Rooney rule to change

[Guest]

Dominique Clare had a pretty good response to this on Twitter yesterday. He said "What a weird job this would be to have. I like the gesture but being the known designated diverse person would be worse than not getting the actual job in my opinion".

I think there is some truth to this and while not all black men or women feel this way, it just seems like a way the NFL is trying to save face. There is an obvious minority problem in the league when it comes to Head Coaches and I think this rule to them trying to make up for whatever actually happened with Brian Flores. 

Is it the right answer? I have no idea, but at least it's something.

[Guest]

It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires.
Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do.

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:
Yes, us poor white males. We've got it rough. And have historically. When will it be our turn?

And in rolls the critical race theory crap....

Every race and gender has had it rough at different points throughout history. Again, this isn't 1962 and oppression is almost non existent as being labeled racist or sexist (valid or not, it doesn't matter) is essentially a career death sentence that nobody is going to risk. Cancel culture is a real thing. Goodell would not hesitate to pull a Donald Sterling and force ownership to sell a franchise if he deemed their hiring practices as "racist." That's why I find them trying to cover their asses with this new rule extremely comical and reeks of politically correct garbage that does nothing to solve the issue at hand. Right up there with them allowing players to post the names of criminals on their helmets for fear of being branded racist or attaching their names to advertisements with a black man stating he makes, "8k less a year then a white man with the same credentials." It's garbage, it's all garbage, and I'm incredibly disappointed in some of this rhetoric the NFL is promoting out of no more then cancel culture fear. 

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:
Yes, us poor white males. We've got it rough. And have historically. When will it be our turn?

i see above you refused to capitalize Black in your first post. fix your racist white priveleged mistake and use all the approved buzzwords, slogans, and Daily Show snark or you risk being thrown to the dustbin of history like the rest of us white males. Hero. 

[Guest]

@jargomcfargo said:
It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires.
Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do.

Source??

[Guest]

@Vikeking2 said:

@StickyBun said:
Yes, us poor white males. We've got it rough. And have historically. When will it be our turn?

i see above you refused to capitalize Black in your first post. fix your racist white priveleged mistake and use all the approved buzzwords, slogans, and Daily Show snark or you risk being thrown to the dustbin of history like the rest of us white males. Hero. 

We're supposed to be capitalizing black? Serious question

[Guest]

@Waterboy said:

@jargomcfargo said:
It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires.
Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do.

Source??

History.

[Guest]

@AGRforever said:

@Vikeking2 said:

We're supposed to be capitalizing black? Serious question

thank you. serious answer. we shouldnt. but that isnt stopping major publications from doing that. seems to be the norm in the little major news i read. they even post exclamatory opinion pieces in their own publication celebrating it. 

i was gonna share a link or two but wouldnt want to post the wrong links. i just google “why is black capitalized” and saw many results including NY Times and HuffPost. many other examples.

 

[Guest]

@jargomcfargo said:

@Waterboy said:

@jargomcfargo said:
It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires.
Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do.

Source??

History.

There are 2 minority partial owners in the NFL.  Jacksonville and Buffalo.  As a representation of the overall ethnicity its not on scale.  We'd need 3-4 black owners, 5-6 Latino and 1.5 Asians IF and a HUGE IF you based it on population NOT on who could realistically purchase a NFL team.  Obviously you and I can't buy one. 

According to google there's 724 billionaires in the USA and 7 are black.  That sounds awful close their representation in ownership.  You can't buy a team if you don't have the green.  Also according to google 70% of our billionaires are self made.  So while it sucks that there's a generational wealth gap the vast majority of people who've made enough to buy a team made the money themselves.  Maybe we should be talking to the 7 black billionaires about buying a team.  The Bronco's are probably going to go for +$4B and are rumored to be for sale.
Maybe the Rooney's would be willing to sell their franchise to a minority owner at a discount?

[Guest]

@AGRforever said:

@medaille said:
There's no requirement to interview women.  They have to hire from the pool of minorities, of which women are now included.  So in practicality, there's probably not going to be much difference given the small pool of women coaches, but if you do interview a woman, you just have to interview one less person based on race or skin color.

Forgive me for not reading the article lol......teams are "forced" to hire from the pool of minorities?
Isn't that the definition of the token black guy?

edit....no shit.  They have to hire someone for the color of their skin.  So in the 2040's when white people are no longer the majority, do we qualify for all these minority programs?

I must have been without enough coffee this morning.  They are forced to have at least one minority assistant coach on the offensive side of the ball.  That is new.  They are forced to at least interview a certain number of minorities (I think 2) before making a hire for high level coaches.  This is the same as it's always been, it's just now they can include women to meet the requirement for interviewing a certain number of minorities before hiring.