The Rooney Rule (still) isn’t working?

[WhoTom]

15 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

I think things like the Rooney rule are the very thing that promote color barriers.  Mike Tomlin didnt get the Steelers job because he was the best Rooney Rule coach he got it and kept it because he was the best coach for the job, period.

 

Interesting example. I remember reading an interview with Dan Rooney (author of the rule itself) who said that the Rooney Rule was the reason they interviewed Tomlin; he wasn't on their radar before that. You're right, however, that he was the best candidate for the job, and that's why they chose him out of all the ones they interviewed.

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, TheProcess said:

The Rooney Rule is mostly a joke. Yes, it forces teams to interview a minority candidate that maybe the good old boys club may not have considered.  However, most of the time it rarely results in a hire and actually patronizes qualified (and some not) minority candidates just to check the box. There are a bunch of qualified minority candidates that deserved an opportunity to at least interview this year that seemingly didn’t get a shot (based on what we’ve seen reported anyway). This is all coming from a league that has routinely failed to give black QBs a chance to be a QB, instead encouraging them to switch positions. If they aren’t willing to consistently give black QBs a chance, what makes you think they are comfortable letting them be CEO of their team as a coach? I know this won’t be a popular take among many, and those people will just point to the few examples sprinkled throughout history as black QBs and coaches, but if they really think about it, that’s kinda the point. Those few black QBs and coaches got to where they are in many cases despite a system, much like that of the real world, that just isn’t fair. 

 

Would you do me a favor and use specifics instead of generalities? In the last, say, 20 years, whose a black QB that was deprived a chance even though he merited it? Same for a black coach that deserved a chance as a HC? Not busting your chops here, just really curious. This conversation cannot happen in generalities. It has to be specifics or else it's just pandering.

[iinii]

The more things change....the more they stay the same.

[row_33]

16 minutes ago, wppete said:

My friend it’s 2020. Let’s stick to this years hires and looking forward. 

Not interested, a team had its sights on one candidate is fine by me

 

[Mr. WEO]

24 minutes ago, BigBillsFan said:

The whole thing is a joke. Look at that ESPN set and ask yourself if they apply diversity according to ethnic makeup. It's 1 white guy and 3 black men. Does that mean the 3 black men aren't qualified? What if you made it gender diverse? I don't see that for sports shows either. It's selective pandering. 

 

 

Come on.  There is no other way to explain Erin Andrews.

[Augie]

47 minutes ago, wppete said:

This is not a political question, this is strictly a Football and NFL question. So please no divisive politics.  We should be able to discuss here.

 

Was watching ESPN and the topic of the "Rooney Rule" came up. Steven A. Smith had some very strong words here in this video. Can someone please explain this rule to me??? Ima a little confused here. From what I understand is that any Head Coaching position that is available/open there has to be at least one minority Interviewed and considered for this position. Seems like this rule was met and adhered to in the signing this week. What exactly is the argument here? Do they now want to Force Owners and Management to Hire Minority Coaches? In essence tell owners who they should hire, pay and lead their team/business? I have never heard anything of this sort in Business 

 

 

 

 

Article from Mike Florio of NBCalso here:

 

The Rooney Rule (still) isn’t working

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/01/07/the-rooney-rule-still-isnt-working/

 

 

I’m afraid to click......is Stephen A going to yell at me??? I don’t like it when he yells at me! 

[IDBillzFan]

18 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

Stephen A's just trying to win back some of the woke points he lost for being too honest about Kaepernick.

 

/thread.

 

The NFL goes above and beyond most sports when it comes to this type of stuff. Teams are hiring anyone able to do the job, regardless of gender, skin color or anything else. In fact, the Bills are outstanding at it.

 

But you're simply never going to please everyone, and as a result, everyone will keep complaining. I've mentioned this elsewhere, but mark my words, the NFL is one hotdog vendor complaint away from having a Salute To The LBGTQ CisGender Fans Month; players wearing rainbow shows...refs throwing rainbow flags...rainbow yard markers...interviews with players who like to cross-dress and make themselves pretty in the offseason.

 

That's right. I'm looking at you, Brady*. Get your wife to pick out your best RuPaul outfit because you're next.

[StHustle]

The rule doesnt work but Im fine with it cause it gives the moth worthiest of minority coaches interviewing experience. I do think its dumb when a team that knows 100% they arent going to hire a guy like Marvin Lewis, but still gives him the Rooney Rule interview. Dont waste a guy like that's time. Its disrespectful imo. A coach with no HC interviewing experience would appreciate it regardless just for the experience value.

Edited January 8, 2020 by StHustle

[SoCal Deek]

These sort of discussions need to go both ways. Aren’t whites way underrepresented on most rosters? So?

[HOUSE]

Hire Rooney and get it over with.....

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by HOUSE

[MJS]

I don't think there's a way to force owners to hire minorities. Whether the system is inherently racist or not, I don't know.

 

But the law states that race, among other things, cannot be considered in the hiring process. The Rooney Rule is against the law because you are literally forcing owners to consider race in their interview process.

 

The equal opportunity act prohibits discrimination based on race and other things. "Discriminate" means to recognize a distinction or to differentiate. You are forcing NFL owners to differentiate between races.

 

Maybe that's not the intent of the law. If that's the case, they need to change the law to allow for racial discrimination in hiring practices or add some kind of clause that allows for positive discrimination in the case of minority races.

 

I know that out in the real world there's the same issue. Schools have quotas now on minimums of minorities they want to admit per semester. Employers, especially in tech, are seeking to add minorities to their teams. There's nothing bad about it, and it is probably a positive, but it is simply against the law based on the equal opportunity act.

[Prickly Pete]

I heard a complaint about the McCarthy hiring, relating to this, so I was thinking about it.

 

Why is it okay for Blacks to be way overrepresented as players in the NFL and NBA, but it's not okay for there to be more White coaches?

[wppete]

7 minutes ago, StHustle said:

The rule doesnt work but Im fine with it cause it gives the moth worthiest of minority coaches interviewing experience. I do think its dumb when a team that knows 100% they arent going to hire a guy like Marvin Lewis, the Rooney Rule interview. Dont waste a guy like thats time. Its disrespectful imo. A coach with no HC interviewing experience would appreciate it regardless just for the experience value.

 

I agree with you, I don't have a problem with the rule, but I do feel its disrespectful to these minority men and coaches. They should be interviewed on merit and not by force. I just don't understand the argument people like Mike Florio and Stephen A. Smith are making, what do they want more? Force an Owner to hire a minority coach??? 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by wppete

[whatdrought]

5 minutes ago, MJS said:

I don't think there's a way to force owners to hire minorities. Whether the system is inherently racist or not, I don't know.

 

But the law states that race, among other things, cannot be considered in the hiring process. The Rooney Rule is against the law because you are literally forcing owners to consider race in their interview process.

 

The equal opportunity act prohibits discrimination based on race and other things. "Discriminate" means to recognize a distinction or to differentiate. You are forcing NFL owners to differentiate between races.

 

Maybe that's not the intent of the law. If that's the case, they need to change the law to allow for racial discrimination in hiring practices or add some kind of clause that allows for positive discrimination in the case of minority races.

 

I know that out in the real world there's the same issue. Schools have quotas now on minimums of minorities they want to admit per semester. Employers, especially in tech, are seeking to add minorities to their teams. There's nothing bad about it, and it is probably a positive, but it is simply against the law based on the equal opportunity act.

 

This is a side of it I never considered.... Intriguing. 

Edited January 8, 2020 by whatdrought

[StHustle]

3 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

Teams are hiring anyone able to do the job, regardless of gender, skin color or anything else.

 

I think you and most on this board TOTALLY miss the idea behind the rule. While I concede the rule doesnt work well at all, I agree with its purpose. If you dont think the reality is that OFTEN times (not going to argue MOST of the time but even 3 out of 10 could be considered OFTEN) minorities get looked over for their white counterparts, you are living in la la land. Their are PLENTY and I mean PLENTY good HC candidates. MOST dont pan out. However in that huge pool of candidates, its easy for the people in decision making power (over 90% white) to interview people who look more like them. Its simply a HUMAN BEING FACT that people are most comfortable around and working with people who look like them. It's SUBCONSCIOUS for most so its wont be acknowledged or admitted to by most so I expect this post to get scoffed at but ANY person who studies this stuff and knows what they are talking about will agree Im right. So what the rule does is force ALL decision makers to at least hear out one minority guy per search to hopefully open their minds.

 

For example, Im a black guy who has owned businesses and hired people. When I had an electronics store near downtown buffalo, the neighborhood was over 90% African American. I hired 4 people and all of them were African American. I, unlike most, will admit Im most comfortable around people of my own race. HOWEVER, I am nowhere near racist and would have been more than willing to hire a white guy. BUT, in a pool of 10 applicants and 9 are black and 1 white...the white guy likely never gets an interview. Now lets say I was FORCED to interview the 1 white guy. By the end of my interview process I may very well deem him a top choice and hire someone I would never even interviewed if not forced. OR at the very least could tell some of my business owner friends about him if he just misses my cut.

 

Sorry no time to proof read this post so forgive me for any typos...I type fast and can make many!

[Punching Bag]

13 minutes ago, MJS said:

I know that out in the real world there's the same issue. Schools have quotas now on minimums of minorities they want to admit per semester. Employers, especially in tech, are seeking to add minorities to their teams. There's nothing bad about it, and it is probably a positive, but it is simply against the law based on the equal opportunity act.

 

For most employers in tech they are hiring minorities especially middle and east Asian when they can get them on visas and pay them cheaper than domestic employees.

[MJS]

Just now, Limeaid said:

For most employers in tech they are hiring minorities especially middle and east Asian when they can get them on visas and pay them cheaper than domestic employees.

 

Some. Not most.

[Punching Bag]

Just now, MJS said:

 

Some. Not most.

 

Every employer I have been with in last 20 years where clearance was not required.

[Augie]

I hate to jump in here, as there is no “right”. There is no “equal”, but you hope for “fair”. 

 

But I have to throw this strange thing in here......I have a Caucasian buddy who is starting a bank. He’s done it before, but this time there is a twist: the investors are 100% Asian, they plan to primarily market to and serve Asians, and they are looking to hire mostly Asians. Before getting too deep into this, he went to the regulators and asked “is this even legal? I can’t start a bank for white people!” He was told that, strangely enough, it was perfectly fine. I suppose they say this market is underserved, so that makes it “fair”. 

 

Bottom line? I don’t care what color, shape, size or age my coaches or players are. WIN and I’ll love you (with some limitations, obviously).  

 

The Rooney Rule was never expected to “fix” everything, but if it’s a step in the right direction, then I’m OK with it as being just that. Like our Bills, just keep making progress. 

[billsfan89]

1 hour ago, thenorthremembers said:

I think things like the Rooney rule are the very thing that promote color barriers.  Mike Tomlin didnt get the Steelers job because he was the best Rooney Rule coach he got it and kept it because he was the best coach for the job, period.

 

The analyst want to be up in arms about the lack of minority coaches but have no issue with the lack of asian, latino and white players in the league, its backwards.

 

 

 

 

The Steelers only interviewed him to satisfy the Rooney rule. It was reported that they had no interest in hiring him but they were blown away by him in the interview and he convinced them.