NFL wants more African American offensive coordinators

[irishroo]

I don't think the desire for diversity is the issue - most anyone would agree that diversity in the workplace or in education is a good thing for all involved because it exposes everyone to different ideas and viewpoints than would not otherwise have been experienced. I think the trouble lies in how we define diversity, specifically with our society's idea that skin color=diversity. It doesn't just apply to football either. For example, one of the few consistent criticisms of the University is its supposed lack of diversity. People point to the fact that 87% of the school is Catholic and something like 75% is white and immediately claim that as evidence of lack of diversity. I currently live in a house with 3 other guys. I am born and bred upper Midwest suburbia, one roommate comes from the Deep South as the heir to a large family fortune, another is born and raised in the heart of the Bronx to a Jewish mother and a Catholic father, and the last is a first-generation American whose parents immigrated to the San Francisco Bay Area from Ireland before he was born and have remained there ever since. We're all upper/upper-middle class white Catholic kids, so by any measurable information or statistic, we're not diverse at all, but if those aren't diverse backgrounds I don't know what the hell are.

 

[scUM Hater]

Next thing you know they will let women vote.

 

[ACamp1900]

Next thing you know they will let women vote.

It's been all downhill since....

 

[notredomer23]

Romeo Crennel is a great coach *said by no one ever*

 

[scUM Hater]

Can we then request more white players besides the kickers?

 

[notredomer23]

Jason Seahorn would be disappointed at the state of the NFL's white corner backs.

 

[palinurus]

Anytime you force anyone/organization to do something based on race, it's racism.

So this is racism.

And like one poster said, it does t bother anyone that the NFL players are overwhelmingly black. It's because the majority of talent at that level is black players....well, maybe the best coaches and corrdinators are white? So what is the issue?

Except they aren't forcing them to do anything; they are suggesting/recommending that they interview people. If they were forcing them to, they would have done it related to these eight or whatever openings there were; they didn't, hence the outcry.

So really, there are two things that could be forced -- the interviewing and the hiring. I'm not saying they should force either. I am saying I don't see anything wrong with the owners, as a group saying (a) our players are by and large black, and out of appreciation for that (and as a PR gesture), we ought to widen our net cast; (b) there's probably a bit of an old boy's network in sports' coaching, and this is a way to get some new blood into the process (btw, the old boy's network isn't a lefty notion; look at baseball: one you get onto the merry go round, you are on, regardless of race/ethnicity, and you get hired over and over -- eg, Ozzie Guillen, Manny Acta, Dusty Baker, et al.); and (c) there is no obligation or quota system or preference system.

I understand the concerns you guys express; I just don't think this is one of those situations. I also say this knowing that a lot of times employers/admissions officials/politicians say "we don't mean/use quotas!" when an honest person knows they actually often do. But I don't see this as that.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Interesting. It doesn't seem to me like African Americans have had a very hard time breaking into professional sports.

 

[palinurus]

Interesting. It doesn't seem to me like African Americans have had a very hard time breaking into professional sports.

Right. I should be clearer; I think there is a bit of an old boy's network in sports coaching. Sports for players is actually almost completely a meritocracy.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Professional sports is the ultimate merit-based industry. These rules are stupid.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Romeo Crennel is a great coach *said by no one ever*

He's in the 99th percentile of anyone who has ever coached a football game.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

He's in the 99th percentile of anyone who has ever coached a football game.

Link?

 

[irishog77]

Also, whenever someone white hits someone black on the football field...there should be an automatic flag thrown for "Personal Foul- Hate Crime"...ijs

Haha, Salty! Reps!

And accordingly, I think when a black quarterback throws the ball away (instead of it being considered a smart play), he should be flagged for being "lazy."

 

[anarin]

This is a tired *** argument.

Regardless of race, the best man for the job should get it.

 

[irishroo]

Except they aren't forcing them to do anything; they are suggesting/recommending that they interview people.

Incorrect. The Rooney Rule does in fact require that teams interview at least one minority candidate for any vacant head coaching position. The Lions failed to do so in 2003 when they hired Steve Mariucci, and were fined $200,000 by the NFL because of it.

 

[irishpat183]

Except they aren't forcing them to do anything; they are suggesting/recommending that they interview people. If they were forcing them to, they would have done it related to these eight or whatever openings there were; they didn't, hence the outcry.

So really, there are two things that could be forced -- the interviewing and the hiring. I'm not saying they should force either. I am saying I don't see anything wrong with the owners, as a group saying (a) our players are by and large black, and out of appreciation for that (and as a PR gesture), we ought to widen our net cast; (b) there's probably a bit of an old boy's network in sports' coaching, and this is a way to get some new blood into the process (btw, the old boy's network isn't a lefty notion; look at baseball: one you get onto the merry go round, you are on, regardless of race/ethnicity, and you get hired over and over -- eg, Ozzie Guillen, Manny Acta, Dusty Baker, et al.); and (c) there is no obligation or quota system or preference system.

I understand the concerns you guys express; I just don't think this is one of those situations. I also say this knowing that a lot of times employers/admissions officials/politicians say "we don't mean/use quotas!" when an honest person knows they actually often do. But I don't see this as that.

Yes. They are forcing teams to interview people based on their skin color. If anything, like all affirmative action, it makes minorities look worse. "Hey! you can't get a job on your own, but don't worry, we'll make people interview you to make it seem like we care".

It's a joke.

Eliminate "quotas" altogether. Let teams hire who they want. And there is a "network" because people want to hire guys that have been either successful, or a part of a successful staff. It's really that simple.

Professional sports is the ultimate merit-based industry. These rules are stupid.

Perfectly put. Guys on the field don't get there because of the way they look. I wonder if we should eliminate the SEC "network" and force teams to draft at least one player from each conference in order to make it even. (yes, it's extreme but the same principle)


Sports aren't supposed to be even or fair.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

You guys clearly don't get it. This is EXACTLY what MLK was talking about in his "I Have a Dream" speech. He had a dream that, one day, every man would be given an NFL coaching interview based not on their coaching ability, history or the content of their character but on the color of their skin. All he wanted was favorable treatment... not equality.

 

[chubler]

I fail to see the problem with requiring one measly interview with a minority candidate. Personally, as an upper-middle-class catholic white male (im pretty unique here at ND) Im pretty against affirmative action. But its only an interview. Not a job. Just making sure more candidates get a foot in the door to show their merit...
I think the reason the lack of black coaches is an issue is precisely because the players are overwhelmingly black. Most coaches are former players. So when the ratios between players and coaches are so different, it raises questions.

 

[Bluto]

I think the point of this is to encourage teams to actively seek more qualified "black" candidates to avoid the continuation of what can easily be perceived as an institutionalized "old boys club". Hasn't the military done this same type of thing for a couple of decades?

 

[kmoose]

In some employment settings, "affirmative action" can be tantamount to quotas and I oppose that thinking. In the NFL, though, you have a private entity (not government enforced, that is) with a lot of black "employees" (players) -- and they are guys who understand the game and are great motivators, that is, they are qualified. I think the Rooney rule is not to require they be hired, but to encourage they be interviewed. Such things can give an opening to guys like Dungy or Tomlin, guys who can definitely do the job, but who might have been overlooked without a broad net having been cast. I'm okay with that - and I'm no bleeding heart.

Dungy and Tomlin were both top shelf coordinators. THAT'S what gave them their opening. Talent and results always rise to the top, in the NFL, regardless of creed, color, or religion.

 

[palinurus]

Incorrect. The Rooney Rule does in fact require that teams interview at least one minority candidate for any vacant head coaching position. The Lions failed to do so in 2003 when they hired Steve Mariucci, and were fined $200,000 by the NFL because of it.

You are right; I was wrong.

 

[palinurus]

Yes. They are forcing teams to interview people based on their skin color. If anything, like all affirmative action, it makes minorities look worse. "Hey! you can't get a job on your own, but don't worry, we'll make people interview you to make it seem like we care".

It's a joke.

Eliminate "quotas" altogether. Let teams hire who they want. And there is a "network" because people want to hire guys that have been either successful, or a part of a successful staff. It's really that simple.



Perfectly put. Guys on the field don't get there because of the way they look. I wonder if we should eliminate the SEC "network" and force teams to draft at least one player from each conference in order to make it even. (yes, it's extreme but the same principle)


Sports aren't supposed to be even or fair.

You, too, are right; I was mistaken about it being a requirement.

I do note that the NFL owners have a PR issue to deal with here, though, that most other employers do not: the product rides on the backs of a workforce, not easily replaceable, that believes overwhelmingly that blacks ought to be officially considered as part of the interview process. It's different than federal government hiring or university admissions policies. If 70% of the NFL is black players, and they perceive that qualified black coaches are being stiffed in the interview process, that raises a PR issue that the NFL needs to deal with.

I agree about meritocracy and unfairness etc. We're talking about an interview. Ultimately, quality is what matters.

 

[BobD]

I believe rules like this are well intended, but end up being more of a divider than anything else. Take race, age, religion, sex and orientation out of the equation. Performance, potential and character are great measurables.

 

[palinurus]

Dungy and Tomlin were both top shelf coordinators. THAT'S what gave them their opening. Talent and results always rise to the top, in the NFL, regardless of creed, color, or religion.

You are right; Dungy predated the policy and Tomlin wasn't a beneficiary of the Rule, according to the Rooneys themselves. I do not know whether anyone who wasn't a high candidate was actually hired as a result of the interview.

 

[irishpat183]

Problem is...Equality is a myth.

We are not created equal. And that has nothing to do with skin color. This forced "equality" or "fairness" is bogas. Because you shouldn't be lumped in with people that you are outperforming or better than. By telling everyone they have an "equal" shot at a job, you're just creating more conflict because the guy with zero credentials is whining about no "opportunities" even though, in MOST cases, he hasn't earned the right. And it's not a perfect world, so guys will get passed up on. It happens on the field, so it's bound to happen in coaching.


If we can accept that and move on, then the world will be a better place.

 

[kmoose]

Problem is...Equality is a myth.

A self-ordained professor's tongue
Too serious to fool
Spouted out that liberty
Is just equality in school
Equality, I spoke the word
As if a wedding vow
Ahh, but I was so much older then
I'm younger than that now

--Bob Dylan

 

[Cackalacky]

From the process of developing players and coaches from high school to NFL this is what scientists term a positive feed-back loop.


regardless of my opinion ....I think there is the Rooney Rule which is NFL policy right? So interviews are mandatory, hiring is not. Non-sequitur. If people are worried about hiring the right people, some organizations are good, some are not, some have intolerable a-holes that think they are a great GM and team owner.... The orgs will hire who they want. Players do not always make great coaches, and coaches do not always make great players.

Affirmative actions initial intention was to give people who did not previously have a chance the ability to showcase themselves and have a chance at most jobs. Those days are mostly here now and I think AA is mostly antiquated. Diversity is not a bad thing.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Hmm let's exercise our brains here a little...

Blacks freed from slavery in 1863

Civil Rights Act passed in 1964

So what year was America's ideal of "equality of opportunity" realized?

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Hmm let's exercise our brains here a little...

Blacks freed from slavery in 1863

Civil Rights Act passed in 1964

So what year was America's ideal of "equality of opportunity" realized?

"Equality of opporunity" will never be realized, as long as people are born in different bodies, in different cities, to different parents.

 

[Cackalacky]

Hmm let's exercise our brains here a little...

Blacks freed from slavery in 1863

Civil Rights Act passed in 1964

So what year was America's ideal of "equality of opportunity" realized?

As one living in the south, that is not always the case... I have seen first hand and been told 1st hand stories of things after 1964 that would make your hair curl. It still is obvious today what some people think of other people. Racism is alive and well on both sides of the spectrum.