|
Post by Sons of Vaval on May 15, 2020 18:24:32 GMT -5
I’ve seen it all.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on May 15, 2020 18:27:41 GMT -5
So what matters to the NFL is the color of your skin and not the content of your character (or ability)? WWMLK say?
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on May 15, 2020 18:33:04 GMT -5
If NFL teams draft a white cornerback or running back, will they begin games with a 3-0 advantage?
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on May 15, 2020 19:48:57 GMT -5
This is insanity
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 16, 2020 9:36:26 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew:
An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards.
But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job.
So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches.
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on May 16, 2020 12:40:00 GMT -5
Offering a better draft pick in the 3rd round assumes
1. An individual owner really wants to win more. 2. An individual owner really believes moving up 8 or 16 spots in the 3rd round of the draft will result in a better team and therefore more wins
That's possible, but what they really want to do is make more money and what the draft pick scenario presumes more wins = more money
Unfortunately, the vast majority of revenue in the NFL comes from TV contracts and that cash is divided equally between the 32 teams no matter how many games you win.
Not saying they should do this, but, if they want to encourage the hiring of minorities as coaches and in the front office, divide the TV money into 128 or 256 shares. Every team receives 1 share. Then develop a system to divide the remaining 96 or 224 shares based on things like hiring minority coaches, front office management, and for where your team ranks in number of minority coaches and minorities in management positions.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on May 17, 2020 7:25:02 GMT -5
Why couldn't the "ultra woke" NBA have implemented something similar ten years ago?
Knicks could've used a few more lottery balls in exchange for signing Jeremy Lin.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on May 17, 2020 7:25:49 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. There are only so many ways to say NAILED IT.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on May 17, 2020 7:28:37 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. ...and when picking quarterbacks for so many decades.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on May 17, 2020 9:15:55 GMT -5
Forget his ethnic background, they should get "points" for hiring an Ivy Leaguer. Getting back to the NFL, how about taking folks (players, coaches, administrators) from FCS schools? More specifically, Patriot League. Even more specifically, Holy Cross. Can you say Kalif Raymond? Domenic Randolph? Derek Mountain? Jimmy Murray?
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on May 17, 2020 10:00:27 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. ...and when picking quarterbacks for so many decades. I don't think anyone would argue against the fact that there WAS for many years racism embedded in the NFL, just as there was in baseball, college football (Alabama had all-white teams into the 1960's until it became clear that this model would never be conducive to winning in the SEC). Not to mention college basketball up until Texas Western (now UTEP) upset UK with an all-black lineup. What a crazy world it must've been to live in where contemporary thinking couldn't have previously comprehended five black guys beating five white guys in basketball. But the world has changed. Yes, the failure of any team to draft Warren Moon, (who was a drop-back QB playing in a pro-style offense in college) was certainly embedded in racism. And that's just one example. But for the betterment of society, thinking has changed. If owners, without the incentive of draft picks for hiring minorities, are incentivized to hire the best possible coaches, minority candidates WILL get hired. Affirmative action is RACISM that ultimately hampers the advancement of minority groups in society. Not to mention, I wouldn't be surprised if this proposed practice violates the Civil Rights Act as race is a protected class. One plausible reason why the ratio of black players to white players isn't anywhere close to reflected in the ratio of black coaches to white coaches: African-Americans ON AVERAGE tend to be better raw athletes than Caucasian athletes. Therefore, in order to make the NFL, many white players need to possess other intangibles to have a shot at getting on the field, especially at certain positions. And it is likely that these type of intangibles are stronger assets towards becoming a coach than having been a "raw athlete". Obviously, there are many African-American players who possess these intangibles and these are the guys who in recent decades have gone on to become successful assistant and head coaches. Like any fan of the game, I look forward to free market capitalist forces providing the opportunity for more minorities to become head coaches, executives and owners.
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on May 17, 2020 14:58:58 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. Since the NFL is 70% African-American the league would not exist in their absence. It's irrelevant whether one team signs a particular black player who other teams have avoided for character issues. Every team has to draft black players, even one that was (hypothetically) owned by a racist. But you've hit the question: why do teams hire inferior white coaches rather than black coaches who would probably be better? You could say that sometimes an owner hires an inferior white coach because the owner is a dope. But when black coaches remain significantly underrepresented year after year in a league that is predominantly black it's hard to avoid the conclusion that there is systemic racism in the NFL. This is what black people have been dealing with for 400 years in this country: an across the board lack of equal opportunity. The new proposal is pathetic really. What it's saying is: let's reward our owners for not perpetuating systemic racism because they've proven themselves incapable of doing so because it is unjust. Not long ago a black minister said to me that he was constantly stunned by how oblivious white people are to the racism all around us. The NFL is a good example of this.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on May 17, 2020 15:19:31 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. Since the NFL is 70% African-American the league would not exist in their absence. It's irrelevant whether one team signs a particular black player who other teams have avoided for character issues. Every team has to draft black players, even one that was (hypothetically) owned by a racist. But you've hit the question: why do teams hire inferior white coaches rather than black coaches who would probably be better? You could say that sometimes an owner hires an inferior white coach because the owner is a dope. But when black coaches remain significantly underrepresented year after year in a league that is predominantly black it's hard to avoid the conclusion that there is systemic racism in the NFL. This is what black people have been dealing with for 400 years in this country: an across the board lack of equal opportunity. The new proposal is pathetic really. What it's saying is: let's reward our owners for not perpetuating systemic racism because they've proven themselves incapable of doing so because it is unjust. Not long ago a black minister said to me that he was constantly stunned by how oblivious white people are to the racism all around us. The NFL is a good example of this.The proposal is DANGEROUS and RACIST because, if implemented, it will devalue and undermine the accomplishments of black coaches who were hired because of their ABILITY and HARD WORK. The NFL and NCAA have come a long way over the last 20 years on this issue but this policy will send us backwards as a society. I remember being in high school when Ty Willingham became the first black coach at Notre Dame (2002) and Sylvester Croom became the first black coach in the SEC at Mississippi State (2004). It was BIG NEWS when both of these hires occurred. Notice that it's no longer earth-shaking news when black coaches get hired? The reason is because the free market, driven by the accomplishments and talents of hundreds of African-American coaches, has spoken. Affirmative action policies perpetuate the "oblivious white racism" you speak of. Let me give you an example: Mike London was hired prior to last season as the head football coach at William & Mary after 38 years of Jimmye Laycock. Mike London WON A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP at a high-academic FCS school (Richmond) and also comes with ACC head-coaching experience at Virginia. And while not an alum (Richmond '82), he is a former William & Mary assistant, serving there from 1991-1994. Despite all of these accomplishments, I have heard multiple people connected with William & Mary, who were unhappy about the choice, referred to it at the time as a "diversity hire". What a slap in the face to this man's resume and talents! This is because of the culture of affirmative action, which reinforces the perceived notion that when a minority gets into a certain school or gets a certain job, that they got there because of their racial background. This sentiment is moving us backwards as a society.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 17, 2020 16:48:48 GMT -5
Logic of the PC Sports Media Crew: An owner like John Mara would be willing to trade up in the draft to take an African American cornerback (Deandre Baker) with character concerns that had caused him to be crossed off some teams’ draft boards. But he would hire an inferior White head coach rather than an African American who would be the best fit for the job. So owners don’t seem to care about the race of players they draft, then they turn into racists when hiring coaches. Since the NFL is 70% African-American the league would not exist in their absence. It's irrelevant whether one team signs a particular black player who other teams have avoided for character issues. Every team has to draft black players, even one that was (hypothetically) owned by a racist. But you've hit the question: why do teams hire inferior white coaches rather than black coaches who would probably be better? You could say that sometimes an owner hires an inferior white coach because the owner is a dope. But when black coaches remain significantly underrepresented year after year in a league that is predominantly black it's hard to avoid the conclusion that there is systemic racism in the NFL. This is what black people have been dealing with for 400 years in this country: an across the board lack of equal opportunity. The new proposal is pathetic really. What it's saying is: let's reward our owners for not perpetuating systemic racism because they've proven themselves incapable of doing so because it is unjust. Not long ago a black minister said to me that he was constantly stunned by how oblivious white people are to the racism all around us. The NFL is a good example of this. Would you ever consider the fact that in a league where owners (and everyone else) are incentivized to win, they are just trying to hire the best people at every position? The best cornerbacks, running backs, quarterbacks, scouts, GMs, coaches, etc etc. And if there really was “systemic racism,” it never would have gotten to the point where 70% of the players were African American.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on May 17, 2020 21:32:14 GMT -5
I checked the career records of 17 African-American NFL head coaches. Their composite W-L record is
922-857
Pretty good, considering the league's overall record is exactly .500
9 have winning records and 8 have losing records
|
|
|
Post by alum on May 18, 2020 7:34:01 GMT -5
As part of a continuing education program, I watched a video on implicit bias last year. I think that knowing something about it would be helpful to this discussion. The first result when I Googled "implicit bias" gave me the following definition: Also known as implicit social cognition, implicit bias refers to the attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner. These biases, which encompass both favorable and unfavorable assessments, are activated involuntarily and without an individual’s awareness or intentional control. Residing deep in the subconscious, these biases are different from known biases that individuals may choose to conceal for the purposes of social and/or political correctness. Rather, implicit biases are not accessible through introspection.
The implicit associations we harbor in our subconscious cause us to have feelings and attitudes about other people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity, age, and appearance. These associations develop over the course of a lifetime beginning at a very early age through exposure to direct and indirect messages. In addition to early life experiences, the media and news programming are often-cited origins of implicit associations. kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/research/understanding-implicit-bias/I also came across this article from the website of a private school organization www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/fall-2018/addressing-implicit-bias-in-the-hiring-process/It will take about a minute to read the summary which details a few studies establishing the pervasiveness of this phenomenon. I have no idea whether the NFL's plan will work (or for that matter whether it is window dressing) but assuming that minority coaches and front office folks are getting a completely fair shake is ignoring reality. No matter how far we have progressed, there is more work to be done. So to bbc's point, there doesn't have to be systemic racism to deny opportunities to minorities. It can simply be implicit bias.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on May 18, 2020 8:08:02 GMT -5
To some degree, doesn't this demean every black coach hired now?
If the Cleveland Browns hire an African American coach or GM, won't this policy create some whispering that the guy was only hired because of race and the desire for the better draft pick? In theory, I suppose the draft pick could be the tipping point between two identical coaches who happened to be of a different race, but I seem to recall the Patriots giving up draft pick(s) to get the head coach they wanted
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on May 18, 2020 8:51:06 GMT -5
I remember wondering if this was an issue for some when FCMB was hired as the HC basketball coach. The criticism from a few never seemed to stop. Was that racism, or was it due to their opinion of his coaching skills (regardless of race)? Both look very much the same from the outside.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on May 18, 2020 10:14:51 GMT -5
The only color that matters in pro sports (and the probably can be said now about college sports too) is green. This isn't the MLB of the early 1900s. Teams make money when they win. They put asses in the seats, they sell beers, they get prime time TV spots, they get licensing deals, they get PSL and season ticket licenses, they sell merchandise... GREEN.
If the QB was black, purple, yellow, orange, six legged, or otherwise alien wouldn't matter. Wins matter.
That's on the field. Now, who drafts those players? Who coaches those players? Strategy comes into play here. This isn't dumb luck, although sometimes it is... executives have to demonstrate the ability to craft, engineer, and execute a strategy. That will result in the players on the field being of a certain caliber to win, and winning means money and money = GREEN. A black GM or white GM or Asian GM or European GM... who the hell cares. Get the results.
I don't really want to get caught up in the personal lives or backgrounds of any of the sports teams I follow, although there are some nice stories that you can get behind and root for... we're really rooting for laundry at the end of the day as Jerry Seinfeld famously said. These people don't care about you or me, or our personal lives. I don't really get involved or vested in theirs. I care about the results on the play of field. Keep it that simple, and race never comes close to being a part of the equation.
Separate chord: teams aren't going out of their way to draft players that look like me, talk like me, have a background like me, have a family like mine... because it's irrelevant. They break it down to the elements of a commodity: winning, and the things it takes to win. None of that other stuff matters.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on May 18, 2020 10:39:37 GMT -5
To some degree, doesn't this demean every black coach hired now? If the Cleveland Browns hire an African American coach or GM, won't this policy create some whispering that the guy was only hired because of race and the desire for the better draft pick? In theory, I suppose the draft pick could be the tipping point between two identical coaches who happened to be of a different race, but I seem to recall the Patriots giving up draft pick(s) to get the head coach they wanted Tom, Based on personal experience I can tell you that these whisperings, these perceptions are always there no matter the circumstances.The demeaning attitude, the whisperings stem from negative perceptions, prejudices, held prior to the hiring. Hopefully after a while the whisperings will abate as the success of minority qb's has demonstrated. Peace. Perhaps so. I just think it would be much worse if you're literally paying teams off to hire someone I don't pay attention to sports gossip outside of New England, but I don't recall any whispering the last time a local team hired a coach that was from a minority
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on May 18, 2020 12:41:56 GMT -5
The only color that matters in pro sports (and the probably can be said now about college sports too) is green. This isn't the MLB of the early 1900s. Teams make money when they win. They put asses in the seats, they sell beers, they get prime time TV spots, they get licensing deals, they get PSL and season ticket licenses, they sell merchandise... GREEN. If the QB was black, purple, yellow, orange, six legged, or otherwise alien wouldn't matter. Wins matter. That's on the field. Now, who drafts those players? Who coaches those players? Strategy comes into play here. This isn't dumb luck, although sometimes it is... executives have to demonstrate the ability to craft, engineer, and execute a strategy. That will result in the players on the field being of a certain caliber to win, and winning means money and money = GREEN. A black GM or white GM or Asian GM or European GM... who the hell cares. Get the results. I don't really want to get caught up in the personal lives or backgrounds of any of the sports teams I follow, although there are some nice stories that you can get behind and root for... we're really rooting for laundry at the end of the day as Jerry Seinfeld famously said. These people don't care about you or me, or our personal lives. I don't really get involved or vested in theirs. I care about the results on the play of field. Keep it that simple, and race never comes close to being a part of the equation. Separate chord: teams aren't going out of their way to draft players that look like me, talk like me, have a background like me, have a family like mine... because it's irrelevant. They break it down to the elements of a commodity: winning, and the things it takes to win. None of that other stuff matters. "Black? And, Purple? Yellow? Orange? (No White?) Huh. What's with comparing black with those other non-human colors? I don't get it. So you reject alums post about implicit bias. You believe there is no implicit or unintentional bias in hiring choices.? No bias? No problem? OK, if that is your opinion. The NFL or at least their policy cosiderations indicate that it not agree with you. Peace. The NFL doesn't agree with me? Fair and reasonable point. I'm not saying that I'm right and they're wrong necessarily, although in my opinion (not fact) that feels like the case.
Extending the logic that me mentioning black with other colors (most of them not found in the pigment of other people) is de-humanizing is a stretch. You're missing my point. I am saying that the color of a person if they were orange or chartreuse or some other exotic or "unusual" look matters absolutely ZERO to me. It's not a part of the equation. Can they play? Can they coach? Can they lead an organization?
It's one of the reasons why I cannot watch ESPN these days, and I would suspect, why society has really jumped on (or likewise opposed) the "Fake News" train. We don't discuss the facts. ESPN doesn't show a highlight of every game-- big plays, final scores, standings... it does one or two "hyped" events, and then has six ignorant talking heads comment on their opinion of what's going on. Most news networks on either side of the aisle do the same.
I come to sports to get away from the politicized, ignorant, slanted opinions, some of them as stupid in my opinion as this type of Affirmative Action work proposed by the NFL. The results and measure of a man or woman or person are objective, measurable, definitive. Who wins? Who bests the other person, at their best? Perhaps there are lots of hurdles that Josh Jacobs, growing up homeless for a time, had to overcome to get on the field. Perhaps he didn't have the same advantages that Josh Rosen (father, renown surgeon of fame and wealth) had. But when they meet on the field, all of that is a sunk cost-- who will WIN the contest?
Jacobs shouldn't have to run 8 yards instead of 10 for a first down. Rosen shouldn't have to throw for 12 yards instead of 10 for a first down... just to try to even things out. We keep the on-field circumstances level for all sizes, shapes, colors, backgrounds, viewpoints, creeds, biases... it's the purest thing people do, sport. I don't see the need to try to further balance a level playing field, gilding the lily.
|
|
|
Post by newfieguy74 on May 18, 2020 15:01:26 GMT -5
As part of a continuing education program, I watched a video on implicit bias last year. I think that knowing something about it would be helpful to this discussion. The first result when I Googled "implicit bias" gave me the following definition: Also known as implicit social cognition, implicit bias refers to the attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner. These biases, which encompass both favorable and unfavorable assessments, are activated involuntarily and without an individual’s awareness or intentional control. Residing deep in the subconscious, these biases are different from known biases that individuals may choose to conceal for the purposes of social and/or political correctness. Rather, implicit biases are not accessible through introspection.
The implicit associations we harbor in our subconscious cause us to have feelings and attitudes about other people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity, age, and appearance. These associations develop over the course of a lifetime beginning at a very early age through exposure to direct and indirect messages. In addition to early life experiences, the media and news programming are often-cited origins of implicit associations. kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/research/understanding-implicit-bias/I also came across this article from the website of a private school organization www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/fall-2018/addressing-implicit-bias-in-the-hiring-process/It will take about a minute to read the summary which details a few studies establishing the pervasiveness of this phenomenon. I have no idea whether the NFL's plan will work (or for that matter whether it is window dressing) but assuming that minority coaches and front office folks are getting a completely fair shake is ignoring reality. No matter how far we have progressed, there is more work to be done. So to bbc's point, there doesn't have to be systemic racism to deny opportunities to minorities. It can simply be implicit bias. This is interesting information, but I would suggest that implicit bias is, at least in part, the stuff of systemic bias. When white people repeatedly deny black people equal opportunity it may be in part due to overt racism and it may be in part due to implicit bias, but the net affect is to create a "system" that creates a barrier to the fair treatment of African-Americans. It happens in countless ways every day all across America. One example (out of thousands/millions): white men with automatic rifles storm the Michigan state house and nothing happens, but Eric Garner is caught selling bootleg cigarettes in NYC and is strangled to death. Why are blacks and Latinos suffering the effects of Covid-19 at a disproportionately higher rate than white people? Answer (at least part of it): black people have comorbidities but these are largely due to their difficulty accessing good medical care, and black people work in large numbers in low-paying front-line jobs (again, often due to unequal opportunity) and are therefore exposed to the virus more than other people. Why do so many black men end up in prison? Why do so many voter suppression efforts target black districts? And yes, why are there so few black executives in the NFL? HC is in part responsible for my views on this issue; Fr. Brooks, for one, walked the walk. I read black intellectuals (Tears That Will Not Stop by Georgetown professor Michael Eric Dyson is a pretty good place to start) and try to listen. I do appreciate that this thread has been a civil discourse on this subject because it's not easy to do so.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on May 18, 2020 15:25:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on May 18, 2020 18:12:10 GMT -5
Influenced by the amount of Melanin in the skin. More Melanin means lower risk.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on May 18, 2020 18:51:12 GMT -5
Right. No racism was involved despite the different outcomes for the races
|
|