The Migration of African-Americans to the Canadian Football League During the 1950s: An Escape from Racism?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is the argument of this paper that the literature on mid-century racial discrimination in sport is incomplete in that it ignores the experiences of a small, but relatively significant, group of African-American football players who actually chose to leave their own country â and correspondingly leave the racially-charged environment of mid-twentieth-century USA â to head north to play professional football in the Canadian Football League (CFL). Beginning in 1946, a steady flow of African-Americans began to migrate to the CFL which, at the time, was a legitimate competitor league to the NFL. This paper attempts to test a perception seemingly held by some that, by moving to Canada, African-American football players were able to escape the racial injustices they often suffered in the US. This view appears to have its roots in the notion that Canada is a âgentlerâ, more tolerant society, without the divisive socio-political history that characterizes much of the race relations in the US. This paper tests these notions using a variety of empirical approaches. The results indicate that, while African-Americans were better represented in the CFL relative to the NFL, African-Americans still faced some level of entry discrimination in the CFL. In particular, African-American players in the CFL outperformed their white counterparts on numerous performance dimensions, indicating the overall talent level in the CFL could have been further improved by employing an even greater number of African-Americans. Additionally, the paper finds that those CFL teams that employed the highest percentage of African-Americans were those teams that had the most on-field success. Finally, the paper analyses prices of player trading cards from that era, and finds that cards of African-Americans were undervalued, relative to white CFL players of equal talent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".