A suggested change to the Rooney Rule...

part of the point is to get minority candidates in front of the people doing the hiring and to ensure they're known around the league. So forcing organizations to meet minority candidates has a separate value.

Whether or not they're hired isn't even the purpose. Its the opportunity. That's what's important.

However I do feel the Rooney rule was more prevalent 10-15 years ago than it is today.

Slowly but surely the number of non-white HCs andcoordinators has been increasing

Going through the interview process is valuable experience

Interview experience and to get them better known. That has led to more hires as coordinators and head coaches.

People actually think minority candidates wouldn't get interviewed if they are qualified. If they want more minorities in coaching put the effort into a program at lower coaching positions that brings them into coaching at the ground level if needed. Actually I think they already have that.

be the best man got the job. Anyway the Rooney rule as I understand it was just intended to get minority candidates the practice of being interviewed so they would be ready when they had a real chance of getting the job. Also there was the hope that with nothing to lose they would be relaxed and maybe be so good in the interview they would have to be considered.

I think it's a good rule. I understand the value of getting minority candidates in front of owners and general managers who wouldn't ordinarily get a chance to know the guy, but when you have a situation like with the Raiders where they know who they want to hire even before they fire their current head coach, it makes a mockery of the rule for them to go through the motions of an interview.

As I said, I would only make an exception to the rule if the team already knows who they want and isn't planning on interviewing anyone.

only 20% of offensive coordinators, and only about a third of defensive coordinators, are minorities. That is what needs to be addressed, not any interviewing at the head coach level.

People should be held to their qualifications and work ethic, not skin color or genitalia.

I know I'm going to get bashed for that, but it's the truth.

If the issue is truly interview experience, there are coaching services available.

are the fans. It’s like they are the ones doing the interviews and “wasting” their time.

in the Tomlin on hiring? he wowed them in interview so much they hired him on the spot

In comment 13782412 micky said:

Quote:

in the Tomlin on hiring? he wowed them in interview so much they hired him on the spot

Rooney said that the rule had nothing to do with Tomlin's interview or hiring.

In comment 13782410 fivehead said:

Quote:

People should be held to their qualifications and work ethic, not skin color or genitalia.

The purpose of the rule isn't for less qualified people to get a job over more qualified people, the purpose is to help bridge the gap between the fact that ownership is overwhelmingly white while the players are overwhelmingly black by mandating that at least one interview be with a minority candidate. My only issue with the rule is when situations like the one with Gruden and the Raiders occur.

In comment 13782357 ron mexico said:

Quote:

Going through the interview process is valuable experience

It could be a misleading experience if a candidate finds that there's a big difference between interviewing with a management team who is truly openminded about your candidacy than it was interviewing with a management team who viewed your candidacy as a waste of their valuable time.

maybe that 1 gem of an interview happens and they don’t spend $100 million...

I really don’t see why this bothers people. If a black coach feels like they are just going to be interviewed because of some rule they have 2 choices - decline or prepare like crazy and blow the doors off.

but now there are so many black coordinators in the league that they are all known. The idea that there are black coordinators who need to be "introduced" to the league via this process no longer stands true.

Here is the other thing...
Teams are so competitive now and the need to win is so great that if a minority coordinator gives a team the best chance to win... then that team will hire the guy as their head coach no matter what color he is. The premium on winning in this league outweighs any closet racist thoughts that owner may have.

can be gained by the white coordinators too. Not sure why it is just a positive for minority coaches. I think it is safe to say that most of the candidates are green when it comes to interviewing for a head coaching position.

In comment 13782433 EricJ said:

Quote:

The premium on winning in this league outweighs any closet racist thoughts that owner may have.

It's not about racism, it's about familiarity. If the owner is a racist, the interview won't make any difference anyway and would be bad training for the minority candidate should they later get a chance with a sincere owner. The problem is you don't need to be a racist to travel in circles where minorities aren't plentiful. And those are the owners targeted by the rule.

In comment 13782443 Milton said:

Quote:

In comment 13782433 EricJ said: Quote: The premium on winning in this league outweighs any closet racist thoughts that owner may have. It's not about racism, it's about familiarity. If the owner is a racist, the interview won't make any difference anyway and would be bad training for the minority candidate should they later get a chance with a sincere owner. The problem is you don't need to be a racist to travel in circles where minorities aren't plentiful. And those are the owners targeted by the rule.

like I said, there are so many minority assistants today that they are all known. It is not like it was when the rule was introduced. Traveling in circles where minorities are not plentiful? WTF is that? You are either traveling in "football" circles or you aren't and if you are, then you are getting exposed to ALL of the possible candidates.

It eventually will come to the point where the rule itself is racist in that it says that minorities need "help" because they cannot do it on their own. You already said it is not about racism.

are white. A much larger percentage of players are minorities when compared to coaches. All these minority players running in "football circles" yet somehow more of the white ones go into coaching.

That fact should tell you all you need to know about how needed this rule is, and how seriously as candidates minorities are taken among (also mostly white) managers and owners.

When those percentages start to make more sense you can start calling the rule itself racist, until then it sounds like deflection.

The percentage of minority players vs minority coaches is apples to oranges.

Any rule or law that segregates on the basis of race is racist.

In comment 13782491 fivehead said:

Quote:

The percentage of minority players vs minority coaches is apples to oranges. Any rule or law that segregates on the basis of race is racist.

^^ Exactly

In comment 13782514 EricJ said:

Quote:

In comment 13782491 fivehead said: Quote: Any rule or law that segregates on the basis of race is racist. ^^ Exactly

True enough, but this this is a case of integration, not segregation, so I'm not really sure how your statement applies to the subject of this thread.

In comment 13782524 Milton said:

Quote:

In comment 13782514 EricJ said: Quote: In comment 13782491 fivehead said: Quote: Any rule or law that segregates on the basis of race is racist. ^^ Exactly True enough, but this this is a case of integration, not segregation, so I'm not really sure how your statement applies to the subject of this thread.

Absolutely correct Milton. Some of you are confusing a rule that you think is about ‘segregation’ when it’s about ‘intergration’.

Quote:

Being a good player doesn't mean you will be a good coach.

But you are seeing successful minority coaches who also weren't successful players more and more. To T-Bone's point, that is a sign of integration.

Steve Wilks is a lot like white assistant coaches. He played college ball at a small school and was moderately successful. Never played in the NFL and started taking position roles at small schools.

He was born and raised in Charlotte which is pretty cool that he came home and was a DC here.

He's very much followed the same path as many assistants. That's really good to see as progress.

Not all rules based on race are about exclusion and segregation. The Rooney Rule doesn't state that ONLY minority coaches should be interviewed... matter of fact, it was created because for a long time a very large majority of white assistants were only getting the opportunities.

That all said, I agree with Milton that it may be time to make some subtle changes to the rule... if not temporarily suspend it for a few years to see if things go back to the way they used to be. If they do, you just reinstall the rule again. But hopefully owners around the league have seen that there are a good amount of minority coaches who are fully capable of being the HC of their teams WITHOUT having being made to see it.

In comment 13782359 theold5j said:

Quote:

People actually think minority candidates wouldn't get interviewed if they are qualified. If they want more minorities in coaching put the effort into a program at lower coaching positions that brings them into coaching at the ground level if needed. Actually I think they already have that.

I agree.

In comment 13782410 fivehead said:

Quote:

People should be held to their qualifications and work ethic, not skin color or genitalia.

Yes, because in the first seven decades of the NFL, there were exactly zero black men qualified to be a HC.

.

unintended consequences; mainly in that it often depreciates minority candidates' qualifications. Almost any time a minority candidate is scheduled, we see posters claim "Rooney Rule interview". Hell, we even see reporters doing it. That is an often unfair characterization of that candidate's qualifications.