Same Old, Same Old

Kottke linked to this post discussing IQ scores for NFL players by position. Searching for further speculation, I found Marginal Revolution's post, where the commenters go wild patting themselves on the back for understanding the situation and frowning at everyone else for thinking differently.

Many seem satisfied by simply figuring out the strong correlation between predominantly white and black positions and leaving it at that, although that seems a bit shallow. For example, why are players segregated like this? Correlation is easy but causation is much harder. Assuming that most football players at any non-kicking position are imposing physical specimens, are offensive linemen simply the smartest of those too slow to worry about running around the field all game? This would not necessarily imply that intelligence is vital, but the final distinguishing factor between similarly talented large, slightly slower players. Or are the less heavy players simply too dumb to fatten up and push people around in the middle? Either method, of course, excludes race-based assumptions when evaluating players' abilities.

Then again, why should this be surprising? The news item and concomitant discourse are at roughly the same level of sophistication as most studies on health, class, or just about anything else more complex than weekend box office figures. Readers (and those they then choose to "inform") get excited and start chattering after figuring out the What and the Who, frequently ignoring the When, concocting theories--either bizarre, reactionary, or vehemently contrarian, but always personal--about the Why without consulting the available evidence, and nearly always leaving out the How, when methodology is nearly always the determining factor in any news item of this sort.