Rooney Rule

[burmafrd]

its a fine rule for those that believe in lying and discrimination. That is what the rule promoted.

And frankly anyone claiming that you should not feel bad when you are 'interviewing' for a job you have no shot at is full of crap.

have to laugh at those that cannot see that 'for show' interviews are just total BS. Yes that is lying- when the person sets up an interview that has no chance of being hired that is a LIE. Frankly its FRAUD.

those that cannot figure that out are those that are oblivious to reality.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by tyke1doe

I had to at the bold. I love how those who don't feel the impact of a particular policy tell others who are that it's a joke and there's no explaining it away.

But let's look at the numbers.

Prior to the 2003, there had been five black coaches in the modern era.
Art Shell was hired prior to the Rooney Rule primarily because of Al Davis, who also hired the first Hispanic coach in Tom Flores. Beyond that, there was no overall movement by the NFL to hire a black coach.

The other black coaches were Dennis Green, Ray Rhodes, Tony Dungy and Herman Edwards.

[View Full Quote]Dennis Green and Herman Edwards got jobs after the Rooney Rule. So an argument can be made that the Rooney Rule benefited them in that they were hired a second time. Ray Rhodes was also a "retread" but that was before the Rooney Rule. He didn't last long, though. He was one and done with Green Bay after a head coaching stint in Philadelphia. More on the retread concept later.



Really? Any figures to back this up?

Compared to before the Rooney Rule, hiring of black coaches increased 22 percent.
That says that more blacks are getting chances to become head coaches. You would say that followed natural hiring practices. But I would offer that there was a significant event that occurred (the Rooney Rule) that prompted the rise. It's hard to deny its impact when the increase was so drastic.
And what's interesting is that many owners were against the Rooney Rule prior to its ultimate adoption. So what would make one believe that these owners would have hired black coaches if the Rooney Rule ultimately was killed? There's nothing to lead me to believe they would have, not based on the numbers prior to the rule.

Furthermore, of the black coaches hired after the Rooney Rule, only one (Romeo Crennel) was a retread. Simply put, more candidates are being considered instead of the usual retreads being rehired.



And this is supposed to prove what? Wouldn't you expect the man for whom the Rooney Rule is named to lead by example?



Pulease.

Do you know how hard it is to get in front of someone to convince them that you can do the job? Do you know how many unemployed citizens would love to be given the chance to be called in for an interview?

And so what if an organization is forced to interview someone whom they won't hire.

As with any policy, the goal is not always instant change across the board as it is institutionalizing a behavior and making it so commonplace that the policy morphs into a general societal practice.

I believe it's a good rule. It has a purpose, and, as the numbers reveal, it is accomplishing its goal in not only getting more minorities hired as coaches but also getting the word out about future head coaching prospects.

Laugh all you want. But a rule based on race is racist. In addition, forcing an organization to interview someone who they intend not to hire just because of his skin color is a slap in the face to black people. Only those who don't respect themselves look for the victim leverage. It reeks of Sharpton type of mentality. I hire who I want regardless of color. I'm not going to say there is no racism in the NFL but I would bet it's much smaller than the PC police would care top admit.

The only purpose this rule serves is to make a mockery of the hiring process as well as the people who are used to fulfill the stupid rule.

And again, no explaining it away will ever make it any less racist.

[Hoofbite]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

its a fine rule for those that believe in lying and discrimination. That is what the rule promoted.

And frankly anyone claiming that you should not feel bad when you are 'interviewing' for a job you have no shot at is full of crap.

have to laugh at those that cannot see that 'for show' interviews are just total BS. Yes that is lying- when the person sets up an interview that has no chance of being hired that is a LIE. Frankly its FRAUD.

those that cannot figure that out are those that are oblivious to reality.

Coaches are free to decline interviews. Any idea as to why minorities coaches haven't been declining in mass?

If you as a fan know it's a fraud, don't you think the coaches do as well?

Why haven't they been turning all these fraudulent interviews down?

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

I used to think the same thing as well. However, I had a person who works for the Jets explain to me the merits of the Rooney Rule.

The Rooney Rule doesn't force people to be hired.

The problem is that people expect to see instantaneous results. For those who are for more minority coaches being hired, they think it's worthless when guys are allowed interviews and don't get hired.

For those who hate the idea, they are afraid that a minority coach will be forced into being hired.

The idea of the Rooney Rule is that it accepts the fact that there is a discrepancy in black players vs. black head coaches. There's also a discrepancy in black assistants vs. black head coaches.

You can't force owners to hire somebody.

[View Full Quote]However, by getting minority candidates interviews it gets their name out. Maybe they don't get hired the first time with a team, but now the owner is familiar with the coach and maybe down the road they hire him. Or perhaps they will pass along to other owners something like 'hey, we didn't hire him but we were very impressed with him.' And maybe a different owner ends up hiring him based upon that. That is what happened to Tony Dungy and Marvin Lewis.

Lastly, it gives minority candidates the experience of doing these interviews, which are often hours upon hours long. I believe one team did a 9-hour interview with one candidate. The experience will allow the minority candidate the chance to better prepare for future interviews.

Thus, I think the Rooney Rule is valid. It's not perfect, but it's productive if it gets coaches like Marvin Lewis a HC job that they probably would never had received before the Rooney Rule.









YR

The problem is people believe the rooney rule = affirmative action, and as you pointed, it's not. Half of the arguments people use really don't apply, but you hear the same BS every time from almost the same people.

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by Cajuncowboy

I'm not going to say there is no racism in the NFL but I would bet it's much smaller than the PC police would care top admit.

I don't think, nor do i believe it's a prevelant thought that there is a bunch of racism in the NFL, as much as coaches getting opportunities through connections that Blacks didn't have.

Did Jimmy Johnson get hired because he was the best canidate out there? Probably not, it was in large part because he was a successfull college coach who just happened to play at Arkansas with the owner of the Dallas Cowboys.

And how many of his friends followed him from Miami?

It's human nature to hire people you are comfortable, and let's be honest it was rare for African American's to be in the same position as their white counter parts. And hiring a white coach who may who you had a working relationship with doesn't make you racist, but it is an obstacle that the majority of african americans faced when trying to break into the coaching ranks.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by Manwiththeplan

I don't think, nor do i believe it's a prevelant thought that there is a bunch of racism in the NFL, as much as coaches getting opportunities through connections that Blacks didn't have.

Did Jimmy Johnson get hired because he was the best canidate out there? Probably not, it was in large part because he was a successfull college coach who just happened to play at Arkansas with the owner of the Dallas Cowboys.

And how many of his friends followed him from Miami?

It's human nature to hire people you are comfortable, and let's be honest it was rare for African American's to be in the same position as their white counter parts. And hiring a white coach who may who you had a working relationship with doesn't make you racist, but it is an obstacle that the majority of african americans faced when trying to break into the coaching ranks.

The connection this is insane since most of these coaches have been around for some time and have access to the same people. You think these owners or GMS don't know who Ray Horton is? Or anyone else? The thoroughness of the front office today is much more complete than ever before. The need for this silly kowtowing rule is non existent. These owners want to win and they want to make money. They will interview and hire the best person for the job regardless of color.

It is a pandering position to force such a thing onto someone who owns a business and more egregious to those being used based on their skin color.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

I honestly don't believe the minority candidates look at it as a slap in the face. They'll gladly take the interview.

I'm a white guy. But, even I have experienced a situation where I was interviewed for a job that I was not going to get and the interviewer already had their mind made up.

In my situation, it was more of an HR thing for the interviewer. The company wanted him to interview at least 3 candidates. He could choose which one he wanted, but they wanted 3 candidates interviewed. For me, it was a much higher position than my position at the time. I was able to get a feel for what interviewers are going to ask at a job at that level.

[View Full Quote]The same is going to happen in the NFL. While you have the majority owner, you have a lot of minority owners that are going to demand that the majority owner at least interviews a few people, even if their mind is made up. It doesn't make a difference if it's all white guys, they want at least a few different people interviewed. And that's no different than the gripes against the Rooney Rule.

What I do not like is how the media always skewers the Cowboys about who Jerry interviews. I remember when Campo got fired they acted like Campo didn't get a fair chance. The guy went 15-33 in 3 seasons and they were seriously trying to tell us that Campo wasn't given a fair chance.

Then when Parcells retired, we interviewed plenty of minority candidates like Todd Bowles, Ron Rivera and others. And the media complained that these candidates were not 'serious.'

Yet, no complaints about KC having their minds made up on Andy Reid. And if no minority candidates are hired, I highly doubt the media will make a peep about it.

Again, I'm for the Rooney Rule. I just hate it when Dallas clearly abides by it and gets skewered for it. But, when the Bills hire Chan Gailey despite having had coaches like Perry Fewell (who coached for the Bills), we don't hear a peep.






YR

Exactly, Reid was going to be hired if he wanted the job, the other interviews were just for show. We do that and Jones is crucified.

[tyke1doe]

Originally Posted by Cajuncowboy

Laugh all you want. But a rule based on race is racist.

No, it's not. Besides, who supports that definition of racism other than Internet posters ranting about political correctness? Racism is deeper than that simplistic definition.

In addition, forcing an organization to interview someone who they intend not to hire just because of his skin color is a slap in the face to black people.

So basically you're saying that Affirmative Action policies enacted after the Civil Rights Bill was passed were a slap in the face to black people?

Only those who don't respect themselves look for the victim leverage. It reeks of Sharpton type of mentality.

So NFL owners, who had to approve the policy, don't respect themselves? They reek of the Sharpton mentality?

I hire who I want regardless of color. I'm not going to say there is no racism in the NFL but I would bet it's much smaller than the PC police would care top admit.

First, you acknowledge there is racism in the NFL and then in the same breath you say you bet it's small by comparison.

And yet, the owners and NFL felt it necessary to have a Rooney Rule. Hhhhmmm.

The only purpose this rule serves is to make a mockery of the hiring process as well as the people who are used to fulfill the stupid rule.

As has been pointed out, the Rooney Rule doesn't require teams to hire a minority, only to interview one. News flash: everyone who is interviewed doesn't get the job. Are those who don't get the job being mocked also?

And again, no explaining it away will ever make it any less racist.

With all due respect, I don't think you even know what racism is.

Originally Posted by definition of racism

ra·cism

[ ráy sìzzəm ]


1.animosity toward other races: prejudice or animosity against people who belong to other races
2.belief in racial superiority: the belief that people of different races have different qualities and abilities, and that some races are inherently superior or inferior

So tell me. Is the Rooney Rule creating animosity toward whites? Towards Hispanics? Is the Rooney Rule saying that blacks are superior to whites that's why they must be given an interview? What white person is being hurt by this? A team can interview as many people it wants even with the Rooney Rule. Adding a minority to the mix isn't denying other races the right to compete for these jobs.

No, the Rooney Rule is not racist. Well, it's not if you're following established definitions of racism and racist rather than making up your own.

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by tyke1doe

So tell me. Is the Rooney Rule creating animosity toward whites? Towards Hispanics? Is the Rooney Rule saying that blacks are superior to whites that's why they must be given an interview? What white person is being hurt by this? A team can interview as many people it wants even with the Rooney Rule. Adding a minority to the mix isn't denying other races the right to compete for these jobs.

No, the Rooney Rule is not racist. Well, it's not if you're following established definitions of racism and racist rather than making up your own.

The funny part that everyone ignores, is that after the Rooney Rule, more white coaches are getting interviewed as well.

[tyke1doe]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

Coaches are free to decline interviews. Any idea as to why minorities coaches haven't been declining in mass?

If you as a fan know it's a fraud, don't you think the coaches do as well?

Why haven't they been turning all these fraudulent interviews down?

Good point. I guess these would-be coaches are in on the fraud.

In addition, why would the owners approve the policy? They didn't have to institute the Rooney Rule, yet they did. And lest one argue that the owners were pressured to adop the rule, these owners are practically isolated from society. They live in their own world. They don't have to enact this policy if they believe they're sufficiently addressing the issue of diversity in the coaching ranks. And apparently they felt they had a blind spot and needed to correct that.

Hence, their adoption of the Rooney Rule.

[tyke1doe]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

Absolutely agree.

Also, we're talking about a close knit group of employers. 32 of them and that's it. These guys talk and a good first impression even in a procedural interview could get a guys name out there and open doors for him at a later date. The simple reporting of a candidate could be enough to draw interest from other teams.

For all the people who complain about how illegitimate the process is and how much of an insult it is to these guys, I can't recall masses of minority coaches coming forward and publicly declining interviews because of it.

And taking a page from the non-NFL world, I know several blacks who've told me they've been passed over for promotions while whites have been sought out for promotions. When they express interest in moving into management, one of the responses they get is "I didn't know you were interested in management."

When you have a policy that mandates you consider certain individuals, you eliminate this dynamic - to some degree - because it addresses that "default" mechanism that has managers picking people they think make great managers and opens them to picking people (at least for the interview) whom they wouldn't have ordinarily considered.

[tyke1doe]

Originally Posted by CanadianCowboysFan

Oh I understand the entire, "gets them interview experience" argument and there is some merit to it but I remember when we hired Parcells. Not only did we have to interview Dennis Green, he had to advise the NFL it was a legitimate interview and that he believed he was given a real shot.

Interviewing someone for a job for which you have already decided to hire someone else is a slap in the face and a waste of everyone's time.

Again, I find it interesting that you can make a pronounce regarding what other people consider a waste of time.

Did Dennis Green feel it was a waste of time? Have you spoken with him?

Unless you're part of that process and has spoken to everyone in that process, you aren't qualified to say what is a waste of someone else's time.

[Star Guard_31]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

I used to think the same thing as well. However, I had a person who works for the Jets explain to me the merits of the Rooney Rule.

The Rooney Rule doesn't force people to be hired.

The problem is that people expect to see instantaneous results. For those who are for more minority coaches being hired, they think it's worthless when guys are allowed interviews and don't get hired.

For those who hate the idea, they are afraid that a minority coach will be forced into being hired.

The idea of the Rooney Rule is that it accepts the fact that there is a discrepancy in black players vs. black head coaches. There's also a discrepancy in black assistants vs. black head coaches.

You can't force owners to hire somebody.

[View Full Quote]However, by getting minority candidates interviews it gets their name out. Maybe they don't get hired the first time with a team, but now the owner is familiar with the coach and maybe down the road they hire him. Or perhaps they will pass along to other owners something like 'hey, we didn't hire him but we were very impressed with him.' And maybe a different owner ends up hiring him based upon that. That is what happened to Tony Dungy and Marvin Lewis.

Lastly, it gives minority candidates the experience of doing these interviews, which are often hours upon hours long. I believe one team did a 9-hour interview with one candidate. The experience will allow the minority candidate the chance to better prepare for future interviews.

Thus, I think the Rooney Rule is valid. It's not perfect, but it's productive if it gets coaches like Marvin Lewis a HC job that they probably would never had received before the Rooney Rule.

YR

I know it's often cited, but I have yet to hear a sound argument logically concluding that the discrepancy between the amount of African American players and Head Coaches is relevant. This implies that by merely playing professional football you are automatically qualified to be a coach in the NFL. It's simply an erroneous comparison. A better measuring stick would be the number of minority NFL head coaches in relation to the percentage of the minority population in the U.S. at large.

15.4% of the U.S. population is African American. By my count, there were 5 African American head coaches in the NFL last year out of 32 possible opportunities. This means that 15.6% of NFL head coaching positions were filled by African American coaches. Statistically, this almost exactly aligns to their representation in society.

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by Star Guard_31

I know it's often cited, but I have yet to hear a sound argument logically concluding that the discrepancy between the amount of African American players and Head Coaches is relevant. This implies that by merely playing professional football you are automatically qualified to be a coach in the NFL. It's simply an erroneous comparison. A better measuring stick would be the number of minority NFL head coaches in relation to the percentage of the minority population in the U.S. at large.

15.4% of the U.S. population is African American. By my count, there were 5 African American head coaches in the NFL last year out of 32 possible opportunities. This means that 15.6% of NFL head coaching positions were filled by African American coaches. Statistically, this almost exactly aligns to their representation in society.

This is a poor argument because there is a coorelation between playing football and coaching it. I'd be willing to bet that every coach in the last 20 years has played football on some level. Whether it was in the NFL, college or HS. And while I don't have the numbers in front of me, I'm positive that more than 15.4% of football players are African American.

That's why we don't see women coaches, or too many other ethnicities because the numbers that play the sport and thus learn it good enough to coach it are very small.

[koolaid]

I don't have a super strong opinion on this, but I feel that this rule has outlived its usefulness. I understand it gets people's names out there, but I just feel that what probably gets coaches hired in the NFL is what they have accomplished in their career.