machine gun kelly Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 34 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said: Ohhh boy. So much I want to say to people who have not studied the topic of racial inequities and systemic prejudices and all that fun stuff. But, as this is a football board and we are discouraged from political discourse, I'll simply say: I'm all for the NFL encouraging diversity in its coaching ranks. I am NOT sure that rewarding teams with competitive advantages in roster building is necessarily the way to do it, however. Noggin, I read a couple of posts, and said, no, I’m staying away fro this one. Well said though. I hope overall as it’s not just coaches, but contributors that at a minimum something positive happens from it as we don’t make these decisions. Back to ball. Much less land mines there. 1
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Process said: Holy cow is this stupid 1. Similar to the rooney rule, is this not racist? We need to reward teams for hiring minorities? Are they not equals? Also lmao at rewarding the teams who "develop" them to be head coaches. A very smart, hard working, black guy who is a great coach gets a head coaching job. Lets give the white coach and gm who "developed" him free draft picks. Yea, because they deserve a lot of credit for making a black guy head coaching material. Black people definitely can't achieve success on their own. 2. It could hurt there chances of getting head coaching jobs. If a team is deciding between a white coach from a non conference team and a black coach from a division rival, why would they choose the black coach and give them free draft picks? 3. Is this even going to work or change anything? I doubt it. To your second point, this is going to be an obstacle to some guys getting jobs. I actually think this will hurt a guy like Bieniemy. Nobody is going to allow the chiefs to get two extra 3rd rounders. I can see teams playing games with this— like The new team will effectively force KC to fire Bieniemy first as a condition to hiring him.
DrDawkinstein Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 41 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said: You dropped some other low-hanging fruit in your post that moves this conversation into other fraught territory. I don't disagree that the compensation side of this seems out of whack. Exactly where I am on this thread. I dont like the gifting of draft picks, especially for something as vague and subjective as "developing" someone. But starting out calling the Rooney Rule racist means I'm not even touching it. Not worth the time. 1
whatdrought Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 Equality in opportunity does not = equality in result. Show us the minority candidates that have been passed over exclusively because of their race, and because of the racist intent of the hiring executive. 4
Vod Kanockers Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 I’d like to see more white RB’s in the league. I can currently only think of 1 or 2. How do we do something about this? What about Hispanic or Hindu coaches? I can’t think of hardly any of them either. Do they get a Rooney rule? Doesn’t seem fair to their group. Nothing like complaining about not being equal, and then having your own set of rules.. 🤦♂️
golfball323 Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 Surprised they didn't make it three fifths.... **ducks** 4
ColoradoBills Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 32 minutes ago, vtnatefootball11 said: Yeah but is it a good, well thought out idea? Like did they really think it through, plug up all the loopholes, thing about unintended consequences, etc? Without seeing the actual language of the rules, I'll say probably NOT. As has been stated, compensation seems out of whack and it could very well deter teams in the same conference or divisions from actually hiring a minority coach. I truly don't know. That's why my only comment was that the owners seem to think so and well, they are the owners. I am getting old enough I guess not to have to concern myself about things that I either can't control or the outcome doesn't really affect me. The only thing I can say about the new "rule" is............ if a team thinks they are going to "game" the system for a couple of 3rd round picks by hiring a coach who is lacking in talent well good luck to them because I think they are wrong with that train of thought.
nedboy7 Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Process said: Why not? It's not just a race issue. Two third rounds picks is significant compensation. We are just going to start handing them out to teams for doing absolutely nothing? Because of comments like these.
mjd1001 Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 3rd round picks are a bit high. This isn't the NHL or NBA where anything other than a top 5 first rounder is a crapshoot. In the NFL, 3rd and 4th round picks commonly become good, sometimes very good players and it is expected the contribute. I'd say make it a 4th at the highest....a 4th round pick still is valuable in the NFL, those players often become starters....yet is isn't too much where a lot of team might try to take advantage of the rule.
vtnatefootball11 Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said: I truly don't know. That's why my only comment was that the owners seem to think so and well, they are the owners. I am getting old enough I guess not to have to concern myself about things that I either can't control or the outcome doesn't really affect me. The only thing I can say about the new "rule" is............ if a team thinks they are going to "game" the system for a couple of 3rd round picks by hiring a coach who is lacking in talent well good luck to them because I think they are wrong with that train of thought. Fair enough, not our problem I guess. And I agree with you wholeheartedly that making decisions on anything other than merit rarely works out. But, gosh, are you really going to hand you division rival 2 third round picks if all else is equal or close between two HC/GH candidates? I think it's pretty obvious how that will work out. Also, do you really not think someone like Belichick is not going to exploit the heck of this? There can't possibly be enough third round picks in the world haha.
Saint Doug Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 Can we make this retroactive for Anthony Lynn? Plus, if we had hired Lynn, would we have received the Brownie points? Would it be better off to let another team hire him then?
whatdrought Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, mjd1001 said: 3rd round picks are a bit high. This isn't the NHL or NBA where anything other than a top 5 first rounder is a crapshoot. In the NFL, 3rd and 4th round picks commonly become good, sometimes very good players and it is expected the contribute. I'd say make it a 4th at the highest....a 4th round pick still is valuable in the NFL, those players often become starters....yet is isn't too much where a lot of team might try to take advantage of the rule. That's kind of a flaw in the system though... If you believe that the disparity of minorities is caused by racist intent and is a huge and horrible issue, which the existence of such a rule would seem to imply, and if you believe that this solution would have any efficacy, which existence of would seem to indicate a perception that it shall - then morally speaking there is no reward too strong to fix this problem - a third then becomes too little. Make it a first. 2 Firsts. Give the teams that makes the first minority hire each offseason the first pick in the draft. Project the idea to its natural conclusion. If this is the huge deal the NFL and media folks make it to be, then these rules are weak half measures. 1 minute ago, Saint Doug said: Can we make this retroactive for Anthony Lynn? Plus, if we had hired Lynn, would we have received the Brownie points? Would it be better off to let another team hire him then? I heard they were going to make it retro-active and give us 2 thirds for Lynn, but that he lost them in the last second.... Edited November 11, 2020 by whatdrought
buffaloboyinATL Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 1 hour ago, matter2003 said: Would that even count since he already has been a HC? We might still be “developing” him. He’s a late bloomer.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 Wowzer. When I first saw this headline I was prepared to defend it to the teeth, being someone who feels passionately about racial inequality and who thinks that there is inevitable bias in coaching hires when ownership is 100% white. The thing is, attaching DRAFT STRATEGY to this concept is the single best way to muck it up. 2
The Wiz Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 7 minutes ago, Saint Doug said: Can we make this retroactive for Anthony Lynn? Plus, if we had hired Lynn, would we have received the Brownie points? Would it be better off to let another team hire him then? 4
DrDawkinstein Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, whatdrought said: That's kind of a flaw in the system though... If you believe that the disparity of minorities is caused by racist intent and is a huge and horrible issue, which the existence of such a rule would seem to imply, and if you believe that this solution would have any efficacy, which existence of would seem to indicate a perception that it shall - then morally speaking there is no reward too strong to fix this problem - a third then becomes too little. Make it a first. 2 Firsts. Give the teams that makes the first minority hire each offseason the first pick in the draft. Project the idea to its natural conclusion. If this is the huge deal the NFL and media folks make it to be, then these rules are weak half measures. I heard they were going to make it retro-active and give us 2 thirds for Lynn, but that he lost them in the last second.... I think you're being a little hyperbolic there. No one in the NFL denies that the coaching candidate circle is a good ol boys club that is very difficult to break into. It's not like teams post Head Coach openings to LinkedIn and Glassdoor. You must already be in the circle to ever get a chance. Like the Rooney Rule, I believe this is an attempt to encourage teams to simply expand that circle, but with rewards instead of punishments. Not to solve some "huge problem of racism". I dont think this solution is a great (or even good) idea with the way it's been laid out so far. But credit them for trying. They can always cut the program if it doesn't work out. Edited November 11, 2020 by DrDawkinstein 2
ColoradoBills Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 10 minutes ago, vtnatefootball11 said: Fair enough, not our problem I guess. And I agree with you wholeheartedly that making decisions on anything other than merit rarely works out. But, gosh, are you really going to hand you division rival 2 third round picks if all else is equal or close between two HC/GH candidates? I think it's pretty obvious how that will work out. Also, do you really not think someone like Belichick is not going to exploit the heck of this? There can't possibly be enough third round picks in the world haha. BB can do whatever he wants. I personally think he almost done coaching and he may go 1 more year to see if he can catch lighting in a bottle again with a QB. I don't see him winning 53 more games to surpass Shula.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: I think you're being a little hyperbolic there. No one in the NFL denies that the coaching candidate circle is a good ol boys club that is very difficult to break into. It's not like teams post Head Coach openings to LinkedIn and Glassdoor. You must already be in the circle to ever get a chance. Like the Rooney Rule, I believe this is an attempt to encourage teams to expand that circle with rewards instead of punishments. Not to solve some "huge problem of racism". I dont think this solution is a great (or even good) idea with the way it's been laid out so far. But credit them for trying. They can always cut the program if it doesn't work out. Agreed. I think financial incentives would be great. Two third-round draft picks is such a concrete and discretely valued commodity that the NFL is practically inviting immoral usage of the rule. For example what division rival would EVER hire a minority coach from within the division?
Doc Brown Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 I have mixed feelings on this rule but if it makes Bill Belichick fire his son I'm for it.
billsfan89 Posted November 11, 2020 Posted November 11, 2020 45 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said: To your second point, this is going to be an obstacle to some guys getting jobs. I actually think this will hurt a guy like Bieniemy. Nobody is going to allow the chiefs to get two extra 3rd rounders. I can see teams playing games with this— like The new team will effectively force KC to fire Bieniemy first as a condition to hiring him. I don't think anyone can force a team to fire someone. I think if you want to hire a coach you are going to hire them regardless of whomever might get extra picks. If you think Bieniemy is a genius offensive mind are you really going to not hire him and hire someone lesser because another team is going to get draft picks? I do think the incentives should be adjusted to the team doing the hiring getting extra picks but I don't see this moving the needle too much in either direction.
Recommended Posts