Brian Flores Suing NFL and NY Giants (Merge)

[luv_pony_express]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

True. I think the point being driven is that the violation of the Rooney rule in intent and practice is unfortunately intertwined with making African Americans primarily a scapegoat in this process, whether it is driven by the owners or GMs. Thus, as an indirect result, singles them mainly out for sham interviews thus resulting in discrimination. Like you said, the unintended consequences of the Rooney rule being played out and GMs/owners have become more bold about using it just as a checklist.

If I’m an owner or a GM, I’m not going to ascribe any more importance to the race of a prospective coach as I would to the race of a prospective player.  Either way.

 

It just doesn’t make any logical sense to do that.  In either case, I want the best I can get.

 

But, then, it’s indisputable that NFL rosters got more minorities a lot sooner and quicker than their sidelines did.  There’s simply no denying that.  Nobody had to institute a Rooney Rule to increase African-American representation among players.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

There are multiple claims about multiple parties.    Maybe refrain from commenting if you have no idea what's going on

I know that the reports so far.....the only stuff that we can comment on.......appear to be about ethics.

 

But hey, I joined the thread in the 4th page after there were gobs of comments about race.

 

 

[jvan1973]

Just now, DougDew said:

I know that the reports so far.....the only stuff that we can comment on.......appear to be about ethics.

 

 

An owner offering a bribe to a coach to lose games?   That goes beyond ethics,  it's illegal

[DougDew]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

An owner offering a bribe to a coach to lose games?   That goes beyond ethics,  it's illegal

Yes I know.  Why do you keep acting like I don't know that.   

 

Is the thread about Flores claim of racism or Ross' illegal activities?   I'm thinking that there should be two threads.

[jvan1973]

Just now, DougDew said:

Yes I know.  Why do you keep acting like I don't know that.   

 

Is the thread about Flores claim of racism or Ross' illegal activities?   I'm thinking that there should be two threads.

It's about both.    

[NFLfan]

30 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

You still have to give an interview to a minority.  I know the Giants could say we did but then Flores can say it was a token interview which I think is his point and has been the criticism of Rooney rule in general.

 

The Giants interviewed other candidates including minorities before Daboll. I believe their former DC Graham was interviewed as was Leslie Fraser. The Rooney Rule requires one to interview one minority, right? I think they wanted to interview Flores. I am waiting for my friend (Giants season ticket holder for decades) to get back to me. He knows everything Giants. He has met the owners. I want to ask him his thoughts. He wanted the Giants to hire Bienemy. (It seems no one has interviewed Bienemy.)

 

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

If I’m an owner or a GM, I’m not going to ascribe any more importance to the race of a prospective coach as I would to the race of a prospective player.  Either way.

 

It just doesn’t make any logical sense to do that.  In either case, I want the best I can get.

 

But, then, it’s indisputable that NFL rosters got more minorities a lot sooner and quicker than their sidelines did.  There’s simply no denying that.  Nobody had to institute a Rooney Rule to increase African-American representation among players.

 

Yep. But if you do get some minority coach for an interview, give them the same full chance with an open mind. That is what they are ultimately striving for.

[smittywerb]

The problem with racism, sexism, and prejudice is that you have to have a smoking gun in hand to prove it’s existence.

[DougDew]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

It's about both.    

I'm missing how one owner offering a bribe to a HC who is black is evidence that the coach then not getting hired by another team was because the coach is black.  

 

There will be facts coming out.  But based upon what we know so far, why are these two things related and why is the bribe thing being raised?

[NFLfan]

12 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Yep. But if you do get some minority coach for an interview, give them the same full chance with an open mind.

 

That is the point that Brian Flores is saying. 

[stitches]

 

[luv_pony_express]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Yep. But if you do get some minority coach for an interview, give them the same full chance with an open mind. That is what they are ultimately striving for.

My company employs about 275 people.  I don’t get personally involved in most hiring decisions anymore.  But I still do for key positions.

 

I can’t speak for all employers, obviously.  But I can say that we typically have a pretty good idea who we want to hire before any interviews take place.  We tend to go after known quantities either internal or external, not the other way around.  That’s not always the case.  We have hired people we didn’t originally expect to.

 

I suspect the notion of a genuinely open mind in hiring is more fantasy than reality.

[luv_pony_express]

12 minutes ago, smittywerb said:

The problem with racism, sexism, and prejudice is that you have to have a smoking gun in hand to prove it’s existence.

In a court of law, that’s essentially true.  We have an evidence-based legal system - both for criminal and civil matters.  It doesn’t actually have to be a proverbial smoking gun.  But the burden (in litigation) does have to be a preponderance of the factual evidence.

 

And thank God for that.  Could you imagine if the force of law was applied on innuendo, suggestion, hunches, etc?

[jvan1973]

13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm missing how one owner offering a bribe to a HC who is black is evidence that the coach then not getting hired by another team was because the coach is black.  

 

There will be facts coming out.  But based upon what we know so far, why are these two things related and why is the bribe thing being raised?

Good lord man.    It's multi faceted 

 It's all in the lawsuit.    Again.  Maybe read the article 

[Shive]

47 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  That's what I do here.  I respond to posts (even when they do not have any context, unfortunately).  I do that all of the time, and will make no special effort to do otherwise simply because it involves posts about certain topics.

 

And if it did, what would Ross' racism have to do with Flores getting a new job with another team? 

 

There would have to be some thinking on the part of Flores and his counsel that what happened in MIA was indicative of racism on the part of the other team.

 

A person would have to think, going into this case, that rich white owners are some sort of club who all think a like. 

 

All emotion, no evidence.  Wanting people to take sides immediately and use the same old labels of Good Ol' Boys are what they are.

 

That is the real problem here. 

No, this is the real problem here:

47 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't need to know the facts of this particular case nor do I care.  I've seen the script many times.

You are admitting that everything you're saying is from a place of ignorance and that a black man claiming he was being discriminated against on the basis of his skin color has no merit because you've "seen this script before". That means that anytime something like this happens, you (without any actual information of context of the matter) automatically assume that the black man's claims have no merit. That would be considered prejudice.

 

42 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't know if he's lying.  If he is claiming racism because Ross is an unethical guy, then I think he doesn't have enough facts about his claim and he needs to stop short of slandering Ross as a racist when he's just an unethical guy.    

 

Which is totally divorced from the situation involving the other team.

 

What have I done.  Had the nerve to actually talk about not lumping rich owners into the same kettle of thinking.  Sorry.

Again, there are 3 different issues laid out in his lawsuit. He isn't saying that the events in Miami cost him opportunities elsewhere. Not even as a mod, but as a fellow poster, it would be great if you would either read the facts or stop commenting on the topic.

[chad72]

19 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

I suspect the notion of a genuinely open mind in hiring is more fantasy than reality.

 

I have only worked for a company with under 50 employees for the past 21 years. When they bring in someone for an interview that is external, they only do so if they are serious. The odds of them getting hired is also very high.

 

Why would you waste the time of an interviewee if you have an idea based on their resume if they are not what you are looking for? Not putting you on the spot but in my mind, based on my own company's actions, I find it odd.

 

If that happens in a company with 275 people, to me that is a symptom of what is happening with the corporate culture, possibly permeating to every organization including the NFL, just my two cents. I am not expecting Utopia but a simple respect for others' time especially if you know as a company what kind of candidate you want is not much to ask for and unlike the NFL, there is no Rooney rule for companies like mine to follow.

[Shive]

At this point, the initial allegations have been widely discussed and until any further information comes out, this thread will be locked.