Rooney rule discussion (1 Viewer)

[Dr. Octopus]

I say get rid of the rule because it is not necessary, at all. Not now, and never will be again.

I don't think it was ever necessary to begin with anyway.

This settles it.

/thread

 

[coolnerd]

Agree with what Rooney was trying to do, just think it's pretty obvious that it needs some revisiting. It's just so blatant that teams are getting it out if te way early in the search. Whether it's a "company man" (staley) or a guy who deserves a real shot (Austin) or a guy that oversaw the lions front office (really? You want Mayhew?) it seems like these interviews are largely to simply satisfy te rule

I may be recalling this incorrectly but it seems to me that when Mike Tomlin interviewed for the Steelers job, a lot of people thought the Steelers were just going through the motions to satisfy the rule also but then we saw one of the better young minds come to get a job.

If nothing else, it offers exposure that might otherwise go completely overlooked. I get what you're saying and I agree, it DOES look rather silly when seemingly EVERY position that opens up has a minority interviewing with the next 15 minutes of the announcement, yet never gets any hires, but then when it DOES happen (or at least puts a person on the map), it has done part of the job.

I kind of wonder if the guys going through the interview see it one way or the other but everything has to start somewhere and a chance is better than none. A new face & name in the conversation is better than one more stinking round of recycled Shanahans, Wade Phillips, etc. I mean, seriously, how many times can ONE guy (say, Romeo) demonstrate that he is not a good coach, yet end up with 10+ NFL jobs over the course of his often-fired career?

the worse part of the rule is that it confirms an assumption (by some, not even many) that any black coach is only being interviewed because he was black...I remember at least one message board (don't think this one) Lovie smith was considered a Rooney candidate. It was quickly pointed out that Tampa has history of hiring black coaches and that with flaws and all Lovie did coach in a Super Bowl. I mean is Duce Staley a worse candidate than Jim Tomsula was san francisco last year?

 

[Arodin]

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

 

[tone1oc]

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

It makes sense to interview a black guy very early on to satisfy the rule. What if the coach you really targeted is interview #1 and you don't want to let him walk out the room without hiring him because he has another one scheduled the next day with another team? You can't hire him because you didn't interview a black guy yet.

Black coaches do get hired. The rule is working fine. I have yet to hear a way to improve on it. Anyone offering up one?

Yes..Interview and hire whoever you feel is the best candidate regardless of color.

They are never going to go backwards.

So hiring the best candidate for a job regardless of color is going backwards....interesting.

 

[JuniorNB]

It makes sense to interview a black guy very early on to satisfy the rule. What if the coach you really targeted is interview #1 and you don't want to let him walk out the room without hiring him because he has another one scheduled the next day with another team? You can't hire him because you didn't interview a black guy yet.

Black coaches do get hired. The rule is working fine. I have yet to hear a way to improve on it. Anyone offering up one?

Yes..Interview and hire whoever you feel is the best candidate regardless of color.

They are never going to go backwards.

So hiring the best candidate for a job regardless of color is going backwards....interesting.

No, I mean the league installed a rule to be progressive and ensure that teams consider at least one black coaching candidate with every new hire. They aren't requiring that they hire them. They aren't going to remove the rule unless there is an overwhelming amount of push back from the owners. And there isn't a single owner who would ever stand up and claim he has a problem with this rule. That would make him look terrible.

 

[tone1oc]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

 

[Quez]

The Rooney rule is ridiculous & outdated. We have a black president for crying out loud.

2 of the last 3 Bucs coaches have been black, and they are going to have to interview a black guy because of this dumb rule, when they already know Koetter is the guy.

It may have been great when it was implemented, but it's no longer necessary.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts.

Maybe you got me on ignore?

 

[tone1oc]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts.

Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts.

Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

I feel it needs a heavy tweaking. .

You had the opinion IIRC that you don't understand why any of us sweat this stuff as a fan...I think I did a good job of explaining why we do care and why it is important. But it's OK if we don't agree Emperor.

I think as a white person I would be not happy if I were brought in as some token interview inside a predominant black organization just to fill a few quotas. No thanks. I'm just trying to see if I can connect with you so you understand how some of us could view the rule and the way it is being carried out or handled.

 

[tone1oc]

Can someone please explain to me how they are embarrased that someone else has to go through a hiring process? Why does this upset you? I don't get it?

In many cases it's a sham, who cares? Does it impact you in anyway, even trivial stuff as a fan?

Great questions and opens up a lot of conversation on the topic. This is part of the reason some fans have turned cynical on the NFL while still rooting their team on but realizing Goodell is changing the league and destroying what once was. Some folks really like the changes, others not so much.

FF turned a lot of folks into pseudo GMs and that has carried over to the real NFL where many want to try and make the decisions for the GM. Also as one ages thru life they start to realize how stupid a lot of folks are who make it up the ladder in the world. Far fewer smart folks then actual jobs so there is a lot that goes into how some of us are impacted by these decisions which obviously seem quite mundane to a fan of your caliber.

I get the disdain for Goodell and his changes, but this was done before Goodell and I don't know how anyone could argue that this rule destroys anything that once was other than having little to no minority coaches & FO personnel. None of this explains why it bothers people unless you just don't like seeing minorities on the sidelines.

As you go through life and realize a lot of dumber folks are more successful, maybe they should reflect on their own decisions/actions/etc that have made it so they are bitter about so many dumb people being more successful.

 

[tone1oc]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts.

Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

I feel it needs a heavy tweaking. .

You had the opinion IIRC that you don't understand why any of us sweat this stuff as a fan...I think I did a good job of explaining why we do care and why it is important. But it's OK if we don't agree Emperor.

I think as a white person I would be not happy if I were brought in as some token interview inside a predominant black organization just to fill a few quotas. No thanks. I'm just trying to see if I can connect with you so you understand how some of us could view the rule and the way it is being carried out or handled.

There is a thread on page 1 that says "Rooney rule is an embarrassment"..

For those that feel this is true, I just want to know why they feel this way. Simple enough right?

 

[JuniorNB]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts.

Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

I feel it needs a heavy tweaking. .

You had the opinion IIRC that you don't understand why any of us sweat this stuff as a fan...I think I did a good job of explaining why we do care and why it is important. But it's OK if we don't agree Emperor.

I think as a white person I would be not happy if I were brought in as some token interview inside a predominant black organization just to fill a few quotas. No thanks. I'm just trying to see if I can connect with you so you understand how some of us could view the rule and the way it is being carried out or handled.

It's hard for you to imagine this as a white guy, but give it a shot...

In your scenario of a predominately black company needs to hire you to fill a quota, if you were a white man trying to get into this field, and you know these owners have meetings with other company's and talk a lot and reputations spread quickly, you would love the opportunity to get a seat in front of the CEO and president and try to impress him with your knowledge. Even if you are certain you won't get that particular job. Maybe you'll get a lesser job but get your foot in the door. Or maybe the CEO will be golfing with another company's CEO and he tells him what a great business mind you have and how forward thinking some of your ideas are. I'm sure some of these black coaches get interviews knowing the team already knows they are hiring someone else. But I bet they are still excited to be given the chance and are trying like hell to impress the people in that room.

 

[ghostguy123]

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

There are even less reasons for you to care if someone cares about it.

For me, it isn't about being upset about it. I simply do not think the rule is necessary.

Not only that, the rule itself pretty much implies that the owners are racist. Maybe some are, but if they are, this rule isn't going to all of a sudden make them see the light and hire a black coach when they otherwise wouldn't have dreamed of it. I also tend to think that even the most racist owner prefers green, and would hire the guy he thinks gives his billion dollar business the best chance to succeed.

In a weird way, to me, rules like this seem like they will prolong racism, not get rid of it.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Can someone please explain to me how they are embarrased that someone else has to go through a hiring process? Why does this upset you? I don't get it?

In many cases it's a sham, who cares? Does it impact you in anyway, even trivial stuff as a fan?

Great questions and opens up a lot of conversation on the topic. This is part of the reason some fans have turned cynical on the NFL while still rooting their team on but realizing Goodell is changing the league and destroying what once was. Some folks really like the changes, others not so much.

FF turned a lot of folks into pseudo GMs and that has carried over to the real NFL where many want to try and make the decisions for the GM. Also as one ages thru life they start to realize how stupid a lot of folks are who make it up the ladder in the world. Far fewer smart folks then actual jobs so there is a lot that goes into how some of us are impacted by these decisions which obviously seem quite mundane to a fan of your caliber.

I get the disdain for Goodell and his changes, but this was done before Goodell and I don't know how anyone could argue that this rule destroys anything that once was other than having little to no minority coaches & FO personnel. None of this explains why it bothers people unless you just don't like seeing minorities on the sidelines.

As you go through life and realize a lot of dumber folks are more successful, maybe they should reflect on their own decisions/actions/etc that have made it so they are bitter about so many dumb people being more successful.

Light bulb went on over here, now I understand where you are coming from. I thought you were just blasting fans who feel the rule is an embarrassment but you actully support it and feel it's fine as it is. I don't know why but I didn't pick up on that earlier

Thanks, party on.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

It's hard for you to imagine this as a white guy, but give it a shot...

In your scenario of a predominately black company needs to hire you to fill a quota, if you were a white man trying to get into this field, and you know these owners have meetings with other company's and talk a lot and reputations spread quickly, you would love the opportunity to get a seat in front of the CEO and president and try to impress him with your knowledge. Even if you are certain you won't get that particular job. Maybe you'll get a lesser job but get your foot in the door. Or maybe the CEO will be golfing with another company's CEO and he tells him what a great business mind you have and how forward thinking some of your ideas are. I'm sure some of these black coaches get interviews knowing the team already knows they are hiring someone else. But I bet they are still excited to be given the chance and are trying like hell to impress the people in that room.

Excellent. You have some valid points.

 

[tone1oc]

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

There are even less reasons for you to care if someone cares about it.

For me, it isn't about being upset about it. I simply do not think the rule is necessary.

Not only that, the rule itself pretty much implies that the owners are racist. Maybe some are, but if they are, this rule isn't going to all of a sudden make them see the light and hire a black coach when they otherwise wouldn't have dreamed of it. I also tend to think that even the most racist owner prefers green, and would hire the guy he thinks gives his billion dollar business the best chance to succeed.

In a weird way, to me, rules like this seem like they will prolong racism, not get rid of it.

We are discussing why the Rooney rule is an embarrassment.. I'm asking people why this is embarrassing to them.

To the emboldened text, you are demonstrating that it is necessary, even if only in small circumstances. I don't see how this rule prolongs racism, except for those who are bothered/embarrased by it being bothered by it and therefore prolonging racism.

 

[ghostguy123]

I don't see how this rule prolongs racism, except for those who are bothered/embarrased by it being bothered by it and therefore prolonging racism.

I understand why people would not agree with the concept, but at some point we need to stop referring to a new hire as "the 3rd black coach in the teams history" and just say "the 9th coach in the teams history".

Rules like this keep the latter from happening, which is sad. Everything gets publicized as black or white, and a rule like this sort of forces it to be reported that way.

I am also not "embarrassed" or particularly "bothered" by the rule. It doesn't affect me at all. But do I really need to be bothered/embarrassed by this rule to post my thoughts about the rule in this thread?

 

[Arodin]

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

Only to the extent that I am choosing to care about football, coaching hires, and such because I choose to play fantasy football. (Also I'm not choosing to be upset, because I'm not upset. I just find the secondary effects to be counterproductive to the stated goal.)

To wit:

As soon as my team has the prospect of missing out on a desirable coaching hire because they hadn't interviewed someone from a designated preference group yet and the prospect signed elsewhere in the meantime, it impacts something I have chosen to care about independent of racial issues.

So now instead of thinking, "do I want my team to sign Coach X or not," I have to also think about "are they allowed to sign Coach X yet, or does it not matter until they interview Coach M?" Which means, "Is Coach X going to satisfy the Rooney Rule or not" is a question I want to know the answer to, which means I suddenly have a reason for caring whether Coach X is white, black, tan, or purple. When I could not have cared less previously.

 

[tone1oc]

I don't see how this rule prolongs racism, except for those who are bothered/embarrased by it being bothered by it and therefore prolonging racism.

I understand why people would not agree with the concept, but at some point we need to stop referring to a new hire as "the 3rd black coach in the teams history" and just say "the 9th coach in the teams history".

Rules like this keep the latter from happening, which is sad. Everything gets publicized as black or white, and a rule like this sort of forces it to be reported that way.

I am also not "embarrassed" or particularly "bothered" by the rule. It doesn't affect me at all. But do I really need to be bothered/embarrassed by this rule to post my thoughts about the rule in this thread?

This is a black or white thing, the NFL decided that it needed to promote diversity among coaching staffs and front office. This was a real thing, and it's helped quite a bit in that mission. The Rooney Rule has nothing to do with "The 3rd black" or "The 9th coach", and is completely a made up thing, and certainly not widespread.

Nobody is publicizing this, except for people crying afoul. As I've said, I'm just positing a question, you shouldn't be so perturbed to think that I'm asking you not to post in this thread. The fact that you think the Rooney Rule promotes racism tells me that you feel racists are aggravated by this, which I'm sure is part of it.

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

Only to the extent that I am choosing to care about football, coaching hires, and such because I choose to play fantasy football. (Also I'm not choosing to be upset, because I'm not upset. I just find the secondary effects to be counterproductive to the stated goal.)

To wit:

As soon as my team has the prospect of missing out on a desirable coaching hire because they hadn't interviewed someone from a designated preference group yet and the prospect signed elsewhere in the meantime, it impacts something I have chosen to care about independent of racial issues.

So now instead of thinking, "do I want my team to sign Coach X or not," I have to also think about "are they allowed to sign Coach X yet, or does it not matter until they interview Coach M?" Which means, "Is Coach X going to satisfy the Rooney Rule or not" is a question I want to know the answer to, which means I suddenly have a reason for caring whether Coach X is white, black, tan, or purple. When I could not have cared less previously.

Ok, please tell me one case in which a team missed out on a coach because of the Rooney rule.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It makes sense to interview a black guy very early on to satisfy the rule. What if the coach you really targeted is interview #1 and you don't want to let him walk out the room without hiring him because he has another one scheduled the next day with another team? You can't hire him because you didn't interview a black guy yet.

Black coaches do get hired. The rule is working fine. I have yet to hear a way to improve on it. Anyone offering up one?

Yes..Interview and hire whoever you feel is the best candidate regardless of color.

They are never going to go backwards.

So hiring the best candidate for a job regardless of color is going backwards....interesting.

You can HIRE whoever you want. Why is this concept so difficult for people?

 

[ghostguy123]

I don't see how this rule prolongs racism, except for those who are bothered/embarrased by it being bothered by it and therefore prolonging racism.

I understand why people would not agree with the concept, but at some point we need to stop referring to a new hire as "the 3rd black coach in the teams history" and just say "the 9th coach in the teams history".

Rules like this keep the latter from happening, which is sad. Everything gets publicized as black or white, and a rule like this sort of forces it to be reported that way.

I am also not "embarrassed" or particularly "bothered" by the rule. It doesn't affect me at all. But do I really need to be bothered/embarrassed by this rule to post my thoughts about the rule in this thread?

This is a black or white thing, the NFL decided that it needed to promote diversity among coaching staffs and front office. This was a real thing, and it's helped quite a bit in that mission. The Rooney Rule has nothing to do with "The 3rd black" or "The 9th coach", and is completely a made up thing, and certainly not widespread.

Nobody is publicizing this, except for people crying afoul. As I've said, I'm just positing a question, you shouldn't be so perturbed to think that I'm asking you not to post in this thread. The fact that you think the Rooney Rule promotes racism tells me that you feel racists are aggravated by this, which I'm sure is part of it.

So...is there a database somewhere to figure out which candidates are of which racial group so we know which hires qualify? I don't usually look at pictures, just read the news blurbs about potential hires and interviews.

More to the point, what does it say about how messed up race issues are in this country that an attempt to address racism forces people like me to suddenly have to care what race Coach X is, when I never would have otherwise?

No it doesn't you choose to be upset about this policy. There is literally 0 reasons for you to care.

Only to the extent that I am choosing to care about football, coaching hires, and such because I choose to play fantasy football. (Also I'm not choosing to be upset, because I'm not upset. I just find the secondary effects to be counterproductive to the stated goal.)

To wit:

As soon as my team has the prospect of missing out on a desirable coaching hire because they hadn't interviewed someone from a designated preference group yet and the prospect signed elsewhere in the meantime, it impacts something I have chosen to care about independent of racial issues.

So now instead of thinking, "do I want my team to sign Coach X or not," I have to also think about "are they allowed to sign Coach X yet, or does it not matter until they interview Coach M?" Which means, "Is Coach X going to satisfy the Rooney Rule or not" is a question I want to know the answer to, which means I suddenly have a reason for caring whether Coach X is white, black, tan, or purple. When I could not have cared less previously.

Ok, please tell me one case in which a team missed out on a coach because of the Rooney rule.

Well I guess that settles it then. Best rule ever. It should continue on forever. It's very, very necessary

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Really looking forward to GordonGekko's response. He's probably been typing it up since yesterday.

 

[tone1oc]

Well I guess that settles it then. Best rule ever. It should continue on forever. It's very, very necessary

You accuse me of not wanting you to discuss this and you are acting sort of like a petulant child.

Do you disagree with any of the following statements?

1. The NFL had a diversity problem among HC's and FO.

2. The NFL has improved diversity among HC's and FO since Rooney rule has come to pass.

 

[ghostguy123]

Really looking forward to GordonGekko's response. He's probably been typing it up since yesterday.

I always get roped into reading the first couple sentences of his posts, realize who it is, scroll down to see several long paragraphs, and just skip it.

But yeah, amazingly, I thought the same thing. None of this can get sorted out until he posts a 783743894739875 word response that nobody reads.

 

[ghostguy123]

Well I guess that settles it then. Best rule ever. It should continue on forever. It's very, very necessary

You accuse me of not wanting you to discuss this and you are acting sort of like a petulant child.

Do you disagree with any of the following statements?

1. The NFL had a diversity problem among HC's and FO.

2. The NFL has improved diversity amount HC's and FO since Rooney rule has come to pass.

What did I accuse you of? Are you even responding to the right person?

To answer one of the other questions, no, I do not think any of that was CAUSED by the Rooney rule. Basically every major company in the USA has improved diversity among higher ranking positions. Did the Rooney rule cause that also?

 

[Warrior]

Well I guess that settles it then. Best rule ever. It should continue on forever. It's very, very necessary

You accuse me of not wanting you to discuss this and you are acting sort of like a petulant child.

Do you disagree with any of the following statements?

1. The NFL had a diversity problem among HC's and FO.

2. The NFL has improved diversity among HC's and FO since Rooney rule has come to pass.

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.

Homer: Oh, how does it work?

Lisa: It doesn’t work.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: It’s just a stupid rock.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: But I don’t see any tigers around, do you?

[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]

Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

 

[ghostguy123]

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.

Homer: Oh, how does it work?

Lisa: It doesn’t work.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: It’s just a stupid rock.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: But I don’t see any tigers around, do you?

[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]

Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Really looking forward to GordonGekko's response. He's probably been typing it up since yesterday.

I always get roped into reading the first couple sentences of his posts, realize who it is, scroll down to see several long paragraphs, and just skip it.

But yeah, amazingly, I thought the same thing. None of this can get sorted out until he posts a 783743894739875 word response that nobody reads.

Whoever's got the keys to Gekko can't resist the race bait. It's his favorite topic.

 

[tone1oc]

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.

Homer: Oh, how does it work?

Lisa: It doesn’t work.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: It’s just a stupid rock.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: But I don’t see any tigers around, do you?

[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]

Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

Same exact thing. And funny. Roll on the floor funny.

Rooney rule has in fact helped many minority candidates get jobs in the NFL. I'm really sorry if that upsets you.

 

[ghostguy123]

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.

Homer: Oh, how does it work?

Lisa: It doesn’t work.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: It’s just a stupid rock.

Homer: Uh-huh.

Lisa: But I don’t see any tigers around, do you?

[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]

Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

Same exact thing. And funny. Roll on the floor funny.

Rooney rule has in fact helped many minority candidates get jobs in the NFL. I'm really sorry if that upsets you.

You seem to be the only one who is upset about anything, and it is hilarious.

 

[tone1oc]

Calmer than you are..

 

[Snorkelson]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts. Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

I feel it needs a heavy tweaking. .You had the opinion IIRC that you don't understand why any of us sweat this stuff as a fan...I think I did a good job of explaining why we do care and why it is important. But it's OK if we don't agree Emperor.

I think as a white person I would be not happy if I were brought in as some token interview inside a predominant black organization just to fill a few quotas. No thanks. I'm just trying to see if I can connect with you so you understand how some of us could view the rule and the way it is being carried out or handled.

There is a thread on page 1 that says "Rooney rule is an embarrassment"..For those that feel this is true, I just want to know why they feel this way. Simple enough right?

The rule isn't an embarrassment, the application of it is. Wasn't trying to troll, but point out that there are an awful lot of minority first interviews that don't get an offer, or any consideration from another team. Teryl Austin has earned an interview IMO thru his work in Baltimore and turning around a terrible lions defense to a top 5 unit, loses his top 3 Dt and still has a respectable unit. Is anyone hearing that he's a front runner anywhere? I guess I wouldn't feel any better if it were the 3rd interview on every team, but it largely seems like it's gotten out I the way so if they bring in gruden or whoever and they wan the job they can pull the trigger and not say "well, we need to do another interview".

 

[tone1oc]

Nobody can answer the question on why it bothers/embarrases/etc them that this rule is in place.

Post #39, I never heard back. Also a post a couple down from there I posted some more thoughts. Maybe you got me on ignore?

Haha.. no not on ignore. And perhaps I'm being dense but I thought you were for the rule. The only other response was just flipping it around on me asking why i care they care.

I feel it needs a heavy tweaking. .You had the opinion IIRC that you don't understand why any of us sweat this stuff as a fan...I think I did a good job of explaining why we do care and why it is important. But it's OK if we don't agree Emperor.

I think as a white person I would be not happy if I were brought in as some token interview inside a predominant black organization just to fill a few quotas. No thanks. I'm just trying to see if I can connect with you so you understand how some of us could view the rule and the way it is being carried out or handled.

There is a thread on page 1 that says "Rooney rule is an embarrassment"..For those that feel this is true, I just want to know why they feel this way. Simple enough right?

The rule isn't an embarrassment, the application of it is. Wasn't trying to troll, but point out that there are an awful lot of minority first interviews that don't get an offer, or any consideration from another team. Teryl Austin has earned an interview IMO thru his work in Baltimore and turning around a terrible lions defense to a top 5 unit, loses his top 3 Dt and still has a respectable unit. Is anyone hearing that he's a front runner anywhere? I guess I wouldn't feel any better if it were the 3rd interview on every team, but it largely seems like it's gotten out I the way so if they bring in gruden or whoever and they wan the job they can pull the trigger and not say "well, we need to do another interview".

I hear what you are saying, and I'm certainly not above well thought modifications to the rule. But the rule was never designed to make anyone a front runner, just open the door for more minorities.

Yes, it's kind of a shame that many of these interviews are a sham. It's imperfect. But the pros far outweigh cons, at least from a minority candidate point of view. And even with sham interviews, the candidate at least gets experience and at best could land a job out of nowhere.

 

[ghostguy123]

Calmer than you are..

Your brain has a....shell on it

 

[Snorkelson]

Come interview with us because you are a minority. We are required to interview at least one minority, which you are, and you are our first interview. The rest are white guys, we don't have anothe minority candidate in mind. You may not get the job, but look at all the great interviewing experience and exposure you will get!

Yeah this sounds progressive. They are interviewing one minority, first off, and hiring the guy they want. This is the embarrassment.

 

[tone1oc]

Come interview with us because you are a minority. We are required to interview at least one minority, which you are, and you are our first interview. The rest are white guys, we don't have anothe minority candidate in mind. You may not get the job, but look at all the great interviewing experience and exposure you will get!

Yeah this sounds progressive. They are interviewing one minority, first off, and hiring the guy they want. This is the embarrassment.

Who is this embarrassing to? As I've said, it's imperfect, but it has worked.

 

[ghostguy123]

Come interview with us because you are a minority. We are required to interview at least one minority, which you are, and you are our first interview. The rest are white guys, we don't have anothe minority candidate in mind. You may not get the job, but look at all the great interviewing experience and exposure you will get!

Yeah this sounds progressive. They are interviewing one minority, first off, and hiring the guy they want. This is the embarrassment.

It's bad for the environment. Lots of wasted gas.

 

[Snorkelson]

The nfl, it's fans, it's players, the owners. The application of an idea that is supposed to bring equality to a very public forum that is blatantly just satisfied with token interviews. There were black coaches before the rule, and guys like Tomlin may have gotten a chance regardless. It has no doubt brought diversity into the nfl, and I'm not against this idea. These teams interview one minority and go back to doing business. I find it embarrassing that we all just read it and report it as "these 6 teams have interviewed this guy, which satisfies the Rooney rule should they want to hire coach x" and it so happens to be interview no 1, and the only minority, and he leaves without an offer. Walk the walk or don't bother talking.

 

[JuniorNB]

The nfl, it's fans, it's players, the owners. The application of an idea that is supposed to bring equality to a very public forum that is blatantly just satisfied with token interviews. There were black coaches before the rule, and guys like Tomlin may have gotten a chance regardless. It has no doubt brought diversity into the nfl, and I'm not against this idea. These teams interview one minority and go back to doing business. I find it embarrassing that we all just read it and report it as "these 6 teams have interviewed this guy, which satisfies the Rooney rule should they want to hire coach x" and it so happens to be interview no 1, and the only minority, and he leaves without an offer. Walk the walk or don't bother talking.

I've never heard a player or team complain about it. Not sure what's embarrassing. Sometimes they actually hire the token black guy. It's working fine.

 

[tone1oc]

The nfl, it's fans, it's players, the owners. The application of an idea that is supposed to bring equality to a very public forum that is blatantly just satisfied with token interviews. There were black coaches before the rule, and guys like Tomlin may have gotten a chance regardless. It has no doubt brought diversity into the nfl, and I'm not against this idea. These teams interview one minority and go back to doing business. I find it embarrassing that we all just read it and report it as "these 6 teams have interviewed this guy, which satisfies the Rooney rule should they want to hire coach x" and it so happens to be interview no 1, and the only minority, and he leaves without an offer. Walk the walk or don't bother talking.

I've never heard a player or team complain about it. Not sure what's embarrassing. Sometimes they actually hire the token black guy. It's working fine.

Exactly... I don't ever hear of "coach x is being brought in to satisfy the rooney rule", I'm sure it happens, especially in the more po-dunk markets. But even if I did, it's not something that I've thought about too much.

Most of the rhetoric about the Rooney rule is coming from one direction- from people who have gripes with it. As ghostguy said so eloquently "rules like this seem like they will prolong racism, not get rid of it."

 

[ghostguy123]

If no coaches are being brought in to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then why do we need the Rooney Rule?

 

[tone1oc]

If no coaches are being brought in to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then why do we need the Rooney Rule?

I'm not saying that it doesn't happen, just that it isn't "being reported" by anyone other than people that have issues with it for the most part.

 

[Buffaloes]

disagree. who knows if Todd Bowles would have been given an opp with the Jets had he not had a huge number of potentially Rooney interviews. Same with Rahim Moore a few years back. just like in a number of other fields, coaches' names get out there, they network, they usually have a better chance of landing a job--even if it's down the line and after a number of Rooney interviews.

the nfl isn't a completely progressive org that's willingly going to change its hiring practices. it's still very much a good ol' boys network.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Really looking forward to GordonGekko's response. He's probably been typing it up since yesterday.

Ah, ConnSkins26, the gigantic jagoff who went absolutely berserk several years back when I said RG3 and Rat Face Shanahan would not get along, that the best thing to do in dynasty, against just about any other conventional thought, would be to trade RG3 and sell as high as possible.

ConnSkins went ape ####, said I didn't know what he knew, the people he knew, the sources he had, how he was the be all , end all to all things Redskins, that he was in deep and knew the scoop, just like he was Morocco Brown, screaming Browns name over and over, telling me to go screw myself, because clearly he had to be the Redskins "guy" on the board.

Then RG3 got hurt, then Shanahan and the kid blew up on each other, then the media started tearing into RG3 and now the QB I said guys should look at a few years back, Kirk Cousins, might actually be someone Jay Gruden will ride for a little while.

Think about how angry and bitter ConnSkins must be, wanting to be the "Redskins guy" the guy who follows everything, listens to every podcast, reads every article, gets all the merchandise, expresses his love for all things DC to no end, and then get schooled the #### over by some old man he doesn't even know on the Internet.

I mean to the degree I schooled ConnSkins, no wonder he's angry. There wasn't one mother ####er on this whole site or even in the entire wide world of sports media or fantasy who would have gutted it out and said trade this high end rookie QB1 with what looked like unlimited potential back then. I basically dropped a load in his moms face and then told her to make me a sandwich and here's ConnSkins now, jilted all to hell, grudgingly cutting the crust off my sandwich because I said so.

ConnSkins, if you want to be the resident Redskins guy, put in the work and break the scoops that will get you there. All people here care about is if you help them win their leagues and if you help them win money in their leagues.

Don't be a hater son, your mom would tell you this herself, but her mouth is full.

And before you think bout running to some Staff member saying, "Gekko was so mean to me!" Remember this smegma guzzler, you been bringing your happy horse #### to me for years, don't blame anyone but you that you finally took both barrels to the face. Like your mom did.

Now go cut the ####### crusts off my sandwich.

Starting to get a better feel for who's running this thing. Much better material here than usual. No need to report anything, I got exactly what I asked for. Knew you couldn't help but find this thread, its your obsession.

I've never in my life claimed to have a source or any inside knowledge of anything Redskins, period. I also have no aspirations of being anyone's "Redskins guy". I don't listen to podcasts, and I'm not even from DC, so I definitely don't scream about a love for all things DC. I grew up in NE. You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I did disagree strongly with you at the time about RG3 and Shanahan, as most Skins fans did. Congratulations on being right.

Anything else, or is it time for your novella on black coaches in the NFL yet?

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Really looking forward to GordonGekko's response. He's probably been typing it up since yesterday.

Ah, ConnSkins26, the gigantic jagoff who went absolutely berserk several years back when I said RG3 and Rat Face Shanahan would not get along, that the best thing to do in dynasty, against just about any other conventional thought, would be to trade RG3 and sell as high as possible.

ConnSkins went ape ####, said I didn't know what he knew, the people he knew, the sources he had, how he was the be all , end all to all things Redskins, that he was in deep and knew the scoop, just like he was Morocco Brown, screaming Browns name over and over, telling me to go screw myself, because clearly he had to be the Redskins "guy" on the board.

Then RG3 got hurt, then Shanahan and the kid blew up on each other, then the media started tearing into RG3 and now the QB I said guys should look at a few years back, Kirk Cousins, might actually be someone Jay Gruden will ride for a little while.

Think about how angry and bitter ConnSkins must be, wanting to be the "Redskins guy" the guy who follows everything, listens to every podcast, reads every article, gets all the merchandise, expresses his love for all things DC to no end, and then get schooled the #### over by some old man he doesn't even know on the Internet.

I mean to the degree I schooled ConnSkins, no wonder he's angry. There wasn't one mother ####er on this whole site or even in the entire wide world of sports media or fantasy who would have gutted it out and said trade this high end rookie QB1 with what looked like unlimited potential back then. I basically dropped a load in his moms face and then told her to make me a sandwich and here's ConnSkins now, jilted all to hell, grudgingly cutting the crust off my sandwich because I said so.

ConnSkins, if you want to be the resident Redskins guy, put in the work and break the scoops that will get you there. All people here care about is if you help them win their leagues and if you help them win money in their leagues.

Don't be a hater son, your mom would tell you this herself, but her mouth is full.

And before you think bout running to some Staff member saying, "Gekko was so mean to me!" Remember this smegma guzzler, you been bringing your happy horse #### to me for years, don't blame anyone but you that you finally took both barrels to the face. Like your mom did.

Now go cut the ####### crusts off my sandwich.

Starting to get a better feel for who's running this thing. Much better material here than usual. No need to report anything, I got exactly what I asked for. Knew you couldn't help but find this thread, its your obsession.

I've never in my life claimed to have a source or any inside knowledge of anything Redskins, period. I also have no aspirations of being anyone's "Redskins guy". I don't listen to podcasts, and I'm not even from DC, so I definitely don't scream about a love for all things DC. I grew up in NE. You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I did disagree strongly with you at the time about RG3 and Shanahan, as most Skins fans did. Congratulations on being right.

Anything else, or is it time for your novella on black coaches in the NFL yet?

Well, you did tell me that DeSean Jackson was contemplating retiring tomorrow.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

It makes sense to interview a black guy very early on to satisfy the rule. What if the coach you really targeted is interview #1 and you don't want to let him walk out the room without hiring him because he has another one scheduled the next day with another team? You can't hire him because you didn't interview a black guy yet.

Black coaches do get hired. The rule is working fine. I have yet to hear a way to improve on it. Anyone offering up one?

dirtyjay's 12-point plan will be made available any moment now.

 

[menobrown]

Never been a fan of the Rooney rule but I expect it to get worse, not better. Basically like this increasingly PC world we live in. I fully expect in next few years we hear gripes from women's groups that the misogynistic NFL won't consider them for jobs other than interns.

I just think if you pay a few hundred million or into the billions for a team you should get to interview whoever you please, after all with that much at stake you would think they don't need a rule to get them to hire who they think is the best person for the job.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Regarding Duce Staley, was he a "real" candidate? Seems unlikely. However, he is definitely respected within the organization and is the only holdover from Reid's tenure. Lurie and/or others respect him. I think that Lurie wanted to get his take on what was happening with the players, as he is supposedly trusted and respected by the players. And it gets him experience and maybe he at least convinces them that he should get more responsibility. I don't see how it was a bad thing for him.