Is it time for the NFL to dump the Rooney rule?

[JackBauer]

I'm glad this thread was started and that there are still some sane people on this forum who realize how ridiculously stupid this rule is. Especially considering how many are surely white-guilt liberals to the core.

As someone else stated, the rule is flat-out racist. Why should a team be told who they have to interview? If they want, they should be able to have an all-white or all-black team if they so desire... I mean who cares? Freedom of choice.

Speaking of stupid posts...

 

[upstater1]

Giving certain coaches the oppurtunity to interview on the basis of their skin color over other coaches is still racist.

No, when someone in power uses one's race to exclude them from consideration, that's racism.

You could argue that the Rooney rule is unfair or unjust, etc., but it's not racist. You'd have to make the case that white NFL owners are deliberately preventing white guys from coaching. That would be racism.

 

[upstater1]

I am not versed enough on the background of coaches to name them off, but there are women that have played college football. Here's the first one:

Earlham College | News from Public Affairs

That's a great argument. You should pat yourself on the back for that one. Helen Hunt should join the Patriots coaching staff.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Ask Romeo Crennel about it. He was adamant that going through the "motions" is eventually what enabled him to land a job.

1) Just because he says it doesnt make it true.

2) Did you ever consider that his lack of theoretical non-Rooney rule interviews had nothing to do with race?

Suppose the NFL decides that teams are too insular and that they must interview and additional 3 candidates selected by the league at random and RAC was one of those candidates, he can still get that job only it had nothing to do with his skin color. I'm not supporting any such system but my point is that it's absolutely possible for a team to go through the motions and still hire someone out of it.

3) It's still a racist system, you don't combat racism by practicing it.

 

[ausbacker]

You guys should read into the South African sporting system and their "quota" philosophy if you'd like some interesting reading into truly diabolical actions of race placement in sport.

After Apartheid, they've gone the other way. The South African cricket team is an interesting case study if any of you feel like following up something similar to the Rooney Rule.

 

[upstater1]

To be more direct towards the content of you question, the rule needs to go. If a billionaire is willing to buy a team for several hundred million, he is probably not a racist based on the fact that he is interested in participating/investing in a sport that is 2/3rds black.

??? It's a business. People don't dismiss a business because the help is black. Plus we have examples of owners who have problems with minorities.

 

[upstater1]

1) Just because he says it doesnt make it true.

2) Did you ever consider that his lack of theoretical non-Rooney rule interviews had nothing to do with race?

Suppose the NFL decides that teams are too insular and that they must interview and additional 3 candidates selected by the league at random and RAC was one of those candidates, he can still get that job only it had nothing to do with his skin color. I'm not supporting any such system but my point is that it's absolutely possible for a team to go through the motions and still hire someone out of it.

3) It's still a racist system, you don't combat racism by practicing it.

I'll say it again, you're using the word racism incorrectly.

Crennel isn't the only coach who says the Rooney rule helped him. it helps to go through the process, it helps to interview, at the very least because it helps you to market yourself.

What could be so difficult to understand about that?

 

[Snake Eyes]

No, when someone in power uses one's race to exclude them from consideration, that's racism.

You could argue that the Rooney rule is unfair or unjust, etc., but it's not racist. You'd have to make the case that white NFL owners are deliberately preventing white guys from coaching. That would be racism.

Yeah, you do realize you simply made up your own definition of "racism" to suit your point, sorry but the textbook definition of racism is quite different.


rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled
[rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

–noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon race.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

[Snake Eyes]

I'll say it again, you're using the word racism incorrectly.

Crennel isn't the only coach who says the Rooney rule helped him. it helps to go through the process, it helps to interview, at the very least because it helps you to market yourself.

What could be so difficult to understand about that?

No, I'm using the word completely acccurately, a policy based on race is BY DEFINITION racist, the issue is that the definition doesnt suit your arguement.

 

[BTTA]

Most people of the majority in any society (in this case, "whites" in the US) are largely blind to their own blindness. In other words, their own perceptions and judgments that cause them to be bigoted are below their level of awareness and comprehension. They don't know what they don't know.

So an owner doesn't need to be overtly racist to be unfair. I'd suggest that a high percentage of owners in the NFL wouldn't interview black candidates not out of an intent to keep black people down, but because the behavioral traits that they associate with competence are in subtle ways tied to behaviors that aren't relevant to actual performance.

For a person of the majority to be aware of this takes a lot of time and attention over the course of a lifetime.

I'm 52 years old and delighted with what I see in the generation that my children belong to. They just aren't carrying nearly as much of this blindness, and are more aware of their limitations than my generation is.

So I suspect that the Rooney Rule won't be necessary with the next generation of NFL owners. Until then, it provides a structure to balance a natural tendency on the part of a majority. The dialogue, networking, and rapport building that goes on in the interview process is important.

 

[BTTA]

That's a great argument. You should pat yourself on the back for that one. Helen Hunt should join the Patriots coaching staff.

That's a hoot! My son went to Earlham. One of his best friends there was a Palestinian kid who became the placekicker. He got to write home to Israel and tell his family that he was on the football team. They all assumed he was a running back or some other star position (all that they knew of the sport).

 

[SpiderFox53]

Given that there are very few women in the NFL I would rather see this rule changed to apply more directly to women. Women seem to me to be far more discriminated against in the NFL than any other minority.

Not that it really matters for this discussion, but women are NOT a minority.

 

[Haley]

Not that it really matters for this discussion, but women are NOT a minority.

Wow ... I have to say, hearing that was a first.

A minority is a sociological group that does not make up a politically dominant voting majority of the total population of a given society. A sociological minority is not necessarily a numerical minority — it may include any group that is subnormal with respect to a dominant group in terms of social status, education, employment, wealth and political power.

You are mistaken. Women are a minority.

 

[SpiderFox53]

Wow ... I have to say, hearing that was a first.



You are mistaken. Women are a minority.

Actually, i'm not. just using the numerical definition (as everyone else was in this thread). I know they are a subordinate group.

 

[Haley]

Actually, i'm not, just using the numerical definition (as everyone else was in this thread). I know they are a subordinate group.

What I have provided you with is the definition of minority. If anyone else is using a different definition to define what is or is not a minority (and I'm quite sure they aren't), they would also be incorrect.

 

[Deus Irae]

Not my fault that you have no clue what racism is.

It's your "fault" that you're ignorant enough about racism to believe that my point demonstrates that I don't know what racism is, and that you're foolish enough to make a post noting that while displaying your own ignorance of the subject.

Look, I'm not going to get into this with you, because it will ruin the thread. Just go learn something on the subject, because you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

[MassPats38]

If that was the case, then why is the rule in place? If a minority coach is the most qualified, he's the most qualified, period. A persons melanin level should never be the determining factor, ever.

As I said, it is a PR move. The idea of the rule is if you see more minority candidates, you will be more inclined to hire one than you would be if you did not interview a minority candidate. The NFL absolutely will not make owners hand the keys of an operation over to a minority candidate, but can only offer a statistic indicating that minority candidates were in fact interviewed. This addresses the outcry and shouts that "we are doing something to address the issue."

If you believe an increase in minority coaches has anything to do with the rule, rather than a coincidence attributable the candidates available at a given time, then you are probably seeing more concern in owners than is reasonably there. It is one thing to deliberately hire a minority candidate in a low-level position to satisfy an equal opportunity quota. It is a far different matter to hire a less qualified minority candidate as president of a company with the health and well-being of the company on the line.

These owners are not dumb, and I suspect few are overt racists if they want to sell their brand. I seriously doubt they were enlightened by minority candidates made available to them by this rule to such a degree that they started hiring them when they otherwise would not. If a justice of the Supreme Court (Scalia) can tell the world to "jam it" in terms of his hiring practices in which no minority law clerks are hired, I doubt owners have to look that hard for reasons to say the same. These coaches are the best possible fit for the job, were interviewed based on an established record, and their selection likely has little to do with an equal opportunity statistic.

 

[sbpatfan]

Why not? Can't they fire/suspend someone just as quick as someone male, can't they?

You realize this is exactly what people used to say about women running businesses, right?

Just because they would be in a position of power to carry out punishment doesn't mean they'd gain the respect of their team. And a woman running a business is completely different than a woman coaching a football team.

 

[drew4008]

It's your "fault" that you're ignorant enough about racism to believe that my point demonstrates that I don't know what racism is, and that you're foolish enough to make a post noting that while displaying your own ignorance of the subject.

Look, I'm not going to get into this with you, because it will ruin the thread. Just go learn something on the subject, because you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

You really like to sound intelligent, but most of your posts, especially anything non-football related, are the exact opposite. And what's with the repeated use of "ignorant"? Do you not know what that one means either? That word has been used, abused, and twisted so much when it comes to race. Get over it, you're wrong here, I'm sorry. Face the facts and get over your white guilt. End of argument.

 

[Haley]

Just because they would be in a position of power to carry out punishment doesn't mean they'd gain the respect of their team. And a woman running a business is completely different than a woman coaching a football team.

I should probably stop posting on this but I can't help it.

I'm not so sure this is true. In business, it seems to only matter that you make money. In football, it seems to only matter if you win. Why wouldn't you have the respect of the team if your strategies are smart enough to win?