Are the Seahawks and the NFL making a mockery of the Rooney rule?

That rule is incredibly racist and I’m not trolling you guys. No, I’m not being insensitive, I haven’t met a black person (yes, black person, I’m dating a black girl, I’ll say what I please, thank you) who agreed with the rule.

Back then, yes, it was necessary, but now even the most “old fashioned” of owners will hire who they think is best for the job. It’s a mockery of the NFL at this point and it needs to be abolished.

It’s a rule that recognizes that racism has existed in the NFL just as it exists in the rest of America. Since its inception a lot of African Americans have become head coaches in the league. I’m not saying that it’s the be-all and end-all, and I’m not saying that owners won’t hire who they want to hire. But there’s a correlation between the rule and the number of black coaches in the NFL as compared to, say, college football.

Is it embarrassing that there has to be such a rule in America? Yeah, but in a country where millions of white people can’t accept that a black man can really be their President sometimes you have to have rules such as this. That says more about society than the rule.

Is complete garbage to begin with. Most of the time a team has an exact coach they’ve got in mind and they are going to go after that coach and probably get them no matter what. That being said, just interviewing for a job seems stupid and a waste of time.

I understand that the NFL wants to get more diverse in the HC ranks, but that’s just not the case right now. They rule on the field play though.

Does this mean that for every black WR signed they’ve got to at least interview Dane Looker and Eric Crouch (even though both not in the NFL anymore). That’s exactly what it says to me.

Part of the reason that the Rooney Rule exists is so that minority candidates get interview experience, even if they never have a chance for a specific job. One of the reasons minority candidates struggled so much in the past to get jobs even with teams that weren’t run in a way that would have prevented it idealogically is that these candidates weren’t good interviews – because they rarely got the chance.

There are a lot of problems with the rule, but its role in providing interview experience for minority candidates so that they can impress later on in interviews that actually do matter is still kinda important. There are a lot of ways that the rule can be improved, but the reasoning behind it is still relevant to the league. So even though it needs to be fixed pretty badly, it at least needs to continue to exist even if it isn’t fixed.

Tony Dungy, Mike Tomlin and Herm Edwards have done more for black coaches than the Rooney Rule ever did. Maybe there was a time for it…I think we’re past it though.

is the fact that it gives minorities a chance to gain some invaluable experience interviewing for a HC position. Leslie Frazier probably went into the Seahawks interview knowing that he most likely wasn’t going to get the job. Use that low-pressure situation to show people what you are all about, and learn more about the process of interviewing, so when the Browns or Raiders jobs open up next year you can go in and interview for the job already kind of knowing what to expect or what you need to say to prove that you are the best candidate for the job.

I think right now the problem is that there aren’t a lot of big name minority coaches out there. With the exception of Tony Dungy, the other big name coaches; Cowher, Shannahan, Martz, are all white. If a team wants to make a run at a big name coach it wouldn’t be because of their race, it would be because of there record/respect as a coach. I am sure that 1/2 of the teams in the league would sign Dungy to a head coaching job in a heart beat.

I agree if you are starting from scratch trying to fill a coaching position (Buffalo) you should have to interview a couple of coaches of all races.

But I think if you look at the NFL organization as a whole (players included) I would almost garentee that if there is a White majority, it would only be tiny. And if you just look at players I am sure that blacks have the majority. Should teams be required to try out white players for receiver and running back positions?

The first African American head coach in the NFL was Art Shell—he was hired in 1981. Between 1981 and 2001 (the year before the adoption of the Rooney Rule), only 5 minority head coaches were hired—this includes one head coach who was only an interim coach for 3 games. 5 coaches in 20 years. Are you really going to suggest that only 5 minority assistant coaches were qualified to be head coaches in 20 years of football?

In 2008 there were 4 head coaching vacancies—none were filled by minority coaches, even though every single new hire was a brand new coach. Same thing in 2007. There are no black majority owners, no black CEOs, no black team presidents, and only 4 black GMs.

69% of the players are minority. Only 19% of the head coaches in the league are minority, even though 38% of the assistant coaches are minorities. Are black assistant coaches really 19% less talented than white assistant coaches?

It’s pretty clear that even though the league has a great number of talented minority players the jobs after football go predominantly to white men. That’s the very definition of institutionalized bias.

Due to outdated rules, Leslie Frazier was basically made to look like the “token black guy.” I hope nobody takes that the wrong way because I don’t mean it in a derogatory sense, but I think it is unfair not only for Frazier to be put in that situation, but the Seahawks organization as well. I would feel the same way for any white guy that got an interview with a team who knew they were going to hire a black coach. If a team is dead set on their coach (Singletary, Carroll, etc.), a team should be allowed to make the hire without bringing in guys and putting them through mock interviews.

I may be a bit naive, but I would like to think that owners and personnel in todays sports organizations are not refusing to hire the right man due to their color of skin. If that were to happen and it made the news, I don’t think players, white or black, would want to play for the organization. We all saw the uproar with Limbaugh being mentioned as a POSSIBLE team owner. He was thrown to the curb within a few days.

The conspiracy theorist can shut their mouths. It’s one thing to say that more Black coaches are needed due to the ratio of “MINORITY” players to “MINORITY” coaches. Then it becomes a slap in the face when you make people interiew candidates that won’t get the job. It is as simple as people not knowing how to mind their own business. Of course in the beginning there weren’t a lot of black players, and once there became a lot, a lot of them seem to want to get away from the game and not coach. Sometimes better candidates have more experience and going with a black coach in most cases will be a rookie coach. The worst part about the whole Rooney rule is people say how many black coaches were interviewed or were their any, when the rule is for minority. Of course this is bogus, people are paying a coach, they should be able to hire who they want. It’s like adding a free agent, why is color not considered to balance the dispairity in the ethnicity of players amongst the league? That would be stupid. This rule is not racist, IMO, it is simply in place to quiet the political idiots, that always want to complain. It’s just like PETA saying they want Mike Vick banned form the NFL. You can’t dictate what a business man does to make money as long as it isn’t illegal. What they should do is take a poll from all minority coaches in the league and ask if it needs to be in place and go from there.

is “Does the Rooney rule make a mockery out of the NFL and race relations in general?”

Paul Allen got the HC/VP he wanted, and he abides by the Rooney Rule and gave a “token” interview to a Minority candidate.

That’s pretty much it, right?

James screwed up by making the first post, rlott is the authority on racism, slavery and also knows every hardship every white person has ever faced in their life, some people make some good points, some people make some bad ones. Seriously there’s nothing I hate more than someone saying “You don’t know what it’s like to have someone think _ about you.” Well I got news for YOU, sir, you don’t understand a damn thing about me or my life or my past so you need to get off your high-horse and have an argument based on facts, not assumptions.

That being said I honestly feel like this topic should be closed for comments because honestly we’re not getting anywhere with this nor will we.

Also, Seahawks should have interviewed Rod Blagojevich because he is blacker than Barack Obama (just ask him).

I AM A PROMINENT FRONT PAGE POSTER AND I DECREE THAT THIS COMMENT-SPREE ABOUT RACISM IN AMERICA IS NOW ABOUT SEXISM IN BATMAN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeHUQAnzpF0

Discuss.

I can’t read through this entire thread, so I’ll just make my quick comment… If you already know who you want to hire before beginning any interviews, you shouldn’t be forced to go through an interview process with any other candidates.

Forget the entire Leslie Frazier interview for a second.

The Seahawks fired Jim Mora Jr because:
a) No GM wanted the job with an existing coach in place
b) They were conducting interviews for Mora’s job while he was still the coach.

Notice how a) and b) contradict. The Seahawks still don’t have a GM, and are still looking for one while having a bigger commitment to the head coach, which was main problem to begin with.

Just look at the Seahawks recent history to see a pattern of disaster:
1) The GM resigns mid-season because he felt a non-committal from the team.
2) The GM was originally hired as a way to demote Holmgren from Czar
3) The reason the existing GM was looking for a commitment was because Holmgren was lobbying to get the job back.
4) Mora was originally hired as an assistant coach and promised heir to the HC despite no history with the organization let alone any degree of success while undermining the existing HC.

Was there any doubt the Rooney Rule was going to get trounced? Every other hiring concept, process or rule has been trounced in Seattle.

Back to the Rooney Rule
I don’t have a opinion either way, I see pros and cons to both sides. I think the fallacy in discussing the Rooney Rule is believing it has a bigger context. It’s a rule passed by the 32 owners to police themselves, that’s it context. It’s a private hiring rule agreed upon by a private entity, it doesn’t touch any other faction in society. If the 32 owners want to do away with it tomorrow, it’s there rule and are choosing to legislate it on themselves.

The problem with the league hiring process isn’t the Rooney Rule, I’d say the problem is having no semblance of a hiring process because no Rooney Rule would be needed. There is a good reason 99.999% of the world accepts resumes, applications and conducts interviews before making a hiring decision . . . even in instances where it’s clear who is going to get hired. That process is meant to eliminate any tinge of discrimination, yet the NFL generally chooses not to operate in this way when it comes to management positions.

Funny story about conducting interviews when the candidate is already agreed to have been selected. A new high school was built in my district a few years ago and were looking for a varsity coach. Two candidates applied, an out of towner and local coaching legend. Well, everyone knew who was getting the job except the out of town candidate. Half way through the out of towner’s interview he asked, “I noticed the other interview candidate listed has the same name as the park across from the school, is this the same guy?” Response, yep. He than asked, “Do I have any chance at this job?”. Response, nope. He still had a chance to present his case despite speaking to closed minds. Not to mention all allegations of discrimination where squashed by having an official, open hiring process.