regardless of family structure. The benefits of intergenerational wealth transfers and other aspects of white privilege discussed above benefit white single mothers, enabling them to build significantly more wealth than married parents of color.
Working full time does not close the racial wealth gap.
Full-time work is critical to the economic security of most American households. Full-time jobs generally pay more per hour than comparable part-time work and are more likely to offer benefits such as employer-provided health coverage, paid sick time, and workplace retirement plans that can provide greater opportunities for employees to build wealth. At the median, households in which at least 1 member works full time (35 or more hours per week) have greater wealth than households where the only jobs held are part-time positions (less than 35 hours per week). But working full time isn’t enough to close the racial wealth gap. According to data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the median white household that includes a full-time worker has 7.6 times more wealth than the median black household with a full-time worker. The median white household that includes a full-time worker also has 5.4 times more wealth than the median Latino household with a full-time worker. Even white households that include only part-time workers—with at least 1 person in the household employed but not working more than 35 hours a week—have statistically indistinguishable levels of wealth as black households with a member employed full-time.18
Americans of all races and ethnicities work hard: among working white, black, and Latino households with a head under age 55, all work at least 40 hours a week at the median and 80 percent or more have an adult employed full-time.19 Yet work effort does not pay off equally: in 2012, white workers employed full time earned a median wage of $792 a week, compared to $621 for African Americans and $568 for Latinos. Considering gender makes the pay disparities even more glaring: Latina women employed full time earned median weekly wages equal to just 59 percent of the wages earned by white males, while black women earned just 68 percent as much.20 However, even if households earned the same income, the racial wealth gap would persist. Previous research from Demos and Institute on Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis University finds that if the distribution of incomes for black and Latino Americans was similar to that of white households (with a median equal to $50,400 in 2011), the wealth gap between black and white households would shrink just 11 percent at the median and the wealth gap between Latino and white households would shrink just 9 percent. An individual’s striving to get a higher paid job or work more hours is not enough to close the racial wealth gap.
Spending less does not close the racial wealth gap.
Personal finance experts abound with advice on how to build wealth by moderating personal spending and shifting a greater share of income into savings and investment. Yet, evidence from a recent Duke University study suggests that reduced spending is not enough to close the racial wealth gap between black and white households. Drawing on data from the 2013 and 2014 Consumer Expenditure Surveys, researchers find that the average white household spends 1.3 times more than the average black household of the same income group.21 In general, little research has been published on racial and ethnic differences in spending patterns and no findings were available on consumer spending among Latino households.
The Duke study divided households into low-, medium-, and high-income groups and found that white households in every income group spent more on average than black households in the same group. On average, white households spent $13,700 per quarter, compared to $8,400 for black households. Even after accounting for factors such as family structure, income, occupation, and geography, as well as wealth and homeownership, white households at all income levels continued to spend more than comparable black households, with low-income white households spending $1,200 more per quarter than low-income black households and high-income white households spending $1,400 more than their black counterparts.
The study also looked at specific categories of spending, finding that white households spend about twice as much as black households on entertainment among all income groups and that white households, especially those with low incomes, spend more than black households on cars. The researchers note that “for clothing, jewelry, personal care, entertainment, eating out, and other non- essential spending, our findings show that black consumers in fact spend the same or much less than whites, at all income levels.”22 The only category in which black households were found to consistently spend more was for utilities, including payments for electricity, heating fuel, water, sewer and telephone service; this may be due to the common utility company practice of risk-based pricing, which requires a deposit or other form of additional payment from customers with low credit scores, without stable employment, or with criminal records. While technically color-blind, risk-based pricing can have a disproportionate impact on black consumers, causing them to be charged more than white households for the same service.23
Differences in spending habits cannot explain the racial wealth gap: white households spend more than black households with similar incomes, yet also have more wealth. While spending less and saving more may be excellent advice for individuals, the evidence suggests that personal spending habits are not driving the racial wealth gap and cannot succeed in closing it.
Conclusion
In order for our nation to begin addressing disparities in wealth and opportunity, we must recognize that the racial wealth gap exists and clearly understand its causes. Public polling data suggest that there remains much work to be done. When asked in a 2016 opinion survey to assess “the financial situation of blacks compared with whites today,” just half of Americans (including 47 percent of white respondents, 58 percent of black respondents, and 49 percent of Latino respondents) recognized that white households were better off financially.24 No comparable question was asked comparing the finances of Latino and white households. Similarly when the same survey asked about “reasons why black people in our country may have a harder time getting ahead than whites,” majorities of black, white and Latino Americans endorsed explanations such as “lack of motivation to work hard” and “family instability”—factors which the data reveal cannot account for the growth and persistence of the racial wealth gap. Although 77 percent of respondents also identified “racial discrimination” as a reason that black Americans might have a harder time economically, 66 percent asserted that “discrimination that is based on the prejudice of individual people” was a greater problem than “discrimination that is built into our laws and institutions.”
Racial inequality in wealth is rooted in historic discrimination and perpetuated by policy: our analyses show that individual behavior is not
the driving force behind racial wealth disparities. Typical black and Latino households that attend college and live in two-parent households still have much less wealth than similarly situated white households. Black and Latino households that include a full-time worker have much less wealth than white households with a full-time worker, and only slightly more wealth
at the median than white households where the only person employed works part time. Differences in spending habits also fail to explain wealth disparities between black and white households.Building a more equitable society will require a shift in focus away from individual behavior towards addressing structural and institutional racism. To aid in that effort, the Institute on Assets and Social Policy developed the Racial Wealth AuditTM as a framework to evaluate public policy proposals for their potential to reduce the racial wealth gap. When policymakers explicitly consider the racial wealth gap in developing policy, the Racial Wealth Audit can provide information to achieve greater racial wealth equity.
PFF: RANKING THE TOP 15 EDGE DEFENDER PROSPECTS OF 2017
Former Texas A&M star Myles Garrett tops PFF’s 2017 edge defender prospect rankings.https://www.profootballfocus.com/draft-ranking-top-10-edge-defender-prospects-of-2017/
Arguably the deepest position group in the entire country, I listed 15 edge defenders below and didn’t even make it through all the players Pro Football Focus’ analysts have with Day 1 or Day 2 grades. It’s a loaded field that could see double-digit names come off the board in Round 1.
2017 Edge Class Rankings
Rankings
1. Myles Garrett, Texas A&MMyles Garrett is the unquestioned top edge prospect in this class. The biggest criticism I’ve seen of Garrett is that he didn’t record enough sacks in SEC play. If you don’t think he was productive against the SEC the past three seasons, however, you simply didn’t watch the games. Garrett is a freak of nature physically who is still only scratching the surface of his potential.
Pro Football Focus ✔ @PFF
“If Michelangelo were sculpting the perfect edge rusher, he’d likely come up with something like Myles Garrett” http://bit.ly/2l8tom42. Derek Barnett, Tennessee
Athletically, Barnett is the antithesis of Garrett. Production-wise, he’s the only player in the class that can compare to Garrett over the course of their careers. Barnett’s 37 combined sacks and hits this past season were far and away the most in college football. He also has 20 total sacks in SEC play the past two seasons. The only concern is his top-tier athleticism, but with the way Barnett wins—with power and hands—that’s not a big issue for me.
3. Carl Lawson, Auburn
The pass-rushers in the SEC last season kept a good number of quarterbacks up late on Friday nights. Lawson registered nine sacks, 13 hits, and 42 hurries in 2016 on only 364 pass-rushing snaps. Lawson wins the edge on offensive tackles as much as anyone in this class and makes them worry about getting out of their stance quickly with his first step. He pairs that up with some of the strongest hands I’ve seen in the class that keep him in control of interactions.
4. Solomon Thomas, Stanford
Thomas’ true position in the NFL is still up in the air, and he could very well play a number of different techniques depending on the situation. He was most often utilized on the interior, with 90.6 percent of his snaps coming inside the tackles a season ago. But at 272 pounds, he might have to play on the edge in the NFL. Still, no player in college football graded out better against the run than Thomas. He also has the freakish athleticism at his size that could translate as a pass-rusher.
5. Tim Williams, Alabama
On a snap-for-snap basis, Williams has been the most effective pass-rusher in the nation over the past three seasons. The issue is that even over those three seasons, he’s only accumulated 685 snaps (485 as a pass-rusher). While he’s notched a ridiculous 22 sacks, 19 hits, and 83 hurries on those plays, it’s still concerning that he couldn’t see the field more. While Williams looks like one of the most athletic edge rushers in the class on tape, his combine performance was lackluster.
6. Jordan Willis, Kansas State
As owner of the highest overall grade of any edge player in the country a season ago, Willis absolutely dominated the Big 12. Then he went to Indianapolis and put up the most impressive combine performance of any edge prospect in the class. So if you’re looking for a player who checks the production and athleticism boxes, Willis is your guy. His biggest issue was level of competition faced. The Kansas State defensive end looked far more pedestrian in one-on-one’s at the Senior Bowl, but come actual game time in Mobile, and Willis registered two sacks and three hurries.
7. Haason Reddick, Temple
Haason Reddick is another player who may not end up on the edge at the next level, but this time for different reasons. Reddick’s athleticism and size could end up moving him to an off-ball linebacker spot at the next level, where he would obviously be a devastating weapon as a blitzer. Reddick was utilized in a true 3-4 outside linebacker role at Temple, dropping into coverage on 74 of his 322 passing snaps last season. That means that his 43 QB pressures last season came on only 248 pass rushes, a ridiculous rate. Reddick is the ultimate Swiss Army knife for defensive coordinators in the NFL.
8. Charles Harris, Missouri
Harris is the undisputed king of the spin move in this class, and has some freakish balance for a 253-pound man. His 28 combined sacks plus hits in 2016 were the fifth-most of any edge player, and he has a penchant for winning quickly. His poor combine will drop him down some boards, but the pass-rushing production is there in spades.
9. T.J. Watt, Wisconsin
The biggest concern with Watt is whether or not he’s a one-year wonder. Physically, though, there’s not much he can’t do. At 6-foot-4, 252 pounds, Watt put up fantastic explosive and change-of-direction numbers at the combine. That meshes with what we saw of him at Wisconsin, where he was arguably the most impressive of anyone in this class at closing on ball carriers in space. He’s still raw as a pass-rusher, as a good deal of his 56 QB pressures a season ago came unblocked, but the ability is there.
10. Taco Charlton, Michigan
Charlton is a physical specimen who simply overpowered college offensive tackles on the edge last season. Standing a legit 6-foot-6, 277 pounds, Charlton was a forced to be reckoned with as a bull-rusher and somehow had one of the most effective spin moves in the country at that size. He registered 18 combined sacks and hits last year, despite rushing the passer only 251 times.
11. Takkarist McKinley
McKinley has some of the best straight-line explosiveness in this class, and was too much physically for many college offensive tackles. He was responsible for one of projected first-round OT Garett Bolles’ three sacks allowed this season, and recorded 20 total sacks plus hits on the year. The biggest concern for the former Bruin was his disappearance in certain games. Stanford and Washington State both held McKinley in check for much of their games.
12. Deatrich Wise Jr., Arkansas
Another “tweener,” Wise’s best position is likely as a 3-4 defensive end. He had some issues holding up to double teams at Arkansas that limited his playing time, but he was incredibly productive on the 488 snaps he saw see as a senior. Then at the East-West Shrine Game, he utterly dominated, racking up two sacks, a hit, and five hurries. He’s still very raw, but Wise has some freakish tools to work with in the NFL.
13. Dawuane Smoot, Illinois
Smoot is one of the few pass-rushers on this list with an already-refined rip move. He also has the bend that makes one think that will translate to the next level. It’s a little concerning that his junior season—60 total QB pressures—greatly outshined his senior year (53 pressures). Smoot’s two-year production as a pass-rusher, however, is still among the 10 best in this class.
14. Trey Hendrickson, Florida Atlantic
Hendrickson was by far the most productive pass-rusher outside the Power-5 conferences. His 20.5 pass-rushing productivity led the entire nation as he racked up 78 QB pressures, second-most in the nation. This comes a year after he finished second in the country with 15 sacks in 2015. Hendrickson’s only knock is level of competition. That concern wasn’t eased at all by an average showing in the Shrine game after the season.
15. Ryan Anderson, Alabama
Anderson may not be what the NFL is looking for on the edge from a size and athleticism standpoint, but he simply gets the job done repeatedly. The Alabama outside linebacker ranked sixth and fifth the past two seasons among SEC edge players despite playing only 670 and 361 snaps respectively in those seasons. He’s already incredibly advanced with his hands and does a great job of keeping his body clean despite limited length.
Class superlatives
Best pure pass-rusher: Myles Garrett, Texas A&M
There’s a reason why Garrett is nearly a lock to go No. 1 overall. He earned a top-three pass-rushing grade as a freshman and sophomore before injuries limited him this past season to only seventh-best in the country.
Best against the run: Solomon Thomas, Stanford
Thomas’ 12.0 run-stop percentage was eighth-best among all defensive linemen in the country last year. I legitimately believe that even at 272 pounds, Thomas could be a full-time 3-technique if he wanted to be. That’s how stout he is versus the run.
Best at winning outside: Derek Barnett, Tennessee
This one may surprise some, but there is far more to winning the edge as a pass-rusher than simply burst off the line of scrimmage. Barnett is excellent at pacing his attack at an offensive tackle and baiting his opponent into getting flat-footed at the top of his set. After Barnett swats away the blocker’s hand, he has enough bend to consistently win the corner.
Best at winning inside: Haason Reddick, Temple
With the juice Reddick has off the edge, college tackles absolutely flew out of their stances against him. Any sort of inside counter or slant wreaked havoc for opposing offensive lines, as he possesses the ability to stop on a dime and duck inside.
Best bull-rusher: Myles Garrett, Texas A&M
272 pounds running a 4.64-second 40-yard dash with ridiculous burst off the line of scrimmage and 35¼-inch arms coming at you is a terrifying package. It’s no surprise that Garrett is the biggest bull-rush threat in this class.
Best spin move: Charles Harris, Missouri
Harris executing his spin is akin to the running back spin move in NFL Blitz. It all happens in the blink of an eye, and while he’s spinning, no one can touch him. No prospect in this class can rival the ease and frequency with which Harris pulled the move off.
