Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

No minority head coaches were hired with 8 openings


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
106 replies to this topic

#41 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • Joined: 27-December 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,732
  • Reputation: 462
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 12:53 AM

I'm talking about this part:


in the history of the NFL there have been literally hundreds of men to coach in the NFL. Out of those hundreds, 21 have been African American. 21 out of hundreds. 14 of those 21 have been since the Rooney rule in 2003. You can draw your own conclusions, from those numbers. I however saw no evidence that the owners had any desire to diversify before the Rooney rule.

The fact is, that yes this is America and the majority of the owners are private businessman running their private business and can basically do as they please with it. However the NFL itself like so many other major industries has grown to the point where its existance has a great impact on the mindset, culture, and behavior of this nation. The decisions they make affect not just you and I as fans but our children as potential players. They represent the endorsements from other major industries as well as the major charities of the world. An entire culture of people that do not all share the same views about what is right and wrong.

Ask yourself honestly, if you were an owner and had lived through the past 60 years of racial tensions in America. You are burdened with the weight of not just your own team but the preservation of the league itself. You have to maintain the support of your fan base, but you also have to make sure you cultivate an environment that must constantly be infused with new talent from ALL walks of life and at ALL levels. But you must do so without alienating ANY part of your constituents. With all this on your plate, is making a promise to at least consider an African American coaching candidate every time really all that bad? Who gives a fug what the media says. Its there job to stir up convo about the league, good and bad.

All you gotta do is promise an interview.

Not a follow up interview.

Not a hire.

1 guy.

1 hour of your time.

and you pick the guy.

#42 Goondal

Goondal

    The Goon

  • Joined: 30-December 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,455
  • Reputation: 1,087
  • LocationSafety Harbor, FL
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 12:58 AM

The NFL doesn't hire many female coaches or Asian coaches. There's not many middle eastern coaches. It's doesn't mean these people are unwelcome, but circumstances dictate that not many of those types of people want to be NFL head coaches and even fewer of them are qualified.

The example I just gave was extreme. African Americans coaches are much more common and there are more qualified applicants but perhaps still fewer blacks than whites. That is the definition of being in the minority right? Now don't get me wrong, I see this as a problem but I do not see an antagonist with malice in their hearts. We are still recovering from a long history of racism that will take generations to rub off with an eraser. Black coaches in their 50s-60s did not have the same opportunities as white coaches. While I feel the the playing field is level now, its too late. The black coaches are already firmly entrenched in position jobs. Maybe they don't even have the ambition to seek promotions at this stage in their lives. The younger guys are moving up the ranks and they have found success. However it's a simple game of numbers. The way to fix it isn't to hire more black head coaches. It's to hire more black coordinators. Moving up the ladder in the NFL is a process and successful coordinators are most commonly promoted. When a franchise interviews 7 white guys and 1 African American there is no reason to expect a 50/50 split on hirings. Get more qualified minority coordinators out there and the owners will interview them. Owners want to win. Bottom line, it's about winning these days.

It's true that we have 4 current minority head coaches. However if you look at all 32 teams, 6 of them had minority head coaches before their current coach. Think Tampa Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Oakland. All these guys were hired on merit and fired on merit. To me that's working as intended. (I will say Lovie got a raw deal but he had been with the team forever and they never got that ring).

One last point. There is currently ONE African American Offensive Coordinator in the NFL.


This is an excellent post, agree totally.

#43 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • Joined: 27-December 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,732
  • Reputation: 462
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 01:02 AM

This is an excellent post, agree totally.



Actually you guys should read up on the history of the Rooney rule. The problem was that there were several Black coordinators and assistant coaches. The concern was that regardless of their successes as coordinators they did not get interviewed. Hence the requirement for the owners to interview at least one.

#44 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,421
  • Reputation: 2,152
  • LocationAt the lake
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 01:27 AM

in the history of the NFL there have been literally hundreds of men to coach in the NFL. Out of those hundreds, 21 have been African American. 21 out of hundreds. 14 of those 21 have been since the Rooney rule in 2003. You can draw your own conclusions, from those numbers. I however saw no evidence that the owners had any desire to diversify before the Rooney rule.

The fact is, that yes this is America and the majority of the owners are private businessman running their private business and can basically do as they please with it. However the NFL itself like so many other major industries has grown to the point where its existance has a great impact on the mindset, culture, and behavior of this nation. The decisions they make affect not just you and I as fans but our children as potential players. They represent the endorsements from other major industries as well as the major charities of the world. An entire culture of people that do not all share the same views about what is right and wrong.

Ask yourself honestly, if you were an owner and had lived through the past 60 years of racial tensions in America. You are burdened with the weight of not just your own team but the preservation of the league itself. You have to maintain the support of your fan base, but you also have to make sure you cultivate an environment that must constantly be infused with new talent from ALL walks of life and at ALL levels. But you must do so without alienating ANY part of your constituents. With all this on your plate, is making a promise to at least consider an African American coaching candidate every time really all that bad? Who gives a fug what the media says. Its there job to stir up convo about the league, good and bad.

All you gotta do is promise an interview.

Not a follow up interview.

Not a hire.

1 guy.

1 hour of your time.

and you pick the guy.


For me the Rooney Rule and saying that the owners are racial biased or motivated are very different. Or that owners would hire or not hire a minority candidate based on whether it alienated some of their fan base. I can totally see the value of the Rooney Rule. I would hope that it wasn't necessary given the fact that if there a number of highly qualified minority candidates being denied an interview based on color, it would be a huge waste of talent which ultimately hurts these same owners. Even if they were biased, they are driven by profit and success, and wins. Whoever can contribute the most to the bottom line will be first in line. It is convincing them that you are the best one, and that it is an individual decision for each club based on a number of factors.

But there is nothing wrong with the Rooney Rule, since it really only obligates you to interview minority candidates not hire them and there is no cap on how many guys you can interview, it doesn't have to diminish the opportunities for non-minority candidates. Everyone who is a non-minority can still be interviewed as well. There is really no reason not to follow the Rooney Rule.

What alienates fan the most is losing seasons. If their team is winning, they don't care who the coach is or the color of their skin. All they care about is that they are relevant again. Winning cures most ills. Losing intensifies them.

#45 BBQ&Beer

BBQ&Beer

    The good actor

  • Joined: 20-April 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,965
  • Reputation: 716
  • LocationMissouri
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 01:46 AM

I posted this back when Rivera was being considered for the job here & stand by it...

The multiple interviews is my biggest problem with the Rooney rule. There's almost no way to tell if say, 7 of those interviews were with teams that already had their HC and called him in to just to satisfy the RR. It puts the minority coaches in a catch 22 because if they know they're just being called in to be a token interview & turn it down, it sends the signal that they don't want to leave where they are so no other team sees them as a serious candidate. If they go to the token interviews & don't get the job it sends up a (very understandable) red flag & teams don't take them seriously.

The flip side of course is that if the teams put any thought in it, they have to discount those warning signs & thus risk chasing after someone who really doesn't want to leave or just doesn't have what it takes. They waste a lot of time.

Just a mess all the way around.



#46 Awesomeness!!

Awesomeness!!

    BangBang

  • Joined: 01-April 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,399
  • Reputation: 1,253
  • LocationArizona
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 01:59 AM

Im going to guess what other NFL markets are having this conversation. Tenn, Jax, ATL, Tampa, and New Orelans.

#47 Awesomeness!!

Awesomeness!!

    BangBang

  • Joined: 01-April 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,399
  • Reputation: 1,253
  • LocationArizona
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 02:00 AM

BUT, I will say this. I know when people are talking about race, and someone brings up genetics, they have never even taken antro 101.

#48 Goondal

Goondal

    The Goon

  • Joined: 30-December 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,455
  • Reputation: 1,087
  • LocationSafety Harbor, FL
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2013 - 03:50 AM

http://espn.go.com/n...nsure-diversity

Jim Caldwell nearly went undefeated as a rookie coach in Indianapolis three years ago and he's one win away from returning to the Super Bowl as an assistant with Baltimore.
Yet Caldwell didn't get one interview for any of the eight coaching vacancies in the NFL this year.
"That's almost impossible for me to comprehend," John Wooten, chairman of the Fritz Pollard Alliance Foundation, told The Associated Press on Friday.


Considering Baltimore is sitll playing, are teams even allowed to interview Caldwell? I honestly do not know for sure but I was under the impression that they could not.

#49 Guest_BlueBoy_*

Guest_BlueBoy_*
Guests

Posted 19 January 2013 - 05:17 AM

Athleticism have nothing to do with skin color

Although you mean well in saying that but it does have to do with genetics. All individuals have different genetic. And genetics is everything. Africans have black skins and give birth to black skinned children. Same for other races. Tall people tend to give birth to tall people. Athletic people also tend to give birth to athletic people. The point is the genetics of Africans tend to give birth to athletic children.

Africans have a tropical body proportion, meaning long legs and short torso. Others tend to have long torso with shorter legs. That has a lot to do with athletic ability and it's genetic that predetermines that. Although it's noble in you wanting everyone to be the 'same' but you can't science and reality under the rug to achieve that.

And it's not racist for us to admit to obvious anatomical differences among people from different region of the world.

#50 Guest_BlueBoy_*

Guest_BlueBoy_*
Guests

Posted 19 January 2013 - 05:20 AM

Although you mean well in saying that but it does have to do with genetics. All individuals have different genetic. And genetics is everything. Africans have black skins and give birth to black skinned children. Same for other races. Tall people tend to give birth to tall people. Athletic people also tend to give birth to athletic people. The point is the genetics of Africans tend to give birth to athletic children.

Africans have a tropical body proportion, meaning long legs and short torso. Others tend to have long torso with shorter legs. That has a lot to do with athletic ability and it's genetic that predetermines that. Although it's noble in you wanting everyone to be the 'same' but you can't sweep science and reality under the rug to achieve that.

And it's not racist for us to admit to obvious anatomical differences among people from different region of the world.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users