Previous Story Next Story View Comments Post a Comment Send This Page

Shaker Students Score National Merit Scholarships

AR Articles on Racial Differences
Race and Psychopathic Personality (Jul. 2002)
Race and Teenage Pregnancy (Feb. 2002)
The Biological Reality of Race (Oct. 1999)
Why Race Matters (Oct. 1997)
Race and Health (May 1996)
A New Theory of Racial Differences (Dec. 1994)
Search AmRen.com for Racial Differences
More news stories on Racial Differences

Scott Stephens, Cleveland Plain Dealer, May 12, 2008

It’s nice to have one.

It’s great to have two.

Three is a very good year.

But six National Merit Scholars from one senior class?

{snip}

Only one other Ohio school had that many—St. Xavier High School, a Catholic school in Cincinnati. Beyond that, no school—public or private—had more than three.

That’s not all of it: Shaker this year had 11 National Merit semifinalists, 19 National Merit commended students, two National Achievement semifinalists, three National Achievement commended students, and one National Hispanic Scholar.

{snip}

Freeman said a culture of learning that begins in kindergarten and continues through high school is one big reason. Even in early grades, youngsters talk about what college they hope to attend. Freeman said he wasn’t surprised to find that most of the students achieving honors had attended Shaker schools their entire academic careers.

{snip}

Students vying for the scholarships are evaluated on grades, the difficulty of the classes they took, their standardized test scores and participation and leadership in school and community activities. They also have to write an essay describing their interests and goals, and they need a recommendation from a high school teacher, counselor or administrator.

{snip}

Nobody disputes the notion that the scholarships winners are among the best and the brightest American high schools have to offer. But some maintain that the National Merit Scholarship Corp., a privately funded, nonprofit company which has run the program since 1955, could improve the process to make it fairer for poor and minority applicants.

Eligibility for the award is based solely on scores on the Preliminary SAT (PSAT) exam. Of the more than 1.3 million 11th-graders who take the exam each year, about 16,000 are chosen as Merit semifinalists. Because test scores are closely linked to social and economic factors, such as family income, many students are at a disadvantage before they pick up a pencil, critics say.

“It pours scholarship money into the hands of kids from well-to-do families,” says Robert Schaeffer, public education director for FairTest, a group that opposes heavy reliance on standardized testing.

Schaeffer said the program uses different PSAT cut scores—the minimum score needed to make the grade—for different states to ensure geographic balance, but has done nothing to address charges that the SAT practice test is racially biased.

“They’ve stubbornly maintained that it’s a neutral test,” he says. “They say geographic equity matters, but racial and gender equity do not.”

Officials at the College Board, which administers the PSAT, say the exam is a valid indicator of merit. The criticisms reflect wider problems in education, not with the test or the competition, they argue.

{snip}

“The National Merit testing has been reliable and valid, and that’s not been the case with many of the more recent testing programs,” Freeman said. “It’s designed with a high ceiling—you just don’t pass it with a low score. As far as testing programs go, it’s valid.”

{snip}

Seated from left: Alyssa Cohen, 17, and Daniel Strassfeld, 17. Standing from left: Alison O’Connor, 18; Abigail Pink, 18; Alex Grossman-McKee, 18; and Julia Wilson, 18.

Original article

(Posted on May 12, 2008)

Shaker Heights High School Profile

Public School Review, no date

Students by Ethnicity	This School	OH School Average
% American Indian	n/a	n/a
% Asian	2%	1%
% Hispanic	1%	3%
% Black	55%	20%
% White	39%	72%
% Unknown	3%	6%

Original article

Previous story Next Story Post a Comment Send This Page Search

Comments

High IQ is rare and productive, thus in the market it’s always in high demand, while low supply. The result is the price (wages) go up for this commodity (high IQ people.) At the same time, since IQ is genetic children of high IQ people are also high IQ. High IQ people also do well in school.

So here we have children of wealthy homes who do well in school, and the connection drawn is: “wealth leads to scholastic success” when in fact the two are entirely unrelated. This is because they left out, intentionally, IQ, the best explanation for everything that happens on earth. IQ is the skeleton key that unlocks every puzzle in the world. It answers every question of why every single individual did as well, (or as poorly) as he did, and the same with every nation/civilization as a whole. So long as IQ is not used, all of their thinking is pure garbage. It’s like describing breathing without ever using oxygen as part of the process.

Posted by Diamed at 6:09 PM on May 12

Because this school is 55% black, it is a surprise that these six individuals were able to become National Merit Scholars at all, because usually these kinds of mixed schools have curricula that are dumbed down to the lowest common denominator for racial pandering, and any separation of brighter (read: white) students into separate classrooms is frowned upon by the U.S. MisEducation Department, the U.S. Just-Us Department, the Federal Judiciary, and other arms of the Equality Politburo.

Posted by Question Diversity at 6:15 PM on May 12

If blacks make up 55% and whites make up 39%, that undermines the theory of lower black achievement being the result of minority status.

“Robert Schaeffer, public education director for FairTest, a group that opposes heavy reliance on standardized testing.”

Standardized tests are fair tests. They’re fair because everyone knows what the standards are and everyone can work to achieve those standards. Relying on arbitrary, subjective, and shifting definitions of achievement seems unfair to me.

Posted by sbuffalonative at 6:19 PM on May 12

Mr. Schaeffer of FairTest appears to make two very questionable assumptions here: One, that all the kids who score high on the test come from “well-to-do families”; and two, that such tests should be “race-normed” to make sure that there is proportional representation, so to speak, among the various racially identifiable groups of students in the National Merit Scholarship winners. By that argument, maybe the players in the National Basketball Association should be race-normed, too.

Schaeffer says something should be done to make the tests “fairer for poor and minority students.” Of course, when a well-intentioned bleeding-heart liberal like him makes such a statement, what he really means is not “fairer” but “easier.” Raise the bar for White students, lower it for blacks (that’s the English translation of “poor and minority.”) He also says that test scores are “closely linked to social and economic factors, such as family income.” Just what does that mean, Mr. Schaeffer? How is the test supposedly rigged so that a poor but bright black student (or a poor but bright White one, for that matter), cannot score high on it?

Posted by Wayne Engle at 6:40 PM on May 12

Unless my eyes are even worse than I thought, those six bright and good-looking kids in the photo are members of a minority group at the SH high school.

Doesn’t the table say that Whites are only 39% of the student body? Last time I checked a minorty is anything 49.9% or less.

“’It pours scholarship money into the hands of kids from well-to-do families,’” says Robert Schaeffer, public education director for FairTest, a group that opposes heavy reliance on standardized testing.”

I couldn’t care less where the best and brightest of this country’s future originate but if they achieve, reward them, reward them, and then reward them again.

If a millionaire doctor cures a disease, that’s terrfic! You’ll find no class nevy here.

Posted by Annoyed In Illinois at 6:57 PM on May 12

I’ll bet the school basketball is all, or nearly, all black. So the test for being selected for the basketball team is poobably “racially biased”.

Posted by Bill Black at 7:02 PM on May 12

“But some maintain that the National Merit Scholarship Corp., a privately funded, nonprofit company which has run the program since 1955, could improve the process to make it fairer for poor and minority applicants.”

Here it is again. Reference to lack of performance by non-whites as being a matter of fairness, rather than intelligence and dedicated work.

Those “some” who maintain the process isn’t fair because it hasn’t any non-whites, at least at this school, better wise up and understand that they’re either going to have a program to encourage learning and reward intelligence or they’re going to have a program that’s a social engineering disaster that awards affirmative action freebies to non-whites because they’re less intelligent, just in order to perpetuate this politically correct scam which pretends all the races are equal.

There’s a group of blacks who wants the world to regard Jesus, a semitic caucasoid, as black in order that more blacks will feel more comfortable worshiping a religious figure that looks like them, because they’re so racist they can’t stand the thought of honoring a caucasoid.

The above bizarre suggestion of unfairness is another such absurd crybaby rant by blacks and other non-whites. I’m getting pretty sick of it myself and wish that those who can’t tolerate white excellence would emigrate to a country where most of the people look like them so they won’t be so miserable.

And, incidentally, I’d suggest they search for a religious figure that looks like them too, so they won’t have to appropriate our sacred icons and morph them into look alikes of themselves, because of their disgusting hatred and racial biases.

Posted by Robert Kelly at 7:07 PM on May 12

from the article - “Because test scores are closely linked to social and economic factors, such as family income, many students are at a disadvantage before they pick up a pencil, critics say.”

Yes, and the disadvantage is lower IQ which is quite often the root cause for the circumstances (such as family income)found amongst the “disadvantaged”.

Posted by Robert at 7:20 PM on May 12

“They’ve stubbornly maintained that it’s a neutral test,” he says. “They say geographic equity matters, but racial and gender equity do not.”

First-off they’re using the gender argument to draw White women to their side, even though 4 of the 6 are girls. Secondly, these students are from a school that is 55% black, so the problem doesn’t lie with the school. The fact that these kids excelled in that environment is a testament to their abilities. I’m all for need based scholarships, as long as the person is qualified, our top students should be at our top schools, regardless of their socio-economic status. This is the only way to stay competitive with Asia. I’m going to be spending $500 a month toward student loans until I’m 50, so I feel for students who have to take out loans to pay for school.

Posted by pinchegabacho at 7:52 PM on May 12

This is definitely nothing but a racist ploy. As you have seen, there are only 39.5%
whites in this school, so the whites should only have had 2 scholarships, but being greedy, they hogged all 6. The non-whites were further discriminated by only being
awarded 93.1% proficiency in reading, as usual, those honkeys grabbed 100%. Unlike the previous story of sex at the prom, these parents were wise to the facts and only awarded the school 4 stars. I suspect this ploy was orchestrated by the teaching staff,
100% of whom have degrees and 83% have masters degree.

Posted by ciccio at 7:54 PM on May 12

The reason these scholarship winners tend to come from wealthier families is that smart kids tend to have smart parents, and smart parents tend to earn more money than other parents. To assume there is something wrong with this, as Scott Stephens does, implies that he doesn’t believe in a meritocracy and that he doesn’t believe intelligence is heritable. Scott, I’ve got some news for you - a “culture of learning” does not make people smart - smart people make a culture of learning.

Posted by Doppelgangbanger at 8:28 PM on May 12

“Because test scores are closely linked to social and economic factors, such as family income, many students are at a disadvantage before they pick up a pencil, critics say.”

Because social and economic factors, such as family income, are closely linked to I.Q. many students from higher SE levels are more likely to succeed. The “Anti-nature Society”, also known as the “FairTest Group” claims that nature is biased and should not impact who gets such scholarships.

Posted by jewamongyou at 8:41 PM on May 12

This is interesting. I teach at a upscale high school in Colorado. We had five students score perfect SAT’s this year. One of them was Black. Two were Asian. Two were White.

Posted by Carl at 8:51 PM on May 12

I really feel sorry for those kids-such a homogenous group. Their missing out on the joy of diversity and since diversity is strength…

Posted by S & GS at 8:59 PM on May 12

Education is the ability of brain to accept information, worked it out and use it. It is easy to understand the concept by using a ‘computer model’. Brain is a CPU given by the Nature. It is possible to down load junk information to the hard drive to get a meager outcome from a capable CPU. However, if a CPU is not capable enough, it does not matter what color is the computer or how high is an income of the household.
Humankind history has proved it finally. All geniuses are not result of a social status or wealth of the family. They are a product of the personal ability endowed by the Nature.

Posted by alex at 9:47 PM on May 12

My father was a roofer. He did not speak English well.
I worked with him on the hot roofs after school and weekends.
I studied in school at night and on rainy days.
I did well on the PSAT and became a National Merit Scholarship Finalist.
Can someone explain to me how a test largely based geometry and English vocabulary is biased?
English was not my mother tongue, but to succeed her you have to master it.
To master English, you have to master yourself.
It’s a struggle for most of us all our lives, but it’s worth the effort.
Blaming the test is shifting the blame from yourself.

Posted by Ron Taggirt at 10:03 PM on May 12

Since they are so concerned with delving into detailed statistics, why didn’t they provide a further break-down? Ethno/religious/economic stats would have been equally interesting. Even more so.

Posted by voter at 10:51 PM on May 12

“Schaeffer said the program uses different PSAT cut scores—the minimum score needed to make the grade—for different states to ensure geographic balance, but has done nothing to address charges that the SAT practice test is racially biased.”

What proof does Schaeffer provide that the test *is* “racially biased,” other than the usual poor performance of blacks? Shouldn’t this “bias” be established as a fact before anyone is asked to address it as a reality?

Posted by Cassiodorus at 10:54 PM on May 12

If the SATs are racially biased, then that (almost by definition) means there are more upper-class blacks that recieved low SAT scores than there are upper-class whites who recieved low SAT scores.

Has any testing been done on that?

Posted by Aaron at 11:06 PM on May 12

The PSAT does a great job of measuring the intelligence and education of the students PARENTS. By overweighting vocabulary you nicely get to choose all the spoiled brat children of University professors while excluding intelligent students of working class families but then what would you expect from the country club elite at Princeton? I am surprised any schools still even use this test.

Posted by Amsterdamsky at 3:07 AM on May 13

Amsterdamsky,

What the heck are you talking about? Neither of my parents attended college, my Mom never even finished high school. But I scored at the 99th percentile on the PSAT, the SAT, and the ACT. Parents aren’t the only place we learn vocabulary. We get it from television, from school, and from reading books.

I realize that two out of three of those things are foreign concepts to many American children.

Posted by at 9:42 AM on May 13

“By overweighting vocabulary you nicely get to choose all the spoiled brat children of University professors while excluding intelligent students of working class families but then what would you expect from the country club elite at Princeton? “

Well,those “intelligent students of working class families” are the ones that become engineers. Which also explains why they are badly-treated by industry and are always run over by Big Business and their H-1Bs. The tech industry is smart enough to realize that techies who can barely get a word out except through their work product can be steam-rollered by the ITAA’s lawyers and lobbyists. There is no GROUP that effectively represents the interests of tech people AGAINST those that would destroy them, the tech industries.

Posted by at 9:52 AM on May 13

The interesting thing is that the Shaker schools are effectively segregated- by ability. The high school has five levels of academic achievement, and entrance into each is voluntary. The top two are whites, the bottom two, well you figure it out.

If a white family wishes, the school district will quietly move elementary pupils to a white school.

Posted by William Hendershot at 10:59 AM on May 13

What is the National Acheivement Test? This has got to be an SAT with lower standards so blacks can get some recognition.

Posted by William Hendershot at 11:07 AM on May 13

Schaeffer uses a double standard in arguing that the scholarships go to those of upper income levels. He does this by not pointing out that this is precisely what is going on accross the country with “minority” scholarships. For years, research has shown that it isn’t the lower income students who benefit but those of upper income parents, particularly within the Black community.

Posted by George at 11:21 AM on May 13

Apparently many “perfect scores” are fraudulent:

‘The liberal philosophy of racial equality has thoroughly corrupted testing for intellectual performance. In the first place, the SAT should be scaled so that a student turning in a blank test receives a score of zero, not four hundred. Padding the math and the verbal parts of SAT I merely serves to obscure the intellectual inequalities among students in general, and of the races in particular.

Also, a check of the “conversion tables” between the original scale and the recentered scale will show that increments in the test score don’t flow quite as linearly with increments in the number of correct test answers as they once did. As if mocking the test’s name, the recentering process makes the relationship between real scholastic achievement and the SAT scores more difficult to assess. Furthermore, today the SAT is “firewalled,” meaning that students who miss some of the questions can still be awarded a perfect score, and thus the test loses its ability to discriminate between the very best and the “pretty good.” ‘

SAT I all-time national average
+/- standard deviation, by race.

RACE VERBAL MATH Composite mean
minus “minimum
padding” After correction
for
“recentering” Overall
performance
(scale White=1)
Asian 499 +/- 124 565 +/- 122 664 574 1.0286
White 528 +/- 100 530 +/- 103 658 558 1.0000
Other race 508 +/- 119 515 +/- 116 623 513 0.9194
No race identified 495 +/- 120 509 +/- 119 604 494 0.8853
Hispanic
C/S American 461 +/- 108 467 +/- 106 528 408 0.7312
Hispanic
Mexican 453 +/- 101 460 +/- 100 513 393 0.7043
Hispanic
Puerto Rican 456 +/- 103 451 +/- 102 507 387 0.6935
Black 431 +/- 100 426 +/- 98 457 327 0.5860

http://christianparty.net/illusion.htm

Posted by dr. joon gordoni at 11:26 AM on May 13

The reference to “spoiled brat children of University professors” that Amsterdamsky has made to may apply in other cases, or perhaps in general. I really don’t know. I can only say that it does not apply in mine.

My parents (and all of my family) did not have the advantage of college degrees. They were “working class people” as he calls them. Yet ours was a literate, articulate, highly verbal family which cultivated good conversation and encouraged reading — and writing as well. We had books in our house, were taken to the library, and my mother was a stickler for correct grammar and pronunciation. She didn’t let an error slip past my tongue uncorrected, although she was “only” a high school graduate … as am I.

A college education is surely an advantage, I’ll not deny that; but it is not everything. Today, it is even becoming, perhaps, a detriment to clear and intelligent thought.

Posted by at 11:37 AM on May 13

More high-minded analysis reminding us that not discriminating against whites equals the most evil of discrimination.

Posted by at 11:52 AM on May 13

“there are more upper-class blacks that recieved low SAT scores than there are upper-class whites who recieved low SAT scores. Has any testing been done on that?”

Yes. Low income whites outperform high income black children, though upper income children of all races do perform better than their lower income brethren.

Posted by at 11:57 AM on May 13

The above lesson appears to be White youngsters DO have an advantage… because the school stubbornly refuses to lower the bar for Blacks. Like those ‘racist’ law schools trying their utmost to keep Blacks from becoming lawyers… by making the exams unreasonably hard to pass. But then again, who would want to hire the services of an affirmative action graduate attorney or surgeon?

University education SHOULD GO TO THOSE WHO CAN BEST BENEFIT FROM IT! If that principle excludes underachieving Blacks… that’s the way the cookie crumbles. It’s almost axiomatic White children born to professional (read well-educated) parents will do far better than most of those with working class parents. Even if only because such parents are more likely to tutor or, if necessary, HIRE a tutor to help their children. Is that favoring or stigmatizing economic groups? Hardly. Amsterdamski might have a grain of truth with his “spoiled brat” comment, but at most ONLY a grain!

Putting a student into a university who has not mastered the basics — has not acquired enough education to score high on achievement tests, intelligence tests or whatever — I would expect even Amsterdamski to concede they’d be a hindrance to more intelligent classmates by holding back rate of learning, and in all probability would hardly be able to do more than barely PASS their college coursework. (To understand what “holding back” means, you have to have attended schools or taught in schools with student bodies composed largely of Afro-Americans or Hispanics.)

One reason public schools tend to be such lamentable failures IS DUE TO BEING REQUIRED TO ADMIT A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF BLACK OR HISPANIC STUDENTS! If the average public school grad has done scholastically extremely well, it probably is largely due to a combination of parental influence and involvement, accessibility of learning tools and family pressure to succeed. Amsterdamski being well off base with his (jealous?) comment.

Lack of parental interest or involvement is all-too-often a hallmark of Black students. Peer pressure also discourages Blacks excelling in school. Resulting in those frenzied demands by Blacks to “lower the bar.” Are even Afro-Americans so simple-minded that they would willingly patronize a doctor or surgeon; who passed soley because of standards LOWERED due to his/her race?

Weighing tests based on economic status or minority race membership is stupid and absurd. A person passes (or fails) on ability, acquired education and individual intelligence. Blacks far too often display a child-like mentality incapable of understanding that concept. Then fill the air with cries and rants of blatant racism.

Posted by Fed Up at 12:59 PM on May 13

Year after year we hear the under-achievers complain about ‘biased exams.’ Whether the exams are academic or civil service, those of color blame their failure on ‘biased’ questions. Interestingly, not one of the complaining groups has stepped up to create an exam that could bring the under-achievers on parity with the achievers.

Why? Because DNA always wins.

Posted by Sensitivity Trainer at 1:23 PM on May 13

Fair Test is an organization that would really prefer no testing. They want quotas. When fair testing results in Blacks and Hispanics doing poorly, that organization demands a test so easy almost everyone can pass. Then college administrators can select among those who pass the easy test and come up with the “correct” entry quotas.
Ever since Eleanor Holmes Norton and the Democrats under Jimmy Carter went to war with test results, the consequence has been less creativity, less productivity, and more incompetnet, obnoxious minorities on government payrolls, in university, etc.—————————-HM

Posted by at 1:50 PM on May 13

“This is interesting. I teach at a upscale high school in Colorado. We had five students score perfect SAT’s this year. One of them was Black. Two were Asian. Two were White.”
Posted by Carl at 8:51 PM on May 12

With all due respect, friend, I’ve never, ever known a black to score perfectly on the SAT, and I’ve had considerable experience in that area.

Can you give us more information so we can verify it for ourselves?

Posted by at 2:24 PM on May 13

My post should read:

I’ll bet the school basketball TEAM is all, or nearly all, black. So the test for being selected for the basketball team is PROBABLY “racially biased”.

Posted by Bill Black at 2:27 PM on May 13

Looks to me like the white parents make sure their children study…doesn’t it??? After all if the black students don’t do so well must be us whites who are to blame…that’s how it works in this stupid topsy tervy world we NOW live it thanks to white liberals and idiots in charge….it is US who are always in the wrong for black mistakes and black dumbness!

Posted by lydia at 2:30 PM on May 13

“Because test scores are closely linked to social and economic factors, such as family income, many students are at a disadvantage before they pick up a pencil, critics say.”

Here we have a variation on the chicken and the egg.

Are people less intelligent because they’re poor and disadvantaged or are they poor and disadvantaged because they’re less intelligent?

Intelligent people, regardless of their social status, understand what they need to do to better themselves.

I grew up with a white guy whose mother slept around and his two brothers had criminal records before they were 16.

He was smart and despite his family situation, he focused like a laser on being in the top 5 of our class and he went on to be a successful architect working in the DC area.

If he wasn’t smart, he never would have seen a way out let alone achieve success in life. Even though he had a basic public school education, he saw education as his ticket away from his highly dysfunctional family.

It’s not the circumstance that ultimately limits individuals, it’s dogged determination and a high functioning brain that you can use to access your skills, wants, goals, and desires.

I don’t discount circumstances. There are plenty of people who are where they are through no fault of their own. I am always reminded of the saying, ‘there but for the grace of God’.

But blacks have been given access to the same schools, teachers, lessons, time constraints, etc, all because of integrated schools. No one can deny (with the exception of Scott Stephens)that blacks have some responsibility to take advantage of everything they’ve been given (including a free public education).

Their incessant complaints are becoming increasingly hollow.

Posted by sbuffalonative at 3:30 PM on May 13

The article perpetuates the oldest of logical errors - inferring causation from correlation. Because A and B are correlated, it does not follow that A causes B. They both might be common effects of some other cause C. Family wealth and kids doing well in school are common effects of the same cause - high IQ of parents. Intelligent people tend to do well financially and also pass on their high intelligence to their children who, in turn, do well in school.
It is all so obvious. Why is it necessary to explain to people something so clear that it practically rises up and bites you on the ***?
Pete A.

Posted by pete A. at 5:38 PM on May 13

I’m getting pretty sick of it myself and wish that those who can’t tolerate white excellence would emigrate to a country where most of the people look like them so they won’t be so miserable.
Posted by Robert Kelly at 7:07 PM on May 12
—-
We all know this won’t happen. They will demand WE emigrate to a country of “our choice”, and we already know those countries are packed full of undesirable minorities also.

~Rande

Posted by Rande at 5:48 PM on May 13

I come from a working class background. I joined the U.S. Navy and tested into the the Nuclear Power Program. This was in 1975 and the Navy was hard pressed to get and retain qualified personnel. There were no blacks or hispanics in my classes. If anyone were qualified, the Navy would have them in a hot minute. Many of my family refer to joining the military as Redneck University. If working class whites can do it why not blacks?

Posted by at 6:42 PM on May 13

De facto, the PSAT is racially biased, since it discriminates against those of lesser intelligence. American blacks score, on average, fifteen points lower on IQ tests than whites. African blacks do even worse.

On the other hand, Ashkenazi Jews score significantly higher that whites as a group, as do Northeast Asians. These stubborn facts are known to everybody who studies or investigates race and intelligence. Some small measure of these disparities may be due to environmental and cultural factors, but these variables are a small component of measurable intelligence and performance, however much sociologists may tie themselves in knots to explain away the patently obvious.

Posted by John at 5:08 PM on May 14

These six students deserve to be recognized for their academic skills. They understand the importance of applying themselves education-wise, unlike Bantus who are concerned primarily with how much money they expect to make in the NFL or NBA. These Shaker Six may never earn the money of a LeBron James or O.J. Mayo, but that doesn’t really matter. They’ll be productive long after James and Mayo have stopped throwing around an orange ball, and wondering if they’ll work in the studio of a cable sports program.

Posted by Soprano Fan at 5:27 PM on May 18

Home Top Previous story Next Story Send This Page Search