PDA

View Full Version : Football NFL looking to expand 'Rooney Rule'


DaKCMan AP
05-20-2009, 01:12 PM
NFL looking to expand 'Rooney Rule'

By TIM REYNOLDS, AP Sports Writer Tim Reynolds, Ap Sports Writer 1 hr 3 mins ago

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. NFL teams looking to hire general managers may soon be required to interview at least one minority candidate.

Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday the league's owners discussed expanding the Rooney Rule which already applies to coaching openings during the final session of their two-day meetings in South Florida.

No vote was taken, though Goodell indicated the change could be made soon.

The Rooney Rule is named for Steelers owner Dan Rooney, who was not at the meeting and will meet later with Goodell on the proposed change.

The Steelers owner is at "ambassador school," Goodell said. Rooney, a lifelong Republican, was picked by President Barack Obama earlier this year to be U.S. ambassador to Ireland.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) The date of the 2013 Super Bowl remains a mystery. Those who fought to bring the game to New Orleans couldn't care less.

Four years after Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans is a Super Bowl city again.

NFL owners voted Tuesday to play what will be the 47th Super Bowl in New Orleans, the first time the championship will be staged there since Katrina shredded parts of the Louisiana Superdome, caused 1,600 deaths and devastated the Gulf Coast.

"We're just thrilled about what's going on," Saints owner Tom Benson said. "We're getting a new Superdome. Now we're going to get a Super Bowl on top of that. It couldn't be any more exciting."

New Orleans beat out Miami, which sought a record 11th Super Bowl, and 2008 host Glendale, Ariz. This is the 10th time New Orleans will be the Super Bowl site and first since 2002.

It was the highlight Tuesday at the NFL spring meetings, where owners discussed many issues, including a longer regular-season schedule (no vote is expected before the conferences close Wednesday), television deals (two-year extensions were reached with Fox and CBS) and an anti-tampering arrangement involving free agents.

"We had a very productive session," commissioner Roger Goodell said.

More productivity will be needed soon: The league plans to open talks on a new collective bargaining agreement with the players union starting next month, with an eye on avoiding a potential lockout that could disrupt the 2011 season.

Jeff Pash, the NFL's executive vice president and general counsel, said Tuesday he believes both the league and new NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith have laid "a good groundwork for these discussions to begin," but stopped short of saying how long they may take.

"We'll stay at it for as long as it takes," Pash said.

NFL owners opted out of the CBA last year, meaning there could be a labor-related stoppage if a new deal isn't struck for the 2011 season. Combined with the global economic downturn and the chance of a longer NFL schedule, it's possible talks between the league and union could be, at best, contentious.

"The right place to start is a place where the players understand why the owners opted out," Smith said. "We all know that the players didn't opt out of this deal. We do know the NFL generated in excess of $8 billion last year. We know that the average team has grown by 400 percent in 10 years. ... What we don't understand is what is wrong with the current deal when those facts exist."

The plan for extending the regular season to 17 or 18 games would likely cut the preseason schedule to two contests, with the season starting in its typical slot just after Labor Day.

Smith, who met briefly with owners Tuesday, said players need to be aware of what's at stake for additional games.

"The players understand the cost to their bodies," he said. "The players understand how tough it is to get through a regular season. They understand how hard it is to try to stand up on a Monday morning. They understand why they need a day off on Tuesday. Their families understand when they get out of football and they have arthritis before they're 40. They understand the cost."

Because no one knows how long the 2012 schedule will be, there's no firm date yet for the New Orleans Super Bowl other than, it'll happen sometime in February.

So New Orleans' Super Bowl future, minus the timing issue, is now clear.

Michael Vick's future remains anything but.

The NFL meetings began as the former Atlanta Falcons star was about to leave federal prison for the final phase of his 23-month sentence related to dogfighting. Goodell said he has not determined any reinstatement process for Vick.

This much is certain: Vick will need not only to say he's sorry, but convince Goodell he means those words if there's any chance his indefinite suspension will be lifted.

"I think that's going to be up to Michael," Goodell said. "Michael's going to have to demonstrate to myself and the general public and to a lot of people, did he learn anything from this experience? Does he regret what happened? Does he feel that he can be a positive influence going forward?"

Goodell said any meeting would take place once Vick's legal process is completed; his time in federal custody ends July 20, or roughly around the same time NFL training camps open.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_nfl_meetings;_ylt=Ao55ZNSXNLCGuQ0mt387Eoms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFkMzNkNmRrBHBvcwMxOTIEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlv bl9zcG9ydHMEc2xrA25mbGxvb2tpbmd0bw--

:grr:

Brock
05-20-2009, 01:17 PM
It doesn't affect the Chiefs, they already hired Jewoli. /B_Ambuehl

Mr. Krab
05-20-2009, 01:48 PM
Why don't think just go ahead and make it an all black league and just get it over with.

black owners
black gms
black coaches
black players
black cheerleaders

Then just change the name to BFL, The Black Football league


Woo woo, go black people!!

bandwagonjumper
05-20-2009, 01:57 PM
I think its a good idea. It certainly worked for the coaches.

CrazyPhuD
05-20-2009, 02:19 PM
This is going to back fire on them when in 2030 whites are the minority in this country! :)

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 02:37 PM
It's a good plan. People rip on the Rooney rule, but it worked. Look at D-1 College coaches and the hiring rate of black coaches is embarrassingly low. And my guess is that owners aren't racist, but I'm willing to bet that most of their inner network is white, so a lot of qualified minorities don't even sniff an interview.

Remember, the Rooney Rule would not require any owners to hire any minorities. It simply means they have to start interviewing them.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 02:44 PM
I think the Rooney Rule itself is more insulting than the lack of one. If somebody is qualified and the best candidate, they will be hired.

The vast majority of the time that these interviews are conducted, the owner/GM already knows who they want. The Rooney Rule just ensures that the process is more drawn out and somebody else is disappointed.

ForeverChiefs58
05-20-2009, 02:52 PM
Its f@#!@#@! ridiculous!!! Why not have a whitey rule that they have to have more white RB's? What about the mexicans or asians? Just stupid BS!! A black person was hired for the highest position in the country, president, by the people without some BS rule! Hire the best MAN available for the position regardless of stupid color. If you want people to be color blind, why force them to look for color?

Brock
05-20-2009, 02:52 PM
Remember, the Rooney Rule would not require any owners to hire any minorities. It simply means they have to start interviewing them.

I don't have a problem with it, the problem is nobody wants to be the token interview.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 03:01 PM
I don't have a problem with it, the problem is nobody wants to be the token interview.

Nobody wants to be a token coach interview now, because the Rooney Rule has been so effective that they happen anyway.

In the front office ranks, you bet your ass minorities would love to be token interviews. Because they'll have an opportunity to interview for a job they wouldn't otherwise have an opportunity to get.

I think they should get rid of the Rooney Rule for coaches and then implement it for Front Offices until, like coaches, the rule is no longer needed.

DJ's left nut
05-20-2009, 03:02 PM
I'm excited about the changes they have on hand for 2014 -- expanding it to QBs.

The wildcat formation is just a covert attempt to sneak it in under the radar.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 03:07 PM
Its f@#!@#@! ridiculous!!! Why not have a whitey rule that they have to have more white RB's? What about the mexicans or asians? Just stupid BS!! A black person was hired for the highest position in the country, president, by the people without some BS rule! Hire the best MAN available for the position regardless of stupid color. If you want people to be color blind, why force them to look for color?

Because whites, mexicans, asians, etc... never went through a period of time when bigotry kept them from getting jobs they rightfully deserved. Asians were never asked to drink out of separate fountains and to attend different schools.

Black people in the 60's, 70's, and to a lesser but still significant extent 80's and 90's did not get jobs they deserved because of bigotry and racism. And so, when you compare the resume of a black guy who graduated in 1960 but was turned down from every school and job he applied to versus a non-black guy who got into those same schools, even if he was less qualified, then you can see how those resumes would be completely different. NFL ownership has a lot of croneyism. Owners hire within their inner networks. And most of those networks don't have a lot of black people, not because they're racist, but because their entire life they've worked with white people. Frankly, I don't think this problem will be fixed until we get more young owners. Rather than wait 10-15 years for that to happen, the Rooney Rule accelerates that process.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 03:12 PM
The Rooney Rule became unnecessary when the Colts and Bears went to the Superbowl, and more recently the Steelers. The NFL is a copycat league, so that right there did more to promote black coaches than any stupid interview formality.

blaise
05-20-2009, 03:26 PM
I don't have a problem with it. I think it was a good idea for coaches, and it worked. It wasn't telling people who to hire, just to interview. I think they've almost gotten to the point now where they don't need the rule for coaches. I actually heard Tony Dungy say words to that effect not too long ago.

Micjones
05-20-2009, 03:37 PM
Why don't think just go ahead and make it an all black league and just get it over with.

black owners
black gms
black coaches
black players
black cheerleaders

Then just change the name to BFL, The Black Football league


Woo woo, go black people!!

Way to go apeshit over nothing.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 03:53 PM
Because whites, mexicans, asians, etc... never went through a period of time when bigotry kept them from getting jobs they rightfully deserved.

A) nobody deserves a job, and B) you need to study the history of this country a little more closely.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 03:56 PM
I think the Rooney Rule itself is more insulting than the lack of one. If somebody is qualified and the best candidate, they will be hired.

The vast majority of the time that these interviews are conducted, the owner/GM already knows who they want. The Rooney Rule just ensures that the process is more drawn out and somebody else is disappointed.

Conducting interviews or employing on the basis of race, sex, color, or creed is illegal. I actually had an HR department tell me who I needed to hire based on their quota. My response was that I would look into it and did nothing further and hired who I though would be the best fit for my team based on the applicant pool.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 04:02 PM
Conducting interviews or employing on the basis of race, sex, color, or creed is illegal. I actually had an HR department tell me who I needed to hire based on their quota. My response was that I would look into it and did nothing further and hired who I though would be the best fit for my team based on the applicant pool.

Quite ironic that you can't exclude somebody because they're gay or black, but you must exclude somebody if you already have too many white people working for you, regardless of how well qualified they are, isn't it?

I understand that these rules may have served a purpose at some point, if only symbolic, but I believe as a nation we're past these "rules".

Hydrae
05-20-2009, 04:12 PM
So a bunch of rich white guys sat around and talked about forcing each other to interview a specific race of people for jobs. I don't get it. If it is a good idea, these 32 guys could just do it. There is no need to create some binding contract if the majority agree to the thing.

Unless the ones who are promoting this are afraid that there would be some advantage to a team that didn't do this voluntarily. :hmmm:

kstater
05-20-2009, 04:15 PM
I think the Rooney Rule itself is more insulting than the lack of one. If somebody is qualified and the best candidate, they will be hired.

The vast majority of the time that these interviews are conducted, the owner/GM already knows who they want. The Rooney Rule just ensures that the process is more drawn out and somebody else is disappointed.

Yup, that's why guys like Gunther Cunningham, Jim Haslett, Mike Martz, Mike Sherman, and Dick Jauron keep getting hired. They're the best, there's no good ol' boys network.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 04:15 PM
Quite ironic that you can't exclude somebody because they're gay or black, but you must exclude somebody if you already have too many white people working for you, regardless of how well qualified they are, isn't it?

I understand that these rules may have served a purpose at some point, if only symbolic, but I believe as a nation we're past these "rules".

I agree.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 04:17 PM
Yup, that's why guys like Gunther Cunningham, Jim Haslett, Mike Martz, Mike Sherman, and Dick Jauron keep getting hired. They're the best, there's no good ol' boys network.

All those guys have had great success at the NFL level.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 04:17 PM
Yup, that's why guys like Gunther Cunningham, Jim Haslett, Mike Martz, Mike Sherman, and Dick Jauron keep getting hired. They're the best, there's no good ol' boys network.

Or because they have the most experience.

blaise
05-20-2009, 04:18 PM
All those guys have had great success at the NFL level.

They've had some success as head coach. I wouldn't call it great.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 04:20 PM
A) nobody deserves a job, and B) you need to study the history of this country a little more closely.

Let me rephrase that...
Yes, there were periods when Mexicans, Asians, and other minorities were excluded, especially during World War II when the country went hush hush about abusing Japanese people. I get that. But the argument that the bigotry against African-Americans was FAR worse in American than against any other race is common sense. Anyone who argues otherwise is a moron. And while there were still cases of prejudice against Mexicans and Asians going into the 70's and 80's, it had at least started to die down, whereas prejudice against African-Americans was still rampant during those times.

As for whether anybody deserves a job, no, nobody deserves a hand-out. But everyone deserves the same opportunity for jobs. And right now, given that the rate of minority hiring in front offices is embarrassingly low. Racism is dying down, but we can't pretend that just because people are more open to other races that there isn't still inequality. Again, try putting yourself in the shoes of a black man who grew up in the 1950's, was smart but couldn't get into any colleges because they wouldn't take black students, then couldn't get a good job because he didn't have a distinguished degree not to mention because prejudiced employers weren't hiring black people. You think that black guy had the same opportunities for advancement than a white person who was given those same opportunities? When you see a black person with only 20 years of experience in upper-level positions vs. a white-person the same age who has 30, which one would you hire?

By the way, in case you were wondering, I am not black. But I understand where the Rooney Rule is coming from. It's not like Affirmative Action where the NFL is demanding a quota be filled. It's merely asking that that black man with 20 years of experience be given the same chance to earn a position in a front office as that white guy with 30 years of experience.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 04:30 PM
Quite ironic that you can't exclude somebody because they're gay or black, but you must exclude somebody if you already have too many white people working for you, regardless of how well qualified they are, isn't it?

I understand that these rules may have served a purpose at some point, if only symbolic, but I believe as a nation we're past these "rules".

I don't believe we will ever be past these rules until a next generation of owners comes in. I think younger people are much more genuinely sensitive to racial issues than older people. That's not a knock on older people, just a statement of the kind of environment of tolerance each generation grew up in. I think the US will naturally evolve into a country that no longer needs these rules, but we're not there yet. The good news is, for most businesses, the people doing most of the recruiting or hiring are skewing much younger, so I think that's why you don't see nearly as much need these days for these kinds of rules. And I think there is a pretty good pipeline now of younger african-americans who are advancing the ranks very quickly on their own merit. But in football, the decision-makers still consist of older, white owners who largely hire within their inner network. I think hiring for an NFL front office is pretty different from hiring for a company.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 04:35 PM
Maybe I'm just looking at this from a different viewpoint being that I work in one of the most diverse industries around, and the fact that I'm from a generation that grew up without the cloud of racism like those preceding.

I just find that these rules and laws meant to prevent exclusion can promote exclusion just as often.

kstater
05-20-2009, 04:39 PM
Maybe I'm just looking at this from a different viewpoint being that I work in one of the most diverse industries around, and the fact that I'm from a generation that grew up without the cloud of racism like those preceding.

I just find that these rules and laws meant to prevent exclusion can promote exclusion just as often.

I can promise you, when I moved down here, I found out extreme racism leading to not hiring someone based on skin color, still exists in this country.

Micjones
05-20-2009, 04:42 PM
Good thing nobody bitches when Affirmative Action benefits White women.
Oops... Said too much.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-20-2009, 04:45 PM
The straight, white, man is doomed.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 04:53 PM
The straight, white, man is doomed.

Not true, but let's look at an extreme situation here.

Subject A is a gay Hispanic woman with a high school diploma and 3 years of experience in whatever industry.

Subject B is a straight white man with a bachelor's degree and 10 years of experience in whatever industry.

Job comes open and because of Affirmative Action the underqualified woman is hired. She performs poorly and is fired in 9 months. The company suffers X amount of money due to her incompetence and cost in turnover.

Not only did she lose her job, but she has a distorted image as to what her worth is to a company. She's stuck wondering why she can't even get her foot in the door when she applies for other jobs where her orientation, race, and sex aren't an issue because she was hired for the same job earlier.

Count Alex's Wins
05-20-2009, 04:57 PM
Herm, come on back!

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 05:06 PM
Maybe I'm just looking at this from a different viewpoint being that I work in one of the most diverse industries around, and the fact that I'm from a generation that grew up without the cloud of racism like those preceding.

I just find that these rules and laws meant to prevent exclusion can promote exclusion just as often.

I tend to think that there are enough practices in place that it doesn't really happen nearly as much in the business world as it used to. Unfortunately, a few bad apples spoil the bunch. More importantly, I think business tend to be more regulated because they have a duty to report to their shareholders. I tend to think NFL owners are very different from traditional business managers.

If you're a CEO and you're constantly hiring your friends and those within your "good ole' boy network" even if they're unqualified, then you'll be ousted in a heartbeat by the Board. In the NFL, you can be incompetent as shit and still keep your job. Look at the Ford family. And CP and Millen were buddy-buddy enough with their owners that they were given a free pass too. That's why the NFL is different from business-as-usual.

KC native
05-20-2009, 05:10 PM
Not true, but let's look at an extreme situation here.

Subject A is a gay Hispanic woman with a high school diploma and 3 years of experience in whatever industry.

Subject B is a straight white man with a bachelor's degree and 10 years of experience in whatever industry.

Job comes open and because of Affirmative Action the underqualified woman is hired. She performs poorly and is fired in 9 months. The company suffers X amount of money due to her incompetence and cost in turnover.

Not only did she lose her job, but she has a distorted image as to what her worth is to a company. She's stuck wondering why she can't even get her foot in the door when she applies for other jobs where her orientation, race, and sex aren't an issue because she was hired for the same job earlier.

Nice strawman. Did it take you long to build it?

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 05:11 PM
I get that. But the argument that the bigotry against African-Americans was FAR worse in American than against any other race is common sense. .

This is also incorrect. World History is much richer and goes back much further than American History. Egyptians, Chinese, Romans, Ottomans, the Spainish, French, Russions all had slaves and bigtotry is alive and well across the globe today. Especially in Europe.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 05:13 PM
Nice strawman. Did it take you long to build it?

Nice addition to the conversation. Did it take you long to type it?

SBK
05-20-2009, 05:15 PM
They should make teams draft players not according to skill, but color.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 05:15 PM
As for whether anybody deserves a job, no, nobody deserves a hand-out. But everyone deserves the same opportunity for jobs. And right now, given that the rate of minority hiring in front offices is embarrassingly low. Racism is dying down, but we can't pretend that just because people are more open to other races that there isn't still inequality. Again, try putting yourself in the shoes of a black man who grew up in the 1950's, was smart but couldn't get into any colleges because they wouldn't take black students, then couldn't get a good job because he didn't have a distinguished degree not to mention because prejudiced employers weren't hiring black people. You think that black guy had the same opportunities for advancement than a white person who was given those same opportunities? When you see a black person with only 20 years of experience in upper-level positions vs. a white-person the same age who has 30, which one would you hire?


this isn't 1950 and I would hire the person with the best skill set for the job. Hiring anyone on the basis of race or sex is illegal.

KC native
05-20-2009, 05:16 PM
Nice addition to the conversation. Did it take you long to type it?

Nope, but if you want I can tell you how that's wrong. Affirmative action dictates that a qualified minority must be given an equal opportunity for the position. In your straw man the woman is a clearly inferior candidate so the business has no obligation to hire her and if the EEOC were to ever investigate the business would have no liability.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 05:16 PM
Good thing nobody bitches when Affirmative Action benefits White women.
Oops... Said too much.

People take notice of it all the time. It is illegal to hire anyone on the basis of race or sex.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 05:18 PM
They've had some success as head coach. I wouldn't call it great.

As coaches in the NFL they've had great success.

Brock
05-20-2009, 05:21 PM
All those guys have had great success at the NFL level.

Other than Martz, none of them have.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 05:26 PM
Nope, but if you want I can tell you how that's wrong. Affirmative action dictates that a qualified minority must be given an equal opportunity for the position. In your straw man the woman is a clearly inferior candidate so the business has no obligation to hire her and if the EEOC were to ever investigate the business would have no liability.

The problem with it is that the true intention behind it can be distorted. Yes, my example was extreme, but common sense dictates that anybody who is qualified will be selected. Rules and laws like these hardly further the cause of minorities. If somebody doesn't want to hire a minority, they'll redefine "qualifications" to fit their candidates.

It's when quotas come into play that it becomes a big problem.

Bwana
05-20-2009, 05:34 PM
Keeping whitey down!

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 05:36 PM
This is also incorrect. World History is much richer and goes back much further than American History. Egyptians, Chinese, Romans, Ottomans, the Spainish, French, Russions all had slaves and bigtotry is alive and well across the globe today. Especially in Europe.

Well, duh. Of course I know there is prejudice, bigotry, and racism all across the globe and of course I know that it extends well past American History. I understand that Japanese internment camps were an appalling act of bigotry.
But the relevant point is what any of those has anything to do with NFL hiring practices. Because racism and slavery in Europe have nothing to do with what hiring practices in the NFL, nor does slavery in Russia. It's a complete non-sequitor.

In RECENT American history, no ethnic group has been nearly as crippled by limited opportunities as African-Americans have been. This is a race of people who were legally barred from some of the best schools and who grew up in a culture where people were taught that it was okay to treat an entire race of people like second-rate citizens, from barring them to the same water fountains to arresting them for having the audacity to sit in the front of a bus.

Those times are behind us, thank God, but that doesn't mean everything corrected itself. Because those black people who were denied opportunities in the 60's and had extremely limited opportunities in the 70's and 80's, many through no fault of their own, are now applying for high-level positions in the NFL. And an appalling low number are getting them. The Rooney Rule is an attempt to break that above the tipping point.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 05:44 PM
this isn't 1950 and I would hire the person with the best skill set for the job. Hiring anyone on the basis of race or sex is illegal.

I'm sure you would. But if you had two resumes in front of you of job candidates of the same age, and one had 10 years of upper-level experience while the other had 20, which one would you hire. No-brainer, right? That's why I was a huge proponent of the Rooney Rule for coaching. The guy with a 20-year resume may not be any smarter than the guy with 10, but because of racial inequality, may have been given opportunities right away that were not given to the black candidate. It says a lot that Tony Dungy, a guy many people associate with the successes of the Rooney Rule, was hired as a defensive coordinator in Pittsburgh despite the fact that many coaches probably had much stronger qualifications.

Whether you acknowledge it or not, minority hiring in NFL Front Offices is a big problem and most people know it. And it's likely a combination between black candidates not having nearly as polished resumes (because they were denied great entry-level opportunities their white counterparts were getting) and because these owners, because they don't have to report to any boards or shareholders, can pretty much hire whomever they want. And so, they usually hire from within their network, most of whom are white.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 05:47 PM
The problem with it is that the true intention behind it can be distorted. Yes, my example was extreme, but common sense dictates that anybody who is qualified will be selected. Rules and laws like these hardly further the cause of minorities. If somebody doesn't want to hire a minority, they'll redefine "qualifications" to fit their candidates.

It's when quotas come into play that it becomes a big problem.

I don't agree with quotas either. And, again, I believe that a firm's responsiblity to their shareholders has forced them to hire in the best interests of the firm, not based on racial preference or limiting biases that would screen out otherwise very qualified candidates.

But when you take away all that, and you have an industry where those in charge don't have to report to anybody, then you can see where the best people aren't hired. I would argue that many NFL front office executives are NOT the most qualified for their respective jobs. Most of them, instead, were hired because they are buddies with the owner/GM. That means that qualified people of all races are getting pushed out of the process.

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 05:49 PM
12.8% of people in the US are black. 22% of head coaches in the NFL are black last I checked. I think that's more than fair now.

SPATCH
05-20-2009, 05:49 PM
This is also incorrect. World History is much richer and goes back much further than American History. Egyptians, Chinese, Romans, Ottomans, the Spainish, French, Russions all had slaves and bigtotry is alive and well across the globe today. Especially in Europe.

are you fucking kidding me? are you really trying to make this argument? in this thread?

look at the representative population of players in the NFL... then look at the representative population of coaches and executives in the NFL...

argument over.... now shut up

SPATCH
05-20-2009, 05:51 PM
12.8% of people in the US are black. 22% of head coaches in the NFL are black last I checked. I think that's more than fair now.

see above comment

jAZ
05-20-2009, 05:51 PM
How can anyone of any political view object to a private business implementing a self imposed rule?

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 05:55 PM
12.8% of people in the US are black. 22% of head coaches in the NFL are black last I checked. I think that's more than fair now.

And it shows you how effective the Rooney Rule is.

Interesting that the NFL has a 22% black head coach rate while College Football, which does not have a Rooney Rule, has a 6% black head coach rate.

Hmm....

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 05:55 PM
see above comment

So the entire NFL should be black? How is that inclusive?

SPATCH
05-20-2009, 06:00 PM
So the entire NFL should be black? How is that inclusive?

you're confused...

u must not have understood what i said

Mecca
05-20-2009, 06:11 PM
I remember when this argument was made about black QB's....and all of the ridiculous things that got thrown out then.

Bwana
05-20-2009, 06:20 PM
Heh

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 06:38 PM
Well, duh. Of course I know there is prejudice, bigotry, and racism all across the globe and of course I know that it extends well past American History. I understand that Japanese internment camps were an appalling act of bigotry.
But the relevant point is what any of those has anything to do with NFL hiring practices. Because racism and slavery in Europe have nothing to do with what hiring practices in the NFL, nor does slavery in Russia. It's a complete non-sequitor.

In RECENT American history, no ethnic group has been nearly as crippled by limited opportunities as African-Americans have been. This is a race of people who were legally barred from some of the best schools and who grew up in a culture where people were taught that it was okay to treat an entire race of people like second-rate citizens, from barring them to the same water fountains to arresting them for having the audacity to sit in the front of a bus.

Those times are behind us, thank God, but that doesn't mean everything corrected itself. Because those black people who were denied opportunities in the 60's and had extremely limited opportunities in the 70's and 80's, many through no fault of their own, are now applying for high-level positions in the NFL. And an appalling low number are getting them. The Rooney Rule is an attempt to break that above the tipping point.

In recent history we have made great changes. Heck Americans were voting Black Americans into office since the 1870's. Now when the Democrats of the time gained power in the US South in the late 1800's, they started passing laws that led to the civil rights act of 1964. In just a few generations from then we've made great strides as a people in terms of acceptance and tolerance. You can't make any of this an American thing. It's very much a human thing. Even in the 53, Ike established a committiee for anti-discrimination in our Government.

It is illegal in this country to hire someone on the basis of sex or race.

chiefzilla1501
05-20-2009, 06:48 PM
In recent history we have made great changes. Heck Americans were voting Black Americans into office since the 1870's. Now when the Democrats of the time gained power in the US South in the late 1800's, they started passing laws that led to the civil rights act of 1964. In just a few generations from then we've made great strides as a people in terms of acceptance and tolerance. You can't make any of this an American thing. It's very much a human thing. Even in the 53, Ike established a committiee for anti-discrimination in our Government.

It is illegal in this country to hire someone on the basis of sex or race.

Yes, but you're talking about a democracy, where everyone has a say in decision-making. The NFL doesn't work that way. Owners and GMs, who are appointed by owners, have all the power in decision-making. Businesses as a whole are more representative of democracies, because at least you have Boards of Directors and shareholders to keep the Executives honest. So while America and businesses are moreso run by the people, NFL teams are run by a few select people. And as long as this hiring goes mostly unchecked, then nothing is stopping NFL Execs from hiring only their friends, which means that they do not have any incentive to hire the best people they can find, white or black. That's the distinction.

And you keep saying that last line, but #1) the Rooney Rule does not require any owner or GM to hire based on race, it only suggests that they have a race quota for interviewing; #2) if it's so illegal, then perhaps you can explain why the Rooney Rule has been in place for years with no legal recourse.

Pooch
05-20-2009, 06:52 PM
If a team talked to Norm Chow and then hired a white coach you know that there would be a bunch of crying about how that wasn't fair!!

Hydrae
05-20-2009, 07:20 PM
Yes, but you're talking about a democracy, where everyone has a say in decision-making. The NFL doesn't work that way. Owners and GMs, who are appointed by owners, have all the power in decision-making. Businesses as a whole are more representative of democracies, because at least you have Boards of Directors and shareholders to keep the Executives honest. So while America and businesses are moreso run by the people, NFL teams are run by a few select people. And as long as this hiring goes mostly unchecked, then nothing is stopping NFL Execs from hiring only their friends, which means that they do not have any incentive to hire the best people they can find, white or black. That's the distinction.

And you keep saying that last line, but #1) the Rooney Rule does not require any owner or GM to hire based on race, it only suggests that they have a race quota for interviewing; #2) if it's so illegal, then perhaps you can explain why the Rooney Rule has been in place for years with no legal recourse.


NFL owners are, by nature, highly competitive. This is why they are usually successful in business and why they are interested in owning a sports team. That is your incentive for hiring the best the can find, white or black. Can you really argue with a straight face that these competitive people are going to hire based on friends instead of the best man they can find for the job? There is nothing these guys (and occasionally gals) would like better than to get one up on their peers at the annual meetings.

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 08:31 PM
are you ****ing kidding me? are you really trying to make this argument? in this thread?

look at the representative population of players in the NFL... then look at the representative population of coaches and executives in the NFL...

argument over.... now shut up

LOL


Who says what the ratio should be? If there were a greater population of non-black players in line with the same ratio of non-black coaches to black-coaches as it is now then it would be all good? The best person for the job should be hired. End of story. If we end up having a greater ratio of black coaches than black player compared to non-black players does that mean we need to scale back the number of black coaches? Would we need a converse Rooney Rule?

Garcia Bronco
05-20-2009, 08:34 PM
Yes, but you're talking about a democracy, where everyone has a say in decision-making.

We live in a Republic not a democracy. You're talking about the NFL. I really don't care what any business does provided they don't break the law. I am talking about the concept of Affirmative Action, which is clearly in violation of our own laws.

ForeverChiefs58
05-20-2009, 10:28 PM
Bullshit argument. IF it actually had to do with how you were treated in the past, they would have the Jewish rule! Six million killed, and Jews have been discriminated against since the begining of time.

Dottefan
05-20-2009, 10:49 PM
Why don't think just go ahead and make it an all black league and just get it over with.

black owners
black gms
black coaches
black players
black cheerleaders

Then just change the name to BFL, The Black Football league


Woo woo, go black people!!

This is the stupidest post that I have ever reed...you should not be allowed near a keyboard. I don't want to call you an angry white man cough cough.. but you are defiantly an Archie Bunker..

MoreLemonPledge
05-20-2009, 10:53 PM
Why doesn't baseball have a Rooney Rule, and why is nobody complaining?

Dottefan
05-20-2009, 11:03 PM
THE ONLY REASON THIS GUY STARTED THIS THREAD WAS TO RACE BAIT..TO GET ALL YOU WHITE GUYS FIRED UP....AND SOME OF YOU LAMES BOUGHT INTO IT..SAD...SO HERE IS MY 2 CENTS ON IT , JUST BECAUSE I SAW SO MANY RETARDED POST ...I HAD TO COMMENT, REGARDLES IF IT CONTRADICTS WHAT I JUST SAID....The whole point is that every one gets a shot... not that they HAVEto hire a minority coach... you ****ing retards did not read the ****ing post.. how stupid are you?...really..all these post about " the white man is getting screwed"..man, calm you asses down. ...all they are saying is because there is still situations in this country when a minority gets passed over because he or she is a minority..they want to make sure it is not happening in the league.and to all you ****ing idiots who said " well the league is 75% black, why not a rule for more white players"..you are a ****ing retard. period. the league will play any one who has talent regardless of race..because the bottom line is they want to win..hell they would put out a purple Asian guy at rb if he could run a sub 4.3 forty and cut like a dear..so lets not cry about the lack of white running backs , it has nothing to do with the front office not hiring qualified minority canidiates....those are two totaly diffrent things....

phillip
05-20-2009, 11:15 PM
to all you ****ing idiots who said " well the league is 75% black, why not a rule for more white players"..you are a ****ing retard. period. the league will play any one who has talent regardless of race..because the bottom line is they want to win..hell they would put out a purple Asian guy at rb if he could run a sub 4.3 forty and cut like a dear..so lets not cry about the lack of white running backs , it has nothing to do with the front office not hiring qualified minority canidiates....those are two totaly diffrent things....

So when it comes to players, the league will play anyone with talent because they want to win, but when it comes to the front office, they don't care about winning? WTF? That doesn't make any sense.

ForeverChiefs58
05-20-2009, 11:15 PM
really? Then why isn't there more Sumo wrestlers that are lineman? racist bastards!

phillip
05-20-2009, 11:17 PM
I am talking about the concept of Affirmative Action, which is clearly in violation of our own laws.

Not according to the Supreme Court.

Dottefan
05-20-2009, 11:18 PM
So when it comes to players, the league will play anyone with talent because they want to win, but when it comes to the front office, they don't care about winning? WTF? That doesn't make any sense.

If you don't know the difference...its not worth me explaining... period..the concept is obviously over your head.

phillip
05-20-2009, 11:18 PM
really? Then why isn't there more Sumo wrestlers that are lineman? racist bastards!

They hire the best talent for linemen regardless of race b/c they want to win. There's no reason for them to change that logic when hiring for the F.O.

phillip
05-20-2009, 11:19 PM
If you don't know the difference...its not worth me explaining... period..the concept is obviously over your head.

Judging by your grammar, nothing you say is going over my head.

Dottefan
05-20-2009, 11:26 PM
Judging by your grammar, nothing you say is going over my head.

So lets not get off track buddy...my choice of grammar,and your lack of common sense are two totally different things.Teacher, why don't you explain to me and the class what exactly is wrong with my grammar. I mean we are on the net, so I didn't know that I had to use correct grammar. I didnt know that the big bad grammar police would try to deflect the original point of the topic. Oh gosh ,is there going to be a pop quiz, or extra homework..if so let me know ...................(in my best Dr. Cox voice)Now back to my point, if you don't understand the difference, then I am not wasting my time trying to explaine..

Guru
05-20-2009, 11:30 PM
What a joke.

phillip
05-20-2009, 11:35 PM
So lets not get off track buddy...my choice of grammar,and your lack of common sense are two totally different things.. and by the way teacher, why don't you explain to me and the class what exactly is wrong with my grammar, I mean we are on the net, so I didn't know that I had to use correct grammar,or else the big bad grammar police would try to deflect the original point of the topic.................(in my best Dr. Cox voice)that if you don't understand the difference, then I am not wasting my time trying to explaine

The only point I can see you possibly making with the contradiction in your post is that the owners want to win, but they are racist and believe that minority talent is limited to athletics and does not extend to the intelligence it would take to run a front office.

But then I thought that must not have been your point, because if that was the case, it is quite clear that forcing them to interview a minority candidate would be an entirely pointless exercise in some sort of political correctness.

The best post I've seen in this thread in favor of the rule is that because of past discrimination, a black candidate may not look as good "on paper," but still prove very impressive in an interview room. But don't try to claim that idea as yours, because it was posted before you entered and clearly not what you were getting at.

As far as the grammar, internet or not, I doubt anyone who talks like you is going to say something that I can't logically comprehend. Though grammar is not synonymous with logical reasoning, there is an education/IQ bridge that links the two.

Dottefan
05-21-2009, 12:15 AM
The only point I can see you possibly making with the contradiction in your post is that the owners want to win, but they are racist and believe that minority talent is limited to athletics and does not extend to the intelligence it would take to run a front office.

But then I thought that must not have been your point, because if that was the case, it is quite clear that forcing them to interview a minority candidate would be an entirely pointless exercise in some sort of political correctness.

The best post I've seen in this thread in favor of the rule is that because of past discrimination, a black candidate may not look as good "on paper," but still prove very impressive in an interview room. But don't try to claim that idea as yours, because it was posted before you entered and clearly not what you were getting at.

As far as the grammar, internet or not, I doubt anyone who talks like you is going to say something that I can't logically comprehend. Though grammar is not synonymous with logical reasoning, there is an education/IQ bridge that links the two.

Hold up there English lit 101 aka phillip..your eltist attitude is obviously clouding your mind... that was my whole point..The rule is there to make sure everyone gets a fair shot..so what I didnt post it first, big ****ing deal..my point was still there. and on a side note... bro really? who is lame enought to get on the net and start crying about GRAMMAR on a sports site..its not like this is a .org, or the Harvad Law review site..its a ****ing sports site..a sports site..for real men who drink beer, eat red meat, fart , and ****..not pansy who sip a nice merlot and wine about grammar..and just for kicks I missspeeled some words, forgot to capitilize some,and used comas and periods incorrectly.. just so you can bust a nut pointing them out..your welcome lol

jAZ
05-21-2009, 12:15 AM
How can anyone of any political view object to a private business implementing a self imposed rule?

Bumb.

blaise
05-21-2009, 10:00 AM
THE ONLY REASON THIS GUY STARTED THIS THREAD WAS TO RACE BAIT..TO GET ALL YOU WHITE GUYS FIRED UP....AND SOME OF YOU LAMES BOUGHT INTO IT..SAD...SO HERE IS MY 2 CENTS ON IT , JUST BECAUSE I SAW SO MANY RETARDED POST ...I HAD TO COMMENT, REGARDLES IF IT CONTRADICTS WHAT I JUST SAID....The whole point is that every one gets a shot... not that they HAVEto hire a minority coach... you ****ing retards did not read the ****ing post.. how stupid are you?...really..all these post about " the white man is getting screwed"..man, calm you asses down. ...all they are saying is because there is still situations in this country when a minority gets passed over because he or she is a minority..they want to make sure it is not happening in the league.and to all you ****ing idiots who said " well the league is 75% black, why not a rule for more white players"..you are a ****ing retard. period. the league will play any one who has talent regardless of race..because the bottom line is they want to win..hell they would put out a purple Asian guy at rb if he could run a sub 4.3 forty and cut like a dear..so lets not cry about the lack of white running backs , it has nothing to do with the front office not hiring qualified minority canidiates....those are two totaly diffrent things....

All us white guys weren't fired up. Try not to generalize based on race, especially since you're so offended by racial issues.

Garcia Bronco
05-21-2009, 12:42 PM
Not according to the Supreme Court.

Yeah, and our Supreme Court memebers, at least one of them, also thinks it's okay to drink and drive.

SPATCH
05-21-2009, 02:05 PM
Why doesn't baseball have a Rooney Rule, and why is nobody complaining?

coaching staffs are representative of the player population in the MLB.....

.... what the fuck about this concept is so hard for you to comprehend?

Dottefan
05-21-2009, 02:36 PM
All us white guys weren't fired up. Try not to generalize based on race, especially since you're so offended by racial issues.

Wow.....your stupid..were in my post does it say I am offended by racial issues.lol..also I said SOME OF YOU LAMES..NOT ALL ..LAMES MEANING THE PEOPLE WHO POSTED THOSE DUMB COMMENTS..I think some of the post were stupid, including yours...how you came up with that is beyond me. I responded..but never said I was offended..I dont take the net that seriously..you should really read something before you make a response..so you dont look like an ass ;)

blaise
05-21-2009, 03:10 PM
THE ONLY REASON THIS GUY STARTED THIS THREAD WAS TO RACE BAIT..TO GET ALL YOU WHITE GUYS FIRED UP....AND SOME OF YOU LAMES BOUGHT INTO IT..SAD...SO HERE IS MY 2 CENTS ON IT , JUST BECAUSE I SAW SO MANY RETARDED POST ...I HAD TO COMMENT, REGARDLES IF IT CONTRADICTS WHAT I JUST SAID....The whole point is that every one gets a shot... not that they HAVEto hire a minority coach... you ****ing retards did not read the ****ing post.. how stupid are you?...really..all these post about " the white man is getting screwed"..man, calm you asses down. ...all they are saying is because there is still situations in this country when a minority gets passed over because he or she is a minority..they want to make sure it is not happening in the league.and to all you ****ing idiots who said " well the league is 75% black, why not a rule for more white players"..you are a ****ing retard. period. the league will play any one who has talent regardless of race..because the bottom line is they want to win..hell they would put out a purple Asian guy at rb if he could run a sub 4.3 forty and cut like a dear..so lets not cry about the lack of white running backs , it has nothing to do with the front office not hiring qualified minority canidiates....those are two totaly diffrent things....

For a guy that says other people are so dumb, you're not very bright.

MoreLemonPledge
05-21-2009, 03:19 PM
coaching staffs are representative of the player population in the MLB.....

.... what the **** about this concept is so hard for you to comprehend?

How many hispanic managers are there?

Garcia Bronco
05-21-2009, 03:31 PM
LOL


Who says what the ratio should be? If there were a greater population of non-black players in line with the same ratio of non-black coaches to black-coaches as it is now then it would be all good? The best person for the job should be hired. End of story. If we end up having a greater ratio of black coaches than black player compared to non-black players does that mean we need to scale back the number of black coaches? Would we need a converse Rooney Rule?

You gonna answer these questions Spat?

38yrsfan
05-21-2009, 05:07 PM
this isn't 1950 and I would hire the person with the best skill set for the job. Hiring anyone on the basis of race or sex is illegal.

That is why I told her it was a paid interview. ;)

chiefzilla1501
05-21-2009, 05:53 PM
We live in a Republic not a democracy. You're talking about the NFL. I really don't care what any business does provided they don't break the law. I am talking about the concept of Affirmative Action, which is clearly in violation of our own laws.

The point is that Obama was elected by President by a fair and partial vote. Because CEOs and Executives are held in check by shareholders and board members, their hiring decisions are more fair and partial too.

On an NFL team, owners are not required to check decisions with anyone. They can hire anyone they want and keep them for as long as they want. Why do you think Peterson and Millen stayed in power for so long, even though the entire city demanded they be ousted. There is no freaking way that a Board of Directors would EVER let those guys stay in power as long as they did.

The NFL operates very differently from traditional businesses. Owners are not held in check, unless the league as a whole does it for them.

And again, you talk about a violation of our laws, but you can't explain why the Rooney Rule has existed for years and is NOT illegal.

Hydrae
05-21-2009, 05:56 PM
The point is that Obama was elected by President by a fair and partial vote. Because CEOs and Executives are held in check by shareholders and board members, their hiring decisions are more fair and partial too.

On an NFL team, owners are not required to check decisions with anyone. They can hire anyone they want and keep them for as long as they want. Why do you think Peterson and Millen stayed in power for so long, even though the entire city demanded they be ousted. There is no freaking way that a Board of Directors would EVER let those guys stay in power as long as they did.

The NFL operates very differently from traditional businesses. Owners are not held in check, unless the league as a whole does it for them.

And again, you talk about a violation of our laws, but you can't explain why the Rooney Rule has existed for years and is NOT illegal.

The owners ARE the league.

chiefzilla1501
05-21-2009, 06:08 PM
They hire the best talent for linemen regardless of race b/c they want to win. There's no reason for them to change that logic when hiring for the F.O.

Phillip, this is a great point, but it's very unrealistic of the way the business world works. Hiring is not about what you know, but who you know. In other words, people who hire want to hire friends or to help people that they know. If CEOs could hire their friends underneath them, they'd gladly do it even if it meant putting lesser qualified people in powerful positions. It's not because they don't want to win, but because they trust people in their inner network much more than someone they've never met before.

But in the business world, there are safeguards to make sure this "good ole' boy network" doesn't happen. Typically, hiring decisions involve multiple people, so that one person doesn't play favorites. Not to mention accountability--if you hire a buddy of yours and that buddy screws up on the job, then you get grilled for it--therefore, you have an incentive to hire the most qualified people. Finally, you have a diverse board of directors. These are people who make sure that when a CEO makes a hire, it's in the best interest of the shareholders, and not because of personal interest. Therefore, in the business world, while executives want to hire their friends, there are multiple checks in place to make sure they don't.

First of all, that check is not in place in the NFL. Owners can keep incompetent GMs in power for years and nobody can force that owner to change. Second of all, owners don't have to clear decisions with any kind of Board of Directors. So yes, the first instinct is to hire out of their inner network, which is most likely to be white. But to your point about why it happens in Front Offices and not with players.... how many individual players do you think an owner or GM knows on a very personal level? Very, very few. But guys they hire in Front Offices, these are usually guys that have worked with them for 10-20+ years or worked closely with someone that they know and trust. So there's a good reason why they'd hire their friends in the Front Office, but hire for "best available talent" in terms of players.

chiefzilla1501
05-21-2009, 06:10 PM
The owners ARE the league.

Yes, and they are all looking out for their best self interest. There is no way the owner of the Titans is going to call Lamar Hunt out because he's keeping Carl Peterson in power too long.

Owners will only keep each other in check when it comes to issues that give a team an unfair advantage over another. But if Kansas City wants to make stupid front office decisions, there's no reason owners in the league would raise a stir--it's one less team they have to worry about competing.

Hydrae
05-21-2009, 06:20 PM
Yes, and they are all looking out for their best self interest. There is no way the owner of the Titans is going to call Lamar Hunt out because he's keeping Carl Peterson in power too long.

Owners will only keep each other in check when it comes to issues that give a team an unfair advantage over another. But if Kansas City wants to make stupid front office decisions, there's no reason owners in the league would raise a stir--it's one less team they have to worry about competing.

Conversely, if there was a minority candidate out there that would increase their competetive edge they would hire them. There is no need to put in a rule to accomplish this, IMO.

chiefzilla1501
05-21-2009, 06:47 PM
Conversely, if there was a minority candidate out there that would increase their competetive edge they would hire them. There is no need to put in a rule to accomplish this, IMO.

You would think so, right? And yet, you see teams like the Chiefs and the Lions put up with incompetent Front Offices for years. Many called Peterson's Front Office his "cigar club" front office.

It's amazing that what you're saying isn't true. But the truth is, most owners (like most people, when not kept in check) will tend to hire people within their inner network. If that qualified minority candidate is not in their inner network, then he has a very big uphill climb to make just to get noticed.

This I do know for a fact. I have spoken with an Athletic Director at a major D-I University. I asked him about why the NCAA is struggling with minority coaching hires, and he commented that you would not believe how many Universities are not interviewing some incredible minority coaches who are in the current pipeline because they have somebody in mind before the interview process even starts. Their loss, he said.

phillip
05-21-2009, 07:34 PM
Yeah, and our Supreme Court memebers, at least one of them, also thinks it's okay to drink and drive.

I didn't say they made the best decision. But its not illegal if they say its not illegal.

TEX
05-22-2009, 10:14 PM
Its f@#!@#@! ridiculous!!! Why not have a whitey rule that they have to have more white RB's? What about the mexicans or asians? Just stupid BS!! A black person was hired for the highest position in the country, president, by the people without some BS rule! Hire the best MAN available for the position regardless of stupid color. If you want people to be color blind, why force them to look for color?

This!

Dottefan
05-22-2009, 11:30 PM
You would think so, right? And yet, you see teams like the Chiefs and the Lions put up with incompetent Front Offices for years. Many called Peterson's Front Office his "cigar club" front office.

:clap:It's amazing that what you're saying isn't true. But the truth is, most owners (like most people, when not kept in check) will tend to hire people within their inner network. If that qualified minority candidate is not in their inner network, then he has a very big uphill climb to make just to get noticed.

This I do know for a fact. I have spoken with an Athletic Director at a major D-I University. I asked him about why the NCAA is struggling with minority coaching hires, and he commented that you would not believe how many Universities are not interviewing some incredible minority coaches who are in the current pipeline because they have somebody in mind before the interview process even starts. Their loss, he said.:clap:

AND THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE ROONEY RULE.:clap:.GREAT POST.:clap:.I WISH THEY HAD THE SAME THING IN DIVISION 1 FOOTBALL. ...

wild1
05-23-2009, 02:25 AM
Giving people with no chance at the job an interview is not going to change a damn thing.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:09 AM
Where's the rule for Mexicans, Asians, and other races?

These guys are just blowing smoke up your asses to buy goodwill.

Notice they aren't including this type of affirmative action for black ownership of a team. That would cost them $$$.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:14 AM
Most of the players in the NFL are black.

Are we going to allow other races to play this game?

Are we going to have whites represented by racial population percentages?

Another dumb jackass rule. Anyone who contests this is a NEONAZI now. Nice going NFL.

This sh** will explode in their faces with LAWSUITS. Teams will get around it and watch the racial wars begin. Dumbasses.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:16 AM
This is the stupidest post that I have ever reed...you should not be allowed near a keyboard. I don't want to call you an angry white man cough cough.. but you are defiantly an Archie Bunker..

It's stupid to you but it's funny to me in that there is truth in it.

Nfl going down a bad path. Racial laws piss people off. It implies that the teams/clubs are all racist when most of the players are black.

Will go to court someday.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:21 AM
Because whites, mexicans, asians, etc... never went through a period of time when bigotry kept them from getting jobs they rightfully deserved. Asians were never asked to drink out of separate fountains and to attend different schools.

Black people in the 60's, 70's, and to a lesser but still significant extent 80's and 90's did not get jobs they deserved because of bigotry and racism. And so, when you compare the resume of a black guy who graduated in 1960 but was turned down from every school and job he applied to versus a non-black guy who got into those same schools, even if he was less qualified, then you can see how those resumes would be completely different. NFL ownership has a lot of croneyism. Owners hire within their inner networks. And most of those networks don't have a lot of black people, not because they're racist, but because their entire life they've worked with white people. Frankly, I don't think this problem will be fixed until we get more young owners. Rather than wait 10-15 years for that to happen, the Rooney Rule accelerates that process.

What an affirmative action baby. Blacks have failed themselves. They always blame racism for their inability to make it in the USA but then look at Asians who come off the boat.

All the colleges in the USA have to take underqualified blacks because of 'racial laws'.

The public's anger with these laws are growing.

This is a FREE country(supposedly).

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:23 AM
Yup, that's why guys like Gunther Cunningham, Jim Haslett, Mike Martz, Mike Sherman, and Dick Jauron keep getting hired. They're the best, there's no good ol' boys network.


RON PRINCE WORKED OUT WELL!

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:26 AM
I can promise you, when I moved down here, I found out extreme racism leading to not hiring someone based on skin color, still exists in this country.

This is a free country. That's 'their' loss then.

Your people just don't understand the USA. It's called freedom. This freedom conflicts with your ideals of government controlling who business can hire.

It's angering the public when they see less qualified people getting scholarships based on race.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 03:34 AM
12.8% of people in the US are black. 22% of head coaches in the NFL are black last I checked. I think that's more than fair now.

The blacks want more because they always use the tired argument that 'most of the players are black'. LOL.

Do we want affirmative action in the NFL? Most of the Black players would be fired.

MoreLemonPledge
05-23-2009, 05:02 AM
C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!!

Sorry, but 7 posts in a row?

phillip
05-23-2009, 09:13 AM
Hold up there English lit 101 aka phillip..your eltist attitude is obviously clouding your mind... that was my whole point..The rule is there to make sure everyone gets a fair shot..so what I didnt post it first, big ****ing deal..my point was still there. and on a side note... bro really? who is lame enought to get on the net and start crying about GRAMMAR on a sports site..its not like this is a .org, or the Harvad Law review site..its a ****ing sports site..a sports site..for real men who drink beer, eat red meat, fart , and ****..not pansy who sip a nice merlot and wine about grammar..and just for kicks I missspeeled some words, forgot to capitilize some,and used comas and periods incorrectly.. just so you can bust a nut pointing them out..your welcome lol

LOL, English Lit. I took one semester of English in college. One. Don't pretend you're purposely mispelling and using poor grammar because you're on a sports site. This was not a case of making a few simple typos that you didn't bother to correct. It's obvious you're just plain dumb. If I look like "Harvard Law Review" in comparison to you after taking one semester of English 7 years ago, you have an IQ problem.

Like I said, I don't care about fixing your grammar and pointing out your errors (which I obviously haven't done). I'm not trying to correct you and teach you English. My point was that someone of your intelligence/education isn't making comments that I can't comprehend or that are "going over my head."

If this was a forum in which we communicated using math, I'd be making note your intellect because you can't add. If we communicated by video here, I'd make note of the fact that you can't tie your shoes.

Don't take it out on me that you went to jail 10 years ago instead of finishing high school. I think its probably quite clear now that you're incapable of asserting some great, complex idea that my feeble mind just can't grasp. I think 3 posts on the matter should be enough to get it across. Either way, I won't bother with a fourth.

Back to the Rooney rule discussion: I think Chiefzilla's and the other argument I mentioned before both have some merit. Overall though, I think we've done enough compensating and its time to go with the color-blind approach, especially in a place like the NFL, where race is not much of a factor anymore.

I think economic status would be a better measure. At least in this area of the country, being poor will set you back equally whether you're white or black. I think a wealthy minority child in a good school district is already better off than a poor white kid going to bad schools. The problem will be exaggerated when the minority leapfrogs the white kid in college and employment opportunities.

whoman69
05-23-2009, 10:26 AM
We have plenty of black position coaches and coordinators in football. That's why the Rooney rule can work.

I would have to guess that front offices are not that way. Until there is a program put in place like they did with coaches to get more blacks into front offices, there is no real way that you can claim they are qualified to do the job.


They were stating on NFL network that if an expanded season goes into place, the Super Bowl could be going on at the same time as Mardi Gras. Talk about a clusterf*ck going on there. Just another reason to stop the insanity of trying to expand the schedule. They will have championship games in cold weather cities at the end of January. Plus watch some star player get hurt in the 18th game of the season and kill their team's playoff chances.

SPATCH
05-23-2009, 01:17 PM
How many hispanic managers are there?

I believe there are three hispanic managers currently... which is pretty impressive considering that they have to get over this thing called a LANGUAGE BARRIER

You gonna answer these questions Spat?

you're going to have to rephrase what you said... because i really didn't understand what you were getting at with that post...

MoreLemonPledge
05-23-2009, 03:17 PM
I believe there are three hispanic managers currently... which is pretty impressive considering that they have to get over this thing called a LANGUAGE BARRIER

3/30 is 10%. I believe that more than 10% of baseball players are Hispanic. There's your representative population.

googlegoogle
05-23-2009, 05:34 PM
Maybe blacks need to create their own football league since the NFL is so racist.

Don't allow whites to go to the games. That'll show em.

Chaunceythe3rd
05-23-2009, 06:55 PM
Hey, I'm handicapped and my feelings are hurt because there are no one-legged quarterbacks. I want a rule that requires every team to have at least one amputee on their roster and that they have to play the guy at least 10 plays per game to show that the team "really, really cares". Then, and only then, will my delicate sensibilities be satisfied.