In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1101
Online now 1068 Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I hope you see my response on the previous page...
WE ARE! And we will always be...
But the exact same thing can be said for the actual players... More players are black that is a fact. So how does that not apply??
I think anyone with a clue knows they play the best players in the NFL.
Why would they not select the best coaches? Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct answer.
Strong was a top choice of Tennessee he said no. Edwards was awful and fired twice.
PENN STATE FOREVER
I didn't say about Strong not having a job. He is the man in KY. I asked if he was nominated for any COY awards after the job he did (serious Q, I dont know... But if not, that's telling).
Again, I agree with Nit. Players and coaches are diff animals. It's easy to see what a player can do on film, but measuring how much a coach has to do with wins/losses, team morale, effort, etc. is tougher to measure. But there are coaches of color with great resumes, great credentials, great reputations that have yet to get HC gigs- black and white. The opportunities are few to begin with. But, even afte that, the numbers don't lie when it comes to the numbers. Period. So now Im racist for suggesting that black coaches have had fewer opportunities? lol Wow.
Who are these coaches you talk about??????
and I have no idea on Strong... Not sure he deserved it regardless
Look. here is a decent article summarizing part of the problem. I don't agree with everything this guy says, just had to throw that out there... But I do agree with this:
"The real reason for the problem can be exemplified with the Arians hire. The real reason is coaches of color have still not broken into, in significant numbers, the NFL's old-boy network. They are, to many owners and others in the NFL, outsiders. Until that changes, the numbers will remain somewhat bleak.
This is what I mean. Arians was fired by the Pittsburgh Steelers -- some reports said Arians retired, others said his contract was not renewed. The truth is he was let go by the team.
After that, Chuck Pagano, coach of the Indianapolis Colts, hired Arians to be his offensive coordinator. Pagano and Arians are close friends.
When Pagano fell ill, Arians became the interim coach.
And that sequence, more than anything, illustrates the biggest reason for the problem. There are almost no black coaches who could get fired from a nice position (or retire or not have his contract renewed) and then have a close enough friend as a head coach who could immediately give him the same nice position.
Most black assistants don't have those types of connections. They are not part of that network. They also don't quickly get that same type of chance.
This is not the case all the time. There are exceptions, but in many instances this is what happens."
The network of minority coaches just isn't as big... Attached below are sheer numbers from the NCAA... And keep in mind, college is even worse- even more of a "good ol boys" network. Which makes the job Sumlin is doing in the SEC even more incredible.
Edit: And to somewhat answer your question, there aren't many assistants... Which is part of the problem and illustrates the problem detailed above in this post.
Out of the eight head coaching hires, none was a candidate of color. Not one. 0-fer-black. In effect, what NFL owners and general managers of those teams said was this: No minority candidate was good enough to hire for some one-quarter of the head coaching jobs in the NFL.
Either this website doesn't exist or is not currently available.
This post was edited by rmj147 15 months ago
Some good discussion in this thread.
Unless you know the inner workings of the Lovie Smith situation though you have no idea if owners didn't hire him because they're racist. For all we know he could be arrogant or overly demanding in interviews. Or his agent could turn off owners before they even get to the point of talking seriously.
omg.... I never said that owners were racist. Not once. Why is that a response to what I am saying? Seriously?
And everyone when talking about Lovie says how easy he is to get along with... People said that winning is what matters and the best coaches get jobs... Look at the numbers and tell me if that makes sense... Not to mention the Carolina Panthers OC getting a job? Seriously? A Canadian league football coach? Really? Ok.
OR the best coaches are getting hired
psumicheal's post goes in opposite of what you are saying... And nothing is just as simple as wins and losses. I agree with him there. You interview for a reason. Lovie Smith is one of the best HC's in the league and he couldn't find a job...
You just ignored the post above and the point of minorities not having the network that others have naturally... Do you think that it's a coincidence that most of the black coaches in the NFL are from Tony Dungy's coaching tree? But then again, you would probably call Dungy racist for hiring so many minority coaches... LOL smh
I think if a white owner wants to hire a less qualified white coach over a more qualified black coach, by all means, let him do it. It's his money to waste. If you want to win, hire the best people possible no matter what color they are. It's ridiculous to try to give people a job or interview based on nothing more than the color of their skin anyway.
He is not a good HC..... Very average. Not in the same vein as a Dungy or Belichick or Tomlin or Harbaugh 1/2....
What I am saying is that there are factors of why there are less minority coaches to get shots in the first place. I am not saying that owners are racist or are turning away coaches for the color of their skin... Again, had to make that clear, because everyone seems to think thats what Im saying.
So how do you break the cycle then?
And numbers can and do lie. I could reverse your argument to NBA players and say they are discriminatory toward whites. Because numbers don't lie right? NBA was 78% African American in 2011. Clearly something is amiss.... Just as I can make the same argument that the NHL is discriminatory against minorities - if I just used the numbers.
He ain't heavy - He's my brother!
Again. Players and coaches are 2 totally different animals. Im done here.
Maybe the biggest factor in minorities not getting head coaching oppurtunities is that they're not as qualified as white coaches. I can't imagine a professional sports team not hiring the best of the best as positional coaches, coordinators, or head coach. Most pro teams want to win at all costs, except the Pirates of course.
So numbers don't lie when they suit your argument but are irrelevant when they don't support it. Got it.
? Players are based on physical talent, easily identifiable on film... Totally different process and smaller numbers for coaches. Not to mention that it takes time to build a resume and prove yourself as a coach. The opportunity is the most important thing. So yes, numbers for players in the league are irrelevant when discussing coaching vacancies. Totally irrelevant. Give coaching numbers and it would be relevant. But no, those numbers have nothing to do with coaching opportunities. It's apples and steak. Some coaches never played at a high level, and some football stars are horrible coaches. Got it?
coaches are based on intelligence, work ethic, image, and vision....... just as definable as athleticism
Your missing the point. Raw numbers and percentages are meaningless. That was my argument. They can't be relevant for coaches and not for players. The bottom line is that the teams want to win, period.
So let me ask you another question - Would you have a better chance at being an NFL coach if your father was one? Regardless of ethnicity?
And how do you quantify that? Not like a 40 time... Are you serious? Are coaches tested? Are you serious? I would say communication skills, organizational skills, the ability to relate to players, and other traits are more important than anything you listed. And again, not easy to see on paper. Charlie Weiss was a great OC... Very smart, great at X's and O's... Terrible HC. Head Coaches are a diff animal within the coaching profession (and again, coaching is totally diff than playing). There is a reason Dick Lebeau is happy as hell running the Pittsburgh D. I don't think he'd be a good HC. But he's one of the best defensive minds of all time.
If a 40 time mattered that much the Raiders would be alive!
Everything is subjective and done with many factors.... players and coaches alike they select the best they can no agenda except WINNING
Surely you didn't just call Rob Ryan a good DC.
In a day when we have a two term black president and many elected black politicians etc, I think the main people pressing this are the NAACP, ACLU, and other left wing liberal groups. Fact is the top candidates are typically hired these days (in most cases, i contridict this by stating that Obama is a two term president) and people want leaders who win. Black, white or other I believe this is crap.
"I tell guys, 'Would you rather go to a Volkswagen dealership to get a Cadillac, or do you go to Cadillac?' "
-- LJ, Sr.
That the process is not always equal and that there are not as many opportunities for minorities as there should be because the process is so selective. It's like talking to a wall. Your ability to have a discussion and retain information is beyond anyone's understanding. At this point, your just arguing for the sake of arguing.
I'm not arguing with you anymore, I've made my point. Enjoy living in your naive and prejudiced mindset.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports