DrDawkinstein

I see a pattern.

It has been proven that diversity for diversity's sake DOES help and improve organizations. By bringing in perspectives and ideas that would otherwise not be heard. Addressing diversity does not equal addressing racism. This is a much more nuanced issue than you are trying to portray it as. I dont know how else to explain it in the little amount of time I want to spend on it here.

You may want to notify Rupert Murdoch of this.

Great thread idea. Carlin, Pryor, and Seinfeld for sure. Last spot is up for debate. I'll have to think about that one... so many choices... Leno, Shandling, Dangerfield, Murphy, Chappelle, Rickles, Bruce, Macdonald... I'd be interested in what answers we'd get if Jerry posed this question on episodes of Comedians in Cars getting Coffee

Its not systemic racism. Again, you are over-stating the problem. It's about teams not being willing to step out of their comfort zone when hiring assistants, and yes, some unconscious bias (which is much 'lighter" than systemic racism). That's it. That is why I feel two 3s is too much. IMO, it should be something like one 4th or two 7ths. Just a slight nudge in the right direction. Not an all-out bribe.

Just being a sarcastic prick.

New cover is out!

Crazy how people dying (or potentially dying) takes precedence over a game!

Colts, Dolphins, even Raiders if they squeak in, would be great match ups for us. I wouldnt even mind the KC rematch in round 2. I think we learned a lot that first game, and if we have a healthy OL back, it could be much different.

There is a lot less to ask about and dive into when we are GOOD and WINNING. It's that simple. Same can be said for the way the board goes. Through the drought, there was a ton to talk about and debate because we were all trying to identify and solve the Bills' problems. How the roster was built, bad coaching decisions, bad execution by the players... all topics that lend to deeper discussion. Now that we have far fewer problems, the only real discussion is "Did you see when they did that? Wasnt it awesome?" The topics and discussions here are way less technical. So go the media interviews. There arent many screw-up moments to ask the players about, and far more positive plays. So it turns into asking the players about how great they feel about the other players and other superficial stuff. It's a good problem to have!

We literally cant even if we wanted to. Just crown me the winner here and close this thread already.

This isnt about hiring Head Coaches tho. It's about who they are hiring as assistants. And the only circle they can control the expansion of is within the NFL. Disagree with the idea the market corrects itself. Before the Rooney Rule (and even a bit since), we see re-tread after re-tread of LOSER coaches. Losing doesnt get you banished from the NFL. Again, I dont whole-heartedly disagree with you, or agree with this new rule, but I'm not fired up about it either. Two 3rds is ridiculous for how valuable they are. But we'll see how it all plays out.

What percentage of coaches are former players? What percentage of players are black? But like I said, it isnt to solve some major racism issue. However, unconscious bias is a thing.

Yep. However, I do believe this has far less to do with hiring Head Coaches, and that the NFL's goal here is to encourage minority hiring at the assistant/positional level. And if those hires manage to work their way up to a HC job, great. I do understand the backlash tho. If this rule had been in place, does Miami hire Flores? Would Flores count as being "developed" by New England? What is the criteria there? I'd think the NFL is providing the teams more detail and we are in the dark as lowly fans. But I get the questions and concern.

I think you're being a little hyperbolic there. No one in the NFL denies that the coaching candidate circle is a good ol boys club that is very difficult to break into. It's not like teams post Head Coach openings to LinkedIn and Glassdoor. You must already be in the circle to ever get a chance. Like the Rooney Rule, I believe this is an attempt to encourage teams to simply expand that circle, but with rewards instead of punishments. Not to solve some "huge problem of racism". I dont think this solution is a great (or even good) idea with the way it's been laid out so far. But credit them for trying. They can always cut the program if it doesn't work out.

Exactly where I am on this thread. I dont like the gifting of draft picks, especially for something as vague and subjective as "developing" someone. But starting out calling the Rooney Rule racist means I'm not even touching it. Not worth the time.

Noticed he calls everyone "Big guy", so it wasnt just a shot at @john wawrow's weight!

I've been here for 15 years so should have a PhD in something by now.

LOL, I was looking for cow/mooing gifs as you posted this.

His comments about Beasely are a better representation of who he is, and what kind of team mate he is, than any of the rumors from Minnesota. "Cole Beasley is always open. I want to make sure you guys see that, watch the film. Cole Beasley is always open. Gotta give him a shout out"

Cows have nothing to do with this.

Polian was hired in 1984 by GM Terry Bledsoe to be Director of Pro Personnel. When Bledsoe was fired after the 1985 season, Ralph promoted from within. To Polian (and Ralph's) credit, Polian did earn the job with his involvement in the negotiations that brought Bruce Smith in.

You'll have to join another board to find out.

Did you just call OP a See You Next Tuesday?