Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 22 of 33 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 316 to 330 of 483
  1. #316
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    I'd rather an imperfect rule positively affect the situation than no rule that doesn't.
    so some racism is okay then?

    wasn't a team penalized when they did not interviewer someone black when knew they were going to hire someone else.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-28c29147dd8b/
    NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue fined Detroit Lions President Matt Millen $200,000 yesterday for failing to interview any minority candidates before hiring Steve Mariucci as the team's head coach in February, the league announced.

    how was that fair?

  2. #317
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    so some racism is okay then?

    wasn't a team penalized when they did not interviewer someone black when knew they were going to hire someone else.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-28c29147dd8b/

    how was that fair?
    There'd be racism either way.

    As to how your scenario was fair, I ask you: how was it fair to all the black coaches that they didn't even get an opportunity to apply for the job?

    Also, the guy the Lions were adamant on hiring never had a winning season and was fired midway through his third year. Perhaps they should have had a more open mind on who they wanted to hire.

  3. #318
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    There'd be racism either way.

    As to how your scenario was fair, I ask you: how was it fair to all the black coaches that they didn't even get an opportunity to apply for the job?

    Also, the guy the Lions were adamant on hiring never had a winning season and was fired midway through his third year. Perhaps they should have had a more open mind on who they wanted to hire.
    race isn't a qualification.

    they knew exactly who they wanted to hire, whether they ended up being wrong or right in that decision, it was who they wanted.

  4. #319
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    race isn't a qualification.

    they knew exactly who they wanted to hire, whether they ended up being wrong or right in that decision, it was who they wanted.
    And that's unfair. You already agreed white people have connections black coaches don't, and those connections are a result of black people not being allowed to make those connections in the past. So if I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that not unfair?

  5. #320
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    And that's unfair. You already agreed white people have connections black coaches don't, and those connections are a result of black people not being allowed to make those connections in the past. So if I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that not unfair?
    the person they wanted to hire had nothing at all to do with race. why should a team be penalized because they didn't want to waste time with an interview that everyone knew would not result in anything. time and money wasted.

    I would bet in America somewhere is a group of people (maybe a company) that has more black people/employees. would you support them making a rule to hire more white people and penalize any time someone black is hired? I would bet no, because that would be racist.

    I understand wanting more diversity and black coaches in the NFL, but it should not require a rule that is solely based on race that is more of a racist rule.

  6. #321
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    the person they wanted to hire had nothing at all to do with race. why should a team be penalized because they didn't want to waste time with an interview that everyone knew would not result in anything. time and money wasted.

    I would bet in America somewhere is a group of people (maybe a company) that has more black people/employees. would you support them making a rule to hire more white people and penalize any time someone black is hired? I would bet no, because that would be racist.

    I understand wanting more diversity and black coaches in the NFL, but it should not require a rule that is solely based on race that is more of a racist rule.
    But you just admitted that white coaches have more connections than black coaches and that's why they're getting hired. You also acknowledged that black coaches were prohibited from getting jobs or establishing those connections in the past.

    So answer the question:

    If I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that fair?

  7. #322
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    But you just admitted that white coaches have more connections than black coaches and that's why they're getting hired. You also acknowledged that black coaches were prohibited from getting jobs or establishing those connections in the past.

    So answer the question:

    If I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that fair?
    so basically some racism is okay as long as it helps black people get something? if people want an advantage now that is racist to make up for perceived racism in the past then don't say you want equality now.


    https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-to-be-removed

    I understand that this is a touchy subject, but I think it is one that needs to be addressed.

    Every time I hear about the Rooney Rule in the NFL, I am reminded that racism still exists in America. The Rooney Rule, along with affirmative action, is the purest form of racism still out there.

    It states that you have to interview potential head coaching candidates based on their race—not on performance, experience, or potential.

    If that isn't racism at its purest form, then I don't know what is.

    In my opinion, there are 32 head coaches in the NFL. I don't care if these coaches are white, black, blue, yellow, or green. There are 32 head coaches in the NFL—nothing more, nothing less.

    I have an idea: how about you interview the most qualified candidates, and then hire the person that you think would do the best job?

    Proponents of the Rooney Rule say that it gives minority candidates chances at head coaching jobs. But again, this is racist: it says that people need to be given opportunities strictly based on their race.
    race shouldn't be a qualification, or some quota where you have to have X number of people.

  8. #323
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    so basically some racism is okay as long as it helps black people get something? if people want an advantage now that is racist to make up for perceived racism in the past then don't say you want equality now.

    race shouldn't be a qualification, or some quota where you have to have X number of people.
    You did not answer my question:

    If I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that fair?

  9. #324
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    You did not answer my question:

    If I got a connection when black people weren't allowed to, and then I use that connection to get a job later that a black person wasn't even considered for, how is that fair?
    not fair, just as a rule now giving one race an advantage isn't fair either.

    there should be a better way to get what is wanted without a racist rule.

  10. #325
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    not fair, just as a rule now giving one race an advantage isn't fair either.

    there should be a better way to get what is wanted without a racist rule.
    OK, so what is it you propose we do instead?

  11. #326
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    OK, so what is it you propose we do instead?
    I'm open to suggestions.
    something other than a rule that actually penalizes a team for not interviewing someone black.

    maybe something that a team would get as a bonus for interviewing, or hiring a black coach, but wouldn't punish a team that doesn't. something like an extra middle round draft pick?

  12. #327
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    I'm open to suggestions.
    something other than a rule that actually penalizes a team for not interviewing someone black.

    maybe something that a team would get as a bonus for interviewing, or hiring a black coach, but wouldn't punish a team that doesn't. something like an extra middle round draft pick?
    Would you actually be in favor of a team getting additional draft compensation for interviewing or hiring a minority candidate? It seems like you would also think that is racist.

  13. #328
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Would you actually be in favor of a team getting additional draft compensation for interviewing or hiring a minority candidate? It seems like you would also think that is racist.
    I still think it would be a privlige, but it wouldn't penalize teams for not.

  14. #329
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,794
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    I still think it would be a privlige, but it wouldn't penalize teams for not.
    I think if your suggestion were the original rooney rule you'd have been complaining that giving teams extra draft picks for hiring a minority was racist.

  15. #330
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,511
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    I think if your suggestion were the original rooney rule you'd have been complaining that giving teams extra draft picks for hiring a minority was racist.
    I'm working for an intended goal, people want more minorities/black people coaching then what would help accomplish that.

    teams should not be penalized when they already know the person they want to hire regardless of race.

Page 22 of 33 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •