TOO FEW BLACK COACHES ....

[tennesseeboy]

So what's the solution in your mind? An all-black league with all-black coaches? Would that effectively remedy the sins of Plessy v. Ferguson in your mind?

 

Perhaps it's not about race. perhaps it's about qualification.

599479[/snapback]

On the other hand...it might be about race.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

On the other hand...it might be about race. 

599495[/snapback]

 

See, that's where I think your theory falls flat on its face.

 

These are the black coaches I can think of in the league that are at a coordinator level or higher:

 

Edwards

Lewis

Shell

Cottrell

Green

Fewell

 

And that's just off-hand. I'm sure if I did research, i could find more. Probably a lot more.

[tennesseeboy]

Sure, black coaches are being appointed in the league at various levels, but it took a lot to get them appointed. And it was about race. Once they were given a chance they performed and kept the position on merit. Look at the Bills...the interviews and hiring were "old boy" and for the most part white. The Lofton and Cottrell interviews were tokens that served a purpose of getting the minority candidate a look. If it weren't for someone doing something (Cochran et. al.) nothing would have changed. Maybe there is a compelling need for affirmative action to ameliorate the players contingent from that long history of oppression we white males have suffered, but I kind of doubt it.

[Like A Mofo]

Perhaps it's not about race. perhaps it's about qualification.

599479[/snapback]

 

 

I think for the most part you are right but I think we would also would be naive of us to believe there is NO racism amongst NFL owners and GM's. Im sure there is, and you will never, ever have a perfect system, but as long as the situation improves little by little, its a start.

 

Im not sure what to think about this requirment that the NFL must interview a minority candidate...I think that might be having a negative effect on the hiring process versus a positive one. I bet it makes some of these guys like Cottrell feel like a piece of meat or something...and that is unfortunate

 

I mean if you are interviewing someone just based on race because you have to, isnt that racism in itself?

[Chef Jim]

And it was about race.

599523[/snapback]

 

And this is based on what exactly?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Sure, black coaches are being appointed in the league at various levels, but it took a lot to get them appointed.  And it was about race. Once they were given a chance they performed and kept the position on merit.  Look at the Bills...the interviews and hiring were "old boy" and for the most part white.  The Lofton and Cottrell interviews were tokens that served a purpose of getting the minority candidate a look.  If it weren't for someone doing something (Cochran et. al.) nothing would have changed. Maybe there is a compelling need for affirmative action to ameliorate the players contingent from that long history of oppression we white males have suffered, but I kind of doubt it.

599523[/snapback]

 

Oh brother.

 

Is there any reason that anything REALLY has to change? Is there some sort of irreperable harm being done to the black community in general or these MULTI-MILLIONAIRE players in particular?

 

I mean it's not like they're forced to use different bathrooms or attend separate practices.

[Orton's Arm]

Look at the Bills...the interviews and hiring were "old boy" and for the most part white. 

599523[/snapback]

"Old boy" and "for the most part white" are two entirely separate issues. Think about it.

[The Dean]

"Old boy" and "for the most part white" are two entirely separate issues. Think about it.

599566[/snapback]

 

tenny said it perfectly. While they are two different catagories and issues, historically there has been a HUGE overlap between the two.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

So what's the solution in your mind? An all-black league with all-black coaches? Would that effectively remedy the sins of Plessy v. Ferguson in your mind?

 

Perhaps it's not about race. perhaps it's about qualification.

599479[/snapback]

 

 

You are right on target that the solution is about qualification and the NFL is trying to figure out a way to deal with the seeming real world occurence that objective qualifications unfortunately does not seem to be what the hiring of NFL HCs is all about.

 

There is the question about to what degress the factor of race impacts NFL HC hiring decisions.

 

Unfortunately, it was clearly a factor in American society's general judgment about hiring issues through much of its history. As an important part of society, the NFL was not immune to this problem.

 

Society fortunately has progressed from its beginning when African-Americans were deemed 3/4 of a person by our constitution. As a product (or by-product in some views) of the Civil War the practice ended as part of the law with several amendments to the US Constitution.

 

Yet, though ended de jure, the de facto policy of racial discrimination continued as seen in the Jim Crow laws, and was reflected in a clear pattern of measurabble racial inequity which could be seen in a racial discrepancy between the population of pools of qualified applicants and the pools of those chosen to receive a variety of societal benefits. For example, even today when one looks at the pool of applicants for loans from banks, even when one compares the loans received by racial groups one find a racial disparity when you compare people of the same economic background and levels.

 

This ame effect is found when one looks at the distribution of environmental degradation. For example, a mid 80s report by the United Church of Christ looked at the distribution of hazardous waste sites across the country. Through US census data, one can determine the race, income and various demographic details of the population of a particular zip code. The U.S. EPA also has lists of the location of hazardous waste sites which can be divided by zip code. This study found that the best predictor of whether one lives in the same zip code as a hasardous waste site is race.

 

These findings were met with some questioning and resistance from a number of sources who asked or claimed that the division was in fact driven by income and as there is a racial disparity by income in this society it explains the racial discrepancy.

 

However, a series of report culminating with an exhaustive examination sponsored by the National Wildlife Federation in the early 90s looked at 63 national or large regional studies of a variety of economic disparties. 75% of these studies (performed by a wide variety of national governmental, scientific, academic, not for profit and business groups) found an income bias in their distribution. However, 88% found a racial bias in their distribution.

 

Interestingly, most studies found a bias in both areas and 62 of 63 found a bias in one area or the other. The one study which found no bias was performed by Waste Management Inc. the largest hazardous waste company in the world.

 

At any rate, for whatever reason it seems statistically clear that there is a race based disparity in how the advantages of our society and the disadvantages of modern living are distributed in society.

 

I lay out these off-topic point to describe the context of the country the NFL operates within.

 

One could pretty clearly see for whatever the reason might be that the NFL also had a racial disparity in the individuals chosen for leadership positions. This was true as there were none or few A-A QBs until the late 80s or early 90s. In the early part of this very decade there were few HCs of A-A descent.

 

The NFL has taken what I see as good steps toward addressing this issue of racial disparitt throught its development and implementation of the Rooney Rule which require eact team to interview at least one qualified candidate of A-A descentfor HC openings.

 

The NFL appears to have done this for a variety of reasons (some folks wanted to as they felt any racial disparity in HC hiring, the racial result and nature of past NFL hiring and employment practices, and the small number of A-A HC as this century began by any standard was un-American and anathema to them. Others in the NFL hierachy were likely motivated by employee management concerns as the vast majority of the players are of A-A descent. Others may well have been motivated by PC concerns, The reasons are different for each individual but these differences do not matter as under the leadership of folks like Dan Rooney things were going to change regarding HC hiring.

 

The NFL seeks to reverse a history of past racist practices targeted at and visited upon the numerous MFL players who were A-A. It is for this reason that it simply misses the point to measure success in hiring by the Rooney rule as being measure by the demograhics of the US population.

 

The Rooney Rule does not seek to achieve a goal of making the HC pool look like America (if it did then a touch over 50% of the coaches would be women). The goal of the Rooney rule is to cause there to be fair representation off the % of HCs of A-A descent and the population of A-A players. It does this to redress a clear history of not hiring A-As in positions of leadership on team's despite race not being a factor we want to use to determine hiring (this notion is clearly reinforced by the success of men of A-A descent when awarded positions such as QB and HC).

 

Those who claim that the Rooney Rule has suceeded because the % of A-A HC hiring mirrors or exceeds the % of people of A-A descent in society are misguided in understanding these measures at best and simply fatuous at worse.

 

American society does aspire to the goals articulated by MLK that one day race will not matter. It will not be a factor in the hiring of HCs. However, to insist that the real world impacts of past racial discrimination should simply be ignored does not take into account the real world racial discrimimation of the recent past where men of A-A descentt had no fair opportunity or career path to achieve the highest on field postion of HC regardless of their qualitifications.

 

The important part of the Rooney Rule strikes me as not being the interview requirement which is the rule itself, but actually the general approach which creates minority NFL coaching internships designed to full the pipeline of qualified A-A applicants.

 

Rather than pursue what I would see as a wrong-headed policy of racial quotas of hiring more A-A HCs regardless of qualification or hiring more white players regardless of qualification, I would instead choose the current NFL policy of internships and activities designed to increase the number of qualified applicants. This is reinforced by the Rooney Rule which the league has mandated upon itself to interview at least one qualified A-A applicant for HC.

 

This approach deal with the fact that though clearly former players are a large part of the pool of qualified applicants, it is far from the total pool. Qualified applicants both of A-A and of other descent (and I suspect one day soon even a woman) can be found who do not have NFL player experience. Thus seeking a one-one correlation between the % of A-A players and HCs is not a description of fairness. However, the former player pool is such a viable source of qualified applicants and the former player pool is at or will soon be above 50%, the days in the early 2000s where merely two or so HCs out of 30 were of A-A descent and quite likely even today's #s where roughly 20% of HCs are of A-A descent represents a statistical disparity which smacks of the past effects of racist hiring practices in the NFL.

 

I like the progress experiecenced under the Rooney Rule of seeing qualified applicants like Marvin Lewis and Lovie Smith get HC jobs. These men in no way have achieved success because they were of A-A descent, but I think it is pretty clear (at least to me) that the lack of hiring of A-As historically by the NFL had a role to play in the failure of Lewis to land a job for a couple of years and the long wait folks like Tony Dungy experienced before they finally landed an HC job.

 

So I disagree with both suggestions from the original post because I do not think that the simple employment of quotas be it for more A-A HCs or for nore white players achieves a good result in terms of the product or in fairness and equity. Its too bad if it happens that a qualified white applicant gets passed over for an HC job because an NFL team forced to merely interview an A-A candidate picks the A-A over him. However, if he has a problem he wants to blame someone for, then blame unqualified or less qualified white candidates like Rich Kotite who got HC jobs in the past over both more qualified white and A-A candidates. it was the repeated hiring and good ol boy bias toward unqualified white candidates which was the problem.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

"Old boy" and "for the most part white" are two entirely separate issues. Think about it.

599566[/snapback]

 

They are separate issues certainly, but they are issues which are intensely related in terms of racial bias in the hiring outcomes don't you think?

 

The Rooney Ruke as an attempt to change the situation strikes me as a far better approach to solving the problem of a racial disparity in hiring practices by the NFL than some slavish devotion to quotas.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Oh brother.

 

Is there any reason that anything REALLY has to change? Is there some sort of irreperable harm being done to the black community in general or these MULTI-MILLIONAIRE players in particular?

 

I mean it's not like they're forced to use different bathrooms or attend separate practices.

599549[/snapback]

 

Yes, change must occur for a range of reasons which include:

 

1. The racial disparity in hiring where few or none of the onfield leadership positions of NFL teams smacks of unfairness and a lack of opportunity.

 

2. It is quite apparent that not only is race not a limitation on the chances of success of an HC, but in practice given the records of success (as measured in W/Ls an making the playoffs but not SB wins but simply wait and it will happen as more A-As get an opportunity to HC) o HCs of A-A descent.

 

3. it is an emplyee management problem when a majority of the employees rightfully feel that they cannot achieve the highest on field position they are qualified to fill if the NFL continued its practice of hiring none or few A-A coaches.

 

4. The argument that people do not believe that NFL teams would not hire a man of A-A descent who can help them win appears pretty doubtable when the NFL consistenly makes a practice of hiring HCs repetitively like a Rich Kotite or who seem less qualified like a Marty Morningwheg or the new guy hired this year as an HC with little previous coaching experience.

 

Given that well qualified men like Tony Dungy or Marvin Lewis have had to wait for years (and far longer than less qualified applicants) before getting there shot creates real doubt about the proposition that NFL owners are solely motivated by a desire to win when failed HCs get jobs over these candidates who once hired lead their teams to the playoffs and ratchet up the # of team Ws.

 

There are myriad more reasons, but based simply on a need to redress years of unfairness toward A-As by the NFL andthe desire to change these perceptions of past reality quickly because there are so many A-A employees, change must occur.

[SDS]

Okay..do me a favor. Go to the library..check out "Roots".

599465[/snapback]

 

wasn't Alex Haley found out to be a fraud who either made up or lifted much of the information (and claimed it as his own personal history) that made it into Roots?

[SDS]

A-A descent who can help them win appears pretty doubtable when the NFL consistenly makes a practice of hiring HCs repetitively like a Rich Kotite or who seem less qualified like a Marty Morningwheg or the new guy hired this year as an HC with little previous coaching experience.

599679[/snapback]

 

Not to defend Rich Kotite, but the guy only had two HC jobs...

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/KotiRi0.htm

[Orton's Arm]

tenny said it perfectly.  While they are two different catagories and issues, historically there has been a HUGE overlap between the two.

599630[/snapback]

I see it differently. The old boy network is a problem, not because it produces the wrong racial outcome, but because it discriminates against all qualified candidates not part of the network. It's just as discriminatory to deny a white coaching candidate a job due to lack of connections as it is to do this to a black candidate.

[X. Benedict]

So what's the solution in your mind? An all-black league with all-black coaches? Would that effectively remedy the sins of Plessy v. Ferguson in your mind?

 

Perhaps it's not about race. perhaps it's about qualification.

599479[/snapback]

 

It is probably less about race and more about nepotism.

Do you doubt that there are enough qualified blacks to coach every team in the league?

(of course if being an NFL head coach is a primary qualification that knocks most blacks out already)

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I see it differently. The old boy network is a problem, not because it produces the wrong racial outcome, but because it discriminates against all qualified candidates not part of the network. It's just as discriminatory to deny a white coaching candidate a job due to lack of connections as it is to do this to a black candidate.

599700[/snapback]

 

True but many ALSO view it as a particular problem because it discriminates both against qualified white coaches AND it discriminates against qualified A-A coaches.

 

As one who thinks that life in general is not fair abd given the rarified la-la land of NFL HC jobs though offensive I have less problem with the discrimination against coaches of white descent.

 

However, given the NFL's quite recent (to the extent of probably being ongoing as far as HC jobs go) hisory of discrimination against people of A-A descent I think that this issue merits action on the NFL'a part. I'm glad that they have adopted an approach based on fostering greater opportunity rather than a senseless addiction to quotas as a method fro addressing this issue.

 

I do not think the fact that the good ol boy network has both discriminated against some qualified white and virtually all qualified A-A is mutually exclusive at all.

 

If you have a problem addressing the past discrimination against A-As that is another issue and you should say so if you do as it would clarify things.

[Orton's Arm]

Okay..do me a favor. Go to the library..check out "Roots".  Watch it. Slavery, lynching all that stuff.  Go get the Burns documentary.  Civil war, slavery, Emancipation Proclamation (tall ugly guy with a beard) Thirteenth amendment.  Pull out American History II notes.  Jim Crow..separate but equal Plessy v. Ferguson.  Emmet Till, Voting Rights Act, Violet Liuzzo, freedom riders, Brown v. Board of Education.  Segregated sports.  Reflecting pool..."I have a dream"...Civil Rights Act, Duke v. Griggs Power. Having reviewed and reflected do you agree this may a be a LITTLE more complicated than the situation you posit?

599465[/snapback]

The things you mention were certainly hard burdens for black people. Many in the black community showed courage in the face of these burdens, and this should be applauded.

 

But as difficult as these things were, the situation faced by the people of Poland was even worse. In 1939, the Soviet Union invaded the eastern half of Poland, and proceeded to murder one person out of every ten. Look around the league, and count the number of coaches with Polish-sounding last names. I can't think of any.

 

Most of the arguments being advanced in favor of affirmative action for blacks could also be used to advocate affirmative action for Poles. Certainly there have been enough past injustices against Polish people. Old boy networks don't necessarily include proportionate numbers of Poles. And I have the feeling Poles are underrepresented in the coaching ranks, when compared against their proprotionate numbers in the general population.

 

Does this mean the NFL should adopt a Rooney Rule for Poles? Does this mean Poles should be a protected minority, as defined by employment law? Of course not. Such measures would merely serve to politicize the hiring process still further; moving us even further away from a meritocracy.

[The Dean]

The things you mention were certainly hard burdens for black people. Many in the black community showed courage in the face of these burdens, and this should be applauded.

 

But as difficult as these things were, the situation faced by the people of Poland was even worse. In 1939, the Soviet Union invaded the eastern half of Poland, and proceeded to murder one person out of every ten. Look around the league, and count the number of coaches with Polish-sounding last names. I can't think of any.

 

Most of the arguments being advanced in favor of affirmative action for blacks could also be used to advocate affirmative action for Poles. Certainly there have been enough past injustices against Polish people. Old boy networks don't necessarily include proportionate numbers of Poles. And I have the feeling Poles are underrepresented in the coaching ranks, when compared against their proprotionate numbers in the general population.

 

Does this mean the NFL should adopt a Rooney Rule for Poles? Does this mean Poles should be a protected minority, as defined by employment law? Of course not. Such measures would merely serve to politicize the hiring process still further; moving us even further away from a meritocracy.

599707[/snapback]

 

 

God DAMN, you're freakin stupid.

 

Sorry...had to type it. a mod can go ahead and take it down.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Not to defend Rich Kotite, but the guy only had two HC jobs...

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/KotiRi0.htm

599692[/snapback]

 

By repetitively I meant twice in this case. If instead it is taken to mean 3 times or more, then feel free to swutch my wording to mean twice as I think it makes no difference in the point I am making.

 

Alternately if the rehiring of Kotite by NYJ (where he led them to 3-13 and 1-24 records) was not stupid after he dragged some great Philly teams down to 8-8 snd 7-9 records feel free to make that case.

[Orton's Arm]

God DAMN, you're freakin stupid.

599709[/snapback]

In other words, you're unable to express your disagreement with someone without questioning their intelligence. Especially when it comes to emotion-laden topics such as employment law.

 

You've been programmed to think a certain way, and attempting to discuss hot botton issues with you is pointless. It's hard to look at you without contempt.