still no minorities hired this year...

[JDG]

Tim Lewis, Donnie Henderson, Maurice Carthon, Ray Rhodes, Art Shell, Ron Rivera, Norm Chow.

Every single new hire has been your prototypical, status quo type coach.  Sad.  And I thought the NFL was making progress?  How the hell does Eric Mangini get the NY Jets head job over a guy like Donnie Henderson?  Mangini was a coordinator for what, 1 year? 

 

This is dirty pool as Donnie Henderson has only been a coordinator for what, two years? Ron Rivera, whom you also listed, has only been a coordinator for one year. I'd also point out that Ray Rhodes is simply not going to get another HC job, not after being fired after just one year in Green Bay and not with his health concerns.

 

Quite simply, there are not many experienced and successful minority coordinators in the NFL right now - which is the usual grooming ground for HC's. This is certainly partly a result of so many minority coaches having been hired lately. So, this is something that is going to take time - but I don't think that race has played any part in the six minority guys you listed not getting a job.

 

JDG

[Alaska Darin]

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

 

I would venture to guess that the only thing that the initiator of this thread knows about each of these candidates Head Coaching ability is the color of their skin.

[Chilly]

Yes Virginis, the NFL is guilty of racist practices in the not too distant past and by some folks in the present. 

 

Examples please.

 

Instead, because of the NFL's past and current practices of racist hiring and employee opportunity (seen in people of A-A descent not being allowed to be QBs at a level which met their skills until the late 80s/early 90s and seen today in the pool of potential good HC candidates consisting in substantial of former players who are in majority recently of A-A descent while even with recent efforts only 20% of HCs are of A-A descent), the NFL is pushing the Rooney Rule and forcing its teams to at least provide the opportunity of interviews.

 

If you do not believe that the NFL has engaged in race based hiring and employee management practices in the recent past and currently, then how do YOU explain the NFL failing to employ people of A-A descent routinely as QBs until quite recently. 

 

How bout the fact that African Americans tend to be scrambling type quarterbacks, and the NFL for most of its existence (until recently) has preferred pocket passers?

 

How do YOU explain 20% of NFL coaches being of A-A descent when a majority of current players (a large part of the pool for HCs though far from the total pool) are of A-A descent.

 

Easily. Being a good player doesn't mean that you will be a good coach.

 

There honestly can be other exolanations for this statistical outcome.  However, explanations based on mere chance seem foolish. Explanations based on past and present NFL hiring practices being based on results (getting Ws) also seem counter to the experience of success from the few HCs of A-A descent to come into the league (Art Shell hisorically, Tony Dungy and Herm Edwards making the playoffs and getting rehired unlike Shell, and Marvin Lewis and Lovie Smith virtually immediately turning around persistent losing teams). 

 

And just because one black coach has had success, doesn't mean that all black coaches will have success. That, my friend, also fits the dictionary's definition of racism.

 

Example: Ray Rhodes

 

Add into that the good old boy network failing totally when Matt Millen got fined for de facto ignoring the Rooney rule and then having to can the guy he hired because he could not produce the Ws.

 

Yeah, because everyone thought that there was a better candidate then Mooch at the time. Especially Detroit.

 

The NFL has a clear statistical record of recent past and current racial biased hiring practices.  One can argue about whether particular individuals are motivated by Matt Millen idiocy which unfortunately supported this history of racial hiring practices or whether there are some NFL owners who lie baseball owner Marge Schott actually has a bunch of Nazi paraphenalia in her sock drawer at home.

 

From a management and reality standpoint the NFL is about fixing its clear racial discrepancies that reflect not giving people their fair shot and not about a focus on who is a racist and who is not.

 

it seems far more intelligent to stick with what we can see and just simply acknowledge that as long as the statitiscal racial discrepancies are there the NFL has racist practices as a real part of its current existence.

575578[/snapback]

 

What, exactly, is so "statistically wrong" about the racial demographic of the current NFL?

[Kultarr]

Herm Edwards?

[Hollywood Donahoe]

As of 2002, African-Americans made up roughly 13% of the U.S. population.

 

Today, African-Americans make up roughly 19% of NFL head coaches.

 

Enough said. These quotas are both unnecessary and racist in their very nature.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Nope, your whole arguement supports the idea that race should be a factor in hiring. It should not be. Hire somene who knows and cares about what they are doing. The whole rooney thing is just plain wrong.  I am not a minority yet, and have been passed over for many jobs in my comapnay becaue they did not have their quota for minorities. When I do become a minority, which should be in a few years, will I get to play the race card then? Will I ask why there are so few white minority coaches in the league? Chances are I wont have to, because race shouldnt matter and the person who is the best at that position will win out.

575651[/snapback]

 

I agree totslly that race should not be a factor in hiring, However, there is this little thing called reality and unfortunately race is a factor in hiring and in many decisions in the US.

 

One can certainly make a theoretical argument that the key to ending this counter-productive and unfair practice is for groups which were discriminated against to simply call for fair treatment from here on out.

 

However, this would not seem to be fair to them and particularly to their children as the science based analysis shows that discrimination and racism still exist today in society.

 

For example, there is a substantial difference in the number and amount of $ which banks loan to people of color versus what they loan to whites (or people of pallor as one friend of mine refered to folks who were white like he was) even when you hold income levels as a non-factor by comparing loan and approval rates for people of color and whites of the same income level and history.

 

Similar studies looking at how doctors recommend various better but more expensive heart treatments for pictures white versus black subjects who have the same demographics (weight, age, blood chhemistry, etc), looking at the housing shown to similar couples of different races looking for a home etc.

 

An examination of various environmental problems and their effects on people indicate that one's race is the best predictor of whether their is a hazardous waste site in the same zipcode where you live. Ironically income was also a clear predictor but pme's race was a better predictor/

 

Race is simply a factor. It is not the only factor, but racism unfortunately still exists in our culture.

 

The NFL IMHO deserves great plaudits for taking an affirmative action based on opportunity using the Rooney rulw and using programs to create more qualified A-A candidates rather than using a quota system which would not only raise more hackles but would create dumb results.

 

I also wish race was not a factor in hiring decisions, but until those who do the hiring in our society eliminate race as and issue it will continue to be one.

 

The objectives studies unfortunately indicate that this has not happened yet. The fact that there is such a wide variance between the number of A-A HCs and the number of A-As in the pool of former players indicates that racist pracitices have not yet ended in the NFL.

 

I think the adoption of the Rooney rule and the programs which came in conjunction with have conincided with a significant increase in the number of A-A HCs and based on looking at W/L and the performance of folks like Marvin Lewis and Lovie Smith the quality of the HC work has improved with the addition of these A-As

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

As of 2002, African-Americans made up roughly 13% of the U.S. population.

 

Today, African-Americans make up roughly 19% of NFL head coaches.

 

Enough said.  These quotas are both unnecessary and racist in their very nature.

576104[/snapback]

 

The better and more relevant statistical comparison here is no a comparison of HCs pf A-A descent to the population but instead a comparison of the number of A-A HCs to the pool of qualified applicants.

 

This is a more relevant comparison because if one followed your logic of the HC pool needs to look like the demographics of America, then 51% of the HCs should be women. Sorry, but I do not think there are even 17 women who are qualified to be NFL HCs (if you think there are then feel free to make the case I do not think you can).

 

It's impossible to really say what the number of A-As in the pool of qualified applicants to be an NFL HC is. However, given that former players are certainly a substantial part of the pool of qualified candidates (not exclusively since you do not have to play the game to be a good HC, but it helps a lot) and that a majority of the NFL players have been of A-A descent for quite a while, it was fairly rediculous that there were only a couple of A-A HCs when the Rooney rule was created,

 

Even at 19% the number of A-A HCs still seems small compared to the likely pool of qualified candidates.

[EndZoneCrew]

minority????

Ted Nolan for OC!!!!!!

It's all about heart baby!!!!

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I'd give FFS three seconds before he reversed his love of affirmative action if HE  was passed over for a promotion or job because of it.

 

THREE SECONDS.

 

And sorry, FFS...quotas, counting statistics and looking at color to determine job eligibility is NOT the American Way. Thats what we strive to do away with.

575625[/snapback]

 

 

Actually, I once lost a job applying to be a legislative correspondent on Capitol Hill specifically because I was not a woman.

 

I know this because the Congressional office head who made the decision informed me that this was the reason he had picked a woman over me who pretty clearly did not have as accomplished resume as I ha.

 

Perhaps he was lying to me and the real reason she was chosen over me was not diversification but she slept with the right people, it doesn't matter because what you suggested was how I would react to be passed over due to a diversity issue and I certainly believed that was the case.

 

I was really pissed and PO'ed.. for about three seconds actually.

 

Yjough I slammed down the phone i was on, pretty quickly I looked at it from the perspective of thinking about the many years of discrimnation that women had faced in my American society.

 

It really is quite horrifying for me to remember that though we were founded in 1776 it actually took us until 1920 to recognize the right of woman to vote. I'm sorry, but I have a firm belief though men and women are quite different (and as my lovely wife will tell you I definitiely say Viva la difference) they are inherently equal.

 

It was certainly an effect and outgrowth of the way civilization developed, but I am so glad that I live in a time and a country that honors a woman's right to vote and it is horrendous that they had to live with economic and job discrimination that went with this.

 

Gender discrimination and inequality are still big issues in our society and part of our society (if you think that there is gender equity simply look at the % of women who serve in Congress, maybe the lack of gender equality there explains in part why Congress is so stupid).

 

At any rate, I pretty quickly decided that I did not mind too much being discriminated against as long as the job went to a member of a group that had been discriminated against.

 

I do not expect everyone to react as I did. i was 22 or 23 and pretty sure that I would find a good job somewhere. The true irony is that I actually count myself as extremely lucky i did not get the job. I'd probably still be marooned on Capitol Hill and in DC if I had gotten too far down the Cpngressional career track.

 

As it was I went to work for a not-for-profit working on environmental protection and I loved the decade I spent in DC working for the environment. Rven better, it built up job contacts which allowed me to find the middle of moving to Buffalo where my lovely wife is from but still do work for DC based groups. Living at Buffalo expense rates but getting paid DC rates is not a bad middle to take advantage of.

 

So in the end being discriminated against on a hiring decision pissed me off for about 3 seconds. I was semi-pissed but philosphical about it for a while anmd realize now that I really would not want to work for anyone stupid enough to pass on a good employee for political reasons.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

The better and more relevant statistical comparison here is...a comparison of the number of A-A HCs to the pool of qualified applicants.

 

[. . .]

 

It's impossible to really say what the number of A-As in the pool of qualified applicants to be an NFL HC is.

Exactly.

[/dev/null]

I know the Bills seem to have narrowed their list to Sherman and Jauron, but are they even going to interview this guy?

 

Johnny Cochran must be turning over in his grave

[Talonz]

Even at 19% the number of A-A HCs still seems small compared to the likely pool of qualified candidates.

576295[/snapback]

 

Even at 1% the number of white RB's still seems small compared to the likely pool of qualified candidates. ( Nick Goings )

 

I **** REALLY **** loathe this way of thinking. Thankfully I think a majority of people would prefer to hire and/or promote based on quality of the person instead of the skin color.

 

Oh well, this thread offically SUCKS.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

First, it seems like you're equating "progress" with the idea of increasing the number of blacks by decreasing the number of whites. I take issue with that. The real definition of progress is a system in which people are hired strictly based on merit.

 

Second, you point to affirmative action as a way of dealing with the injustices of the old boy network. I vehemently disagree. Let's say there's a company with ten openings. Nine of them are allocated to white people with good connections. The tenth hasn't yet been spoken for. So along comes an affirmative action program, which states that one new hire out of ten must be a minority. You know the nine connected people aren't being squeezed out, so that leaves the white guy trying to get in on merit to give up his place. This problem has made it all but impossible for a non-connected white or Asian male to get into an Ivy League school.

575951[/snapback]

 

 

First, all signs seem to point to the quality of NFL coaches improving as more people of A-A descent are hired. I think this is true not because A-As are better HCs (there are A-A Rich Kotites just as there was a white Rich Kotite.

 

I think the reason that there is improvement of HCs overall is because since there was year's of discrimination against A-As becoming HC's, the HCs of A-A descent who are breaking through now represent some great candidates who were made to wait or were passed by because of the non-relevant factor of race.

 

Due to the increased focus on A-A hiring guys like Lovie Smith are now getting their shot and a fellow like Marvin Lewis who should have been hired the year his Raven's defense set league records, but he had to wait not one off-season as NFL teams rushed to do hires before they were forced to take him after the SB and then he was not even hired the nest off-seasion. As it happens both Smith and Lewis turned around franchises which had not been competive for years.

 

Your second point fails to recognize that statiscally moving from hiring zero or very few of a group discriminated against to a more fair hiring practice will actually improve the quality of the group hired. This will be true as long as:

 

1. A hiring process based on quality is pursued in hiring under affirmative action.

 

2. The group receiving affirmative action includes people who are in fact qualified to do the job.

 

Specificallty using your example, the questuion is whether the ten white employees you start out with are in fact the ten most qualified people. In the NFL's case they are clearly are not.

 

If the tenth white guy you lose because someone has to lose their job is Rich Kotite and the man hired to replace him under the Rooney rule and affirmative action is someone likea Marvin Lewis or a Lovie Smith then clearly the HC pool is improved.

 

Are you taking into acount that the hiring process you start out with is flawd and discriminatory?

 

The NFL has a clear history of hiring (and actually rehiring) incompetent HCs like a Rich Kotite. Most reasonable people also feel that folks like Tony Dungy or Marvin Lewis had to wait far longer for HC jobs that their quality as applicants dictated.

 

The reason I assume that the qualiy of HCs is improving under the Rooney rule and the NFL efforts at affirmative action is because of thse factors. One can argue about everything involved in football, but when one looks at the W/Ls amassed by the "best and brightest" A-A HCs and specifically when you compare it to the work of the segment of white HCs who got canned, the trade off of these A-As who earned jobs from their interviews is a net gain in quality over the failed white HCs who were fired.

 

Do you disagree?

 

On the face of it regarding the NFL you are going to have to argue that the fired white NFL HCs (Marty Morningweg for example) are of better quality than the A-A HCs hired (Lewis and Smith who turned around losers, Edwards and Dungy who made it to the playoffs numerous times with their teams, or even Art Shell who produced a clear winning record as an HC and made the playoffs with the Raiders several times while numerous HCs post Shell except for Gruden failed miserably with the Raiders.

 

In the case of the NFL (what we are talking about here really) affirmative action, the Rooney rule and the hiring of more A-A coaches after they interview shows every sign of improving the HC pool quality.

[The Dean]

First, it seems like you're equating "progress" with the idea of increasing the number of blacks by decreasing the number of whites. I take issue with that. The real definition of progress is a system in which people are hired strictly based on merit.

 

Second, you point to affirmative action as a way of dealing with the injustices of the old boy network. I vehemently disagree. Let's say there's a company with ten openings. Nine of them are allocated to white people with good connections. The tenth hasn't yet been spoken for. So along comes an affirmative action program, which states that one new hire out of ten must be a minority. You know the nine connected people aren't being squeezed out, so that leaves the white guy trying to get in on merit to give up his place. This problem has made it all but impossible for a non-connected white or Asian male to get into an Ivy League school.

575951[/snapback]

 

Many share a similar view, and while I'm not questioning your sincerity , specifically, it would ring truer if I witnesed them raising their voices against the 9 connected hires/placements as often and vociferously as they do against the one affirmative action hire. While there seems to be much support among certain groups for eliminating affirmative action, I haven't noticed these same groups lobying for the elimination of using family references, "legacies" and other connections that give the already privlaged (and usually white) an unfair advantage in our society.

 

I've already posted many times that I think the current rule forcing owners to interview minorities has been good for the league and has given black candidates the exposure and experience they need to get jobs (even if it's not the job they initially interviewed for). So...I'd like to move on.

 

While i understand Iowa's point (and agree with his basic premises and sympathies) I have top admit that RkFast is right when he insists on including Herman Edwards this year...but, probably not for the same reason. Herman was hired the way many HCs were hired before the Rooney rule was in place. The Chiefs knew they wanted him before interviewing other candidates...they just decided HE's our guy. That's a pretty crappy way to run a business, IMO. And, remember the NFL is the REAL business...any particular team is a small part. Normally when hires like that have taken place the coaches picked have been white. People (like me...and the league leaders) hated that Millen picked Mooch before interviewing any other candidates. It looked bad, because no blacks were considered...and it's bad business. Hiring Herman without interviewing other candidates is equally bad business, IMO. So, the NFL has proven it has moved forward at least a little, as now a team has made an "impulse buy" of a non-white coach. Sometimes the truest signs of progress are in the mistakes. We'll know more progress has been made when a terrible black coach gets several opportunities to prove how bad of a HC he is.

 

While i think it's been odd that non of the hires this year (except for Edwards) have been black, I agree with K-Dog that this year (unlike in some past years) it seems to be more coincidental than anything else. Of course, if this happens year-after-year, there's more than just coincidence at work.

 

i think the league is changing...and that's good. There are several successful black coaches. A black QB is no longer a rarity and subject to having his abilities questioned simply due to his skin color (although that still exists in the minds of many fans, I find). More and more assistant coaches and coordinators (the typical HC pool) are black and are getting promoted. i see the day coming soon, when the Rooney rule will be superfluous.

 

I hope to see the day when people get opportunity based soley on their qualifications, desire and by treating others with respect...etc. When that day comes, the Kennedy's won't be going to the best schools and getting the great jobs unless they have the talent to do so. The Bush kids will have to take and pass the same entrance exams and work their way up the same as a kid from the other side of the tracks. A kid named Abu Mohammed (or a girl named Teron Chang) will have the same chance at being the high school's QB as a boy named Manning.

 

Hey...i have dreams, too.

[1959BillsFan]

I have a question:

 

The Rooney Rule states that every team in need of a head coach is FORCED to FORMALLY interview an A-A candidate, or face a stiff penalty

 

Does this rule also state a percentage of these new HCs must be A-A??? In other words, can the NFL FORCE a team to hire an A-A candidate if the NFL hasn't met a quota???

[The Merovingian]

What difference does the color of ones skin make? Isn't it the content of their charactor that matters?

 

I personally think that it is totally wrong for the league to have made a rule that in essence says "each team that is looking for a new coach must bring in a token minority" This is self defeating and demeaning to the minority coach. Especially if he is the only minority that interviewed for the position. ie James Lofton.

[The Dean]

I have a question:

 

The Rooney Rule states that every team in need of a head coach is FORCED to FORMALLY interview an A-A candidate, or face a stiff penalty

 

Does this rule also state a percentage of these new HCs must be A-A??? In other words, can the NFL FORCE a team to hire an A-A candidate if the NFL hasn't met a quota???

576367[/snapback]

 

 

Don't believe so. No forced hiring and no quotas.

[IBTG81]

Perhaps there are no asian HC's because no one knows how to run a frea-fricker?

575645[/snapback]

 

 

 

Perhaps the funniest post I've ever read on TBD!

[IBTG81]

As of 2002, African-Americans made up roughly 13% of the U.S. population.

 

Today, African-Americans make up roughly 19% of NFL head coaches.

 

Enough said.  These quotas are both unnecessary and racist in their very nature.

576104[/snapback]

 

 

Come on HD, between Tenny "I am a commie", Kelly "I make Hillary look right-wing", and Iowa "I am a racist", you know there is no making sense in this thread...

 

 

[JDG]

I have a question:

 

The Rooney Rule states that every team in need of a head coach is FORCED to FORMALLY interview an A-A candidate, or face a stiff penalty

 

Does this rule also state a percentage of these new HCs must be A-A??? In other words, can the NFL FORCE a team to hire an A-A candidate if the NFL hasn't met a quota???

576367[/snapback]

 

 

No and no. It just mandates interviews.