Regarding Interviewing minorities for HC positions

[MikesVikes]

At what point does it reach the embarrassing stage when a minority interviews for a head coaching position and he doesn't get one? Leslie Frazier has interviewed for several jobs already and has more to go. What if he's a "finalist" for 15 jobs but isn't picked for any of them. This wouldn't look good for the NFL, imo. If I were him, I'd hate being the token candidate to interview. Like can the Lions do any worse than they already have done in the past if they gave him a serious look? I don't think so.

[Whiskey Pimp]

I completely agree. When does this rule (Rooney Rule) become a slap in the face to those it's supposed to benefit?

[Outshined]

At what point does it reach the embarrassing stage when a minority interviews for a head coaching position and he doesn't get one? Leslie Frazier has interviewed for several jobs already and has more to go. What if he's a "finalist" for 15 jobs but isn't picked for any of them. This wouldn't look good for the NFL, imo. If I were him, I'd hate being the token candidate to interview. Like can the Lions do any worse than they already have done in the past if they gave him a serious look? I don't think so.

 

Maybe he sucks at interviewing or speaking? Didn't Tomlin get hired after his 1st interview? Besides, what has he done to warrant a head coaching position? With the defense players they have assembled, I expected a little more from them?

Edited January 14, 2009 by Outshined

[Galloping Ghost]

~~~

 

I agree that any rule based on a racial quota will ultimately do more harm than good.

 

~~~

[jackshi17]

It appears that some teams are avoiding the rule by appointing a "coach in waiting" i.e. Mora in Seattle.

[Ziachild007]

Somwe cases it may be a "token interview." But if they do well in the interview, then they could surprisingly end up with the job or at least get a great reference for future openings.

[cdrudge]

It appears that some teams are avoiding the rule by appointing a "coach in waiting" i.e. Mora in Seattle.

Or Caldwell in Indy. Wait, bad example.

 

Granted I'm not a minority, but at the level of the NFL is racism really that big of a deal? Are teams seriously looking at a coach's skin color first to see if they are the best option for a team? I would have thought a team would want to hire the best coach possible, regardless of skin color. Same thing goes for affirmative action in the workplace, acceptance into college, etc. But maybe it's the male, white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, hetrosexual, middle-class person in me speaking with blinders on.

[MTSuper7]

~~~

 

I agree that any rule based on a racial quota will ultimately do more harm than good.

 

~~~

 

There was a point in time where this clearly was not true, but I'm not sure if we are still in that point in time. The University of Michigan got busted for affirmative action rules which essentially mandated that they accept a prerequisite number/percentage of minority students for admission, regardless if they were as qualified as other, non-minority students. The real spirit of affirmative action (and the NFL's rules regarding hiring coaches, as it is) is to make sure that minorities are being given the same opportunities as anyone else. Unfortunately this intention seems to have faded away over the years...

 

So now we have issues where guys like Frazier have to wonder why they are brought in for interviews. Is it because they are qualified for HC positions? Or is it because of the color of their skin?

[isleseeya]

Best man for the job should be hired whether he is white , black , or blue

 

all should be given a fair shot regardless of color but no one should be forced to hire someone because of their color

 

Our new president , highest and most powerful position in the US and the world , is black ... that should kill any idea that minorities can not make it if they do not get very special treatment or assistance

Edited January 15, 2009 by isleseeya

[Ursa Majoris]

The rule is flat out stupid. Teams will hire the best guy in their opinion, same as they hire the best RB, WR, DL, etc based on performance and potential.

 

Is there a rule mandating all teams must have at least one white RB? None of these people whining about the supposed lack of black coaches ever seems to whine about the preponderance of black people in the playing ranks or in the NBA. Why is that?

[Randall]

In 2003, the NFL fined the Detroit Lions $200,000 for failure to interview minority candidates for the team's vacant head coaching job.

 

They should have fined them to keeping Millen.

 

I like the idea of interviewing and considering minorities but fining teams makes no sense. I'd rather see them encourage teams to hire lower level people so they can get experience and be hired later if they are good candidates. Start at the bottom somehow.

[Ursa Majoris]

+1

 

If there's no encouragement at the middle levels, then how does one get the experience necessary for HC?

The same way all the current black HCs have - by working their way up and demonstrating talent. What is this "encouragement" of which you speak?

 

There's at least six current black HCs (Edwards, Smith, Caldwell, Singletary, Lewis, Tomlin off the top of my head), which is 18.75% of all HCs. Black population of the US is 12.8% of the total population. By these color blind stats, blacks are actually ahead of expectation as HCs.

[Ursa Majoris]

The Rooney Rule.

Which, as I've noted above, is an outdated nonsense.

[Bill Swerski]

Which, as I've noted above, is an outdated nonsense.

 

Yep, it's been outdated for at least 20 years. Hopefully more Tony Dungys and Mike Tomlins come along and the rule becomes even more useless.

Edited January 15, 2009 by Bill Swerski

[gbpfan1231]

The NFL is a WIN now league and I would think and hope that a team would hire the coach that gives them the best chance to win regardless of what color the person is.

 

Same with every position on the team. There is always talk of why not more black QB's. Maybe it is because there are not as many black QB's that give that team the best chance at winning. Teams don't have any issues signing black RB's or DB's so if a black QB gives them the best chance to win I would hope that person would get the job.

[PatsFanCT]

The same way all the current black HCs have - by working their way up and demonstrating talent. What is this "encouragement" of which you speak?

 

There's at least six current black HCs (Edwards, Smith, Caldwell, Singletary, Lewis, Tomlin off the top of my head), which is 18.75% of all HCs. Black population of the US is 12.8% of the total population. By these color blind stats, blacks are actually ahead of expectation as HCs.

 

Uh, the increase of black head coaches is because of the Rooney Rule, so apparently this is a good rule. Why are people complaining about equal opportunity? Without this rule, some of these black coaches would still be coordinators. The rule is in place not to make a team hire a black coach, but to give black coaches the same exposure potential white coaches are getting. College football should incorporate the same rule.

[FishFreak]

The same way all the current black HCs have - by working their way up and demonstrating talent. What is this "encouragement" of which you speak?

 

There's at least six current black HCs (Edwards, Smith, Caldwell, Singletary, Lewis, Tomlin off the top of my head), which is 18.75% of all HCs. Black population of the US is 12.8% of the total population. By these color blind stats, blacks are actually ahead of expectation as HCs.

 

Using percentages is pointless and reinforces silly quotas which nobody likes including minorities. For instance, let's say the NFL's players are 75% black. Should the coaching staffs be 75% also?

[FishFreak]

The problem many people are forgetting is than many minority candidates weren't being considered or even being given the opportunity to interview for HC jobs. That in itself is clearly racial bias. It doesn't make someone a rascist but maybe a older white male owner just isn't as comfortable handing a HC job to a minority than a white guy. You have to remember there is a big difference in generations like experiencing the Civil Rights Movement or being a 70's/80's baby. Anyway...The NFL got threatened (and rightfully so) and made changes. The rule clearly isn't perfect and has flaws (like the Leslie example) but we don't live in a perfect world either. It's kind of like a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. When ever you force quotas on organizations, it always makes the candidates seem unqualified because they are force feeding candidates into numerical goals. Some maybe ideal candidates that would have otherwise not gotten the opportunity while others may just be jokes.

 

I can tell you that there are still trends regarding racial biases in the NFL. One that I've noticed for a while now is that most minority Assistant Coordinators that rise up the ranks tend to be on the defensive side of the ball. I don't see too many minority O-coordinators which tends to be more of a strategic, "thinking" position as if minorities aren't able to handle that. It's kind of like why it took so long to let minorities play QB which is a thinking, leadership type of position and usually the face of a franchise. I don't know if the Coordinator/HC thing is just a lack of opportunity, stereotypical bullsh*t or just filtered down from the college ranks but it's an annoying trend that has taken a while to change.

 

To be fair and speak on this from both sides of the fence, professional balck atheletes (particularly football players) continue to stregthen negative stereotypes. If you're an owner or VP running an organization and many guys on your teams thru the years beat their wives, do drugs, are involved in shootings, etc. it certainly doesn't help the good guys trying to get ahead. It's certainly a two way street..........

[Ursa Majoris]

Uh, the increase of black head coaches is because of the Rooney Rule, so apparently this is a good rule. Why are people complaining about equal opportunity? Without this rule, some of these black coaches would still be coordinators. The rule is in place not to make a team hire a black coach, but to give black coaches the same exposure potential white coaches are getting. College football should incorporate the same rule.

Sorry, I don't accept that as there is zero evidence to prove it. It is just as likely that the current level of black HCs would have been reached simply because more black people are entering the coaching ranks, being successful and working their way up.

 

Using percentages is pointless and reinforces silly quotas which nobody likes including minorities. For instance, let's say the NFL's players are 75% black. Should the coaching staffs be 75% also?

The point is that some people are still droning on about the "lack of black head coaches" when, based on the prevalence of races in the general population and the supposition that all men are equal, it is simply not true.

 

ETA: This was posted before I saw the previous post.

Edited January 15, 2009 by Ursa Majoris

[PatsFanCT]

Sorry, I don't accept that as there is zero evidence to prove it. It is just as likely that the current level of black HCs would have been reached simply because more black people are entering the coaching ranks, being successful and working their way up.

 

 

The point is that some people are still droning on about the "lack of black head coaches" when, based on the prevalence of races in the general population and the supposition that all men are equal, it is simply not true.

 

ETA: This was posted before I saw the previous post.

 

You don't have to accept it, and you might even be right. But you posted the % of black coaches in the league as being 18.75% when the fact is only a few years ago, before the Rooney Rule, that number was 5%. That says a lot. And when you compare it to the college ranks today, which is still only around 4%, that speaks volumes...and I really, really hate the term "speaks volumes" , but that's what it does.

[Ursa Majoris]

You don't have to accept it, and you might even be right. But you posted the % of black coaches in the league as being 18.75% when the fact is only a few years ago, before the Rooney Rule, that number was 5%. That says a lot. And when you compare it to the college ranks today, which is still only around 4%, that speaks volumes...and I really, really hate the term "speaks volumes" , but that's what it does.

I completely agree about the old ratio - pre-Art Shell, it was zero. But that glass ceiling has been completely shattered now, as it has in the NBA, and a good thing too. Time for people with a grievance to realize it's been redressed - and I really would like to think that black coaches made it on their own merits, not because of some artificial rule. Still, I can't say for sure the Rooney Rule didn't help any more than anyone can say it did.

[Seahawks21]

I apologize that I don't have a link, but I saw a story either on these boards or ESPN.com a few years ago that said that black players play harder and with more discipline when they play for white coaches. This was a few years back, so I don't know how much has changed, but that could be a factor to consider. Who really knows about the relevancy of numbers like that? That would be an awfully hard study to perform.

There really has been a lot of progress. Seven years ago, Frazier would have been lucky to get an interview or two. As of now, I would bet he has a job within the next year. I don't think we'll be near 50% equal in the next 25 years, but there should be more progress made once some of the current black coaches lose guys from their coaching trees for promotions from other teams. Wayyyyy down the line we're going to have an influx of black owners as well. Maybe the coaching and front office numbers will jump at that point.

[cdrudge]

 

Using percentages is pointless and reinforces silly quotas which nobody likes including minorities. For instance, let's say the NFL's players are 75% black. Should the coaching staffs be 75% also?

No, not necessarily, but obviously we need a rule that teams must tryout at least one token white guy for each position, even if they don't have any intentions of signing them. You gotta give a white guy a chance to maintain a sense of racial diversity and equality.

[detlef]

Maybe he sucks at interviewing or speaking? Didn't Tomlin get hired after his 1st interview? Besides, what has he done to warrant a head coaching position? With the defense players they have assembled, I expected a little more from them?

Are you implying that Tomlin is not doing a good job? It is hard enough to win in the NFL and no team is so loaded anymore that anyone should realistically "expect a little more" than hosting a conference championship. At least to the extent that you feel even vaguely disappointed with a guy in his second year as an NFL head coach if his team is in that position.

 

In general, I see plenty about both sides of the argument to be annoyed by and supportive of. I do think it is somewhat naive to think that there's no "old boys" network among NFL execs. Just look at the amount of re-treads that have gotten jobs. Execs feel comfortable with the same-ole and the same-ole just happens to be white. The main argument in favor of the rule is that, even if they're token invites, at least they're getting guys a chance to interview, and get better at the process. Guys who don't fit the comfort zone profile of the execs. Additionally, Tomlin is a perfect example. Dude was the token interview for Pitt and he blew them away. Now he's coaching his team in the AFC Championship.

 

All that said, it is still tough to ever come to grips with the notion of quotas. By nature, they're a bit unsavory and ironically, blatantly racist in their own right. In a world that should strive to be color-blind in these regards, they unintentionally force the opposite upon us.

 

As for the comparison between players and coaches, I think that is a rather silly notion. The NFL uses a lot of very quantifiable data to determine who will be a good player. Size, strength, speed, jumping ability, agility... Perhaps to a fault in some cases (particularly QB it seems). However, none the less, it's a lot more cut and dry than determining who's going to be a good HC. If you don't want to talk to anyone who's slower than 4.5 for your open RB position and none of the applicants that fast are white, then it's pretty simple, you're talking to black guys.

 

There's no metric relevant to coaching acumen so you absolutely need to at least talk to a guy and find out. That's the difference.

Edited January 16, 2009 by detlef