Online Now 852

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 641
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 902
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN THE B1G?

  • the U.S. is 72% white and 12% black, I'm curious if those percentages resonate among all of college head coaches.. Our staff has 3 black coaches or 30% of the staff..

    BaltLions24

  • rmj147 said...

    LOL wow... Why we cannot discuss race in this country is amazing to me lol Laughing because I do not know what else to do, or where to begin... Wow.

    One of the reasons we can't discuss it is because the second someone disagrees with affirmative action they are labeled a racist, and who the hell wants that. Wow....

    We Are27731 ●

  • psubills62 said...

    I think Rittenberg needs to clarify about African-American HEAD coaches, not just coaches. He keeps saying "A-A coaches" when I think he meant A-A head coaches.

    Race should never be a factor in a decision, period. Whether negatively or positively.

    I think all affirmative action should be gone. Hire the best man for the job and ignore the color of the skin. Also I always wonder why the Asian Nd Latino population do not get more upset about this issue. If I am not mistaken both have populations larger than africAn americans. Race should not detain anything skill and quality of a person should...

    Trock56

  • BaltLions24 said...

    the U.S. is 72% white and 12% black, I'm curious if those percentages resonate among all of college head coaches.. Our staff has 3 black coaches or 30% of the staff..

    Who cares that the U.S. is 72% white and 12% black?

    If U.S. citizens chose to pursue careers evenly across every industry, then that would be a meaningful statistic. But we don't.

    A more appropriate statistic for the purpose of comparison would be the racial make-up of the industry (college and nfl coaching) -- And then compare that to the racial make-up coaches on our staff.

    [Edit: Really? A down-vote? Looks like someone feels threatened by the appropriate application of statistics]

    This post was edited by BoulderFish on 3/2/2012 at 2:17 PM

    BoulderFish ●

  • Trock56 said...

    I think all affirmative action should be gone. Hire the best man for the job and ignore the color of the skin. Also I always wonder why the Asian Nd Latino population do not get more upset about this issue. If I am not mistaken both have populations larger than africAn americans. Race should not detain anything skill and quality of a person should...

    I'm Filipino, and I hate affirmative action. People shouldn't be given unfair advantages because their skin color is something other than white.

    PureRockFury ●

  • Trock56 said...

    I think all affirmative action should be gone. Hire the best man for the job and ignore the color of the skin. Also I always wonder why the Asian Nd Latino population do not get more upset about this issue. If I am not mistaken both have populations larger than africAn americans. Race should not detain anything skill and quality of a person should...

    Just for the record, the POINT of Affirmative Action (AA) is to ensure that companies DO ignore the color of skin.

    Many people misunderstand the AA action laws (because they're getting their info from right-wing radio or something), and believe that they require the hiring of minorities. "Quotas" are often mentioned. The AA laws do not ANYWHERE require that.

    There was a time when discrimination in hiring was rampant. The norm. It was difficult for fully, even better qualified African Americans to get a fair shot at jobs. Nobody disagrees with that, right? A portion of our population was being shut out of job opportunities simply because of their skin color. Just making that illegal wasn't enough -- because it could never be proven. For the sake of our country as a whole, It was our country's best interest to make a law that required companies to be prepared to prove that they were ACTIVELY trying to make sure race was not a part of their hiring decisions.

    Clearly it's better today, and the necessity of the AA law is much more debatable. I'm not going to debate that, because I can see both sides of it.

    But just to set the record straight... AA laws and hiring "the best man for the job" are not contradictory, but rather absolutely 100% in alignment.

    BoulderFish ●

  • PureRockFury said...

    I'm Filipino, and I hate affirmative action. People shouldn't be given unfair advantages because their skin color is something other than white.

    Im not a fan of affirmative action either, but for other reasons... The chief one being that it is counter-productive to its aims... It is a quota system and doesn't really do that much. At the same time, white people hate it and resent those that take advantage of the opportunities. My first year law school class had a week long field day on the very subject... Very heated and not very productive. There was no in between.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • BoulderFish said...

    Just for the record, the POINT of Affirmative Action (AA) is to ensure that companies DO ignore the color of skin.

    Many people misunderstand the AA action laws (because they're getting their info from right-wing radio or something), and believe that they require the hiring of minorities. "Quotas" are often mentioned. The AA laws do not ANYWHERE require that.

    You are right about the original point of affirmative action. The problem is that universities abused this law to allow for raced based admissions rather than just looking at who had the better grades.

    Right wing radio did not give affirmative action a bad name, but universities did, imo. They did and still find ways to use quotas.

    POV

  • BoulderFish said...

    Just for the record, the POINT of Affirmative Action (AA) is to ensure that companies DO ignore the color of skin.

    Many people misunderstand the AA action laws (because they're getting their info from right-wing radio or something), and believe that they require the hiring of minorities. "Quotas" are often mentioned. The AA laws do not ANYWHERE require that.

    There was a time when discrimination in hiring was rampant. The norm. It was difficult for fully, even better qualified African Americans to get a fair shot at jobs. Nobody disagrees with that, right? A portion of our population was being shut out of job opportunities simply because of their skin color. Just making that illegal wasn't enough -- because it could never be proven. For the sake of our country as a whole, It was our country's best interest to make a law that required companies to be prepared to prove that they were ACTIVELY trying to make sure race was not a part of their hiring decisions.

    Clearly it's better today, and the necessity of the AA law is much more debatable. I'm not going to debate that, because I can see both sides of it.

    But just to set the record straight... AA laws and hiring "the best man for the job" are not contradictory, but rather absolutely 100% in alignment.

    I agree with the origins of the system. The core point was to be seen, and to have employers prove that they saw minority candidates. There was no requirements to hire X amount. However, some new policies (which vary from employer to employer) have said that you have to hire a VERY small amount of black people... And many times, that number is so small (1-2) that it really doesn't mean ANYTHING. BUT, at the same time, white people can resent those that took advantage of that quota system to get a job that they may not (through no fault of their own- many times the candidates are equally qualified in fact) have otherwise have had. If the two candidates are evenly qualified, I, as a black man see NO PROBLEM with hiring a black man instead of a white man. Good God, diversity is a good thing. At least, I am a fan of it... But then again, I am black so I will be called racist...

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • BoulderFish said...

    Just for the record, the POINT of Affirmative Action (AA) is to ensure that companies DO ignore the color of skin.

    Many people misunderstand the AA action laws (because they're getting their info from right-wing radio or something), and believe that they require the hiring of minorities. "Quotas" are often mentioned. The AA laws do not ANYWHERE require that.

    There was a time when discrimination in hiring was rampant. The norm. It was difficult for fully, even better qualified African Americans to get a fair shot at jobs. Nobody disagrees with that, right? A portion of our population was being shut out of job opportunities simply because of their skin color. Just making that illegal wasn't enough -- because it could never be proven. For the sake of our country as a whole, It was our country's best interest to make a law that required companies to be prepared to prove that they were ACTIVELY trying to make sure race was not a part of their hiring decisions.

    Clearly it's better today, and the necessity of the AA law is much more debatable. I'm not going to debate that, because I can see both sides of it.

    But just to set the record straight... AA laws and hiring "the best man for the job" are not contradictory, but rather absolutely 100% in alignment.

    We can agree to disagree. When given a state test for example a police officer. Certain races get additional points. How is that hiring the best person. T me that is a great chance for race to be ignored. A computer grades a test but additional points are given to races. So how is that hiring the best person for the job. We all need to stop looking backwards. Because someone's grandfather was denied a job do to race which is wrong and stupid does not mean the grandson deserves points on a test. They need a fair chane to prove they are the best. Nothing less or more

    Trock56

  • rmj147 said...

    Im not a fan of affirmative action either, but for other reasons... The chief one being that it is counter-productive to its aims... It is a quota system and doesn't really do that much. At the same time, white people hate it and resent those that take advantage of the opportunities. My first year law school class had a week long field day on the very subject... Very heated and not very productive. There was no in between.

    “Affirmative action is the attempt to deal with malignant racism by instituting benign racism” - Elliott Larson -

    signature image signature image signature image

    pwpitch

  • rmj147 said...

    As one of the few black people on this site... Gotta say, this article is true... It's concerning... The NFL is lightyears ahead of college as far as coaching opportunities go. Still an "old boys" club by and large... Sorry, but that is the truth. Not even debatable...

    This is most certainly debatable. To say there are not coaching opportunities for blacks in college is only true if schools are making an effort not to hire black head coaches. Do you really think PSU or Minnesota or Michigan wouldn't have hired Tony Dungy if he had been interested? Making an effort to specifically hire a black coach is not judging people by their ability or content of their character, it is judging people by the color of their skin.

    An Actual Lion

  • POV said...

    The problem is that universities abused this law to allow for raced based admissions rather than just looking at who had the better grades.

    I don't disagree with that. In fact I fully agree that that was (or is) a problem. But that is a problem with the universities, not the law. In other words, hate the playa, not the game.

    BoulderFish ●

  • BoulderFish said...

    I don't disagree with that. In fact I fully agree that that was (or is) a problem. But that is a problem with the universities, not the law. In other words, hate the playa, not the game.

    They are one in the same. Universities as a majority share the same thoughts as certain politicians.

    Trock56

  • POV said...

    You are right about the original point of affirmative action. The problem is that universities abused this law to allow for raced based admissions rather than just looking at who had the better grades.

    Right wing radio did not give affirmative action a bad name, but universities did, imo. They did and still find ways to use quotas.

    And yet Penn state is still 98 percent white lol lol lol The results are in... AA doesn't really do much at ALL... Read the Supreme Court case about the Univ. of Mich... If there was no AA, PSU would probably be 99.9 percent white lol If the kids are evenly qualified, for diversity sake and a difference of opinion in classrooms, different experiences for your students, etc. Universities can make the argument that those things are more important than having another white student attending PSU... Sorry. But if I and another white student are evenly qualified, I will gladly take the spot and increase the spectrum of outlook and perspective in a class. They have a lot of other concerns about the makeup of a class than simply race. A lot of other things are taken into account... Look at me, I said I wouldn't get involved, but again lol I am probably the only black person on this board lol AA works so well lol

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • Trock56 said...

    We can agree to disagree. When given a state test for example a police officer. Certain races get additional points. How is that hiring the best person. T me that is a great chance for race to be ignored. A computer grades a test but additional points are given to races. So how is that hiring the best person for the job. We all need to stop looking backwards. Because someone's grandfather was denied a job do to race which is wrong and stupid does not mean the grandson deserves points on a test. They need a fair chane to prove they are the best. Nothing less or more

    I don't think we're disagreeing anywhere. As a general supporter of the AA law, don't condone what you're describing here. What they are doing there is counter to the objective of the AA law.

    BoulderFish ●

  • rmj147 said...

    I agree with the origins of the system. The core point was to be seen, and to have employers prove that they saw minority candidates. There was no requirements to hire X amount. However, some new policies (which vary from employer to employer) have said that you have to hire a VERY small amount of black people... And many times, that number is so small (1-2) that it really doesn't mean ANYTHING. BUT, at the same time, white people can resent those that took advantage of that quota system to get a job that they may not (through no fault of their own- many times the candidates are equally qualified in fact) have otherwise have had. If the two candidates are evenly qualified, I, as a black man see NO PROBLEM with hiring a black man instead of a white man. Good God, diversity is a good thing. At least, I am a fan of it... But then again, I am black so I will be called racist...

    How is deciding to hire a black man over a white man when the two are equally qualified not racist? You are discriminating against one person based on their skin color. And if we are interested in diveresity, why are we only interested in diversity of skin color? Why not diversity of thought? height? hair color? If a person's race does not define them, if there is truly no difference between us, why are you in favor of rewarding one person because of their race?

    An Actual Lion

  • BoulderFish said...

    I don't disagree with that. In fact I fully agree that that was (or is) a problem. But that is a problem with the universities, not the law. In other words, hate the playa, not the game.

    Yep, and Universities differ. Private schools vs. public school, regionally, etc... Berkley vs. Ole Miss... A lot of factors... ANd it is a very complicated and complex problem, requiring a complex answer. My problem with AA is that a lot of school over-simplify it like if we take 10 black kids, thats good... That will do the trick lol And it's a lot more complex than that. But again, this argument is pointless. Race is one thing, like religion, where people refuse to see the other side... I was forced to in class when we debated this for a week straight... But here, people aren't even trying to see another side... I get the other side of the argument... I've heard it 10000000000 times. And again, I am one of the only black voices on this board... And I was in law school as well. Gotta love affirmative action lol

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • rmj147 said...

    And yet Penn state is still 98 percent white lol lol lol The results are in... AA doesn't really do much at ALL... Read the Supreme Court case about the Univ. of Mich... If there was no AA, PSU would probably be 99.9 percent white lol If the kids are evenly qualified, for diversity sake and a difference of opinion in classrooms, different experiences for your students, etc. Universities can make the argument that those things are more important than having another white student attending PSU... Sorry. But if I and another white student are evenly qualified, I will gladly take the spot and increase the spectrum of outlook and perspective in a class. They have a lot of other concerns about the makeup of a class than simply race. A lot of other things are taken into account... Look at me, I said I wouldn't get involved, but again lol I am probably the only black person on this board lol AA works so well lol

    Maybe you should look at the actual breakdown. My google search says 78 percent white. Seems you think this should be a black and white issues while ignoring Latinos , Asians and other nationalities. Bottom line ignore skin color hire th best and except the best for admission. Government sucks and any time they try to correct something they take away freedom and they screw it up. Even with the best intentions lawyers, judges and politicians will always screw it p for their own self interest. Not for the interest of the people involved

    Trock56

  • rmj147 said...

    Sorry. But if I and another white student are evenly qualified, I will gladly take the spot and increase the spectrum of outlook and perspective in a class.

    So only your desires should be taken into account? The white student who is shunned deserves to be discriminated against? Maybe the white student contributes to diversity in another way. Why is your race and his race a superior consideration here?

    An Actual Lion

  • Kev5048 said...

    hiring someone just because they are a minority is the dumbest reasons to hire someone

    That is NEVER the sole reason... Instead, if I and you are equally qualified, what can I bring to the office as a black man (when there are no black people in the office), rather than you as another white employee... Just like Bob, Phil, Randy, etc... It's more complex than simple race... But that is the constant argument and I love it... Like it's that simple and thats the real rationale behind it lol

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • rmj147 said...

    And yet Penn state is still 98 percent white lol lol lol The results are in... AA doesn't really do much at ALL... Read the Supreme Court case about the Univ. of Mich... If there was no AA, PSU would probably be 99.9 percent white lol If the kids are evenly qualified, for diversity sake and a difference of opinion in classrooms, different experiences for your students, etc. Universities can make the argument that those things are more important than having another white student attending PSU... Sorry. But if I and another white student are evenly qualified, I will gladly take the spot and increase the spectrum of outlook and perspective in a class. They have a lot of other concerns about the makeup of a class than simply race. A lot of other things are taken into account... Look at me, I said I wouldn't get involved, but again lol I am probably the only black person on this board lol AA works so well lol

    I know you are not the only black person on this board. There is more than a handful who have identified themselves as such over the last year, and I am sure there are others who don't discuss their race (I never find the need to state my own race).

    I disagree with race based admissions as a policy, because studies have shown those admitted under such policies are usually unable to do well in the core classes and start well behind the 8-ball. However, I do agree with you that diversity is a great thing - whether it be this board, universities, or at the job. Breaking a tie to get an under-represented group would be more than okay with me. Handing out critical positions to those less qualified is another matter entirely.

    This post was edited by POV on 3/2/2012 at 2:40 PM

    POV

  • An Actual Lion said...

    So only your desires should be taken into account? The white student who is shunned deserves to be discriminated against? Maybe the white student contributes to diversity in another way. Why is your race and his race a superior consideration here?

    No, the concerns of the school, the professors (who I am SURE value differences of opinions, perspectives, LIFE EXPERIENCES, etc.) and the other students... Do you realize how many times in my criminal procedure class in law school I was the only black voice countering illegal search and procedure questions... It happens. Everyone's concern should be taken into account. But to simply say that "whites are discriminated against" in ANY way is highly laughable. Did you go to PSU? How many black kids were in your class? Really??? Really?

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • rmj147 said...

    That is NEVER the sole reason... Instead, if I and you are equally qualified, what can I bring to the office as a black man (when there are no black people in the office), rather than you as another white employee... Just like Bob, Phil, Randy, etc... It's more complex than simple race... But that is the constant argument and I love it... Like it's that simple and thats the real rationale behind it lol

    Maybe he is gay. Blind or deaf. Maybe it is not about race when it is about diversity. Maybe it is about hiring the fat guy because everyone is skinny. Your thoughts are that just because you are a certain race that matters more. Hell iwould rather see a coin flip between equal people then your thoughts that a certain characteristic is more important then another

    Trock56

  • rmj147 said...

    No, the concerns of the school, the professors (who I am SURE value differences of opinions, perspectives, LIFE EXPERIENCES, etc.) and the other students... Do you realize how many times in my criminal procedure class in law school I was the only black voice countering illegal search and procedure questions... It happens. Everyone's concern should be taken into account. But to simply say that "whites are discriminated against" in ANY way is highly laughable. Did you go to PSU? How many black kids were in your class? Really??? Really?

    And depending on location there are schools with a high African American percentage.

    Trock56

Penn State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports