NFL to propose to improve a team's draft position if it hires a person of color as HC or GM

[Ring 6]

You probably shouldn’t talk about who is adding anything constructive to the conversation if you can’t even stick with widely accepted meanings of words because they don’t line up with your feelings.

Making rules that favor people based on race is not inherently racist. You have to look at intention and reasoning. The Rooney Rule is literally a rule that benefits some races over others because it mandates minorities definitely get an interview while whites people don’t necessarily have to. That’s mostly because that particular branch positions has longstanding history of boxing people out and mostly benefiting those who are well connected or related and that usually extrapolates to “some white people have their foot in the door for these roles and minorities who didn’t come up being related to these guys or close to these guys don’t”. So they mandate teams give some consideration to a minority candidate so they aren’t blindly going with some preordained person with no other consideration.

Even this rule, it’s not even forcing anyone’s hand. The Rooney Rule actually mandates action. This is an incentive that quite frankly most teams won’t take because a head coach or GM is infinitely more valuable than moving up a few draft spots (see all the bottom feeders with good picks every year).

Saying “listen minorities are traditionally shut out of these roles, we’d like to fix that, so we are offering an incentive if you do hire a minority” is not inherently racist. It’s recognizing an existing problem and giving benefits for people who take action to help with it. It doesn’t make anyone do anything. If anything the current nepotism and well connected people that keep getting these opportunities are still wildly benefiting white people. Whether it’s giving a Shanahan or Ryan an opportunity to play nice with their dads.... this is adding a benefit the other way.

It would be racist if everything was equal and this was just an attempt to give someone an advantage. However the rationale behind this is that certain people already have an inherent advantage so we are making up the gap by adding our own to equalize it.

Is this the perfect way to do it? No. Anything like this is going to be difficult. It’s also far from the worst thing they could propose either. Trust me I know. There’s plenty of companies that do a wink wink “hey we only have white guys in here, try to hire a woman or minority with the next open position”.

And like I said before, it would be one thing if people were losing their minds over the current structure that is inherently unfair already. However, they aren’t. So now an imperfect action to correct an already imperfect system is being called racist because it might give a minority who traditionally was blocked out from a job a better chance at landing it

Putting someone at an advantage due to their race by definition puts others at a disadvantage because of their race.
Since race is the sole criterion it is 100% racist.
If you feel a racist approach is preferred as reparation for prior racism that’s a different story, but the person getting the advantage and the disadvantage are getting them solely and exclusively because of race, which adds up to; in the past members of race A were disadvantaged and race B got the jobs, so going forward to make up for it we will continue to make race the only factor and reward the descendants of group A and punish the descendants of group B because racism in the opposite direction balances it out. Of course that is silly.

 

[jimnance]

Making rules that favor one group over another for a position is racist. If you can't see that, you'll not be able to add anything constructive to this conversation.

The idea is to create a climate of equal opportunity, not enforcing equal outcome. Look at some of my other posts in this thread. There are ways to achieve this without enacting racist policies.

What you say is true if we have a level playing field. We still don't. It's a lot more level than it was 50 years ago but there's still a long way to go.
You seem very ignorant of history.
The Rooney rule is a good thing..
The so-called idea in this thread of course, is ridiculous.

 

[lancerman]

What you say is true if we have a level playing field. We still don't. It's a lot more level than it was 50 years ago but there's still a long way to go.
You seem very ignorant of history.
The Rooney rule is a good thing..
The so-called idea in this thread of course, is ridiculous.

Thank you

 

[jimnance]

NFL is the classic good ole boys network which is run/owned by men who a) are ****ty business people and their trust fund saves them from eating Spam (which is very good grilled) and b) know nothing about football but think they do.

Rw good post until the Spam thing.
Spam is nasty.

 

[Galeb]

What you say is true if we have a level playing field. We still don't. It's a lot more level than it was 50 years ago but there's still a long way to go.
You seem very ignorant of history.
The Rooney rule is a good thing..
The so-called idea in this thread of course, is ridiculous.

I haven't been attacking the Rooney rule, although I think it's not effective. Isn't it just about giving minority groups interviews? That doesn't fall into the category of what I am arguing against.

I was arguing against the idea of forced equality of outcome vs. equality of opportunity.

 

[Tony2046]

Actually a lot of people would argue that it is racist and it ignores a number of no non racial factors. Aka white people are more likely to take up swimming competitively. A lot of poorer predominately black countries are bigger in track because it’s one of the least expensive sports you can get into (same with boxing). Or that Kenya where track is a big pastime is all well suited for training because of altitude. Or that white people generally succeed at golf more because they frequent gold institutions more because country clubs and access to golf courses is more socio economic based. Or that in America in inner cities or poor rural areas you have kids more likely to aggressively pursue sports because those are some of the only opportunities those communities are offering. Or better yet by influence a lot of white kids see themselves in Gretzky or Joe Montana so they play hockey or try to be quarterback and black kids see themselves in Michael Jordan or Barry Sanders/Randy Moss so they take up basketball or go for skill positions. Or how baseball exploded in Puerto Rico so there has been an influx of talent there. Or we could talk for years about why Eastern Europeans excel at gymnastics.

Also the fact is you don’t have an equalized system to account for it. You would need to take hundreds or thousands of people, give them the same coaches, make them devote the same amount of hours from early childhood on to get an accurate understanding of where differences are.

Overall point, there’s so many different factors from what country you are from, whether you grew up rich or poor, where you trainers, who you grew up watching and idolizing before you can even say “you are better at this because of the color of your skin and nothing else”

But Jimmy the Greek said......

 

[jimnance]

I'm not either. Everyone knows what it is though.

Really? Enlighten me

 

[Tottie]

What you say is true if we have a level playing field. We still don't. It's a lot more level than it was 50 years ago but there's still a long way to go.
You seem very ignorant of history.
The Rooney rule is a good thing..
The so-called idea in this thread of course, is ridiculous.

Define the following for me please: even playing field. Can you elaborate on what you think that is as it regards to NFL coaches and NFL executives. Please be exact.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

And the 1st overall pick if you start an Asian at middle linebacker.

Dat Nguyen to the courtesy telephone...

Regards,
Chris

 

[fightingirish595]

Actually a lot of people would argue that it is racist and it ignores a number of no non racial factors. Aka white people are more likely to take up swimming competitively. A lot of poorer predominately black countries are bigger in track because it’s one of the least expensive sports you can get into (same with boxing). Or that Kenya where track is a big pastime is all well suited for training because of altitude. Or that white people generally succeed at golf more because they frequent gold institutions more because country clubs and access to golf courses is more socio economic based. Or that in America in inner cities or poor rural areas you have kids more likely to aggressively pursue sports because those are some of the only opportunities those communities are offering. Or better yet by influence a lot of white kids see themselves in Gretzky or Joe Montana so they play hockey or try to be quarterback and black kids see themselves in Michael Jordan or Barry Sanders/Randy Moss so they take up basketball or go for skill positions. Or how baseball exploded in Puerto Rico so there has been an influx of talent there. Or we could talk for years about why Eastern Europeans excel at gymnastics.

Also the fact is you don’t have an equalized system to account for it. You would need to take hundreds or thousands of people, give them the same coaches, make them devote the same amount of hours from early childhood on to get an accurate understanding of where differences are.

Overall point, there’s so many different factors from what country you are from, whether you grew up rich or poor, where you trainers, who you grew up watching and idolizing before you can even say “you are better at this because of the color of your skin and nothing else”

highly recommend you check out Gary Hunters work

Longer tendons make faster runners, suggests UAB research - News
Scientists Theorize Why Black Athletes Run Fastest | Live Science
Exercise Economy in African American and European American Women - PubMed

it’s not racist to conclude that in general, black people can run faster and jump higher because of physical differences such as longer Achilles’ tendons... if that’s what the evidence suggests

 

[patman12]

I’ll never be an NFL HC or GM, so from a personal job opportunity perspective, this doesn’t bother me.

But from a broader perspective, I’m not sure how this will really incentivize teams all that much. Would a team really hire a lesser qualified, minority HC just to jump up in the draft? Seems like a big risk for a small payout.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Irony...

- Div. 1 college and NFL player pool dominated by people of color due to merit.

- Pool of predominantly white players can't make team, but love the game and want to stay in it.

- Pool of predominantly white players told to pursue coaching career, starting at bottom.

- Pool of predominantly white players do that, develop coaching career and resume to go with it.

- NFL comes hiring, sees pool of developed coaching resumes skews white.

- NFL team hires white guy, NFL accused of having a race problem in the hiring process.

Does the league even understand root causes before it goes off and starts considering rules to address the issue? I'm sure there are several contributing factors aside from the one I outlined. And racism is one of them. Is it the overriding one, though? What has the league done to show that it is?

Regards,
Chris

 

[fightingirish595]

But Jimmy the Greek said......

Maybe brush up that reading comprehension and make a good faithed representation of what I said. What I presented is not even close to what jimmy the Greek said

 

[Ring 6]

Irony...

- Div. 1 college and NFL player pool dominated by people of color due to merit.

- Pool of predominantly white players can't make team, but love the game and want to stay in it.

- Pool of predominantly white players told to pursue coaching career, starting at bottom.

- Pool of predominantly white players do that, develop coaching career and resume to go with it.

- NFL comes hiring, sees pool of developed coaching resumes skews white.

- NFL team hires white guy, NFL accused of having a race problem in the hiring process.

Does the league even understand root causes before it goes off and starts considering rules to address the issue? I'm sure there are several contributing factors aside from the one I outlined. And racism is one of them. Is it the overriding one, though? What has the league done to show that it is?

Regards,
Chris

The nfl has shown on every issue that exists that all it cares about is optics and public relations. It’s futile to try to find reasoned judgment in anything the nfl does.

 

[fightingirish595]

The nfl has shown on every issue that exists that all it cares about is profits, optics and public relations. It’s futile to try to find reasoned judgment in anything the nfl does.

Fixed

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

The nfl has shown on every issue that exists that all it cares about is optics and public relations. It’s futile to try to find reasoned judgment in anything the nfl does.

Oh, I know. My questions were rhetorical, but I ask in case someone shocks us with a link to an actual root cause analysis done by someone sanctioned by the league, school or other entity.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Ring 6]

Fixed

Well they are supposed to care about profits they are a business and it is there purpose of being.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

The problem is that people aren't being hired based on merit.

When you say this, yes and just want to make clear a ton of the inexperienced white coaches are not the best candidate for the job. Not hired on most merit. Good ole boys.

.

 

[fightingirish595]

The problem is that people aren't being hired based on merit.

You would have a very hard time showing evidence of that.

someone could technically be more qualified but also not a good fit for the direction the organization wants to go.

I would hire someone potentially less qualified if I thought his scheme fit my teams roster better.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Irony...

- Div. 1 college and NFL player pool dominated by people of color due to merit.

- Pool of predominantly white players can't make team, but love the game and want to stay in it.

- Pool of predominantly white players told to pursue coaching career, starting at bottom.

- Pool of predominantly white players do that, develop coaching career and resume to go with it.

- NFL comes hiring, sees pool of developed coaching resumes skews white.

- NFL team hires white guy, NFL accused of having a race problem in the hiring process.

Does the league even understand root causes before it goes off and starts considering rules to address the issue? I'm sure there are several contributing factors aside from the one I outlined. And racism is one of them. Is it the overriding one, though? What has the league done to show that it is?

Regards,
Chris

I think what's sad is this isn't remotely close to root cause but interesting you think you've explained it. You don't think a ton of black players want to coach too ?? Wow it's so simple, black people don't want to coach is your logic

.

.