Brian Flores Sues NYG and NFL for Racial Discrimination (1 Viewer)

[ignatiusjreilly]

Ultra competitive NFL where it’s winning at all cost isn’t hiring better coaches because they are black. Riiiiiiiiight. Now I’ve heard everything.  

If you think the fact that these are high-stakes decisions means that people must be acting in their rational self-interest, all I can say is that you've clearly never been in the boardroom of a Fortune 500 company.

I'm also reminded of the old joke about two economists walking down the street who see a $100 bill. "Do you think it's real?" asks the first. "Nah," says the second. "If it were, someone would have picked it up already."

 

[Yenrub]

I think there seems to be a pre-supposition that there is some sort of natural progression of NFL players becoming NFL coaches. But I’m not so sure that’s how it works most of the time. 

About 50% of college FBS players are black. About 37% are white. 

About 58% of NFL players are black and 25% are white.

So we need to ask ourselves 2 questions I think:

1) What causes those percentages to shift in favor of black players from college to the NFL and

2) At what age/stage of life does the average NFL coach begin coaching?

I don’t know the answer to that, but my gut says:

-black athletes gain and white athletes lose from college to the NFL because black athletes are outperforming white athletes in football

-white athletes that realize they aren’t moving on to the NFL are hopping into coaching earlier than black athletes and it’s giving them a long term advantage. There could also be an unfair financial component here where white coaches are able to live off of the peanuts that young coaches often make thanks to family support while others may not have the financial option of grinding for peanuts for years.

If those are actually the reasons, then I’m not sure how the NFL fixes things without simply being patently unfair to white players/coaches who wipe out of football earlier and don’t have the chance to make NFL player money but start the coaching grind earlier. Do they lose out twice to black athletes because of a wrongly perpetuated belief that the path to NFL coaching goes college player>NFL player>NFL coach?

We already know that black players have some sort of unfair advantage over white players to getting into the NFL and making those big bucks by looking at the numbers. I think we’re probably all in agreement that that is the case because those men earned their spots in the NFL through performance. That makes sense to me as to why black players are over represented in the NFL compared to their percentage of US population, even though it comes at the expense of white players.

But so far the best, basically only, argument I see being made for a similar over representation of black coaches at the expense of white coaches is “because there are more black players than white players”, but that argument has zero merit unless there is proof that playing in the NFL has a strong correlation with better NFL coaches. Until someone can show me that data/proof, consider me unpersuaded as to the merits of that argument.

There are over 200 FBS & FCS football programs. All with at least 60 players each. 

Only a very small percentage of college players make it to the NFL.  There are plenty of former college players of all races who never even sniffed the NFL 

 

[PhillipPhoto]

If you think the fact that these are high-stakes decisions means that people must be acting in their rational self-interest, all I can say is that you've clearly never been in the boardroom of a Fortune 500 company.

I'm also reminded of the old joke about two economists walking down the street who see a $100 bill. "Do you think it's real?" asks the first. "Nah," says the second. "If it were, someone would have picked it up already."

Since I have been in the boardroom of a fortune 500 company that makes zero sence.  They're tripping all over themselves right now to put women and minorities in higher positions in the company. 

 

[DropKick]

I don’t think they’re arguing that it’s “therefore racial discrimination.” It’s actually simpler than that: the players that are black want to see more black coaches. Black people in general want to see more black coaches. That’s their position. I think they’ll get what they want, eventually. 

I think we need less black coaches.  More Irish... more Mexican too.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Since I have been in the boardroom of a fortune 500 company that makes zero sence.  They're tripping all over themselves right now to put women and minorities in higher positions in the company. 

I was speaking more generally. Even with billions of dollars at stake, companies make boneheaded moves all the time (I was thinking in particular about mergers and acquisitions that almost always end up destroying shareholder value, although I suppose one could argue such moves are completely rational if the goal is to maximize the CEO's take-home pay). Also, companies who are tripping over themselves to hire women and minorities are, in fact, acting rationally, since studies show that increases shareholder value.

In any event, I don't want the metaphor to distract from my main point, which is that your contention that the "ultra-competitive" nature of the NFL means that teams must be acting rationally in their hiring processes is clearly not true. 

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

The perception is that the NFL is ultra-competitive but it’s just that a perception

Teams that have not had any significant success for decades are still raking in money hand over fist

Lions?  Jets?  What do you consider significant?   Every team out there would love to pull a Bengals and win all of a sudden.  Very few are content with raking in money and being the Lions or Jets.

 

[PhillipPhoto]

Ok, we've narrowed it down to the Lions and Jets that are racist. Boot those two teams and problem solved. 

 

[Yenrub]

Lions?  Jets?  What do you consider significant?   Every team out there would love to pull a Bengals and win all of a sudden.  Very few are content with raking in money and being the Lions or Jets.

Yes I agree that they all would want to pull off what the Bengals just did but they aren't REALLY upset if/when they don't. Because the money is coming in regardless.

There are a handful of teams that have only been to the playoffs once in the last decade. Giants, Jets, Browns, Jaguars and Dolphins.

Two of those teams are in the top 10 of the NFL in terms of franchise worth. Giants are #3 and the are around 6 or 7.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Yes I agree that they all would want to pull off what the Bengals just did but they aren't REALLY upset if/when they don't. Because the money is coming in regardless.

There are a handful of teams that have only been to the playoffs once in the last decade. Giants, Jets, Browns, Jaguars and Dolphins.

Two of those teams are in the top 10 of the NFL in terms of franchise worth. Giants are #3 and the are around 6 or 7.

This came up in the thread I started about the NFL's hiring practices. I mostly don't buy it. I'm sure there are owners who are content to cash 'dem checks and don't care how the team does (Donald Sterling comes to mind), but I definitely don't think that explains all, or even most, of them. Daniel Snyder is a lifelong Washington fan who desperately wants to win, but can't get out of his own way. The only plausible explanation is that he's just not very good at his job and makes dumb moves that are clearly irrational (even in the moment, literally no one thought signing Albert Haynesworth was a good idea). Jerry Jones is another one who made one very smart decision 30 years ago to hire Jimmy Johnson and has screwed up lots of things since, including making himself the GM. He made another smart move in recent years in handing responsibilities over to his more analytical son, and it was Stephen who (barely) talked him into drafting Zack Martin over Johnny Manziel in 2014. Then again, it was some combination of Jerry and Stephen who decided to hire Mike McCarthy. 

In other words, I reject your hypothesis that they don't care about winning, but I also reject @PhillipPhoto's hypothesis that their desire to win means they are, by definition, acting rationally. 

 

[GroveDiesel]

Interesting post, but this paragraph confused me. First you say it's an "unfair" advantage, then you say the Black players "earned their spots through performance". Wouldn't that make it a "fair" advantage, then?

In any event, this kind of gets at what I was talking about in my previous post. I firmly believe the NFL's player selection process is about as close as you can get to a pure meritocracy (it wasn't always the case, as in the past Black QBs weren't given a fair chance and were often forced to switch positions, but those problems are mostly gone at this point.) Because it's a meritocracy, I don't really care about the discrepancy or what causes it. 

The coach-selection process, meanwhile, is nowhere near a meritocracy. In addition to whatever racial bias is at play, there's also nepotism, tunnel vision, the over-reliance on familiar names, etc. Again, I don't think the numbers by themselves prove anything, especially with such a small sample size, but they are suggestive. Far more relevant IMO is the experiences described by Black coaching candidates -- the sham interviews, the roadblocks and objections that prevent them from getting hired, the shorter leashes once they do get the job. You can probably look at any individual case and rationalize it, but taken as a whole they indicate to me there's something going on.

This is perfectly fair. As I said in a previous post, I think that a large number of owners/GMs/coaches are bad at hiring in general. And I’m certainly not naive enough to believe that racial bias may not play a factor at times. I’m just not persuaded much by the numbers arguments that are being made. 

 

[GroveDiesel]

There will always be arguments about the reasons. But whatever the reasons, there needs to be more black head coaches. And no it’s not racist to say so. 

It’s not racist, but it certainly seems discriminatory.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

This is perfectly fair. As I said in a previous post, I think that a large number of owners/GMs/coaches are bad at hiring in general. And I’m certainly not naive enough to believe that racial bias may not play a factor at times. I’m just not persuaded much by the numbers arguments that are being made. 

Got it. Sounds like we're in agreement. I think it was just the word "unfair" that threw me.

 

[timschochet]

It’s not racist, but it certainly seems discriminatory.

Of course. All decisions of this sort are discriminatory. 
 

Many people here think that race should play no role whatsoever in hiring NFL head coaches. I can respect that point of view, I understand it. But I disagree with it. 

 

[GroveDiesel]

Got it. Sounds like we're in agreement. I think it was just the word "unfair" that threw me.

Yeah, that was poor wording/communication on my part. Probably should have put it in quotes or used a word like “unbalanced”. 

 

[Yenrub]

This came up in the thread I started about the NFL's hiring practices. I mostly don't buy it. I'm sure there are owners who are content to cash 'dem checks and don't care how the team does (Donald Sterling comes to mind), but I definitely don't think that explains all, or even most, of them. Daniel Snyder is a lifelong Washington fan who desperately wants to win, but can't get out of his own way. The only plausible explanation is that he's just not very good at his job and makes dumb moves that are clearly irrational (even in the moment, literally no one thought signing Albert Haynesworth was a good idea). Jerry Jones is another one who made one very smart decision 30 years ago to hire Jimmy Johnson and has screwed up lots of things since, including making himself the GM. He made another smart move in recent years in handing responsibilities over to his more analytical son, and it was Stephen who (barely) talked him into drafting Zack Martin over Johnny Manziel in 2014. Then again, it was some combination of Jerry and Stephen who decided to hire Mike McCarthy. 

In other words, I reject your hypothesis that they don't care about winning, but I also reject @PhillipPhoto's hypothesis that their desire to win means they are, by definition, acting rationally. 

Its fine that you disagree with me, I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind, but IMO winning is a very very very distant 2nd to making money for these organizations.

Also using Daniel “two books” Snyder as an example of someone who cares more about winning than making money is a very poor choice.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Its fine that you disagree with me, I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind, but IMO winning is a very very very distant 2nd to making money for these organizations.

Also using Daniel “two books” Snyder as an example of someone who cares more about winning than making money is a very poor choice.

Look buster, I'm a lifelong Washington fan, so there's no way you're going to trick me into defending Daniel Snyder. How dare you. HOW DARE YOU!       

In any event, I agree you can't say he cares "more" about winning. If he were committed to delivering a winning franchise above all else, he would recognize that the best thing he could do is sell the team. But of course he won't, because his outsized ego won't allow him to see that he's the problem. So I would say that he is greedy AF and also that he mistakenly believes that he is the person best suited to help the team achieve the success he desperately wants. But I definitely don't think he's a Sterling type who is indifferent to winning.

 

[Summer Wheat]

Seems like a good firing now. Dolphins look sharp and precise.

 

[Max Power]

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are set to face off against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday. At a mid-week press conference with the Bucs’ head coach Todd Bowles, several reporters latched on to the fact that both head coaches happen to be Black.

As ESPN reported, someone began the narrative by asking Bowles about the match-up against Steelers Coach Mike Tomlin, who is also Black:

“I have a very good relationship with Tomlin,” Bowles said Wednesday when asked about them being two of the league’s four Black coaches, a group that now includes Steve Wilks, who replaced the fired Matt Rhule on an interim basis this week in Carolina. “We don’t look at what color we are when we coach against each other, we just know each other.
“I have a lot of very good white friends that coach in this league as well, and I don’t think it’s a big deal as far as us coaching against each other, I think it’s normal. Wilks got an opportunity to do a good job, hopefully he does it. And we coach ball, we don’t look at color.”

ESPN reporter Jenna Laine then asked this follow-up question:

Bowles then was asked about the impact of representation and what it means for aspiring coaches who are minorities to see NFL coaches who “looks like them” and possibly “grew up like them.”
“Well, when you say, ‘They see you guys,’ and ‘look like them and grew up like them,’ it means that we’re oddballs to begin with,” Bowles said. “I think the minute you guys stop making a big deal about it, everybody else will as well.”

 

[dickey moe]

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are set to face off against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday. At a mid-week press conference with the Bucs’ head coach Todd Bowles, several reporters latched on to the fact that both head coaches happen to be Black.

As ESPN reported, someone began the narrative by asking Bowles about the match-up against Steelers Coach Mike Tomlin, who is also Black:

“I have a very good relationship with Tomlin,” Bowles said Wednesday when asked about them being two of the league’s four Black coaches, a group that now includes Steve Wilks, who replaced the fired Matt Rhule on an interim basis this week in Carolina. “We don’t look at what color we are when we coach against each other, we just know each other.
“I have a lot of very good white friends that coach in this league as well, and I don’t think it’s a big deal as far as us coaching against each other, I think it’s normal. Wilks got an opportunity to do a good job, hopefully he does it. And we coach ball, we don’t look at color.”

ESPN reporter Jenna Laine then asked this follow-up question:

Bowles then was asked about the impact of representation and what it means for aspiring coaches who are minorities to see NFL coaches who “looks like them” and possibly “grew up like them.”
“Well, when you say, ‘They see you guys,’ and ‘look like them and grew up like them,’ it means that we’re oddballs to begin with,” Bowles said. “I think the minute you guys stop making a big deal about it, everybody else will as well.”

Just heard a clip of that press conference. LMAO at the reporter whitesplaining to Bowles how he should feel in this situation. He handled it masterfully.