It has nothing to do with race. I find the race deal boring bc he wasn't fired for being blackQuote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Printable View
It has nothing to do with race. I find the race deal boring bc he wasn't fired for being blackQuote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Unless they try to tie it the Hue Jackson thing that came out today and make a claim that teams only hire minority coaches to intentionally lose games.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
I?m not sure of all the angles here as I haven?t read the entire allegations
He's got the Giants and Broncos from the example I've read. And apparently he's got some other coaches willing to step forward. Hue Jackson is a name I've heard (and that Hue was told to tank the Browns). We'll see how it plays out. Just because the entire NFL is mentioned does not mean that excludes the Giants from being found to be a rogue party with bad hiring practices.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irondawg
Again, maybe he was a cancer. He sure isn?t doing himself any favors by acting like a big crybaby right now just because he wasn?t hired somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
I say he would be a snowflake if he was wronged and didn't sued. It takes some balls to take the NFL and that money machine.Quote:
Originally Posted by 662dawg
Calling him a crybaby for suing just means you are making yourself judge and jury on the situation when you can't possibly know whether he was wronged or not. I know that I don't know, what do you know about the situation? You been in Miami or NY working in these NFL franchises and posting on this message board?
wouldn't it have been better to try and get another head coaching job and win? Like Mike Tomlin. wouldn't that be better than bringing in lawyers. I have read the allegations and I figure out the racism. He was given the head coaching job of the Dolphins for goodness sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
I know he wasn?t not hired because of his race. That?s what I know. The owners/GM?s are hiring the guy they think is the best man for the job regardless of their race & that?s how it should be. This is 2022 not 1822. He?s a crybaby. I?m going out on a limb & saying there?s more to the story than currently being told. However the NFL is probably to woke to call him out & will likely just settle & move on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
The Bill B text is the interesting part of this to me. How would he have a multiple day head start on the media on them hiring Dabool?
We Brian D did work for the Pats a couple a couple of times and the Giants hired their GM from Buffalo so it may have been a package deal that he somehow knew about but they had to wait to announce the HC until they completed ?interviews?.
It will be interesting to see what they can prove here or if Bill was making the same assumption everyone else did when they hired their new GM.
Regardless this seems like a incident seemingly isolated to the NYG. The Denver allegations are more odd and given that they were 3 years ago might harder to validate unless they can find a whistleblower there.
tehQuote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
If they have a case and proof of this happening systemically, then it is absolutely the right thing to do to bring a lawsuit. If they don't have a good case, then yeah, he shouldn't have sued. The lawyers he hired are the ones driving it. Do they have a legit case or are they just after the fees. I do not know.
Would have been easier to just be quite and make a good living coaching somewhere? Maybe. But maybe he was tired of the system being slanted and wanted to make a difference. If he didn't believe it, I doubt this lawsuit happens. He may not win but I bet he believes he was wronged. Was he? is the question. I for sure thought it was obvious to everyone for years the Rooney Rule had become a joke.
We know he is a good coach and he most certainly would have gotten a job somewhere even if it wasn't a HC job making a good living and may have gotten another HC shot but: Some people just can't go away quietly when they feel wronged.
With respect to some people being unable to go away quietly, "whistleblowers" are almost always unlikeable people. Very rarely does being a whistleblower work out well for the whistleblower, so people that become whistleblowers are usually very disagreeable and unlikeable (or they are scammers looking for a payday). Flores seems to pretty clearly be the former. It looks like he was fired pretty much for not being the type of guy that will go along to get along. It doesn't appear that he was fired for his onfield results, which seemed reasonably promising. His only problem legally is that it doesn't look like it was race related. The racial stuff gives him a lot of leverage from a PR standpoint, but it looks like the worst thing that happened to him was he went to some sham interviews, which is demeaning, but I'm not sure gives rise to any claims. What are the damages for your name being circulated for jobs you're not actually in contention for? Judging by Sexton clients, it's a plus, not a negative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
Assuming his allegations are true, I'm not sure what legal claim being retaliated against for not tanking raises. If he was being asked to violate a law, that'd be simple. Not sure what it means to be retaliated against for not violating an NFL rule against tanking (which I assume doesn't implicate any federal or state laws).
One thing is for sure and that is that he is basically Kapernicking his chances of ever coaching in the NFL again.
Chicago and Denver also just announced hiring minority DCs that are both promotions.
Going to be interesting to see if the NFL fights it in court because even if you got Flores to go away would you have copycat suits?
This could get more interesting than I originally thought and really blow up if other people try to join the suit.
I think the Rooney Rule serves no useful purpose. Don't GM's & Owners have a good idea going in as to who they want? Why force another interview that's not going anywhere? Has one of these forced interviews ever flipped to a hire??Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
I know this: You are wrong when you call him a crybaby. The easy thing for him to do would be to walk away. He could have gotten another job, he is a good coach. Now, maybe not and I assure you he knows the risk he is taking and was willing to do it anyway. That takes balls, not a crybaby.Quote:
Originally Posted by 662dawg
The Giants may not have purposely not hired him because of race but they damn sure didn't give him or any other minority a legit interview as required by the NFL rule. So, that lawsuit may just win. Like it or not.
These are the NFL Rules put in place to give minorities a chance. They didn't have to hire him but they were expected to interview him in good faith and they didn't. The NFL as a whole has made a mockery of their own rule by allowing the Giants and others to circumvent the Rooney Rule for years. It's been a topic and anyone paying attention knew this was bound to happen at some point. Somebody would have the balls to stand up and say, this is wrong.
But but I wanted this other guy. They still could have hired him but they had to interview a minority candidate before making the hire and didn't. What were they scared of? Him interviewing well?
You're expecting this rule to solve racism and discrimination and be perfect, and if it's not then it's shit. The Rooney Rule is by no means perfect. But it's a start. And it's clear that some teams can't even do that much. And yet you think the solution is that it's not needed? Just do away with it because why? It bothers you?Quote:
Originally Posted by OLJWales
Propose something better then. Stop letting perfect be the enemy of good and work to improve / replace the process instead of deprecate it.
I?m not wrong. He?s a crybaby. The teams hired the guys they wanted. He wasn?t their choice. He stomped his feet & screamed ?racism? because he wasn?t that choice. If the Rooney rule wasn?t in place then this would have never happened in the first place. The team could have just hired who they wanted to & went on about their business. I wouldn?t be surprised if these teams also interviewed other white coaches after they already knew who they were going to hire. Should they just find a reason to sue as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
Nope you wrong. A man stands up for himself is not a crybaby. In fact, he is considered by many to be more of a man than the ones that tuck their tails and run. It those Belichick texts turn out to be true, then the Giants circumvented the rules, period. If you can't get that part then you are blinded by your prejudice.Quote:
Originally Posted by 662dawg
He may lose this lawsuit but that does not mean that he doesn't have balls. In fact, if he loses he has gigantic balls because he will have sabotaged his career to get his day in court.
The irony of the NFL fighting with a black man in court and their "end racism" campaign is..interesting. I wonder what the next NFL woke commercial topic will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irondawg
What racism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
This is the problem. You ASSUME race is a factor. Again this is 2022 not 1822.
Do you know who the most discriminated against people in the world are right now? Straight white males & black conservative free thinkers.
The perfect system is to throw the RACE card in the trash can & move on in life. It?s a classic divide & conquer tool used by Marxists. No owner in the NFL is hiring or firing anyone based on their race. It?s just not happening.
And the only racist thing about this entire topic is the Rooney rule itself. It is the purest form of racism in all of America. It states that you have to interview head coaching candidates based on their race.. not on performance, experience, potential or an owner/GM just going with their gut.
With that said, I?d be ecstatic if my Saints were to hire Mike Tomlin tomorrow & didn?t interview one white guy or anyone else for the job. Not because of his race, but because the man can coach and has had long term success.
The Rooney Rule is definitely in need of overhaul. It was a good idea 13-14 years ago when it was implemented but nowadays it seems 90% of the teams are just bringing in a minority candidate to say they did. There are a lot of minority candidates that deserve a look over some of the people that were hired last cycle. I mean do you really think Eric Bienemy or Byron Leftwich would have done worse in Jax than Urban? I?m not saying that minority coaches need to be given jobs just because of their race, but some definitely need to be given a closer look. Flores is a hell of defensive mind and he is a hell of head coach. He would be an upgrade over 5-6 current HCs.
I also find it odd that this is happening right as black history month begins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Interpolation_Dawg_EX
I?m not prejudiced or blinded by anything. I have a black son and it would be very sensitive to me if this were a REAL case of racism. Fortunately it isn?t. It?s a crybaby kicking and screaming because he didn?t get his way. It?s just like the last 10-15 years of race hoaxes. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM have turned out to be hoaxes. Not one, but all of them have been. Stop trying to create racism where it doesn?t exist. Race pimps are the worst. Wait until race is left behind by the left & the LGBTQ community becomes the new ?Rooney rule?. It?s slowly but surely happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
Yea, we're not going down the rabbit hole of "what racism???" You can cut that shit. Most discriminated poor white man doesn't have a ducking clue give me a break. Blocked. Not arguing with you because there's no changing your mind. You don't know true discrimination until it's laying down on your neck for 8 minutes and killing you in broad daylight. And not a damn good cop to be found to stop it. Go hang out with a group of 5 minority teenagers and walk through a mall / walmart and see how security looks at you. How other people look at you. Then do it again with a group of non minority. Then tell me again how white males are the most discriminated against lmao. And if you try to frame it as a coaching thing, there's literally 1 head coach that's not a white male. Yea, no, blocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by 662dawg
He hired a very diverse, all white firm to represent him........... Probably couldn't convince any folk who think differently to take the case. wonder what he does in the future since he won't be an nfl coach again?
You are really woke. Looking for favorable outcomes not caring about equal opportunities that exist. Wamart-NFL comparison is lame. 1 non white doesn't automatically mean racism. Your basically saying the NFL is racist which is not true and hateful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
flores has been swayed into kapernicking himself and he'll look like a fool. I went to wal mart the other day and had no issues other than the dude in the parking lot..........
True statement. Win - nothing else matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by OLJWales
Test are benign, they don't think or make judgements on skin color or where you are from. How you do on test is about how prepared you are for the test, what you know, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
A piece of paper can't have social bias. Surely you can't believe that?
The results may reveal some social differences but that just reveals some potential clues to root causes of that result.
You try to use work as an insult when doing so makes you seem like a jackass.Quote:
Originally Posted by OLJWales
I'm not calling for equal outcomes. I'm calling for the obvious biases to stop. It's extreme arrogance to think that white males are the head of every profession based on merit. As much as I despise the guy, nick wright made an excellent point today. 35% of assistant coaches are a minority in the NFL. A vast majority of coaches played at least collegiate ball. White males are a 30% minority of players. How do those stats line up with the top guy be 95% white male? It's as ridiculous as if we would see the NHL be 90% non-white coached or the MLB have all but 1 manager be Hispanic.
You keep wanting to apply some argument I'm not making that it should be equal outcomes when I'm just pointing out that the outcomes are an indicator. What people should get is a fair shake. The Rooney rule, while it has its faults, is at least designed to give people a fair shake.
Think about it this way. The owners lose nothing from hearing out one minority person's pitch. They literally just have to hear them out. AND THEY CANT EVEN BRING THEMSELVES TO DO THAT MUCH
How do you see that and not think "well, **** the problem is even worse than imagined. they're flipping the bird at diversity and it's rules."
Instead you somehow think... the rule is the problem??? Like seriously. Think about that. Stop digging your heels in and trying to win an argument. Just ****ing think and listen to someone explain to you why you are wrong and learn.
You've literally been proven wrong several times over.Quote:
Originally Posted by R2Dawg
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/....1981.12022238
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0048546
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...4.2015.1121474
Start there. These are people more educated than you. Trust them to do the research. You can't grasp that a "piece of paper" was decided upon by individuals in power with certain biases. And if you don't like my links, there's 1000s of other scholarly article for you to search up and read.
If you prefer an analogy. Think about it like this. There's a standardized test. It was made by a monkey to help see how smart someone it. The test was to climb up a tree and grab an apple. All the monkeys passed the test with flying colors. They are so smart. None of the fish could climb off the ground. Monkeys are clearly smarter than fish and are there because of their merit. There is no way this test could be biased because it was just a standardized test with simple instructions. How could it be biased?
The Rooney Rule says NFL Owners are racist and cant be trusted. I would prefer personally more black coaches but no need to be woke unless discrimination is going on. I wonder if there may be an educational gap since having played is towards the bottom of the employment application.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
So maybe the testing for cornerbacks is biased. Maybe we need a Rooney Rule to make sure white corners get a chance. Maybe we need a quota or affirmative action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
My point is that the US is 12% black. So it’s not like the league should be 50% black coaches. The best players play and the best coaches coach. If the best corners are all black, then I have no problem with it. It’s called merit.
But when the NBA is 80% black or the cornerbacks are 100% black it’s “because they deserve it.” Yet when the quarterbacks were 95% white it was “discrimination.”
The Rooney Rule was CRT before CRT was cool. Is is possible for an organization to be pro affirmative action and at the same time promote themselves as an equal opportunity employer?Quote:
Originally Posted by OLJWales
It's extremely arrogant and nonsensical to believe that white people vastly dominate positions of power disproportionately based on merit. That's what we call racial bias and having someone in that position to hire have that bias creates a self fulfilling prophecy.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodyshotmypaw
This is a really dumb take. Especially when minority cities are burning to the ground & they?re even making theft LEGAL in many of these cities. You?re more worried about fake ?racism? than you are about minority communities that are suffering so badly right now. Crime & murder rates sky rocketing. I promise you the white man or racism or cops isn?t the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
I can also assure you that the 70% minority WOKE NFL isn?t discriminating against blacks either. It?s just reality, something I now know that you know nothing about. I?m not sure what world you live in but it isn?t the real world lol.
Very fair point. It’s extremely arrogant and nonsensical to believe that black people vastly dominate positions of athleticism and speed disproportionately based on merit. That’s what we call racial bias and having someone in that position to hire have that bias creates a self fulfilling prophecy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
But this isn?t true & just made up garbage once again. Did you know that the US black population is 12% & 11% of Congress is black? US Latino population is 18% & Congress is made up of 8.6% Latinos. Not really a big difference in the black Congress to population ratio. That?s pretty much equality for the black population, but not so much for the Latino population, although I?m not sure I?ve ever heard a Latino complain about this. Maybe they have & just missed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tater
What you want is equity, not equality, which is literally a racist ideology.
Again, please join us in living in the real world.
Athleticism and speed are objectively quantifiable metrics. Power is part of a social construct and not empirically measurable.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodyshotmypaw
But hey, if you want to say that the NFL owners are even more racist in their view of people than I'm positing, go right ahead. Keep making the opposite point you try to make.
Why are owners racist? By that logic then Wal Mart is a racist Mfer
Hopefully people will wake up and realize that none of this is about "equality" but it's about "equity and control". We have equality in our country today. But alot of people dont want that. They want to control from a minority position. They want control.