Rooney Rule potential changes

[beastlyskronk]

Here’s the article if anyone’s interested in reading through it

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-to-pres...to-rooney-rule

I think it’s absurd to allow teams to jump potentially 16 spots in the 3rd round (possibly moving into the 2nd round) after the 2nd year and jumping up 5 in the 4th after a 3rd year just because they hired a minority HC/GM or to give out an extra compensatory pick in the 4th round for having a minority QB coach for longer than a season. I guess it would somewhat even out once the minority coaches start moving from team to team as then that team would get a 3rd or 5th round compensatory pick in return.

The more I read the article the worse it sounds to me. Instead of legitimizing their coaching credentials they’re treating minority coaches like objects that can be manipulated for free draft picks. I do think the NFL does need to make some changes to it as how the rule currently stands it’s become just a check in the box and some good candidates do get passed over because they already checked that box and already have a person in mind for the job who is generally going to get the job regardless of what measures they put in place assuming the draft pick compensation isn’t passed which I think is absolutely the wrong way to go about it. I think it would be a very divisive rule that would create a lot of tension over time if not immediately.

[broncolee]

Unfortunately, something has to be done to interrupt the good ol’ boy network.

The solution isn’t always going to seem fair, at face value.

[CanDB]

Based on my initial understanding, this potential incentive bothers me. It just sounds like smoke and mirrors, when the real problem is, some grown ups are not being fair. And I sense that this will not change the minds of those who are closed to it. My gut tells me the biggest winners will be those who were always open minded.

I do understand why affirmative actions have been taken for decades, like when I was more involved with HR. If nothing else, it can reduce gaps created by systemic injustice. But at some point the real problem has to be discussed and hopefully, corrected.

Just to add....Merit, merit, merit!!!!

[EddieMac]

What crap.... how about take the best candidate? Weird concept for sporting teams that winning is everything as far as revenue goes..

[johnlimburg]

Why not double down on an already failing and stupid concept ? What do they propose for teams drafting white cornerbacks and black kickers ? Something must be done.

[EddieMac]

Honestly, if I’m an owner, looking at potential candidates, I don’t care if the guy is green with purple eyes. If he’s a winner and he’s got the experience that I seek for my club, then he’s my guy.

[CanDB]

As I mentioned, I am a proponent of merit when selecting for a position. Even with that said, the part that is a loose variable is who is involved in the selection itself. I was on a ton of selection committees, within my various career roles, and most of them were done by the book, and with who we believed was the best candidate. But there were a few that involved managers who tried to sway the process, even within the interviews. So in a perfect world, you have good candidates, a good selection process, and a good selection committee.

Back to this proposal....I can't even imagine how they came up with the incentive rules. Sounds like somebody had a drink or two and threw ideas at the wall, without really thinking it through. Again, if someone was not receptive before, I can not see moving up some spots in the 3rd round as a game changer. As for GM....it is hard to imagine how a great candidate would be overpassed, given the importance of the job. Even 10 spots up in the 3rd seems gimmicky, at that high level of position.

[atwaterandstir]

As a business Owner, this sounds like an exploitable loophole.

If this is being done because of some sort of good ol boy premise than why wouldn't these same Owners just use the rule to improve draft spots occasionally? Is it no less nefarious?

Did I read it right? Two seasons in -you can fire that same coach and get rewarded with an improved spot? As long as they got 2 seasons? And then moving up a handful in the 3rd after 3 seasons? That sounds like a recipe for mediocre teams to rotate through certain coaches every two years. Certainly not as a plan, but an opportunity.

[sra84]

Free agent LB Sam Acho made a good point when discussing the new proposal. One of the main issues is that guys get head coaching jobs because of connections and familiarity.

The Rooney Rule, basically, threatens punishment (fines) for not interviewing minority candidates. Now, the new proposal is practically a bribe to hire minority candidates. It's not a good method to invoke change.

[CheyennePress]

This is just a giant step backwards and is really demeaning to front offices. No mention of the best person for the job, the content of one's character, one's mindset, or acumen. If I am writing anaddendum to this, I am putting in a rule for white cornerbacks, SE Asian receivers and female left guards.. The sooner we just all treat folks as folks the better like gets.

[beastlyskronk]

It just shows that they have no idea how to force the team’s decision makers to interview these candidates in good faith. I’m not going to go as far as to say that more minorities aren’t hired due to personal prejudices but rather when you have a certain person in mind already it’s very hard to change your mind (ironically Vance Joseph comes to mind), I’m not really sure what change they could make to reverse that. This rule would probably create change but like many of you have said it can be manipulated to serve the team rather than legitimize the coaching credentials of the minorities interviewing.

This is a drastic decision, and I question how much thought was put behind it. I do like that teams would no longer be able to deny a coach but the draft pick compensation is ridiculous. I think a better solution would be to interview one minority candidate for every non-minority candidate. It doesn’t really give an equal standing ground but it at least gives the illusion that it does and I doubt that it would change a lot but it would give more interview opportunities and more chances to impress a team’s decision makers. Personally and maybe I’m just being optimistic here but I do think as time continues to pass this issue will eventually resolve itself as people become more and more progressive in their thinking. However the NFL probably is facing some pressure from someone somewhere to create change sooner rather than later.

[broncolee]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...-include-women

NFL might be going too far now.

[sra84]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...-include-women

NFL might be going too far now.

Isn't the practice of hiring solely based on race or gender illegal?

[GMTD]

It just shows that they have no idea how to force the team’s decision makers to interview these candidates in good faith. I’m not going to go as far as to say that more minorities aren’t hired due to personal prejudices but rather when you have a certain person in mind already it’s very hard to change your mind (ironically Vance Joseph comes to mind), I’m not really sure what change they could make to reverse that. This rule would probably create change but like many of you have said it can be manipulated to serve the team rather than legitimize the coaching credentials of the minorities interviewing.

This is a drastic decision, and I question how much thought was put behind it. I do like that teams would no longer be able to deny a coach but the draft pick compensation is ridiculous. I think a better solution would be to interview one minority candidate for every non-minority candidate. It doesn’t really give an equal standing ground but it at least gives the illusion that it does and I doubt that it would change a lot but it would give more interview opportunities and more chances to impress a team’s decision makers. Personally and maybe I’m just being optimistic here but I do think as time continues to pass this issue will eventually resolve itself as people become more and more progressive in their thinking. However the NFL probably is facing some pressure from someone somewhere to create change sooner rather than later.

Some interesting ideas. This all happened because of the Brian Flores case. Sometimes in a deeply conservative institution like football (at least amongst owners/execs) you need something like this to act as the catalyst for change.

It will take time to work through the details, but I suspect that teams won't have a problem finding suitably qualified candidates to fill at least one assistant role with someome who is from a minority community or a woman There would already be many minority senior coaches if it wasn't for the old boys network.

Maybe your approach would work better. I don't know. I'd like to see the NFL's idea run for a short period - say 5 years - and then for the league to take stock and see whether the
approach is no longer necessary. I suppose what they hope is that a few OCs will emerge that become very successful, leading to copycat hires from other teams.

[BroncosFJB]

With the Rooney rule expanding to include women, the key question is, what is a woman?