Rooney Rule

[Skull and Bones]

and if you were Jimmy Lake and the Glazers just fired Morris and his staff, which included you, and then said hey  we would like to interview you for HC what would you tell them?

[jerseybucsfan]

This topic is really too hot to discuss on message boards without someone being offended.

[Patrick9]

and if you were Jimmy Lake and the Glazers just fired Morris and his staff, which included you, and then said hey  we would like to interview you for HC what would you tell them?

He goes from fired DB coach who 31 owners and fanbases haven't heard of to head coaching candidate.  Even an obviously Rooney rule interview still gets your name out there.

[docbravo]

silly?  absolutely.  using a person's skin color as a requirement for an interview is silly.  actually, it's racism.  don't agree it's necessary either.  if a guy is qualified he'll get consideration  regardless of his skin tone.  but giving an interview to a guy that isn't, such as a Jimmy Lake, just to be in compliance is one, pointless and two, disrespectful to the qualified candidates,  and three, degrading to that person.

If we all lived in a vacuum, and everyone was fair and just, then it wouldn't be necessary. Have things improved over time? Absolutely! But I'm not going to assume that the "playing field" is equal. I think there are many benefits to the Rooney Rule.  In 2009, Raheem got an interview with the Broncos (whether he deserved it or not). That interview didn't get Raheem the Bronco job, but I can't help but think it opened the door for him here. A coach will be judged by his wins and losses. Not his skin color. The Rooney Rule may give a minority candidate an opportunity to coach, but it won't keep him there.  The Rooney Rule doesn't dictate that a team HIRE a minority candidate, it simply has to consider one. They are will within their rights to hire whoever they want, and in my opinion, the BEST MAN should get the job.

If teams interview coaches like Jimmy Lake, simply to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then same on them. They are the type of organizations that made the rule a necessity.  Shame on them for not doing their homework. You can't tell me that their aren't more qualified minority candidates other than Jimmy Lake out there.
 

seriously docbravo, I have no idea what ethnicity you are but how would it make you feel if you got a job interview only because their was a law that stated the company had to interview one person of your skin color?  you wouldn't consider that a slap in the face?

Honestly, no I wouldn't consider that a slap in the face. I feel any opportunity to advance in  your career is a good one. If there was a law that got me in the door of a company (that wouldn't have given me an opportunity without it), I'd be grateful! But once I was in said interview, it would be on me to BLOW THEIR SOCKS OFF with my intelligence, preparedness, skill, determination, wit, performance, attitude, and confidence! If at the end of the interview process, the company  found someone they liked better for their organization, so be it. But that one interview may put me on the radar of another organization, or another position within that company.

[CBWx2]

silly?  absolutely.  using a person's skin color as a requirement for an interview is silly.  actually, it's racism.  don't agree it's necessary either.  if a guy is qualified he'll get consideration  regardless of his skin tone.  but giving an interview to a guy that isn't, such as a Jimmy Lake, just to be in compliance is one, pointless and two, disrespectful to the qualified candidates,  and three, degrading to that person.

If we all lived in a vacuum, and everyone was fair and just, then it wouldn't be necessary. Have things improved over time? Absolutely! But I'm not going to assume that the "playing field" is equal. I think there are many benefits to the Rooney Rule.  In 2009, Raheem got an interview with the Broncos (whether he deserved it or not). That interview didn't get Raheem the Bronco job, but I can't help but think it opened the door for him here. A coach will be judged by his wins and losses. Not his skin color. The Rooney Rule may give a minority candidate an opportunity to coach, but it won't keep him there.  The Rooney Rule doesn't dictate that a team HIRE a minority candidate, it simply has to consider one. They are will within their rights to hire whoever they want, and in my opinion, the BEST MAN should get the job.

If teams interview coaches like Jimmy Lake, simply to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then same on them. They are the type of organizations that made the rule a necessity.  Shame on them for not doing their homework. You can't tell me that their aren't more qualified minority candidates other than Jimmy Lake out there.
 

seriously docbravo, I have no idea what ethnicity you are but how would it make you feel if you got a job interview only because their was a law that stated the company had to interview one person of your skin color?  you wouldn't consider that a slap in the face?

Honestly, no I wouldn't consider that a slap in the face. I feel any opportunity to advance in  your career is a good one. If there was a law that got me in the door of a company (that wouldn't have given me an opportunity without it), I'd be grateful! But once I was in said interview, it would be on me to BLOW THEIR SOCKS OFF with my intelligence, preparedness, skill, determination, wit, performance, attitude, and confidence! If at the end of the interview process, the company  found someone they liked better for their organization, so be it. But that one interview may put me on the radar of another organization, or another position within that company.

Well said doc. BTW MeanD, it's racist in and of itself to assume doc is a minority because he has these views. Making that statement in a comment intended to suggest that the rule is racist is irony at it's finest. The fact that you aren't bright enough to realize that makes your opinion on the subject worthless, IMO.

[docbravo]

silly?  absolutely.  using a person's skin color as a requirement for an interview is silly.  actually, it's racism.  don't agree it's necessary either.  if a guy is qualified he'll get consideration  regardless of his skin tone.  but giving an interview to a guy that isn't, such as a Jimmy Lake, just to be in compliance is one, pointless and two, disrespectful to the qualified candidates,  and three, degrading to that person.

If we all lived in a vacuum, and everyone was fair and just, then it wouldn't be necessary. Have things improved over time? Absolutely! But I'm not going to assume that the "playing field" is equal. I think there are many benefits to the Rooney Rule.  In 2009, Raheem got an interview with the Broncos (whether he deserved it or not). That interview didn't get Raheem the Bronco job, but I can't help but think it opened the door for him here. A coach will be judged by his wins and losses. Not his skin color. The Rooney Rule may give a minority candidate an opportunity to coach, but it won't keep him there.  The Rooney Rule doesn't dictate that a team HIRE a minority candidate, it simply has to consider one. They are will within their rights to hire whoever they want, and in my opinion, the BEST MAN should get the job.

If teams interview coaches like Jimmy Lake, simply to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then same on them. They are the type of organizations that made the rule a necessity.  Shame on them for not doing their homework. You can't tell me that their aren't more qualified minority candidates other than Jimmy Lake out there.
 

seriously docbravo, I have no idea what ethnicity you are but how would it make you feel if you got a job interview only because their was a law that stated the company had to interview one person of your skin color?  you wouldn't consider that a slap in the face?

Honestly, no I wouldn't consider that a slap in the face. I feel any opportunity to advance in  your career is a good one. If there was a law that got me in the door of a company (that wouldn't have given me an opportunity without it), I'd be grateful! But once I was in said interview, it would be on me to BLOW THEIR SOCKS OFF with my intelligence, preparedness, skill, determination, wit, performance, attitude, and confidence! If at the end of the interview process, the company  found someone they liked better for their organization, so be it. But that one interview may put me on the radar of another organization, or another position within that company.

Well said doc. BTW MeanD, it's racist in and of itself to assume doc is a minority because he has these views. Making that statement in a comment intended to suggest that the rule is racist is irony at it's finest. The fact that you aren't bright enough to realize that makes your opinion on the subject worthless, IMO.

I agree CBWx2. I purposely ignored his comment about my race, because I felt it had no barring on the conversation.

[John Galt?]

The Rooney rule may be part of why Morris was hired in the first place. He was promoted to DC and Denver interviewed him for their HC job (partly to satisfy the Rooney rule, partly as a backdoor way to try to lure him as a possible DC) then when the Glazers saw him interviewed as a HC, they panicked and named him HC.

[Skull and Bones]

silly?  absolutely.  using a person's skin color as a requirement for an interview is silly.  actually, it's racism.  don't agree it's necessary either.  if a guy is qualified he'll get consideration  regardless of his skin tone.  but giving an interview to a guy that isn't, such as a Jimmy Lake, just to be in compliance is one, pointless and two, disrespectful to the qualified candidates,  and three, degrading to that person.

If we all lived in a vacuum, and everyone was fair and just, then it wouldn't be necessary. Have things improved over time? Absolutely! But I'm not going to assume that the "playing field" is equal. I think there are many benefits to the Rooney Rule.  In 2009, Raheem got an interview with the Broncos (whether he deserved it or not). That interview didn't get Raheem the Bronco job, but I can't help but think it opened the door for him here. A coach will be judged by his wins and losses. Not his skin color. The Rooney Rule may give a minority candidate an opportunity to coach, but it won't keep him there.  The Rooney Rule doesn't dictate that a team HIRE a minority candidate, it simply has to consider one. They are will within their rights to hire whoever they want, and in my opinion, the BEST MAN should get the job.

If teams interview coaches like Jimmy Lake, simply to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then same on them. They are the type of organizations that made the rule a necessity.  Shame on them for not doing their homework. You can't tell me that their aren't more qualified minority candidates other than Jimmy Lake out there.
 

seriously docbravo, I have no idea what ethnicity you are but how would it make you feel if you got a job interview only because their was a law that stated the company had to interview one person of your skin color?  you wouldn't consider that a slap in the face?

Honestly, no I wouldn't consider that a slap in the face. I feel any opportunity to advance in  your career is a good one. If there was a law that got me in the door of a company (that wouldn't have given me an opportunity without it), I'd be grateful! But once I was in said interview, it would be on me to BLOW THEIR SOCKS OFF with my intelligence, preparedness, skill, determination, wit, performance, attitude, and confidence! If at the end of the interview process, the company  found someone they liked better for their organization, so be it. But that one interview may put me on the radar of another organization, or another position within that company.

well thanks for answering my question and I can certainly respect your feelings on the manner-trying to make the most out of a less than ideal situation.   One that should't have to exist to begin with.   Its the practicable way to view it.  Guess I'm just not as big a man as you.  I'd would be resentful and consider it degrading.  Of coarse that attitude isn't going to take me very far either and I can acknowledge that.

[docbravo]

silly?  absolutely.  using a person's skin color as a requirement for an interview is silly.  actually, it's racism.  don't agree it's necessary either.  if a guy is qualified he'll get consideration  regardless of his skin tone.  but giving an interview to a guy that isn't, such as a Jimmy Lake, just to be in compliance is one, pointless and two, disrespectful to the qualified candidates,  and three, degrading to that person.

If we all lived in a vacuum, and everyone was fair and just, then it wouldn't be necessary. Have things improved over time? Absolutely! But I'm not going to assume that the "playing field" is equal. I think there are many benefits to the Rooney Rule.  In 2009, Raheem got an interview with the Broncos (whether he deserved it or not). That interview didn't get Raheem the Bronco job, but I can't help but think it opened the door for him here. A coach will be judged by his wins and losses. Not his skin color. The Rooney Rule may give a minority candidate an opportunity to coach, but it won't keep him there.  The Rooney Rule doesn't dictate that a team HIRE a minority candidate, it simply has to consider one. They are will within their rights to hire whoever they want, and in my opinion, the BEST MAN should get the job.

If teams interview coaches like Jimmy Lake, simply to satisfy the Rooney Rule, then same on them. They are the type of organizations that made the rule a necessity.  Shame on them for not doing their homework. You can't tell me that their aren't more qualified minority candidates other than Jimmy Lake out there.
 

seriously docbravo, I have no idea what ethnicity you are but how would it make you feel if you got a job interview only because their was a law that stated the company had to interview one person of your skin color?  you wouldn't consider that a slap in the face?

Honestly, no I wouldn't consider that a slap in the face. I feel any opportunity to advance in  your career is a good one. If there was a law that got me in the door of a company (that wouldn't have given me an opportunity without it), I'd be grateful! But once I was in said interview, it would be on me to BLOW THEIR SOCKS OFF with my intelligence, preparedness, skill, determination, wit, performance, attitude, and confidence! If at the end of the interview process, the company  found someone they liked better for their organization, so be it. But that one interview may put me on the radar of another organization, or another position within that company.

well thanks for answering my question and I can certainly respect your feelings on the manner-trying to make the most out of a less than ideal situation.   One that should't have to exist to begin with.   Its the practicable way to view it.  Guess I'm just not as big a man as you.  I'd would be resentful and consider it degrading.  Of coarse that attitude isn't going to take me very far either and I can acknowledge that.

It was a fair question. Thanks for asking! You aren't alone in your line of thinking bro. I know many people who feel the way you do. I'm just a "glass 1/2 full" kinda guy. And  I would certainly use that scenario to improve my situation. Or at least have an attitude that it was going to improve my situation.

I'm sure if you ask ANY of the up and coming assistant coaches currently in the NFL, (White, Black, or Hispanic) they would all say, "Hey man, just give me an opportunity to show you what I can bring to the table for your organization."

[Skull and Bones]

yeah, I guess I just consider it a continuation of making one's skin color something that matters and ideally we need to move beyond that.

[nybuccguy]

There are far more black coaches in the league than there are white receivers and runningbacks. Should we have a rule to ensure more white players will get playing time at those positions?

[docbravo]

There are far more black coaches in the league than there are white receivers and runningbacks. Should we have a rule to ensure more white players will get playing time at those positions?

First of all, the 1st part of your statement is False.

And I'm not even sure the last part of your post even deserves a reply......

[dbucfan]

it doesn't

[JavaRay]

The Rooney rule is a racist rule and needs to be abolished.    It's outdated.

[CBWx2]

The Rooney rule is a racist rule and needs to be abolished.    It's outdated.

Is it a racist rule or is it outdated? Because your statement suggests that there was a time in the NFL where racism was needed to fight...well...racism. If that's the case, then you are acknowledging racism existed. So  if that's the case, how would you have gone about combating it rather than the "uber-racist" Rooney Rule? Or are you suggesting things were better with one form of racism but horrible with the other?