The Rooney Rule
 

I totally agree with diversity in coaching and equal opportunity for all. However ... Under the Rooney Rule, a team is required to interview one minority candidate. What if they have one or several non-minority coaches in mind? Well, then they still have to interview a minority to satisfy the rule, thus wasting everyone's time. That seems pointless, but I know it's politics.


Sorry if Repost

Holy shit you're right!
How did no one realize this before?

:bravo:

My fault. I should have made a thread about Herm getting fired.

The real problem with it, IMO, is that the minority candidates might see the writing on the wall as far as the Chiefs looking hard at Shanahan or Cowher, and refuse to bother interviewing. It's not a problem taking the time to interview them, but nobody wants to be seen as just fulfilling the requirements of the rule.

I would think they would do it anyways. To get a feel on what to say and do and learn from the experience. It could only help for future interviews where the GM/owner don't have their guy already.

It boggles my mind that people continue to discuss the Rooney Rule. It is completely and utterly insignificent.

The last team that didn't follow the guidelines of the Rooney Rule was fined $200,000.

That's it.

Clark Hunt wipes his ass with more money than that.

True, but that's the only time it ever happened, and I doubt it's likely to happen again.

repizzle times eleventybillion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

since they took a "good long hard look" at herm, does that count?

Shouldn't HAVING a minority HC and considering keeping him, and after giving him fair consideration, canning him count?


Just sayin...

He just lit 4 mil. on fire when he canned Herm, but I'm sure the 200K would give him pause.

Well, IIRC the coach at Pitts was not high on their list but was their Rooney rule guy. He got hired. So, the rule does work and as Kclee said, it prepares them for future interviews.

In a way it can help teams not rush into a decision.

Now, it does seem that some of these teams already have their coach lined up before they start.

Also, we just had a Black coach. It seems to me they should make an execption for those teams. They have already demonstrated that color of skin is not an issue with them. But, that doesn't seem to matter.

Welcome to the P.C.U.S.A.

it should, but doesn't

they have a "incumbents don't count" clause in the rule

I have no problem with this rule.

so why aren't the asian, mexican, american-indians up in arms..... oh that's right this is carry over from Affirmative Action. :)

Pioli should interview Herm for the head coach position just to show how worthless this "tick the box" rule is...

When it first came out the Lions got in trouble because no minorities would interview knowing they were looking at Mariuchi (sp).

um ...... the incumbent coach doesn't count for the 100th time

We have a ****ing black president and we need the god damned Rooney rule? Seriously, enough is enough....

Move forward but live in the past. Gotta love it. heh

The rule was antiquated as soon as it was written.

Seriously, if an owner passes up a better more qualified coach because of color, he deserves to lose. Bad buisness is all it is. In America you should be able to interview or hire whoever you want for your buisness.

I look forward to the day that they start requiring teams to have white cornerbacks. You know, for fairness.

yep, what about racial balance for the players!!!!!!

Honestly i think this rule is a bunch of bull crap

Does the Rooney rule apply to a fired black to be replaced with a clearly more qualified white guy in shanahan?

Somewhat, if all the presidents up to Obama were as black as stuck matches and he was the president everyone would be saying he is white.

Well then Chiefs Planet needs to update it's search engine. I typed "Rooney Rule" in the search engine and all I got was the latests posts about Shanahan, Herm, etc. I never try to repost, and I don't spend 24 hours per day on this board. Sorry if repost.

Afraid to say it but you can't really trust the search engines here. sometimes they are dead on and others they do exactly what you just said.

I don't know the in's and out's of the rule, but if a team can demonstrate that it made an effort to schedule interviews with a minority candidate, I would think the NFL would waive the rule. I mean, what would Pioli have to do, put an ad in the Classifieds of the KC Star asking for the first minority to show up at Arrowhead for a Head Coaching interview?

Here's another thought. If current demographic trends continue and we eventually have more people of Hispanic descent, would Mike Shanahan count as a minority candidate?

The rule may have outlived its usefulness, but I don't think it's a coincidence that the NFL has improved markedly with black head coach hires and yet the NCAA has such a low representation of black coaches for major D-1 teams.
If black coaches are becoming so successful in the NFL, then why aren't we seeing more of them on the college level?

I don't think it's a bad rule. It forced teams to at least become aware of the diversity problem, and it was a very big problem previously. The reason the Rooney rule existed was because black assistants in the 70's, 80's, and early 90's were not given jobs they deserved because of racially prejudiced owners and GMs. The problem doesn't exist today and I think that's largely due to the Rooney rule.

The NCAA, on the other hand, is still a huge step behind.

I'm not for affirmative action, but if we are going to have it, it makes more sense to have it in the pros. That Gunther could get another job after his disgraceful performance with us show to me the level of cronyism in the NFL. I don't think that's the case in college.

What's interesting is how much power the fans ("boosters") have in college football. No way Herm could have lasted as long as he did if "boosters" controlled the Chiefs.