PFT: Having 3 NFL African American coaches is shameful

[Popeyejones]

If that's true how do we explain fired white coaches getting second and third chances at higher rates than do non-white fired head coaches? This was in the most recent report, but IIRC it has also been modeled by academics outside of that report too (and IIRC again even across different sports at the college level; a lot of these studies happen at the college level just because the N is bigger).

Would have to dig into the internals to know for sure, but In the NFL I'd be worried about sample size creating a distortion.
Just off the top of my head (added a couple from a quick Domehawk level of 'research')... recycled minority Head Coaches:
Ron Rivera
Hue Jackson
Lovie Smith
Tony Dungy
Jim Caldwell
Dennis Green
Tom Flores
Herm Edwards
Ray Rhodes

Is there any doubt Tomlin would be snatched up instantly if let go? Not going to be shocked to see Lewis resurface if he's actively interviewing and Flores is creating a name for himself with the Miami late season turn around.

Simply forcing candidates into the Head Coach role

Addressed this above, but I'm strongly opposed to this claim, as it is simply untrue.

I wasn't referring to a current practice just advising against incrementalism i.e. We've had the Rooney Rule for X years and only Y results therefore we need to mandate Z minority hires.

Yeah, would loooove to dig into the internals too, but there's no way they'd ever. :lol:

It takes a lot of work but people have been able to get into the door and do process stuff for college admissions, university hiring and hiring in some elite occupations like law and finance, but no way the NFL would ever let someone IMO.

And 100% agrees about the sample size problem of the NFL. Even if you find statistical significance the N is so small that I'd still have doubts (how psych has gotten themselves in so much trouble with all their statistically significant but not replicating small N studies that they love so much).

It's why focusing on the college level makes more sense from a data perspective but less sense from a public interest perspective probably.

 

[Popeyejones]

I"m surprised frankly that there ISN'T a league-wide effort to fund a diversity scholarship/internship program or incentives for minorities and women, given that the league has implemented both the Rooney Rule (for minorities) and a "sister Rooney Rule" saying that at least one woman has to be interviewed for any executive position.

These rules exist b/c participation in these ranks was seen as so low (Thing One) that something needed to be done about it (Thing Two) that wasn't happening at the organic level. The same occurs across industry; the sheetmetal and electricans' unions, for example, do similar things for women.

So far, of course, the paucity in women/minority candidates can be partially explained by so few of them existing in the pipeline, which leads to arguments that there's no one really good to interview when the problem is scarcity. It is only when sufficient people are in the pipeline that we can then see whether there are discrepancies in how they as a class are treated on the field and how they advance. And the more of them that do, the more likely that they will be judged not as "minority hires" but based on their own individual record.

Someone asked about "reverse racism." This can certainly occur--CMC admitted that in his combine days, he felt some skepticism from teams about playing RB as a white man. But in general, men and especially white men are more than others are apt to get a hearing, a foot into, any door they wish.

Popeye talked about the ease with which men entered prior female-dominated fields as said fields became more lucrative or high-profile--telephone operators and punchcarders used to be women; now those who do the equivalent tech jobs are mostly men. You can't say men (especially white men) are excluded in the same way, as it's always been that when white men knock on doors, they've gotten at least an opportunity to compete, and often get treated in a more "dignified" matter when they do succeed.

This is true even down to the cheerleader level, one in which jobs are incented almost totally based on pub rather than pay. They are barely compensated and certainly not enough to maintain the personal routines that are necessary for the job, but clearly, the PR exposure/fame/changing times has drawn some men, who have not only been accommodated but held to a different and easier standard as to how their body is expected to be displayed and judged.

:2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: to every word of this.

 

[pmedic920]

Winning is EVERYTHING in the NFL.

Personally I don’t see any owner hiring anyone that isn’t what he sees as the best chance to win.

Guess it’s possible that an owner would forgo a few wins just to hire a “white guy” be I’d be hard pressed to believe it.

YMMV

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

Just a couple years ago there were 8 minority HCs. Unfortunately 5 of them sucked and got fired.

The big disparity is that while 70% of football players are black, only 9% of HCs are black. It's all about the pipeline. If most coaches are former football players, you would assume that coaching staffs would resemble the ethnicity of the players more. However, if more black players actually make an NFL roster, while more white players don't make the cut, more white players are going to go into coaching at a younger age. As the old saying goes, if you can't do, teach.

However recently we are seeing more retired NFL players go into coaching, but they have to start there way from the bottom. You aren't just going to retire from playing and go directly to being an OC/DC.

Bottom line is, it's not so much about racism when hiring a head coach, it's about there actually being viable candidates. When your pool of head coaching candidates is 90% white, you're probably going to hire a white guy. It starts from the bottom, more black players need to go into coaching at a younger age.

 

[kobebryant]

Winning is EVERYTHING in the NFL.

Personally I don’t see any owner hiring anyone that isn’t what he sees as the best chance to win.

Guess it’s possible that an owner would forgo a few wins just to hire a “white guy” be I’d be hard pressed to believe it.

YMMV

Martha Ford re: Caldwell (.563 win %) & Patricia (.297 win%)

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

Winning is EVERYTHING in the NFL.

Personally I don’t see any owner hiring anyone that isn’t what he sees as the best chance to win.

Guess it’s possible that an owner would forgo a few wins just to hire a “white guy” be I’d be hard pressed to believe it.

YMMV

Martha Ford re: Caldwell (.563 win %) & Patricia (.297 win%)

Martha's probably wishing she waited for Grier/Flores instead of Quinn/Patricia.

But even in this tight window of being interested only in the Patriots, there was the opportunity to talk to Grier/Flores too. I wouldn't be surprised if they did, and if the decision came down to rebuild strategy. Grier/Flores were for burning it to the ground, and Quinn/Patricia were for augmenting the pieces that they had.

I was so down on Miami's strategy, but it appears to have worked brilliantly.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

New PFT article: Judge not concerned with people questioning his hire

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... is-hiring/

See, he's getting flack because everyone knows the Giants had to interview minority coaching candidates, and there's widespread perception that a lot of them are better than a ST-coach that no one knows.

 

[Bobblehead]

:2thumbs: :2thumbs:

The mere existence of the Rooney Rule is racist itself, and undermines the legitimacy of ANY non-white coach hire. Quite frankly, it's insulting to minority coaching candidates.

You're telling me that in this day and age, and with billions of dollars at stake, that coaching hires are overwhelmingly favoring "white" men because of racism? Then how do you explain the overwhelming percentage of black players, particularly in skill positions?

GTFO with that crap!

Those people who are keeping score based on skin color are the real racists, and THAT is what's shameful here.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ad-coaches

"The struggle doesn’t end with being hired. Nonwhite coaches tend to be hired for less successful teams than white coaches are. That leads to less job security and shorter stints, according to a 2019 data dive by the Undefeated. Minority coaches who are fired from a head coaching job are half as likely as white peers to be hired for another NFL head coaching position, according to the Arizona State study. Fired white head coaches also went on to offensive coordinator positions in the NFL at nearly three times the rate of coaches of color, according to the 10-year study."

This experience is shared by a lot of minority hires, actually: There's resentment that the person came in with this "advantage," and once they've had their chance and "blown it," people are like, "Well, they had their chance." NEXT.

This does not happen when people get the "chances" more frequently awarded to white coaches.

Kyle Shanahan was assisted into his coaching career by being the son of Mike Shanahan, for whom he worked and failed at the Redskins, and after which he had two losing years before succeeding with the 49ers. No minority coach has the privilege of being a son of a coach, unlike the sons of Shanahan, Belichick and yes, Pete Carroll. Gruden meanwhile failed spectacularly with the Redskins, he got fired, and all indications are that he's not out of NFL coaching. After all, if nothing works, he has a brother who already is a HC and can just work for him.

Even Jim Tomsula and Chip Kelly enjoyed success after their failures that happens far less with minorities. After SF, Tomsula went on to do his old job (DL coach) for the Redskins. He was just fired there, but guess what, he's on to Dallas in the same position. Kelly got fired from the Eagles before, got fired at SF, and now is HC with UCLA.

Lewis? He's got an minor advisory position with the Sun Devils after working up with three NFL teams and then coaching 16 years with a fourth team. There will be no powerful white writer like Peter King showing up on his doorstep to chronicle the new innovative thoughts in his head; the sentiment is that despite taking the Bengals to the playoffs in 8 of 16 seasons, he should just be happy that he has a job in coaching at all. Jason Garrett did worse--but everyone expects Garrett to be back as a coordinator or at least a position coach with the NFL, and no one thinks Garrett should just be happy to be in the bowels of a mid-tier Pac 12 school coaching because of failure.

So to those rehashing that the moral code should be "just the best, I don't care, black, white, polka dotted or yellow," this is not that Dr. Seuss book where the issue is just "stars upon thars." This involves powerful NFL coaches already promoting nepotism, which minority coaches have no access to. It is a blindness to see that really, we have less of an issue throwing over someone like Lewis or Hue Jackson while the propping up of retreads like Gruden won't be questioned, and when the privilege of even colossal flameouts like Tomsula or Kelly to have NFL/high level college employment is unquestioned, including by many who see no problem with this while insisting this is all part of a color-blind meritocracy.

The data suggests otherwise.

 

[Mindsink]

This experience is shared by a lot of minority hires, actually: There's resentment that the person came in with this "advantage," and once they've had their chance and "blown it," people are like, "Well, they had their chance." NEXT.

This does not happen when people get the "chances" more frequently awarded to white coaches.

Resentment. This is key. And this is why the Rooney Rule will never work in the long run.

This is a no-win situation. How do you possibly expand or change the Rooney rule to get more black coaches hired, short of FORCING these hires?

Bias (racial or otherwise) may be a dirty word but this is reality. You think Christian McCaffrey's success will create a flood of opportunities for white skill position players from the pee wee league up? No. He's an anomaly. Black kids will always be seen as better athletes, because on average, this is what's been proven for decades.

White coaches will always be seen as better, for whatever reason(s), unless proven otherwise. Look at how long it took for even black QBs to break the stereotype. And even today, it's hard to look at a black QB and not assume his athleticism isn't the key to his success. And when a white QB has athleticism (e.g. Josh Allen), people are surprised.

 

[bigskydoc]

For the NFL what this would mean is that for coordinator and head coach positions, instead of the Rooney Rule the NFL would offer to pay (say) 20% of the median coaches salary for teams when they hire non-white coaches and coordinators. It's a direct incentive to do so. .

I don't think this would work in the NFL. Money (at least at the level of coaches salary) really isn't a huge incentive for owners, wins are the incentive.

If I could guarantee to owners, that hiring this one specific position coach will guarantee 1 additional win every year, I am certain that almost all of them would be happy to pay an additional million per year in salary, or more.

Obviously, you can't offer any kind of additional win guarantee.

What might work is to offer a salary cap adjustment for diversity hires. You could offer a 1 million increase in cap for every minority coach that was hired. That would be very effective, and would put any racist owner in the interesting conundrum of deciding whether the additional cap space is worth hiring someone who he believes is a less capable hire.



*disclaimer, this is only for the sake of argument, I'm not saying this should be done, I'm just saying what would be effective in getting more minority candidates hired.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

As much as I agree that it's weird that no one's interviewed a guy like Eric Bieniemy, the offensive coordinator of arguably the most dynamic offense in the entire league for two straight years now............the Rooney Rule is a textbook example of how you can't legislate or force businesses to hire who they don't want to hire.

I don't know if it's racism, or just a bunch of closed minded owners and GM's that just keep hiring the same guys cause that's their comfort zone, hiring who they already have relationships with, or who they feel safe hiring.

Either way, the answer is not to hold a gun to owner's heads forcing them to go through the motions of interviewing minority candidates when you know damn well they're not going to hire that person. The answer is to get more minority coaches and coordinators in the NFL and college, so that there's more of them coming up through the ranks to be considered once they're successful.

More clinics, more recruiting, get some of that NFL money going towards making coach, coordinator and even intern jobs more attractive to minorities, so again more are in the league in general coming up through the ranks.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

Resentment. This is key. And this is why the Rooney Rule will never work in the long run.

This is a no-win situation. How do you possibly expand or change the Rooney rule to get more black coaches hired, short of FORCING these hires?

Bias (racial or otherwise) may be a dirty word but this is reality. You think Christian McCaffrey's success will create a flood of opportunities for white skill position players from the pee wee league up? No. He's an anomaly. Black kids will always be seen as better athletes, because on average, this is what's been proven for decades.

White coaches will always be seen as better, for whatever reason(s), unless proven otherwise. Look at how long it took for even black QBs to break the stereotype. And even today, it's hard to look at a black QB and not assume his athleticism isn't the key to his success. And when a white QB has athleticism (e.g. Josh Allen), people are surprised.

OK, but you have to look at why there's so much resentment over the Rooney Rule. All it is is a mandate to interview one person who is not a white male for only the highest coaching position. Like I said, there are "rules" that only white coaches get (like outright nepotism) that NO ONE seems to have a problem with even as they are blatant, let alone the advantage created by growing up and being socialized/accepted in the white boy network that gives you these intangibles like "fit" that apparently Judge and Rhule had in spades over Bienemy, Richard, David Shaw.

I contest that "white coaches will always be seen as better." Nope, white male coaches get vastly more opportunities than their minority counterparts from literally birth, and no one has a issue--but they're upset because a rule makes teams at least talk to one person who's not a white male for the highest coaching seat only.

What is needed, besides the Rooney Rule, are diversity training opportunities along the pipeline. And for people getting salty over the prospect of the league subsidizing a few internships or minority hires, well, then at least protest egregious crap when it goes the other way. Steve Belichick, Nate Carroll, just happen to be the "best men" for the job irrespective of that they've only been on teams headed by their dads, with no consideration that their dad's stature had everything to do with it because "black white polkadot purple?" Get out of here.

 

[Mindsink]

OK, but you have to look at why there's so much resentment over the Rooney Rule. All it is is a mandate to interview one person who is not a white male for only the highest coaching position. Like I said, there are "rules" that only white coaches get (like outright nepotism) that NO ONE seems to have a problem with even as they are blatant, let alone the advantage created by growing up and being socialized/accepted in the white boy network that gives you these intangibles like "fit" that apparently Judge and Rhule had in spades over Bienemy, Richard, David Shaw.

I contest that "white coaches will always be seen as better." Nope, white male coaches get vastly more opportunities than their minority counterparts from literally birth, and no one has a issue--but they're upset because a rule makes teams at least talk to one person who's not a white male for the highest coaching seat only.

What is needed, besides the Rooney Rule, are diversity training opportunities along the pipeline. And for people getting salty over the prospect of the league subsidizing a few internships or minority hires, well, then at least protest egregious crap when it goes the other way. Steve Belichick, Nate Carroll, just happen to be the "best men" for the job irrespective of that they've only been on teams headed by their dads, with no consideration that their dad's stature had everything to do with it because "black white polkadot purple?" Get out of here.

And here's the fundamental point where we disagree. I am not disagreeing with the existence of the bias. Where I disagree is that whether or not this is an issue that needs to be addressed. I say no, it is not.

This is a topic that goes way beyond the NFL and coaching hires. Why do [insert minority group] need more representation...in ANYTHING? Is there a coalition of black coaches who are picketing NFL front offices for equality? How about Hispanic coaches? Pacific Islanders? I mean, we had many outstanding HoF players from the Pacific Islands with ZERO representation in the coaching ranks. Why no outrage there?

No. The vast majority of it comes from talking heads who believe they need to voice outrage at racial disparity (particularly when it comes to African Americans) in the name of social justice.

You know where there's the greatest racial disparity? It is with players, particularly skill position players. Why does nobody have a problem with the league having greater than 90% black Wide Receivers and Running Backs? Yet there are always race bean counters keeping score of how many black QBs there are.

Answer me this... if the NFL were 100% black, would you have a problem with it? If not, then why not?

 

[RolandDeschain]

I mean, it's totally logical that all the older white owners are like "ehhh, I'll take a lesser white coach candidate rather than a better black one who will get me a Lombardi".

Makes perfect sense. I'm sure that's exactly how it is and why we need the Rooney Rule and more. I bet Paul Allen was trying to get one of our white players to hoist the Lombardi after Super Bowl 48 rather than Wilson, too.

 

[Mindsink]

I bet Paul Allen was trying to get one of our white players to hoist the Lombardi after Super Bowl 48 rather than Wilson, too.

Come on now. Wilson is practically white.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I bet Paul Allen was trying to get one of our white players to hoist the Lombardi after Super Bowl 48 rather than Wilson, too.

Come on now. Wilson is practically white.

Lmao. He did get accused of being an Oreo, IIRC.

Fine - since we're just making ridiculous crap up anyways, let's go with Paul Allen tried to stop Sherman and Bennett from touching the Lombardi.

 

[Mindsink]

I bet Paul Allen was trying to get one of our white players to hoist the Lombardi after Super Bowl 48 rather than Wilson, too.

Come on now. Wilson is practically white.

Lmao. He did get accused of being an Oreo, IIRC.

Fine - since we're just making ridiculous crap up anyways, let's go with Paul Allen tried to stop Sherman and Bennett from touching the Lombardi.

I thought it was "cornball brother". But either way, yeah, he's basically Carlton Banks.

 

[Ambrose83]

The mere existence of the Rooney Rule is racist itself, and undermines the legitimacy of ANY non-white coach hire. Quite frankly, it's insulting to minority coaching candidates.

You're telling me that in this day and age, and with billions of dollars at stake, that coaching hires are overwhelmingly favoring "white" men because of racism? Then how do you explain the overwhelming percentage of black players, particularly in skill positions?

GTFO with that crap!

Those people who are keeping score based on skin color are the real racists, and THAT is what's shameful here.

100% everything is about race these days.. It's exhausting ....

 

[chris98251]

Waiting for the NFL WOKE moment now.