OT:. I never new about this hiring rule in the NFL…

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]FLU, don’t you think that health insurance or any scheme that spreads the cost of medical services is affirmative action for the sick?

Why should the healthy pay for the sick?[/quote]

Well, I think you’re not getting the issue with the current state of affirmative action. My beef with affirmative action isn’t that we shouldn’t be helping the disadvantaged…Let’s be real.

The current state of affirmative action is more beneficial to an African American or Latino who parents might live in Long Island or Rancho Santa Fe who might also be only 25% of that race (being from an interracial family) than it would benefit a white kid from a poor, rural family from the south who could have been the the first in his family to go to college if he could have afforded it.

I’m sorry, but a person from a family that is an upper middle class family I seriously doubt is “disadvantaged” in the sense that A.A. original intent meant to address. And President Obama has proven that minorities have “made it” and the opportunity is there IF someone wants it.
To to say African Americans, Latinos, women, or any other demographics group is “disadvantaged” in this modern day is not only incorrect, it’s a complete disservice to those demographics. I mean, as an employee, what do you most people would rather know. We hired you because you’re the best, or we hired you to fill a quota?

So how about restructuring A.A. instead of helping benefiting someone of specific races or gender for the sake of because they are of different color, start helping people who really are disadvantaged and need it.
I think this nation is already at a point in which we have already been politically sensitized, and that for the most part, blatant racism and oppression has already been overcome…I mean we have a African American President and one of the Republican front runners is also African American… Yes, all those hill-billy redneck white people that you insist are all righty nutjobs…
So it’s my opinion we need policies/laws to protect against racism, but no longer need such “disadvantaged” labels attached to such groups…

And it’s absolutely ridiculous that CA is allowing for state tuition fees and possible financial assistance even to people who are not even legally here in the U.S. It’s not that I’m against providing basic education and resources to people. But when CA is starving for financing, we’re cutting teachers, and academic programs, it’s simply a dollar/sense issue. We cannot afford to educate people who are not in the U.S. legally when we cannot even afford to educate people who are here legally. Every other country takes care of their own citizens/naturalized residents before anyone else…Look no further than Japan and Korea. And let’s face it, Americans are opposed to paying for more taxes to fund all this. Heck some of you don’t even want to pay these taxes (like Mello-Ruse(s)), your argument being you don’t have kids… (Brian, I think you fall into that category if I recall).

With that said, your argument about health insurance is a complete incorrect comparison since I never said we shouldn’t be giving disadvantaged people a break..(BTW, I pay full premium for my health insurance, thank you very much…)

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1][quote=sdrealtor]Brian
Diversity does not flow to the bottom line in professional sports. Only one thing does….winning![/quote]

Haha… very true.

The NFL owners are a pretty egotistic bunch so I’m sure they won’t let a little rule interfere with their money.

If the players are majority Blacks, it might help to have a Black coach make the team a winning team. That’s what I meant with the bottom line in this case.[/quote]

Brian: So, if I understand you correctly: The NFL is 70% Black and Black players would play better under a Black coach and thus win more? Do I understand that right?

You never played football, did you? There’s a great old Bart Starr interview where Starr tells the interviewer that Vince Lombardi treated everyone on the Packers equally, “like fucking dogs”. When asked why Starr continued to play for Lombardi, his answer was simple: “He won”.

The San Francisco 49ers are an excellent case in point. Previous coach was Mike Singletary, legendary Bears LB. Also Black. Team sucked under Singletary. Enter Jim Harbaugh, fresh from turning the Stanford Cardinal program around. Harbaugh is white. 49ers are now 9 – 2 and playing some of their best football since the Montana – Young years. Same team, same talent and completely different results under Harbaugh. Color doesn’t and SHOULDN’T have shit to do with the hire. Find the best person for the job and hire them. Regardless of what the job is. That is a major problem with this country right now: We’re too shit scared to tell the truth and we’re downright TERRIFIED of excellence.

[UCGal]

I have a question. Perhaps a dumb one.

Where does it say in the Rooney rule that teams must hire a minority candidate… or even have a single minority employee on their coaching or head office staff?

It says they need to interview a minority candidate.

It doesn’t preclude them from interviewing 100’s of white guys.

Do I agree with the rule… not completely. But is it reverse discrimination…. hardly.

When you’ve got attitudes like former “color commentator” Rush Limbaugh suggesting that McNabb was QB because of affirmative action… there’s some entrenched issues that need to be considered. By having at least one minority candidate interviewed, it doesn’t force any hiring, but it might change some attitudes.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=UCGal]By having at least one minority candidate interviewed, it doesn’t force any hiring, but it might change some attitudes.[/quote]

If the NFL wanted to get truly serious, they’d confront the fact that they’re running what amounts to a plantation-style labor system.

Of course, that never really gets talked about, nor does the deplorable physical/mental state of many former players.

I don’t think the Rooney Rule is reverse discrimination, I simply think its stupid. You can’t legislate good behavior, no matter how hard you try. As to having more coaches of “color” in the league: Why? To act as a sop to the players who participate? To put a token in front of the cameras come game-day?

Find the best. Hire the best.

[briansd1]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=UCGal]By having at least one minority candidate interviewed, it doesn’t force any hiring, but it might change some attitudes.[/quote]

If the NFL wanted to get truly serious, they’d confront the fact that they’re running what amounts to a plantation-style labor system.

Of course, that never really gets talked about, nor does the deplorable physical/mental state of many former players.

I don’t think the Rooney Rule is reverse discrimination, I simply think its stupid. You can’t legislate good behavior, no matter how hard you try. As to having more coaches of “color” in the league: Why? To act as a sop to the players who participate? To put a token in front of the cameras come game-day?

Find the best. Hire the best.[/quote]

I agree with UCGal, but I agree with you Allan as well.

There is the hard truth as you tell it Allan. But there are also words and “marketing”. As you’ve said on previous threads before Allan, words and the way we communicate have meanings and power and do change the culture and attitudes.

It’s a complex world we live in, and there are no simple solutions.

[CardiffBaseball]

[quote=briansd1]About the NFL. I’m surprised Ron Paul’s supporters are not all over themselves supporting the Rooney Rule.

BTW, I support affirmative action. It depends on how it’s applied.

If I run a business in a Hispanic area, I will hire a manager who can best relate with my customers and make me more money.

If our society needs more doctors that can serve minority under-served area, we should train students from those areas. They will then become professionals who can best deal with the problems in their communities. Society benefits as a whole.[/quote]

Why would Ron Paul supporters be all over the Rooney Rule? I just happen to think it’s a stupid waste of time, but I have no problem with the rule per se. If the NFL wants it that way, who am I to say?

Also I am talking AA as something that is forced. It seems to me you are suggesting a free market decision, not AA. You have reasoned that having a hispanic manager is good for your enterprise outstanding. The rest of Piggs should not tell you “find the best hispanic”.

(though my last two hires were minority, an AA-Male and latin female)

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]
There is the hard truth as you tell it Allan. But there are also words and “marketing”. As you’ve said on previous threads before Allan, words and the way we communicate have meanings and power and do change the culture and attitudes.

It’s a complex world we live in, and there are no simple solutions.[/quote]

Brian: So you’re advocating window dressing then, right? Simply doing something for appearances sake only and hoping that attitudes change as a result.

I’ll again point out that you’ve never played the game. I’ll give you a good personal example from when I played in HS. I played for a very good Catholic HS that recruited players for the team, but we also had tryouts every year and every position was open (meaning, if there was someone better than you, they got your position). So, completely meritocratic. There was one kid, however, whose dad was unhappy with Junior not making the squad and essentially bribed the school with a fat Booster Fund donation so that Junior would get a place on the team. This kid, through no real fault of his own, was loathed by everyone else on the team and spent a season in misery. The players couldn’t stand him, because he hadn’t earned the right to be there, and the coaches hated him because the school forced him on them. He was pretty much used as a tackling dummy in practice and I think he played a sum total of about five actual game plays during the season. That, by the way, was the last time the school did something like that.

Football is driven by winning. Period. The only that matters to EVERY team in the NFL is winning the Superbowl and they’ll do whatever it takes to get there.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Football is driven by winning. Period.[/quote]

The recent news from Penn State supports this claim all too well.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Football is driven by winning. Period.[/quote]

The recent news from Penn State supports this claim all too well.[/quote]

Pri: Sadly, this isn’t new news. Even more sadly, the NCAA sits back, makes “concerned” noises, and does absolutely nothing.

I don’t know about you, but even as cynical as I can be, Penn State completely shocked me. I played linebacker in HS and was in awe of the program that Paterno put in place (Penn State was known as “Linebacker U”) and sustained over decades. Absolutely sickening what happened there.

[Anonymous]

Allan,

I spent a big part of my youth in PA, near Pittsburgh. I played “midget” football as a kid (I think they call it “Pop Warner” around here) and loved the game. I wanted to play high school, but weighed only 115lbs when I was 16 – not big enough to make the cut in the competitive world of Western PA football. But perhaps it was a blessing as today my knees are still in great shape.

I never really liked Penn State, just because I lived closer to rival Pitt. I also have never been into hero worship and certainly never understood the reverence for Paterno. But I always did think of him as a very honorable man and a role model in many ways.

Yeah, I was shocked too – at just how absolutely callous they all were about the whole thing. Clearly, everyone involved did just what they needed to do to protect first themselves, and second their football program. The victims weren’t even secondary – there is no evidence that they were a concern at all.

Perhaps we could rationalize this away if this were about a more “mundane” offense: A financial crime, a sex scandal between adults, gambling, whatever.

But there is no pass on this one – there is NO acceptable explanation for their actions. When something like this happens and you have the power to stop it, you must act. Period.

I believe Paterno should go down in history as one of America’s greatest moral cowards. Anything he did on the gridiron is insignificant in the context of this tragedy.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Football is driven by winning. Period. The only that matters to EVERY team in the NFL is winning the Superbowl and they’ll do whatever it takes to get there.[/quote]
Actually… no.

Football is a business and about making money. Winning can help the teams make money. But clearly it is sometimes in a team’s best interest to go cheap on coaching if they know they don’t really have a shot at the superbowl that year.

Espn has a decent opinion article from this past August about it, mostly talking about unspent potential salary cap money:
http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/6883286/tmq-says-money-motivates-losing-cheap-paying-wins

“Player expense might not equate to wins, of course. But there’s something more basic happening. In the NFL structure, a cheap team that loses might have more profits than an expensive team that wins. Victory is nice, to be sure, but losing cheap can be remunerative. As all NFL teams save the Packers are privately held, and of those all save the Raiders are family businesses, money that is not spent on players goes into the pockets of the owner and his relatives.

Each NFL team gets exactly the same national TV payment whether it’s winning big on “Monday Night Football” or losing badly and never aired nationally. Ticket sales can vary and generally are where the profit resides. But the revenue swing between packing the house and having a poor gate just isn’t that great.”

So yeah, NFL Football is about making money, first and foremost. High school football is much more about winning, and NCAA is sort of a hybrid.

[Anonymous]

[quote=poorgradstudent]So yeah, NFL Football is about making money, first and foremost. High school football is much more about winning, and NCAA is sort of a hybrid.[/quote]

Good points. Money in the NFL, and pro sports in general, is driven by branding. Winning helps the brand, but there probably isn’t a perfect correlation.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Football is driven by winning. Period. The only that matters to EVERY team in the NFL is winning the Superbowl and they’ll do whatever it takes to get there.[/quote]
Actually… no.

Football is a business and about making money. Winning can help the teams make money. But clearly it is sometimes in a team’s best interest to go cheap on coaching if they know they don’t really have a shot at the superbowl that year.

Espn has a decent opinion article from this past August about it, mostly talking about unspent potential salary cap money:
http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/6883286/tmq-says-money-motivates-losing-cheap-paying-wins

“Player expense might not equate to wins, of course. But there’s something more basic happening. In the NFL structure, a cheap team that loses might have more profits than an expensive team that wins. Victory is nice, to be sure, but losing cheap can be remunerative. As all NFL teams save the Packers are privately held, and of those all save the Raiders are family businesses, money that is not spent on players goes into the pockets of the owner and his relatives.

Each NFL team gets exactly the same national TV payment whether it’s winning big on “Monday Night Football” or losing badly and never aired nationally. Ticket sales can vary and generally are where the profit resides. But the revenue swing between packing the house and having a poor gate just isn’t that great.”

So yeah, NFL Football is about making money, first and foremost. High school football is much more about winning, and NCAA is sort of a hybrid.[/quote]

PGS: Good post, and better stated than mine. However, I’d argue (as a counterpoint) that pri is also correct regarding branding and nothing is better than a winning brand.

A friend remarked about being in Tokyo some years back and noticing the large number of Dallas Cowboys jackets being worn. American football is not big in Japan, but the Cowboys logo is nearly immediately recognizable as “American” and thus the popularity.

One of the best marketers and promoters of the NFL brand was Al Davis and the Raiders were the NFL’s first real “brand”, in that Davis was looking to create a saleable image and an outlaw culture that stood as a counterpoint to the established “safe” images of teams like the Packers, Redskins and Cowboys.

Money and winning are strongly entwined and the NFL is now a multibillion dollar marketing operation and the Superbowl is the culmination of that season long operation. Look at the amounts spent on Superbowl commercials and the anticipation of what Pepsi, or Bud, or Doritos will come up with each year as their signature commercial.

Yes, maybe all teams aren’t similarly focused on reaching the Superbowl, but they also aren’t there to lose, either. Witness the recent firing of Jack Del Rio, head coach of the Jags. J’ville isn’t exactly the most competitive squad out there, but the organization didn’t hesitate to make a change. I’d opine the reason for that change had very much to do with coach Del Rio’s W – L record. I’d also be willing to bet that Caldwell won’t survive if the Colts go 0 – 16, in spite of his winning record in the seasons leading up to this one.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Pri: Don’t underestimate the importance of good knees later in life. Mine are shot and, man, you feel it everyday.

Pennsylvania is pretty amazing when it comes to producing top-notch football talent. Ditka, Marino, Montana, Kelly, Revis… the list goes on and on.

I agree with what you said about Paterno, especially the moral cowardice. As repugnant as I find physical cowardice, moral cowardice is far worse and from someone in the role of coach and mentor to young men. Watching JoePa trying to whitewash his role and offering tepid excuses about possibly having “done more”. Fucking sick.

Being a Catholic, this hits home very hard. For me, the Church’s cover-up was far worse than the crimes themselves and that is saying something. While Penn State certainly doesn’t rise to the level of what happened within the Catholic Church, the disregard by those in power was awful. The one coach who could’ve intervened and stopped the rape of a 10yo, but instead went home and called his dad. Are you fucking kidding me? My God. How does this person live with himself?

[briansd1]

Allan, you’re right, I never played football.
I’m not strong enough for that.

But I can ski better than my power friends who would uncontrollably just tumble down the slopes.

No, I’m not just for window dressing. I’m for institutional rules that set new and different expectations and change the culture.

At first, the new rules and policies may appear as simple window dressing, but, overtime, they take root and produce positive change.

[Author]

Posts