isle-hawg Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 The NFL announced on Monday that it has extended the Rooney Rule, which mandates interviews to minority candidates, to senior football operations positions. Pittsburgh Steelers Chairman Dan Rooney, for whom the rule is named, and who is also chairman of the league's Workplace Diversity Committee, recommended the rules change. Commissioner Roger Goodell strongly hinted at the league's spring meetings last month in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., that the Rooney Rule would be extended to general manager-level positions. The change received strong backing from NFL owners at the meeting. To this point, the Rooney Rule was a policy that included only head coaches. The rule was established in 2003. "The recommendation ... recognizes that this process has worked well in the context of head coaches and that clubs have deservedly received considerable positive recognition for their efforts in this respect," Goodell said in a statement released by the league. The rule mandates clubs to interview at least one minority candidate as part of the process for a team's senior football operations position, "whether described as general manager, executive vice president of football operations, or otherwise." The only exclusions to the rule are the same exceptions that currently exist for head coaches: "If the position is held or filled by the owner or a member of his family, or occasions where the club has a pre-existing contractual commitments filed with the league office to promote a current member of its staff." "The [extension] makes common sense," said Atlanta owner Arthur Blank, a member of the Workplace Diversity Committee. Although not required by the rules change, Goodell "strongly urged" teams to interview a broad and diverse slate of candidates for a wide range of football operations roles, "including scouting, player personnel, and contract and cap management positions." "The more thorough the search, the more likely clubs are to find the right candidates, and to be able to groom future leaders from within their organizations," Goodell said in the league release. There are currently five African-American senior club football operations executives. Len Pasquarelli is a senior writer for ESPN.com. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4260724 We knew this was coming. I think we all understand the history and real or perceived good old boy's network that is causing this rule. But is it not condescending to minorities? Can the owners not just interview the best people regardless of skin complexion on their own and avoid the rule? Apparently not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I think in the future it wont be needed but i think there are areas where minorities are underrepresented Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darklight1216 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Hiel Goodell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. Always an emotive subject, as any is where race is concerned, but the Rooney Rule, in the main, is a complete sham set up to make the powerful white owners feel better that they are doing their part in at least interviewing minorities, even though 9 times out of 10 they have absolutely no intention of giving them the job if truth be told. I appreciate that by its very nature there's been an increase, all be it small, in African American coaches throughout the league, but when it mainly help's the conscience of those doing the hiring to turn around and say "well at least we interviewed the back guy", like Vertex alluded to, I don't see how there's real progress being made. Which is a real shame as there's some real fine guys out there, as guys like Coach Dungy are testament to. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman#21 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Makes sense, i dont know why we need a rule saying it though.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuraitengai Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. exactly. i hate rules that give minorities preferences like that. the job should go to the best qualified, not someones skin color or gender. it wouldnt matter if there is a rooney rule or not, if im starting a team, the first person i talk to is tony dungy. not cuz of his skin color but cuz of what he brings to the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 My only concern is, the rule was intended for ALL minorities, but all they talk about are African-American minorities. I know there has been a few hispanics interviewed, but have any Asians? I mean, if you're going to have a rule, make sure all are involved. There seems to be alot of backlash when a black coach doesn't get an interview, yet no one made an uproar when Ron Rivera was passed over several times. It's not a fair rule to all minorities. At least get it right NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chamelio Salamander Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 exactly. i hate rules that give minorities preferences like that. the job should go to the best qualified, not someones skin color or gender.it wouldnt matter if there is a rooney rule or not, if im starting a team, the first person i talk to is tony dungy. not cuz of his skin color but cuz of what he brings to the table. I agree. I guess we can thank our fore fathers the white slave masters for instilling a white superiority complex that continues to plague many of their ancestors until this day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-O-G Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 This is SO stupid. Its racist. Its like, blacks can have BET tv but whites cant have a white entertainment tv or it would be "racist". Blacks can have black only colleges, could you imagine if whites tried to have a white only college? It should be if the current coach is black, they should interview x amount of white coaches and vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Slave owners thought they were doing minorities a favor by "putting them to work" because "They can't care for themselves." The owners need to do all minorities a favor and stop trying to help. It would insult me if I was interviewed solely because of the color of my skin and it would insult me WAAAY more if that's why I was hired. As was said before, progress will only truely be here when we have come so far that we are blind to the races that were once so dividing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 This is SO stupid.Its racist. Its like, blacks can have BET tv but whites cant have a white entertainment tv or it would be "racist". Blacks can have black only colleges, could you imagine if whites tried to have a white only college? It should be if the current coach is black, they should interview x amount of white coaches and vice versa. We live in America where whites are (currently) the majority and hold most of the power. If you want a white only college or white entertainment TV, move to another country. You'll find many magazines and TV channels and clubs for whites only already exist in other countries, for the exact same reason they exist in the United States of America for minorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I'm a proponent for affirmative action. Therefore, I'm a proponent of the Rooney Rule. I imagine opinions on this are pretty cut and dry, and have very little to do with football. I guess an interesting question (to me at least) would be: does anyone support affirmative action but oppose the Rooney Rule (or vice versa)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. Very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I'm a proponent for affirmative action. Therefore, I'm a proponent of the Rooney Rule.I imagine opinions on this are pretty cut and dry, and have very little to do with football. I guess an interesting question (to me at least) would be: does anyone support affirmative action but oppose the Rooney Rule (or vice versa)? I support the Rooney Rule. I have mixed feelings about affirmative action. On one hand, the most qualified person does not get the job. On the other hand, there are other things that affirmative action may provide, such as diversity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. A more accurate statement would read: "we won't have real progress until white men consider females or people of minority descent because of the qualifications they have independently displayed, rather than because they are forced to by law." We aren't at that place yet. Therefore, affirmative action is necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger.Staubach Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 They going to do a 'reverse' Rooney Rule for the playing field? Not enough white folks on the field. It is my opinion that affirmative action promotes racism and weakens capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I support the Rooney Rule.I have mixed feelings about affirmative action. On one hand, the most qualified person does not get the job. On the other hand, there are other things that affirmative action may provide, such as diversity. Yeah, another angle I've heard certain people promote is the idea that, in all likelihood, the upper-middle class white male is already going to college, regardless of what scholarship he gets. So, if you reserve that scholarship for a minority who otherwise does not have the opportunity to go to college, you thereby increase the population of your educated workforce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 weakens capitalism. To this point, I'd be interested in what you'd have to say to my previous comment about increasing the size of your educated workforce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 They going to do a 'reverse' Rooney Rule for the playing field? Not enough white folks on the field.It is my opinion that affirmative action promotes racism and weakens capitalism. "White folks" get to audition their skills plenty from high school to college to the pros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Yeah, another angle I've heard certain people promote is the idea that, in all likelihood, the upper-middle class white male is already going to college, regardless of what scholarship he gets. So, if you reserve that scholarship for a minority who otherwise does not have the opportunity to go to college, you thereby increase the population of your educated workforce. Part of the problem with that though is that those middle middle class white males who won't snag the scholarships or government help because their parents make too much and they aren't minorities still can't afford the really good schools then. If those upper middle class white males are already going to their local state college then I want to help them go to an ivy league or a private school. I don't mean this INSTEAD of helping minorities go to college at all, but rather that the two should be equal. Each is equally important in my mind. I realize that you might have just been making the point and that you don't necessarily buy into it yourself. I hope I don't seem like I'm attacking you but rather just the line of thinking which you presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Part of the problem with that though is that those middle middle class white males who won't snag the scholarships or government help because their parents make too much and they aren't minorities still can't afford the really good schools then. If those upper middle class white males are already going to their local state college then I want to help them go to an ivy league or a private school. I don't mean this INSTEAD of helping minorities go to college at all, but rather that the two should be equal. Each is equally important in my mind.I realize that you might have just been making the point and that you don't necessarily buy into it yourself. I hope I don't seem like I'm attacking you but rather just the line of thinking which you presented. I tend to agree with affirmative action for other reasons. I was mainly just putting forward another wrinkle in the conversation. Many people seem never to consider the issue on anything other than a surface layer. (You didn't come across as though you were attacking me at all, by the way.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 we won't have real progress until people of minority descent are considered because of their qualifications, not because of their minority status though. Bingo! :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I tend to agree with affirmative action for other reasons. I was mainly just putting forward another wrinkle in the conversation. Many people seem never to consider the issue on anything other than a surface layer. (You didn't come across as though you were attacking me at all, by the way.) I agree the whole thing goes much deeper than the surface. I think one possible solution to the debate (though not for the NFL) are the type of scholarships that target the poor or those from bad neighberhoods. These are often more likely to his minorities but don't exclude the majority from taking advantage of it if it still applies to them. As far as the NFL goes, I think the Rooney rule should only apply for assistant coaching jobs. This would ensure that more minorities are brought INTO the coaching tree and thus are given a chance to learn the game from the head coaches. That way, they have the opportunity to move up if they are qualified without handing out one of the elite 32 head coaching jobs. I think if there were more minorities in the pool to pick from then there would be more minority head coaches. We don't need a rule to force minority interviews, we just need a system that invites more minorities into the business. They can climb the ladder by virtue of their own talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 I think the should extend the Rooney Rule to kickers. Is there a minority kicker in the league or is it all skinny white boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.