Austin did have a lot of talent especially on the DL. Let's not act like he was coaching a team with as little talent on D as the Giants
You're really minimizing the loss of an all pro talent on defense. I also never said that Detroit had as less talent, don't try to pull that strawman around here. You're going to completely ignore the fact that Austin oversaw the secondaries of 3 super bowl teams in the passing league era?
Wow he was a secondary coach and a defensive coordinator for a mediocre defense?!
He shaped a Seahawks defense that featured Trufant, Ken Lucas, Hamlin,
I don't believe Francesa. McAdoo might be the guy but to bring in 4-5 other candidates knowing they don't want any of them makes no sense. I personally would like a defensive coach like McDermott or Austin but I am sure Eli has a say.
with the Rooney Rule. They interview a perfectly good candidate but because he's black, idiots think it's only because of he Rooney Rule.
+1 - A team with an African American GM is not just going through the motions. Like him or not JR is not bringing people to check off a box. Hope they can talk Shaw into coming, but I thought I heard somewhere his wife loves it at Stanford and does not want to leave.
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
RE: RE: McAdoo has much less coaching experience than Ray Handley did
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
We would have had at least 3 more wins this year if the offense was 'playoff caliber'. They put up good numbers, but against better competition or when it really counted, they came up short.
hits the key point regarding performance versus the good football teams. The OL and running game need more talent and horsepower, and Mcadoo's playcalling tendencies were often being picked up by the opponents in the green zone.
'There's your Rooney Rule'?! I am by NO MEANS a PC guy, but I think that these men are coordinators in the NFL and have some decent qualifications. If they interviewed David Shaw would he JUST be the Rooney Rule guy?!
Okay, I'll come down off my soap box now.....
RE: Can we not refer to EVERY black 'candidate' as
'There's your Rooney Rule'?! I am by NO MEANS a PC guy, but I think that these men are coordinators in the NFL and have some decent qualifications. If they interviewed David Shaw would he JUST be the Rooney Rule guy?!
Okay, I'll come down off my soap box now.....
I think there is a difference between saying a candidate is "just" a Rooney rule candidate and commenting on the Rooney Rule in general. Pointing out that the Rooney Rule is satisfied means that the coaching decision could be made at any time. Before the rule is satisfied, you know the team CANNOT choose a candidate.
It's a somewhat natural reaction. We all know the Giants HAVE to
It is likely racist to think of this interview in strictly the Rooney Rules terms though. This guy is apparently an up and coming coordinator. I honestly know nothing about him.
If you want a "token black minority" to satisfy the Rooney rule you bring in fucking Duce Staley ASAP. His coaching history would almost be the equivalent of the Giants interviewing Tiki as head coach.
The Giants interviewed a legit candidate that at the very least they want to learn about and hear from. If they wanted to satisfy some archaic and outdated rule they would have brought in any minority in any coaching capacity immediately and powered through a joke interview.
interesting especially if Soags is in contention for the HC job or continuing as DC here. Has good resume and expierience..We know our defense needs a lot of help. Now that TCs assistants will all be gone most likely.
and likely is better than some of the interviewees here, and around the league.
7 vacancies and 4 candidates getting at least 3 interviews each, and he is one of them. He's not the RR.
hits the key point regarding performance versus the good football teams. The OL and running game need more talent and horsepower, and Mcadoo's playcalling tendencies were often being picked up by the opponents in the green zone.
It was predictable because there was no threat of a run game. Without that, teams knew Eli was throwing the RB check downs/flares, end zone pick plays, and end zone fades...
From his days at Syracuse. He was a defensive assistant coach working with the DBs. Very highly respected by players and coaches. He's a good guy who for the most part has had good success on the defensive side of the ball. I'm not sold on him as the hc of the Giants at this point however. I think there are more qualified candidates out there who are more ready right now.
Detroit and Giant run defenses were somewhat comparable
Which is partially why black candidates are in a no-win position in this thing.
Teams weren't really doing the research to seek out these candidates in the first place before this rule was put into play.
If you are a black coach, knowing the sham that some of these interviews are, if you elect to not take the interview because you believe it's a sham, you are criticized in some circles because you are not "putting yourself in the network" of possible hires thus eliminating you from potential other opportunities.
But if you do take the (sham) interview and do several interviews with teams (who are likely simply doing it for compliance reasons) and not immediately hired after the first few chances, you are then questioned as to why you are not being hired. Go figure.
So either way, you can't win unless you completely blow the team away or they had sought you out in the first place with the intention of hiring rather than satisfy a rule.
RE: RE: a legit Black coach can feel discriminated against just because of it
Which is partially why black candidates are in a no-win position in this thing.
Teams weren't really doing the research to seek out these candidates in the first place before this rule was put into play.
If you are a black coach, knowing the sham that some of these interviews are, if you elect to not take the interview because you believe it's a sham, you are criticized in some circles because you are not "putting yourself in the network" of possible hires thus eliminating you from potential other opportunities.
But if you do take the (sham) interview and do several interviews with teams (who are likely simply doing it for compliance reasons) and not immediately hired after the first few chances, you are then questioned as to why you are not being hired. Go figure.
So either way, you can't win unless you completely blow the team away or they had sought you out in the first place with the intention of hiring rather than satisfy a rule.
I'm so tired of the POS on this site who just make that assumption. Been on here since 2005 and I see it all the time, from Eric on down. I don't see that on other Giant sites but here it's like a normal conversation. "hey this guy is being interviewed. Rooney rule, you know." Talk about race card.
I'm so tired of the POS on this site who just make that assumption. Been on here since 2005 and I see it all the time, from Eric on down. I don't see that on other Giant sites but here it's like a normal conversation. "hey this guy is being interviewed. Rooney rule, you know." Talk about race card.
You can be tired of it, but that doesn't mean some teams aren't making a sham of it.
And what is this "race card" thing? Are we at a poker table or something?
RE: RE: RE: RE: a legit Black coach can feel discriminated against just because of it
I'm so tired of the POS on this site who just make that assumption. Been on here since 2005 and I see it all the time, from Eric on down. I don't see that on other Giant sites but here it's like a normal conversation. "hey this guy is being interviewed. Rooney rule, you know." Talk about race card.
You can be tired of it, but that doesn't mean some teams aren't making a sham of it.
And what is this "race card" thing? Are we at a poker table or something?
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Football had its first black coach in 1921 and then went almost 6 decades without one.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
Football had its first black coach in 1921 and then went almost 6 decades without one.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
Football had its first black coach in 1921 and then went almost 6 decades without one.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
On top of that, even though Deuce Staley may have never been a serious candidate, he did get the experience of the interview, which should help him long term.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: a legit Black coach can feel discriminated against just because of it
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: a legit Black coach can feel discriminated against just because of it
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
Right. Questioning sketchy logic makes THAT person the racist. That's always a fun argument.
The Eagles are in the process of trying to find their new head, and apparently, the NFL isn't overly pleased with how they are going about it.
According to Bleacher Report's Jason Cole, the NFL is "troubled" by how the Eagles interviewed running backs coach Duce Staley, and believe it was not a legitimate interview, but instead just a way to "manipulate" with the Rooney Rule.
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
Right. Questioning sketchy logic makes THAT person the racist. That's always a fun argument.
What is this nonsense? I don't have time for silly straw man arguments. Don't waste your time responding until you post something that pertains to my original post. I certainly won't.
He also didn't have his Pro Bowl MLB Deandre Levy.
DC's need good players, too. Especially in this offensive-happy league.
Quote:
Austin did have a lot of talent especially on the DL. Let's not act like he was coaching a team with as little talent on D as the Giants
You're really minimizing the loss of an all pro talent on defense. I also never said that Detroit had as less talent, don't try to pull that strawman around here. You're going to completely ignore the fact that Austin oversaw the secondaries of 3 super bowl teams in the passing league era?
Wow he was a secondary coach and a defensive coordinator for a mediocre defense?!
If that is true this is a Rooney Rule interview.
I don't believe Francesa. McAdoo might be the guy but to bring in 4-5 other candidates knowing they don't want any of them makes no sense. I personally would like a defensive coach like McDermott or Austin but I am sure Eli has a say.
+1 - A team with an African American GM is not just going through the motions. Like him or not JR is not bringing people to check off a box. Hope they can talk Shaw into coming, but I thought I heard somewhere his wife loves it at Stanford and does not want to leave.
It does satisfy the Rooney Rule so they will be set to go.
That's like totally racist. Just because he is black you refer to him as dark and an animal? Some people...
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
Quote:
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
No doubt
Quote:
a darkhorse candidate who has done a lot of good work with DBs in AZ and SEA, and ascending through the coaching ranks.
That's like totally racist. Just because he is black you refer to him as dark and an animal? Some people...
Well played.
Quote:
If you're coming off a Super Bowl (and you are approaching senility) hiring an inexperienced coach for the sake of continuity is understandable. Doing it after going 11-21 with that coach as your offensive coordinator is unforgivable.
The O wasn't the problem the last two years. We had a playoff caliber O both seasons under McAdoo and Eli Manning made dramatic improvements cutting down turnovers. The D and the lack of depth caused by personnel moves were our downfall. Had we even had an average D we are in the playoffs definitely this year and quite possibly last year
We would have had at least 3 more wins this year if the offense was 'playoff caliber'. They put up good numbers, but against better competition or when it really counted, they came up short.
Okay, I'll come down off my soap box now.....
Okay, I'll come down off my soap box now.....
I think there is a difference between saying a candidate is "just" a Rooney rule candidate and commenting on the Rooney Rule in general. Pointing out that the Rooney Rule is satisfied means that the coaching decision could be made at any time. Before the rule is satisfied, you know the team CANNOT choose a candidate.
If you want a "token black minority" to satisfy the Rooney rule you bring in fucking Duce Staley ASAP. His coaching history would almost be the equivalent of the Giants interviewing Tiki as head coach.
The Giants interviewed a legit candidate that at the very least they want to learn about and hear from. If they wanted to satisfy some archaic and outdated rule they would have brought in any minority in any coaching capacity immediately and powered through a joke interview.
7 vacancies and 4 candidates getting at least 3 interviews each, and he is one of them. He's not the RR.
It was predictable because there was no threat of a run game. Without that, teams knew Eli was throwing the RB check downs/flares, end zone pick plays, and end zone fades...
It was pretty damned good last season.
Right. The same argument was and still is used re: affirmative action students and/or professionals.
Right. The same argument was and still is used re: affirmative action students and/or professionals.
passing defense discrepancy was sick:
1000 less passing yards for Detroit.
100 more attempts versus Giants
Both horrendous stats due in large part lack of a pass rush, exacerbated by dinged up secondary.
Sacks - Detroit 42 versus Giants 23
Which is partially why black candidates are in a no-win position in this thing.
Teams weren't really doing the research to seek out these candidates in the first place before this rule was put into play.
If you are a black coach, knowing the sham that some of these interviews are, if you elect to not take the interview because you believe it's a sham, you are criticized in some circles because you are not "putting yourself in the network" of possible hires thus eliminating you from potential other opportunities.
But if you do take the (sham) interview and do several interviews with teams (who are likely simply doing it for compliance reasons) and not immediately hired after the first few chances, you are then questioned as to why you are not being hired. Go figure.
So either way, you can't win unless you completely blow the team away or they had sought you out in the first place with the intention of hiring rather than satisfy a rule.
Quote:
.
Which is partially why black candidates are in a no-win position in this thing.
Teams weren't really doing the research to seek out these candidates in the first place before this rule was put into play.
If you are a black coach, knowing the sham that some of these interviews are, if you elect to not take the interview because you believe it's a sham, you are criticized in some circles because you are not "putting yourself in the network" of possible hires thus eliminating you from potential other opportunities.
But if you do take the (sham) interview and do several interviews with teams (who are likely simply doing it for compliance reasons) and not immediately hired after the first few chances, you are then questioned as to why you are not being hired. Go figure.
So either way, you can't win unless you completely blow the team away or they had sought you out in the first place with the intention of hiring rather than satisfy a rule.
I'm so tired of the POS on this site who just make that assumption. Been on here since 2005 and I see it all the time, from Eric on down. I don't see that on other Giant sites but here it's like a normal conversation. "hey this guy is being interviewed. Rooney rule, you know." Talk about race card.
You can be tired of it, but that doesn't mean some teams aren't making a sham of it.
And what is this "race card" thing? Are we at a poker table or something?
Quote:
I'm so tired of the POS on this site who just make that assumption. Been on here since 2005 and I see it all the time, from Eric on down. I don't see that on other Giant sites but here it's like a normal conversation. "hey this guy is being interviewed. Rooney rule, you know." Talk about race card.
You can be tired of it, but that doesn't mean some teams aren't making a sham of it.
And what is this "race card" thing? Are we at a poker table or something?
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
Agreed.
When the Rooney rule was passed in 2003, there had only been 6 "non-white" coaches in NFL history.
Since then there have been 13 more in only a dozen years. The whole idea behind the Rooney Rule proved true: just bring minority candidates in front of owners and let them sink or swim on their own merits. That's exactly what has happened.
On top of that, even though Deuce Staley may have never been a serious candidate, he did get the experience of the interview, which should help him long term.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
Quote:
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
According to Bleacher Report's Jason Cole, the NFL is "troubled" by how the Eagles interviewed running backs coach Duce Staley, and believe it was not a legitimate interview, but instead just a way to "manipulate" with the Rooney Rule.
http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2016/01/nfl_troubled_by_eagles_trying_to_avoid_rooney_rule.html
Quote:
In comment 12747851 2ndroundKO said:
Quote:
What does making a sham of it have to do with what I said? Don't try to deflect. I'm pointing out how it's assumed that whenever a Black candidate is interviewed, it's because of the Rooney Rule according to posters. Either relate your post to what I'm saying I f*ck off with your silly deflection tactic.
Some posters and others have been lead to believe based on the actions of some teams since the rule has been implemented that some of these interviews are nothing more than procedural before they get to and eventually hire the person they really want assuming that person is halfway competent. Whether that is fair or not is up to each person to decide, but some teams in certain instances have made it very easy for folks to read between the lines.
If you don't want to believe it, I could care less. Call it deflection or whatever you want ("race card"), but the fact you got your antenna up on a term you brought to the discussion is all one needs to know about you.
Right. Questioning sketchy logic makes THAT person the racist. That's always a fun argument.
What is this nonsense? I don't have time for silly straw man arguments. Don't waste your time responding until you post something that pertains to my original post. I certainly won't.