Quote: @"Chuckf" said:
@"bigbone62" said:
@"Chuckf" said:
@"bigbone62" said:
@"Chuckf" said:
@"JR44" said:
@"bigbone62" said:
@"JR44" said:
So the Giants hired the guy who is credited with transforming Josh Allen into one the league's best QBs and was razor close to going to the Super Bowl two at years in a row over a guy who was just let go from his team, because the consensus within the organization was that he was an egomaniac who verbally abused others. There are reports of him completely abused Tua in practices. And this becomes a racism lawsuit? So if you get let go and you can't find another job then the answer is to just create a lawsuit, sounds pretty familiar.
Funny thing is that the Dolphins long time GM is black, their DC is black as well as 4 other coaches and their owner tried everything he could to trade for Watson. I wouldn't doubt he was offered money to lose game as that would have netted them Burrow, but that doesn't have anything to do with race.
What does the Dolphins having a black GM, other black coaches and the team wanting a black QB have to do with the Giants allegations?
Nice try, how about actually reading what I wrote which was comparing him to Daboll, but go ahead with your agenda here and post whatever you want to read into it.
It has everything to do with the Giants had their guy they wanted and because of the Rooney Rule had to go through the motions. IF this is all true. JR44's point is easily inferred. Flores WHOLE CASE is because racism and JR44's point is it has NOTHING to do with race it is all about performance and need. Daboll turned Josh Allen into an All Pro, the Giants have a talented young QB in Daniel Jones they want the same results for. Flores had TUA and did NOTHING to advance his development. In fact, he regressed. The other point is Flores was HIRED by Miami, so when he doesn't get desired results and gets fired now all of a sudden the Dolphins front office is racist?
That is some serious mental gymnastics! His complaint is against the Giants. What the Dolphins do has absolutely no bearing on the Giants allegedly having picked a coach before they complied with the Rooney Rule. This is like saying "I can't be prejudice because my friend hires minorities".
Not at all but whatever. You do you. There is also, you know, the whole deal where the owner has the right to hire who they want too, right? You don't think in the history of the NFL that an owner and GM had their guy picked out but also interviewed others as well? What does race have to do with it? Funny he also brought out the Broncos and we all know Vance Joseph was the head coach who was fired. Personally after reading what Oracle posted above its more of the "nepotism" factor than race it seems like.
Explain to us what the Dolphin's having a black GM, coaches or players has to do with the Giants. In what way are the Dolphins involved in what the Giants allegedly did? The funny thing is I haven't even commented one way or the other on The Rooney Rule or what the Giants did. I am simply pointing out that what Miami has going on in no way corelates to what may have happened in New York. It a false equivalency
Kinda of shows he wasn't fired because of racism? The allegations of the owner trying to pay him to lose is really bad, I agree on that. What exactly did the Giants do that was illegal or bad? Daboll obviously coached up Josh Allen into an All Pro talent. The Giants have a physically talented QB in Daniel Jones who was a top ten pick, a lot invested. They want the same results, Daboll has proven he can do it. Meanwhile in Miami, Tua has regressed under Flores. There is a reason Daboll was their prime target and it had NOTHING to do with his skin color.
Where did I or anyone in this thread say Miami fired him for his race? Beyond that what does his firing in Miami have to do with the Giants situation?
Quote: @"VikingOracle" said:
@"savannahskol" said:
@"VikingOracle" said:
What coach would want to take the Dolphins head coaching job now? Think about it -- you're going to be heavily scrutinized over the next couple of seasons; if the paid tanking accusations are true, the Dolphins will probably lose draft picks (among other penalties), may be hard to get free agents to come to the Dolphins as long as Ross is owner and there is going to be a cloud over the entire organization.
Lol, the Dolphins. Class-action, bro. You're missing the bigger picture.
Flores just tapped into something larger. Much larger. Even Kaep is taking a bow.
Have you read the news/news reactions to this suit? Google it.
Go coach Flores!
(and whoever his lawyers are...hit a HR on the press-release)
Yes, I decided to look at one tangible result of the "HR on the press release." And, yes, I think systemic racism is throughout the NFL coaching system -- you need look no further than the coordinators on the Vikings last year -- if the vast majority of HCs in the NFL are white and they choose to elevate their offspring, well, that takes up opportunities for POC.
But I don't need to google the lawsuit to know that it is not all about racism. The part of the lawsuit that is getting the most attention is the payments for losses. That is not racist. I am sure Ross would have been pissed at a white coach if he had made the team perform as well as Flores.
Also, keep in mind there is a chance this will all be pushed into arbitration.
Then layer on top of that that Flores is trying to do this as a class action -- who are members of that class? Can't be all black coaches because black coaches do get hired to coach teams. And you can't say the Rooney rule is just window dressing as Mike Tomlin proves it is not. And what black coach will want to be part of the class -- are there any other class representatives?
Yes, look at Kaep -- he sued the NFL but then the entire litigation got really quiet. Do you even know the result?
So, yes, I can look at the larger picture but I chose to look at the one piece of tangible damages caused by yesterday's filing.
well my friend, rev Al and 4 other ‘civil rights leaders’ had a sit down with Rog yesterday.
summary, according to al:
topic A = “ no diversity “ and the Rooney Rule “ is a joke”. (aka, RACE)
which would bolster my take and diminish yours.
topic B = “tampering” discussion, broached with much less enthusiasm.
no topic/not mentioned = nepotism
topic C = al promised local municipal actions/consequences, if goals not achieved on his timeline.
al also brought up Kaep, and said the community would not leave Flores hanging, like they did Kaep.
You be the Judge, counselor. 
Post rev Al (et al) meeting, The Rog agreed that they needed to take a hard look at the Rooney Rule, and diversity outcomes, uber alles!
Hi Savannah: With all due respect, I am not quite sure why you have singled me out as if I don't believe racism is part of the NFL hiring process. I did write "And, yes, I think systemic racism is throughout the NFL coaching system...". I am glad that civil rights leaders sat down with Goodell. Good for them. I am glad that a black man is thinking about purchasing the Broncos. About time. I don't care that they didn't talk about nepotism -- but if part of the problem is that people like to hire people that look like themselves, well, nepotism is probably the best example of that. I am really not sure what point I made that has been diminished by the civil rights leaders meeting with Goodell -- though my original point (that the Dolphins job would not be desirable) appears to be off the mark.
My other points are still valid: (a) I believe the NFL will try to move this into arbitration. Here is a commentary that agrees with that: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/04/arbitration-clause-could-quickly-derail-the-brian-flores-lawsuit/. And it is discussed here also: https://today.law.harvard.edu/brian-flores-vs-the-nfl/ (“The NFL will no doubt rely heavily upon the long line of favorable Federal Arbitration Act precedents to support its motion to compel arbitration. It has even been applied in cases involving alleged violation of plaintiffs’ civil rights.”) (b) I also believe it is a difficult case for class certification. It will be interesting to see whether other minority coaches/executives join the lawsuit.
Good for the civil rights leaders to stand up and demand change and to recognize that they should have stood up for Kaep.
Here is something I do know -- consider the work of Jack Dovidio and his work on aversive racism and how it easily applies to the hiring process. I truly wish more people were familiar with Dr. Dovidio's work.
Quote: @"VikingOracle" said:
Hi Savannah: With all due respect, I am not quite sure why you have singled me out as if I don't believe racism is part of the NFL hiring process. I did write "And, yes, I think systemic racism is throughout the NFL coaching system...".
You wrote on page 2: "The part of the lawsuit that is getting the most attention is the payments for losses. That is not racist.''
& If you watch rev Al's vid above, he'll assure you that that bribery was assuredly racist.
My other points are still valid: (a) I believe the NFL will try to move this into arbitration. Here is a commentary that agrees with that: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/04/arbitration-clause-could-quickly-derail-the-brian-flores-lawsuit/. And it is discussed here also: https://today.law.harvard.edu/brian-flores-vs-the-nfl/ (“The NFL will no doubt rely heavily upon the long line of favorable Federal Arbitration Act precedents to support its motion to compel arbitration. It has even been applied in cases involving alleged violation of plaintiffs’ civil rights.”) (b) I also believe it is a difficult case for class certification. It will be interesting to see whether other minority coaches/executives join the lawsuit.
Wow!
Civil Rights litigation needs to be subservient to the legal concept of arbitration?
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/268/
"To the contrary, in its 1991 amendments to the 1866 Act, Congress reiterated that it did not intend to allow employers to use mandatory arbitration clauses to deprive their employees of a judicial forum within which to challenge allegedly discriminatory acts.''
Good for the civil rights leaders to stand up and demand change and to recognize that they should have stood up for Kaep.
LOL! Now we agree!
The NFL is systemically racist. Tear down any (white, Southern) statues, tear down the Hall of Fame!
Quote: @"savannahskol" said:
Wow!
Civil Rights litigation needs to be subservient to the legal concept of arbitration?
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/268/
"To the contrary, in its 1991 amendments to the 1866 Act, Congress reiterated that it did not intend to allow employers to use mandatory arbitration clauses to deprive their employees of a judicial forum within which to challenge allegedly discriminatory acts.''
The law student who wrote this article may be correct regarding the intent of the 1991 amendment but courts have not always agreed. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/court-report-section-1981-arbitration.aspx ("employment-related claims alleging race discrimination in violation Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which prohibits race discrimination in contractual relationships, are subject to arbitration when an employment contract includes an agreement to arbitrate employment disputes, according to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals."). Lambert v. Tesla Inc., 9th Cir., No. 18-15203 (May 17, 2019). Also in the article: "On appeal, the 9th Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court. The 9th Circuit found that both U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. and 9th Circuit precedent in EEOC v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps supported the assertion that Section 1981 claims are subject to arbitration." Who knows what the outcome will be when the NFL moves for arbitration (judges can be unpredictable) but as I said before the NFL will try.
Even your article notes this:
![[Image: kz46ma9909o1.png]](https://vikefans.com/vfforums/uploads/editor/0m/kz46ma9909o1.png)
Quote: @"VikingOracle" said:
@"savannahskol" said:
Wow!
Civil Rights litigation needs to be subservient to the legal concept of arbitration?
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/268/
"To the contrary, in its 1991 amendments to the 1866 Act, Congress reiterated that it did not intend to allow employers to use mandatory arbitration clauses to deprive their employees of a judicial forum within which to challenge allegedly discriminatory acts.''
The law student who wrote this article.....
Nope!
The author was a Harvard educated law professor at the publication of this article.
https://law.unlv.edu/sites/default/files/faculty/resumes/Sternlight_12-21.pdf
Quote: @"savannahskol" said:
@"VikingOracle" said:
@"savannahskol" said:
Wow!
Civil Rights litigation needs to be subservient to the legal concept of arbitration?
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/268/
"To the contrary, in its 1991 amendments to the 1866 Act, Congress reiterated that it did not intend to allow employers to use mandatory arbitration clauses to deprive their employees of a judicial forum within which to challenge allegedly discriminatory acts.''
The law student who wrote this article.....
Nope!
The author was a Harvard educated law professor at the publication of this article.
https://law.unlv.edu/sites/default/files/faculty/resumes/Sternlight_12-21.pdf
I stand corrected. Of course, that does not change the fact that she recognizes that the vast majority of courts hold that civil rights cases can be compelled to arbitrate. Her article argues that the various court decisions were wrongly decided. Sorry if I impugned her reputation by claiming she was a law student (though, of course, she once was).
I am a little confused why you are holding onto the arbitration point so doggedly -- it really only a procedural question and does not help nor hurt your underlying belief that the NFL hiring system is discriminatory (something we are in agreement). If anything, perhaps it is fair to recognize how the NFL has stacked the deck against transparency by its aggressive use of arbitration provisions in agreement.
|
