First of all - you describe the worst possible low economic situation. Is Tony Allen really from that bad of an environment? Second of all, while inner city schools under perform, they are not generally under funded on a per student basis compared to well performing schools, instead it seems the culture of the community and the parents have a lot more influence then the cash pumped in.
Tony Allen comes from the south side of Chicago, one of the worst places on earth. Yes, it was that bad for him. One of the reasons TA wants to get into education once he retires is to give back to children and provide them with the education and support he found lacking as a child in a poor neighborhood.
But you're partly right, the culture of the community and the parents are huge factors--that is why socioeconomic condition is so important, because the cycle of poverty and a lack of education and opportunity goes from generation to generation. If your parents are poor, and they raise you in a poor environment, it's very hard to escape the cycle--only the exceptional ones and those who matriculate through the right outreach programs can escape (and those who find other means of escape, like athletes, musicians, etc.). At the same time, if your parents are rich and you're raised in that environment, you tend to stay at that level even if you neglect your studies or are otherwise unworthy of that station in life.
But not all schools are created equal. Going to an affluent school on the East cost is not the same as going to one in the mid-west, nor is there much equality between high schools in affluent neighborhoods out east and poorer neighborhoods in the same cities. Culture goes hand in hand with socioeconomic opportunity.
Here's the eligibility for playing ball: (these might have changed since TA played, but close enough.)
4 years of English
3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher)
2 years of natural/physical science (one must be a lab science)
1 year of additional science, math or English
2 years of social studies
4 years of additional core courses (they can be from any listed above or from nondoctrinal religion or philosophy or foreign language)
The "sliding scale" used by the NCAA now allows a higher core GPA to reduce the SAT component. A 2.5 core GPA will still need a 820 SAT score, a higher core GPA of 2.75 will need a 720 SAT score, a 3.0 core GPA will only require a 620 SAT score and a 3.55 core GPA will just need a 400 SAT score. The NCAA has stated that their research now indicates that core class grades were the best indicators of academic success during a student-athlete’s freshman year.
Now you get a lot of chances in life - and I wouldn't hold the JuCo thing against anybody - in fact with the cost of college these days, it's probably a good route for everyone to consider unless money is not an issue, i.e. the wealthy and those getting scholarships.
Given that the first 2 years of college is usually a bunch of general requirements anyway, I'd tell everyone to go to community college unless they're on scholarship or have rich parents--the money you save from 2 years at community college as opposed to going to some of the more prestigious institutions is outrageous, probably between 25,000-60,000 dollars and let me tell you there is little difference between Calc 1 at your local community college and Calc 1 at Harvard.
But TA was knucklehead in college (suspended for a fight amongst other issues), he's been a knucklehead in the pros (legal trouble, bone head plays, the dunk injury) - this is a pattern and their is no evidence of change.
First, he was never convicted of anything, and given where he came from the transition to college life was probably difficult. Second, he has shown a pattern of change, his last season in Boston was perhaps his best as a pro, he finally embraced the finer points of the game, mainly the importance of film study and preparation.
Finally I think what was meant by two black is "culturally too inner city." This raises two questions:
1. Since its been stipulated that this culture is at least somewhat responsible for negative things (like the bad schools), isn't it right to criticize someone for being too tied to it?
I don't think so, but this is another issue altogether. I'm a part of American culture and all the good and bad things that come from it, but I don't think it's fair to criticize me for something that started before I was born and will continue long after I'm dead. It's not like many have a choice to divorce themselves from the culture they find themselves in.
2. Does this apply to white players that might "act black"? For example if someone with Eminem's background was a great PG with attitude issues - would be right as saying "he's not embraced because he's too black?"
Yeah, there was somebody like that, his name was Jason Williams. And you can bet he lost millions of endorsement and contract dollars because of the way he acted.
