Let’s call it what it is.... The league’s probably closer to 80 percent than it is 70 percent African-American. In terms of relating, coach Wilks is like that big uncle you always were cool with growing up. Internally for players it’s definitely an advantage. In the New York market, it’s huge, it’s polarizing, it’s No. 1, I think it would be a good look, because he is African-American. Whether they’ve never done that before, which they haven’t, if the guy is a worthy candidate I think it’s a great look for Mr. Mara and the country.
Let’s call it what it is.... The league’s probably closer to 80 percent than it is 70 percent African-American. In terms of relating, coach Wilks is like that big uncle you always were cool with growing up. Internally for players it’s definitely an advantage. In the New York market, it’s huge, it’s polarizing, it’s No. 1, I think it would be a good look, because he is African-American. Whether they’ve never done that before, which they haven’t, if the guy is a worthy candidate I think it’s a great look for Mr. Mara and the country.
Fine with me.
I've always been anti-Rooney Rule, but if, all things considered, he is the best man for the job, and this is one aspect of that job, then all the better.
And just pick the best coach period ... every Giant fan I know would take Mike Tomlin in a heartbeat ... this discussion needs to be 100 per cent based on skills, qualifications and who is going to get us the next Lombardi trophy as quickly as possible. If DG does pick Wilks, then let's just get to rebuilding the team and not spend 2 seconds dealing with the PC crowd.
Having said that, Beason's observation and recommendation should not be taken lightly. He was a leader on and off the field and knows what it takes to win.
I think teams go from one to the other. We went from easy Fassel to tough Coughlin and back to easy McAdoo. Guessing we’ll bring in a tough disciplinary guy whoever that is.
I know little about Wilks so I am hoping that someone can tell me why I should be excited to have him coach the Giants.
What makes Wilks a superior candidate ?
I understand that he relates well to his players and that he can be an authoritarian leader. Is this enough?
What is his strong suit? What makes him a great head coach ?
Does he create creative defensive game plans ? Is he an exceptional teacher?
Is he detail oriented? Does he make excellent in game adjustments?
Who is he like as a coach? Is he aggressive in his style of play?
Whoever can coach big nasty OL and a variety of RBs along with a passing game that takes maximum advantage of our our receivers and our QB's strenghths.
I know little about Wilks so I am hoping that someone can tell me why I should be excited to have him coach the Giants.
What makes Wilks a superior candidate ?
I understand that he relates well to his players and that he can be an authoritarian leader. Is this enough?
What is his strong suit? What makes him a great head coach ?
Does he create creative defensive game plans ? Is he an exceptional teacher?
Is he detail oriented? Does he make excellent in game adjustments?
Who is he like as a coach? Is he aggressive in his style of play?
-His strong suit is his leadership.
-Just listening to him for 5 minutes you learn something.
-Adjustments may also be another strong suit for him. Look at the game yesterday against the saints for example. They allowed 21 points in the first half but only 10 in the second half.
-Only Greg Williams blitzed more than Wilks this season.
His ability to get the best out of his team is first priority, and secondarily (or maybe not), build a top notch staff of coordinators and position coaches.
RE: RE: Didn't many endorsements prior to mcadoo hiring Â
So the Giants should hire the guy who gets no endorsements?
I swear some of you just live to be contrarian.
umm..think one would be a little hesitant on limited experience coordinator, esp after this last one. not contrarian..it being skeptic for good reason. no..not all first time hc are failures..but giants situation coming right off of one..is cause for concern. maybe not if mac wasn't hired. to each their own opinions.
I would go with the black candidate over the white candidate because I think there is added value that comes from the fact that 75% of the players are black. But all things are rarely equal, so it's a non-issue for the most part.
Bottomline, especially at the NFL level, is that players want a coach who is good at his job and gets them wins. Same with the QB position (re: complaints that Rosen's UCLA teammates didn't like him). Black, White, Jew, Gentile, it doesn't matter.
There's absolutely nothing racist acknowledging someone in your race or community can better relate to you. It's why diversity in leadership is important.
I'm a huge advocate of diversity in leadership but that answer is horseshit. What if Eli made the same statement about wanting an old white guy who he could relate to? Color of skin should have no place in the Giants coaching search. Period.
I learned very little during my years at Wharton, but one thing I remember is that research showed that using blacks in advertising gave you added value when reaching out to black consumers without any sacrifice when it came to white consumers, whereas using whites in the same advertisement gave you no added value among white consumers (in other words, whites couldn't care less whether it was a black or white in the ad, but blacks cared).
So if you extend that from advertising to coaching in the NFL, a black coach would give you added value, whereas a white coach has no impact one way or another.
His ability to get the best out of his team is first priority, and secondarily (or maybe not), build a top notch staff of coordinators and position coaches.
It's a shame the Giants got away from the level of discipline Coughlin had installed in the first half of his tenure.
The kind that almost got him fired?
What made the 2007 team successful was him being more relate able.
Without that the Giants never win that Super Bowl.
The kind that got the Giants to four straight playoff appearances.
He got more relatable in 2007, but he kept the structure and rules he established early on.
I'm not saying the Giants need Coughlin's rules specifically, but they do need somebody who can instill more discipline and structure than they have now.
RE: RE: RE: I like what I'm hearing about this guy. Â
It's a shame the Giants got away from the level of discipline Coughlin had installed in the first half of his tenure.
The kind that almost got him fired?
What made the 2007 team successful was him being more relate able.
Without that the Giants never win that Super Bowl.
The kind that got the Giants to four straight playoff appearances.
He got more relatable in 2007, but he kept the structure and rules he established early on.
I'm not saying the Giants need Coughlin's rules specifically, but they do need somebody who can instill more discipline and structure than they have now.
Coughlin suspended Plax in a regular season game early on in 2008 IIRC.
There’s a fair amount of social science to back him up.
I also think Christian is trying make more difficult point than Beason. We’re not talking about an affirmative action program aimed at providing positive role models for young black men. The Giants are just looking for a coach who can get the best performance out of a group of players. If men of color comprise 75% of your team, it’s not really hard to understand why they might be extra motivated to help make him successful. Calling that kind of Black solidarity “racist” turns the whole problem of racism on its head.
RE: RE: Didn't many endorsements prior to mcadoo hiring Â
There's absolutely nothing racist acknowledging someone in your race or community can better relate to you.
It's why diversity in leadership is important.
I'm a huge advocate of diversity in leadership but that answer is horseshit.
What if Eli made the same statement about wanting an old white guy who he could relate to?
Color of skin should have no place in the Giants coaching search. Period.
If Eli Manning played in a league where 70% of the players where white and 75% of the coaches were black, then yes Eli Manning would have an argument worth hearing.
And just out of curiosity why are you a huge advocate of diversity in leadership?
I have been admiring Coach Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers .... Â
for several years and I have read the wonderful comparisons of Steve Wilks to Mike Tomlin in the past week. If Mr. Wilks can be anything like Mr. Tomlin, then I can't wait to see him hired. I will support him 100%!
Diversity brings added value to any organization. If all things are the same -if two coaching candidates are equally qualified - then choosing the candidate that adds diversity creates the more favorable environment for success.
There’s a fair amount of social science to back him up.
I also think Christian is trying make more difficult point than Beason. We’re not talking about an affirmative action program aimed at providing positive role models for young black men. The Giants are just looking for a coach who can get the best performance out of a group of players. If men of color comprise 75% of your team, it’s not really hard to understand why they might be extra motivated to help make him successful. Calling that kind of Black solidarity “racist” turns the whole problem of racism on its head.
I understand your position. My concern is that by hiring a black coach because he may be able to "relate better" on some level is patronizing and unfair to both the coach and the players. It's the age old argument of seeking equity v. equality. If you want to hire a coach because he is the best guy regardless of his skin color, that is equality. If you want to hire a black coach for the sake of increasing the number of black coaches in the league that is seeking equity. Two very different things.
Christian, I support diversity in leadership because it proves that leaders and executives can thrive regardless of race. That's what I thought we were working towards.
Diversity brings added value to any organization. If all things are the same -if two coaching candidates are equally qualified - then choosing the candidate that adds diversity creates the more favorable environment for success.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on here. To automatically assume that diversity in hiring is automatically a benefit to an organization is a tone deaf way of broadly evaluating decision making. At the highest level of a multi million dollar organization there is no room for anyone except for the absolutely best football coach. I don't care if the guy is a green Martian.
Diversity brings added value to any organization. If all things are the same -if two coaching candidates are equally qualified - then choosing the candidate that adds diversity creates the more favorable environment for success.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on here. To automatically assume that diversity in hiring is automatically a benefit to an organization is a tone deaf way of broadly evaluating decision making. At the highest level of a multi million dollar organization there is no room for anyone except for the absolutely best football coach. I don't care if the guy is a green Martian.
This is not an "assumption", it's is an assessment that has been proven out scientifically. If you don't have an anecdotal experience to draw from I would encourage you to read up on this topic.
The kind that almost got him fired?
What made the 2007 team successful was him being more relate able.
Without that the Giants never win that Super Bowl.
Quote:
Let’s call it what it is.... The league’s probably closer to 80 percent than it is 70 percent African-American. In terms of relating, coach Wilks is like that big uncle you always were cool with growing up. Internally for players it’s definitely an advantage. In the New York market, it’s huge, it’s polarizing, it’s No. 1, I think it would be a good look, because he is African-American. Whether they’ve never done that before, which they haven’t, if the guy is a worthy candidate I think it’s a great look for Mr. Mara and the country.
Fine with me.
I've always been anti-Rooney Rule, but if, all things considered, he is the best man for the job, and this is one aspect of that job, then all the better.
So the Giants should hire the guy who gets no endorsements?
I swear some of you just live to be contrarian.
Quote:
happen ....and look what the end result was..
So the Giants should hire the guy who gets no endorsements?
I swear some of you just live to be contrarian.
lol isnt that the truth..
So what? Should every young HC candidate be eliminated because of McAdoo failures? Get a grip.
My point is...if that is in fact an issue for some younger guys...who is the real racist in that situation?
My point is...if that is in fact an issue for some younger guys...who is the real racist in that situation?
How many racists are there in the Midwest Gay Club Scene?
Having said that, Beason's observation and recommendation should not be taken lightly. He was a leader on and off the field and knows what it takes to win.
It's why diversity in leadership is important.
Like 5 or 6 players cane out and said Mcadoo was a great coach.
Grain of salt.
TMS disagrees with you on Mike Tomlin.
What makes Wilks a superior candidate ?
I understand that he relates well to his players and that he can be an authoritarian leader. Is this enough?
What is his strong suit? What makes him a great head coach ?
Does he create creative defensive game plans ? Is he an exceptional teacher?
Is he detail oriented? Does he make excellent in game adjustments?
Who is he like as a coach? Is he aggressive in his style of play?
Whoever can coach big nasty OL and a variety of RBs along with a passing game that takes maximum advantage of our our receivers and our QB's strenghths.
It's why diversity in leadership is important.
I'm a huge advocate of diversity in leadership but that answer is horseshit.
What if Eli made the same statement about wanting an old white guy who he could relate to?
Color of skin should have no place in the Giants coaching search. Period.
What makes Wilks a superior candidate ?
I understand that he relates well to his players and that he can be an authoritarian leader. Is this enough?
What is his strong suit? What makes him a great head coach ?
Does he create creative defensive game plans ? Is he an exceptional teacher?
Is he detail oriented? Does he make excellent in game adjustments?
Who is he like as a coach? Is he aggressive in his style of play?
-His strong suit is his leadership.
-Just listening to him for 5 minutes you learn something.
-Adjustments may also be another strong suit for him. Look at the game yesterday against the saints for example. They allowed 21 points in the first half but only 10 in the second half.
-Only Greg Williams blitzed more than Wilks this season.
One OC possibility is Rob Chudzinski. He and Wilks worked together in the past with San Diego and Carolina.
Quote:
happen ....and look what the end result was..
So the Giants should hire the guy who gets no endorsements?
I swear some of you just live to be contrarian.
umm..think one would be a little hesitant on limited experience coordinator, esp after this last one. not contrarian..it being skeptic for good reason. no..not all first time hc are failures..but giants situation coming right off of one..is cause for concern. maybe not if mac wasn't hired. to each their own opinions.
Bottomline, especially at the NFL level, is that players want a coach who is good at his job and gets them wins. Same with the QB position (re: complaints that Rosen's UCLA teammates didn't like him). Black, White, Jew, Gentile, it doesn't matter.
Quote:
Who does he hire for an offensive staff?
One OC possibility is Rob Chudzinski. He and Wilks worked together in the past with San Diego and Carolina.
Chudzinski is a good guess. One of the better OCs in the game.
I heard Ken Dorsey and Eric Washington as his coordinators.
Quote:
There's absolutely nothing racist acknowledging someone in your race or community can better relate to you. It's why diversity in leadership is important.
I'm a huge advocate of diversity in leadership but that answer is horseshit. What if Eli made the same statement about wanting an old white guy who he could relate to? Color of skin should have no place in the Giants coaching search. Period.
So if you extend that from advertising to coaching in the NFL, a black coach would give you added value, whereas a white coach has no impact one way or another.
It's why diversity in leadership is important.
What dopey horseshit you spout.
i think these are equally important
Archer, I'll try to find you some. Won't be hard now that his name is just about everywhere.
Quote:
It's a shame the Giants got away from the level of discipline Coughlin had installed in the first half of his tenure.
The kind that almost got him fired?
What made the 2007 team successful was him being more relate able.
Without that the Giants never win that Super Bowl.
The kind that got the Giants to four straight playoff appearances.
He got more relatable in 2007, but he kept the structure and rules he established early on.
I'm not saying the Giants need Coughlin's rules specifically, but they do need somebody who can instill more discipline and structure than they have now.
Quote:
In comment 13778760 an_idol_mind said:
Quote:
It's a shame the Giants got away from the level of discipline Coughlin had installed in the first half of his tenure.
The kind that almost got him fired?
What made the 2007 team successful was him being more relate able.
Without that the Giants never win that Super Bowl.
The kind that got the Giants to four straight playoff appearances.
He got more relatable in 2007, but he kept the structure and rules he established early on.
I'm not saying the Giants need Coughlin's rules specifically, but they do need somebody who can instill more discipline and structure than they have now.
Coughlin suspended Plax in a regular season game early on in 2008 IIRC.
I also think Christian is trying make more difficult point than Beason. We’re not talking about an affirmative action program aimed at providing positive role models for young black men. The Giants are just looking for a coach who can get the best performance out of a group of players. If men of color comprise 75% of your team, it’s not really hard to understand why they might be extra motivated to help make him successful. Calling that kind of Black solidarity “racist” turns the whole problem of racism on its head.
Quote:
happen ....and look what the end result was..
So the Giants should hire the guy who gets no endorsements?
I swear some of you just live to be contrarian.
lol it's unreal.
Quote:
There's absolutely nothing racist acknowledging someone in your race or community can better relate to you.
It's why diversity in leadership is important.
I'm a huge advocate of diversity in leadership but that answer is horseshit.
What if Eli made the same statement about wanting an old white guy who he could relate to?
Color of skin should have no place in the Giants coaching search. Period.
If Eli Manning played in a league where 70% of the players where white and 75% of the coaches were black, then yes Eli Manning would have an argument worth hearing.
And just out of curiosity why are you a huge advocate of diversity in leadership?
I also think Christian is trying make more difficult point than Beason. We’re not talking about an affirmative action program aimed at providing positive role models for young black men. The Giants are just looking for a coach who can get the best performance out of a group of players. If men of color comprise 75% of your team, it’s not really hard to understand why they might be extra motivated to help make him successful. Calling that kind of Black solidarity “racist” turns the whole problem of racism on its head.
I understand your position. My concern is that by hiring a black coach because he may be able to "relate better" on some level is patronizing and unfair to both the coach and the players. It's the age old argument of seeking equity v. equality. If you want to hire a coach because he is the best guy regardless of his skin color, that is equality. If you want to hire a black coach for the sake of increasing the number of black coaches in the league that is seeking equity. Two very different things.
Christian, I support diversity in leadership because it proves that leaders and executives can thrive regardless of race. That's what I thought we were working towards.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on here. To automatically assume that diversity in hiring is automatically a benefit to an organization is a tone deaf way of broadly evaluating decision making. At the highest level of a multi million dollar organization there is no room for anyone except for the absolutely best football coach. I don't care if the guy is a green Martian.
There's nothing patronizing or dismissive about it.
It's not an exercise in equity or equality. It's an exercise in quality.
And it's not racist to acknowledge that race and similar formative circumstances are relatable factors.
The point is to win football games.
A wealth of social science supports the idea diverse leadership creates more successful group dynamics and successful organizations.
This is beyond simple to grasp.
Quote:
Diversity brings added value to any organization. If all things are the same -if two coaching candidates are equally qualified - then choosing the candidate that adds diversity creates the more favorable environment for success.
That is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on here. To automatically assume that diversity in hiring is automatically a benefit to an organization is a tone deaf way of broadly evaluating decision making. At the highest level of a multi million dollar organization there is no room for anyone except for the absolutely best football coach. I don't care if the guy is a green Martian.
This is not an "assumption", it's is an assessment that has been proven out scientifically. If you don't have an anecdotal experience to draw from I would encourage you to read up on this topic.
There's nothing patronizing or dismissive about it.
It's not an exercise in equity or equality. It's an exercise in quality.
And it's not racist to acknowledge that race and similar formative circumstances are relatable factors.
The point is to win football games.
A wealth of social science supports the idea diverse leadership creates more successful group dynamics and successful organizations.
This is beyond simple to grasp.
If that was true, and thank God it isnt, why would any organization hire anyone who isn't white to manage their predominantly white staff?
Social scientists haven't had time to answer that question I guess.