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

rochrist said:

You are an idiot.

Click to expand...

As they say when you cant argue facts call the other guy names. It’s your specialty.

JackBauer said:

Full disclosure: I haven't read the entirety of this Dumpster fire of a thread, but where did IC say the article was partisan?

Of course you didn't launch a "personal attack," but that doesn't mean that what you did was not an ad hominem.

Click to expand...

The article being partisan was obvious, the partisan opinion he was using it to support was right in his post.

Ring 6 said:

As they say when you can argue facts call the other guy names. It’s your specialty.

Click to expand...

You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.

captain stone said:

Don't know if it's been mentioned yet (I skipped over the last couple of pages), but the 2-Minute Drill on Sirius/XM radio's NFL channel this morning announced that the Rooney Rule has been updated to demand that teams now include At Least Two non-whites during any HC searches - and at least one NW during any Coordinator search...

I like this idea better than the previous one we've been discussing...

Click to expand...

should make the coordinator one 2 as well.

Calhoun44 said:

I believe in fairness, and in my opinion this will make the playing field a bit more level. I implied earlier in the thread that I took the poll literal. It asked if I like "this idea", which generally I do, but I think there is room for improvement. But I think it has people thinking about the possible these types of inequities and I am always in favor of seeing people think about addressing problems/perceived problems.

Click to expand...

Which playing field? There's the coaching field and then there's the ones you coach field. While you're leveling one you're creating an advantage to that team and hurting a team that maybe doesn't need a coach.

fightingirish595 said:

should make the coordinator one 2 as well.

Click to expand...

Might as well, I suppose, though this new Coordinator business might also dove-tail with the link that XLIX posted in the previous page...It also sounds like the league is going to be more demanding - Much more demanding - that all teams comply with this update than they might've done in the past, when in some cases the Rule seems to have been ignored completely...

Calhoun44 said:

I love these topics, it is very stimulating for me, in a PG rated kind of way.

Click to expand...

rochrist said:

You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.

Click to expand...

facts? They’re awesome....especially when they turn into conspiracy theories

PatsWSB47 said:

Which playing field? There's the coaching field and then there's the ones you coach field. While you're leveling one you're creating an advantage to that team and hurting a team that maybe doesn't need a coach.

Click to expand...

coaches should have term limits

rochrist said:

You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.

Click to expand...

I am speaking only of facts. You are the one who faces a fact you don’t like, and can not refute so you attack the messenger. Low class, low intellect thing to do. If the shoe fits.

Ring 6 said:

But it is what our system is based upon.

Click to expand...

That is a fact.

IllegalContact said:

coaches should have term limits

Click to expand...

Practically speaking most of them do. Why should a good coach have to leave?

Calhoun44 said:

I believe in fairness, and in my opinion this will make the playing field a bit more level. I implied earlier in the thread that I took the poll literal. It asked if I like "this idea", which generally I do, but I think there is room for improvement. But I think it has people thinking about the possible these types of inequities and I am always in favor of seeing people think about addressing problems/perceived problems.

Click to expand...

But if you believe in fairness, you shouldn't like a proposal that would have teams moved down a spot in the draft simply because someone else hired a coach and/or GM of the right skin color. Sure, we're only talking about one spot in the 3rd round, but again, I don't see the fairness in that.

I have no issue with the modified Rooney rule that was passed, but I can see a possible scenario where it would be overkill.

Obviously this example isn't likely, but let's say Andy Reid has some medical issues before the season begins and decides to step down. The Chiefs name Eric Bieniemy interim HC, who then leads KC to a 19-0 season, shattering records along the way. They now won't be able to name his as the new permanent HC until they interview one more minority candidate. Again, this isn't likely, but it would just be ridiculous they can't instantly offer him the job.

I love all the people worried about "fairness" ... in the NFL.

There's like 5 combined black coaches and GMs in a league where blacks make up 70% of the players.

That's a lot more egregious than moving up a spot or two in the 3rd round.

venecol said:

You sound awfully chipper today. You must've gotten one of those rare atta boys from the old man. I'm happy for you.

Click to expand...

I just made an observation based on facts
But I feel chipper everyday. Not every second of everyday but in general I try live a grateful life.

Hope you have a fine evening

BaconGrundleCandy said:

I love all the people worried about "fairness" ... in the NFL.

There's like 5 combined black coaches and GMs in a league where blacks make up 70% of the players.

That's a lot more egregious than moving up a spot or two in the 3rd round.

Click to expand...

What specifically does % of players have to do with % of coaches?

PatriotsReign said:

What specifically does % of players have to do with % of coaches?

Click to expand...

That really has to be explained to you, huh?

Ring 6 said:

The article being partisan was obvious, the partisan opinion he was using it to support was right in his post.

Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point.

Let’s get off this subject because it’s no longer an issue

Next question: what do you think of affirmative action and racial quotas?