If they wanted an offensive guy, then their slate of interview candidates - 5 defensive guys and Daboll - makes no sense. Unless the fix was in from the beginning.
Brian Flores suing NFL, Giants over "sham" Rooney rule - "mistakenly" (?) sent Belichick text may be linchpin
- Thread starter bsj
- Start date
I think there's a timeline somewhere, but how many interviews -- Zoom or in-person -- did they conduct before they hired the GM?
This is where those claiming racism often lose their audience.
We are a pretty progressive place. The sense of the thread is that people are sympathetic to Flores. That people in the thread believe that systematic racism is a thing. That people in the thread believe it is a problem in the NFL.
But a suggestion that our guy is maybe part of the problem? Well, then the conversation starts to turn a bit.
This is what happens. This is how it keeps happening. This is why it doesn't get better. Nobody wants to take a microscope to those they respect (or to themselves). Is Bill an overt racist? Doubtful. None of us (I don't think) knows him personally but there seems to be plenty of evidence not.
But is Bill part of the patriarchy that is the problem here? I know what we want the answer to be. But we have to be open minded and acknowledge that even though he's our guy, that he may very well be part of the problem. In fact, if Flores thinks so, Flores would know. For the same reason that when Flores says John Elway or Ross is part of the problem we believe it -- because Elway and Ross aren't our guys -- we have to be willing to not detach from the conversation when it's our guy that may be part of the problem. Wanting Bill not to be part of the regressive old boys network does not mean that he isn't. I'm willing to hear Flores out on that.
And we need to do that with ourselves too. We're mostly white male football fans here. Are we part of the problem? Can't be, right? Look how progressive we are in supporting Brian Flores here. (Narrator: yes, we're part of the problem)
If they asked BB about Judge and then hired him, the only two things you can glean from that logically are either (i) BB gave Judge a good recommendation and the guy was an abject disaster as coach, which should lead you to conclude that either BB wasn't honest, or BB doesn't really know which of his guys are going to end up being good head coaches, or (ii) Bill was honest about Judge's qualifications, and they hired him despite that. Either way, it should cause you to question the value of recommendations like that.
If they are destined to suck they might "do the league a favor". Obviously, it would be very wrong of them.
Completely agree, this would be a very strong point for Flores.
Absolutely agree, which is why I'm not sure that BB's recommendation really mattered a ton in the case of hiring Daboll. As SN alluded to, the "fix" was probably in from the beginning - they knew who they wanted - which leads me to doubt that anything hinged on what BB had to say.
Edit: I'm rooting for Flores here guys. The league sucks at hiring coaches, and it especially sucks at hiring minority head coaches, and the issue is probably tied together. I'm trying to understand what arguments are in his favor here. I think the Giants not interviewing any other offensive coaches beside Daboll, including Leftwich and Bienemy, are strong points for Flores.
That’s all fair. I just hate NFL nepotism. I hate all nepotism. So my view is skewed.
My pushback to this is what is Bill supposed to do? People give their professional feedback all the time on former employees. It happens, and there is literally nothing that can stop that.
Now, is the fact that the Giants may have relied too heavily on Bill's feedback on Daboll, and perhaps did not do the same with Flores a problem? Sure. But that is not something Bill did incorrectly, which is why people are pushing back.
1. My position: Let's sit back and listen and see if we learn something.
2. It's pretty rare with structural racism that you can ever point to a micro event or decision and say it was "incorrect." That's not the nature of the problem.
The nepotism thing is tricky. Steve and Brian both put in like 4 years each as coaching assistant grunts before getting promoted to positional coaches. Would they have gotten the initial coaching assistant gigs if their last names weren't Belichick? I can't answer that but I can definitely make some assumptions. That said, since the Junior Belichicks arrived, has their been any rumblings from players or coaching colleagues (including disgruntled ex-Patriots) who've indicated that those two are clowns, unqualified, or not worthy of being on an NFL coaching staff? I haven't seen any, but it's possible I've missed it. (Mayo, interestingly enough, was hired as the NE LB coach with zero coaching experience, versus a guy like Troy Brown who worked his way up the coaching ladder before landing a positional gig.)
Nepotism, in general, sucks. But I have less of a problem with it when the beneficiaries do what they can to maximize the opportunity they were given (or handed, based on your framing). From what I can tell, the Junior Belichicks have worked their butts off and are well respected by their players and coaching colleagues.
I have a much bigger problem if a guy like Josh McCown (with zero coaching experience) were to get a HC gig than the Belichick kids methodically working their way up the coaching ladder. It'd be a much better look if the Belichick kids had done it in a different org, but by all accounts, they're legitimate coaches who belong on an NFL coaching staff.
Yeah, I find this a bit curious. The majority of us refer to that as a reference. For the average Joe it's pretty much widely accepted to list up to 3 referrals on any job application. I would well imagine that it's a pretty important part of the hiring process when it comes to hiring an NFL coach.
Interesting recent piece on just how prevalent nepotism is in the NFL. It's pretty widespread, and fair to say a definite impediment to minorities getting the top jobs of GM, co-ordinator, and head coach. It's a tricky issue. If you're a parent, and your kid shows a desire and an affinity for the business you're in, it's only natural to either hire or use your network to try and get that kid started in the business. But its obviously, at least in some cases, blocking an avenue for an equally qualified, un-related candidate. I'm not sure what the answer is.
https://defector.com/just-how-big-a-problem-is-nepotism-in-nfl-coaching/
"Recent research conducted by the NFL determined that nine of the 32 current head coaches are either the son or father of a current or former NFL coach (including coordinators and position coaches). The same NFL research report also found that 63 total NFL coaches (including coordinators and position coaches) are biologically related or related through marriage—53 of the 63 related coaches are White coaches."
https://defector.com/just-how-big-a-problem-is-nepotism-in-nfl-coaching/
"Recent research conducted by the NFL determined that nine of the 32 current head coaches are either the son or father of a current or former NFL coach (including coordinators and position coaches). The same NFL research report also found that 63 total NFL coaches (including coordinators and position coaches) are biologically related or related through marriage—53 of the 63 related coaches are White coaches."
Those are some numbers. I don't know what the answer is either.
But imagine the same exact thing at a major New York law firm. Or at a big Silicon Valley company boardroom. And of course, imagine that literally they were all 'sons," as in the NFL, because there is not a single woman involved in the entire enterprise.
You'd hope that the answer started with everyone acknowledging "well, this is a problem."
The point is that nepotism hires like that perpetuate inequality in the coaching ranks. Most head coaches are white, if they are hiring friends and family into these feeder positions, most of them are going to be white. Minority candidates don't have the same opportunity. It doesn't matter whether some (or all) of the nepotism hires actually work out, the point is minority coaches don't get those opportunities.
I mean, the answer is not to do this. My daughter wanted to access my father's network to try to enhance her chances of getting into the college she wanted to go to. I didn't prohibit it because she was 18 and it was her choice, but I talked to her about all of the advantages that she already had over other candidates (and the fact that she was qualified on her own) and she decided not to do it. She got in on her own without the extra help.
I'd like to note... everyone keeps saying "Bill just gave him a reference" but we don't know that at all. We aren't privy to any information at all about Bill's involvement, Flores is probably privy to some but not all.
Maybe Bill got a call about guys as a former boss... or maybe Bill actively campaigned to get a guy a job, we don't know. Plenty of guys actively campaign for guys they know/like, especially if they aren't on their staff.
I don't think NFL coaching searches are particularly analogous to your company putting out a job posting in any way, and pretending they are is kind of silly.
Maybe Bill got a call about guys as a former boss... or maybe Bill actively campaigned to get a guy a job, we don't know. Plenty of guys actively campaign for guys they know/like, especially if they aren't on their staff.
I don't think NFL coaching searches are particularly analogous to your company putting out a job posting in any way, and pretending they are is kind of silly.
I can see Flores signing with Houston
I'm sure the NFL calls in a favor and the Caserio/Pat's dynamic adds another layer
Also hi im uncle billy
I'm sure the NFL calls in a favor and the Caserio/Pat's dynamic adds another layer
Also hi im uncle billy
That’s genuinely admirable. But my guess is you are very much an outlier in terms of the approach most people would take. My comment about not knowing what the answer is was more about what specific, realistic policies could be put in place to mitigate the fact that, in my experience, most people who can, will use nepotism to further their careers, or those of their children.
Last edited:
I spent a bunch of time responding to comments but they passed me up while working on a well thought out reply, so I'm going to leave this as a generic comment...
My take:
Giants had already decided on Daboll, perhaps before any interviews took place. I am not a fan of Daboll, I think Flores is a SIGNIFICANTLY better coach here. I don't think any of this is simple though; There appears to be a problem with firing black coaches with winning records, i.e. Tony Dungy, Lovie Smith, Jim Caldwell, etc... However, the idea of "systemic racism" is a very complex equation where much of the accused racism can fall into a judgment call gray area. The problem then becomes deciphering what is actually "systemic racism" or what is actually people acting in what is natural interest in friends & families. With that being said, it is actually in the business' best interest to find the most highly qualified candidates, despite the NFL acting in the contrary, IMO. There are so many variables that go into this, I wrote a huge paragraph about it but then deleted it because I don't feel like responding to all the comments that it would get. The question then becomes, who gets to judge these decisions? On what basis? What recourse is there parties that feel slighted? What happens to parties that feel slighted but are incorrect? I think it's a delicate and very complex matter that I can't simply explain, and anyone who thinks there is a simple solution I would probably dismiss as not having carefully thought through the problem. (Not that anyone here is). This problem is not exclusive to the NFL, either.
The Rooney Rule will inherently cause some sham interviews. Perhaps revise the rule so minority candidates must be interviewed first to avoid what just happened? This won't change the actual outcome, however, this is simply just a more polite "F you". This really comes down to a fundamental human problem where the decision was already made, perhaps by the owner or others, then the interviews happened. At a human level, we do often make decisions without REALLY considering the alternatives, or we make decisions based on biases that we think are objective decisions. Solving this problem isn't so simple, but revising the rule would cool tempers probably.
Ultimately, I think this is one of the more egregious cases with Flores, but I don't think he will win this case going against a billion dollar industry backed by billionaires. I hate the Daboll hire, and I hate the Doug Pederson hire, both of whom are significantly worse hires than Flores.
My take:
Giants had already decided on Daboll, perhaps before any interviews took place. I am not a fan of Daboll, I think Flores is a SIGNIFICANTLY better coach here. I don't think any of this is simple though; There appears to be a problem with firing black coaches with winning records, i.e. Tony Dungy, Lovie Smith, Jim Caldwell, etc... However, the idea of "systemic racism" is a very complex equation where much of the accused racism can fall into a judgment call gray area. The problem then becomes deciphering what is actually "systemic racism" or what is actually people acting in what is natural interest in friends & families. With that being said, it is actually in the business' best interest to find the most highly qualified candidates, despite the NFL acting in the contrary, IMO. There are so many variables that go into this, I wrote a huge paragraph about it but then deleted it because I don't feel like responding to all the comments that it would get. The question then becomes, who gets to judge these decisions? On what basis? What recourse is there parties that feel slighted? What happens to parties that feel slighted but are incorrect? I think it's a delicate and very complex matter that I can't simply explain, and anyone who thinks there is a simple solution I would probably dismiss as not having carefully thought through the problem. (Not that anyone here is). This problem is not exclusive to the NFL, either.
The Rooney Rule will inherently cause some sham interviews. Perhaps revise the rule so minority candidates must be interviewed first to avoid what just happened? This won't change the actual outcome, however, this is simply just a more polite "F you". This really comes down to a fundamental human problem where the decision was already made, perhaps by the owner or others, then the interviews happened. At a human level, we do often make decisions without REALLY considering the alternatives, or we make decisions based on biases that we think are objective decisions. Solving this problem isn't so simple, but revising the rule would cool tempers probably.
Ultimately, I think this is one of the more egregious cases with Flores, but I don't think he will win this case going against a billion dollar industry backed by billionaires. I hate the Daboll hire, and I hate the Doug Pederson hire, both of whom are significantly worse hires than Flores.
I don't know that there's an answer or that it is solvable on a societal scale, my guess is it is probably not. Yes I know I am likely an outlier here, but I care about this stuff so if I don't adhere to it in my own life, then pretty much nobody will.
In the real world I don't begrudge anyone using their own networks to advance in their careers, I think that's pretty much the way things work and you have to cultivate your own network. Leveraging other people's networks through loose affiliation is gross, though. The guy who offered to write a letter of recommendation for my daughter had never even met her (or me) and was doing so only on the basis of knowing my father. That is the kind of stuff that really makes the playing field uneven.
Also, a lot of times the feeder process for a coaching career is very low paying (akin to an unpaid internship). That is a lot easier to survive if your father was or is a head coach in the league.
Brian Flores was hired by the Patriots in 2004 as a 23 year old. He took on the defensive responsibilities for the Patriots in 2018 (14 years after starting with the organization), but was not named the defensive coordinator.
Steve Belichick was hired by the Patriots in 2012 as a 25 year old. He took on the defensive responsibilities for the Patriots in 2019 after Flores left (7 years after starting with the organization) but was not named the defensive coordinator.
Steve's brother, Brian, also works for the Patriots.
In terms of the NFL, would a league rule forbidding an HC to hire any family members for their staff be feasible? It wouldn’t stop them from using their influence to place their kids on another team, but might at least improve things on the margins at first.
All subjective assessments (interviews, recommendations) are subject to bias. There's no way around that. In an ideal world, the candidates for any position would take some sort of objective test, and the best scoring applicant would get the job, period. But, that sort of ideal world is a complete fantasy.
Kudos to you, and I’m sure that was an important teaching moment for you as a father as well.
Women have a harder time in this world than men, and showing your daughter she can make it to where she wants to go on her own two feet is an important message that I’m sure she will hold on to.
I think ultimately this would just lead to a coaching child swap, but perhaps its a start.
I posted this in the Dolphins thread, but apparently McDaniel is bi-racial. The cynic in me thinks that Miami will see this as an opportunity to “disprove” the racism suit. Of course, I do hope he gets a chance because he’s such a non-traditional choice in multiple ways.
View: https://twitter.com/omarkelly/status/1489585287063814149?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/omarkelly/status/1489585287063814149?s=21
It’s one thing to cite a disparity (in this case an overwhelming disparity) as evidence of systemic racism. It’s another to say that Flores (or any specific candidate) is “actively being penalized because he don’t look like the people who are in the right network”.
To use a different example...let’s say that in city X (call it Speedsvile) black and white drivers actually break the speed limit at similar rates. Joe is a police officer and he stops a car that’s speeding and gives the driver a ticket. The driver is black. Is that a racist action? No way of knowing. But what if the police department in the city stops black speeders (we aren’t talking about giving people tickets who aren’t speeding; just the population that IS speeding) at 10x the rate of white drivers. Clearly we’d say that something is systemically amiss here. This would be a case of systemic or institutional racism.
But the individual black speeder that Officer Joe stops... is he being stopped *because he’s black*? It’s not that the city police ONLY stop black speeders. Whites do get tickets too. It’s hard to know, though we can have our suspicions.
It’s sometimes easier to see how a system can be structurally racist than to tell if any given action within that system is actually a racist action.
So I assumed you were talking particularly about Flores. How could we say that Flores isn’t getting hired because he’s black when he was JUST HIRED as a HC in the NFL?
It’s hard to know if his specific situation is a case where he’s being actively penalized (your words) in his job hunt *because he’s black*.
See what I’m saying?
PFT suggests that arbitration clause (remember those?) might be in play here:
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/04/arbitration-clause-could-quickly-derail-the-brian-flores-lawsuit/
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/04/arbitration-clause-could-quickly-derail-the-brian-flores-lawsuit/
That is not a fight likely to be picked by owners who shoe-horn their kids into all kinds of 'operating costs' positions.
The Bill Walsh Diversity Coaching Fellowship was created to help address this. So for example, NE currently has two coaching assistants listed in their media guide: Tyler Hughes and Ross Douglas (who is part of the fellowship program). Troy Brown came from that same fellowship program and has worked his way up the ladder.
While nepotism is generally a problem in the NFL, I'd argue that the lack of Black QB coaches/passing game coordinators is a much bigger deal. The offensive "whiz kids" are almost always the assistants who generate the most buzz, are in the most demand, and they're ALWAYS white. Is nepotism intertwined in that? Yeah, I could see a case being made there. But QB coach/passing game coordinator is pretty much always the path to being an OC--or even bypassing OC and going straight from QB coach to HC.
For example, a former Black QB like Tee Martin paid his coaching dues but is limited to being a WR coach in the NFL, but guys like Kevin O'Connell and Ken Dorsey got to be NFL QB coaches basically right out of the gate. O'Connell parlayed that into being a HC, and Dorsey will probably be one in the next few cycles. Crappy white QBs get the plum QB coaching gigs that Black QBs hardly ever get. For every Byron Leftwich, there seem to be a million Mike Kafkas, Kliff Kingburrys, Major Applewhites, etc. That's the coaching problem I'd most like to see solved--how do we get waaaay more Black people into the QB coaching pipeline.
I can’t see Flores getting a job with any NFL team since I believe he is suing all of them.m
EDIT- my presumption is that Flores presumes he will never work in the NFL again.
Is the Rooney Rule legal in the United States? Doesn't current Federal law make it illegal to use race, religion, sex, age or orientation as criteria for hiring or firing? Supreme Court is already deliberating on affirmative action college admissions.
Isn’t this like asking why there’s black history month and not white history month? Almost sounds like Flores should be grateful the system worked for him once - as he deserved - and ignore everything after.
On the other side of this let's suppose for a sec that in the midst of all of this he's offered a legit HC position. How could possibly he accept it? I can't see him dropping his suit and nor can I imagine him putting in 16 hour work days while trying to prepare for a very high profile law suit. Something else that I can't see happening, but in the back of my mind I'm wondering if there is a team out there willing to make him turn down a HC position.
Nothing more needs to be said really. You can nitpick around the margins or make one-off excuses for teams, but this statistic is beyond damning and evidence that something needs to change.
If you could, it wouldn't be "systemic." It really is unfortunate that the word "racism" is used, because it implies that the problem can be attributed to one or another individual's malicious actions. I understand why it is used: the problem doesn't hurt people like me who have to wear sunscreen. But at the same time, the second word in the phrase draws attention away from the first, leading to "X is not a racist, what did he do wrong?!" arguments that ought to be entirely beside the point.
This is an instance in which the world of sport reflects the wider world in which it exists. In the past, sport has, at least in part, helped drive changes in that wider word by showing a better way. "Systemic" makes this a more complex and therefore difficult problem than "racism," which makes the present circumstance in the NFL, as in many circumstances in the wider world, depressingly difficult to even address, let alone solve. I hope Flores can provoke some progress.
Edit: I see the connection, however I believe that it’s still fair to point out that Flores is being hypocritical while using it as a core argument and talking point in his lawsuit.
Saying that Daboll received preferential treatment while receiving the same preferential means that it either isn’t preferential treatment at all; or it’s hypocritical to now bring it up in the media as a point of contention in a class action lawsuit and suggest that Bill Belichick orchestrated a back-alley deal with the Giants.
Last edited:
The Rooney Rule does not require any team to make a hiring decision on the basis of race. It simply requires they interview a diverse slate of candidates.
I see what you’re saying - maybe the analogy I should’ve used is a minority whose parents went to an Ivy pointing out that the legacy system has a disparate impact on other minorities even though it may have helped him in this particular case.
Yeah, I don't think it's illegal under current law. You can interview an unlimited number of white candidates. You can interview an unlimited number of any candidates.
However, I could imagine our current Supreme Court issuing opinions that would draw the Rooney rule into doubt under Title VII. I read a statistic once that the only time Clarence Thomas has ever sided with the plaintiff in an equal protection case, the plaintiff was white or George Bush. I don't know if that's actually true. But I think it does sort of encapsulate where this Court might be on these kinds of issues. I guess the ruling would be somehow that it violates Title VII to mandate that candidates of a certain race get interviews but not to mandate that candidates of other races get interviews.
Of course to challenge it you need a plaintiff. The number of while male NFL head coach eligible guys who have been screwed by the Rooney rule is not a particularly big group.
I think you’ll get more black QB coaches with more black QBs coming through HS, college, etc. Think how insane it is that not that long ago the conversation was whether teams trusted black players to play that position.
Bill is still a coach in this league. Why would another team ask him if someone was a good coach, and then run with it if he says "Oh yea he's going to take your team to the super bowl in a year!" I mean, teams still think he eavesdrops on visiting locker room-that these same teams are letting Bill pick their next coach is fucking laughable. Also, didn't Bill give Flores his first break at coaching years ago in some tiny role and bring him up through the ranks? And Flores ends up getting a head coaching job after all of that? But now Bill is a racist who only wants the white guy who used to coach with him to be hired? Flores I'm sure has some honest gripes but trying to name Bill as a problem really sucks, and it's not just because he coaches my flippin' team it's because he did everything for Flores that he's done for white coaches that worked for him, and it ended up really well for Flores until the dolt from Miami ridiculously fired him, something I'm pretty sure BB had zero to do with.
And requiring diverse slates is a common tool in corporate America to improve diversity, particularly in the executive ranks (which imo is the right comp for an NFL coordinator or coach). Nothing at all controversial about this.
Just wait til some guy named Schirt Culling applies for a coaching gig and gets turned down. He'll be at the courthouse an hour before it opens.
But seriously, there will be no shortage of aggrieved white wanna-be/retread coaches ready to file should SCOTUS (or any court) suggest that it's actionable.
Flores didn't say that, nobody in this thread has said that, and it is a ridiculous interpretation of Flores' comments. There are also several posts in this thread explaining what Flores meant, and why recommendations from a guy like BB can act in furtherance of inequality in the hiring process. You might disagree with it, lots of posters in here seem to. This post adds nothing to the discussion, though.
There's a fraternity of coaches / front office personnel and Belichick is in it. His opinion is respected. Reportedly he called Steve Bisciotti and recommended John Harbaugh when the Ravens hired him. That makes sense; Belichick was Ozzie Newsome's boss in Cleveland and knows people in the Ravens org. Belichick worked for the Giants for years and undoubtedly has a relationship with the Maras. He knows people and he talks to people throughout the league. Hell, why was he texting Brian Daboll at all? He knows people, he has relationships with people, those relationships are important, and Belichick's word is taken seriously.
Put aside the legality of trying to lose games and the impact on gambling.
Players and coaches generally work on short-term contracts, and their performance is judged primarily based on their records.
It's gross that the coach is held to a different standard when the team itself benefits from and actively encourages as few wins as possible.
The idea that Flores has no right to complain because he got hired to be a head coach one time is fucking preposterous.
Players and coaches generally work on short-term contracts, and their performance is judged primarily based on their records.
It's gross that the coach is held to a different standard when the team itself benefits from and actively encourages as few wins as possible.
The idea that Flores has no right to complain because he got hired to be a head coach one time is fucking preposterous.
There is no reason to believe any court in America would find that rule unconstitutional. Ineffective? Yes. Illegal? No.
So what is Flores trying to say then? Bill gave him his first opportunity and promoted him over and over and and he ended up getting a head coaching job, one of 32 in the league, and if Bill's word is so valued pretty sure he must've said some good things to the fins about Flores before they hired him. What happened to him with the Dolphins sucks, the Giants making a mockery of the Rooney rule (if that's what they did) sucks, but insinuating somehow the guy who's given him all his breaks is somehow working against him now just really bugs me.
Read the thread, several people have explained what he was saying. Relying on recommendations like the one Bill gave to Daboll for the Giants (if he did) will benefit people who are well networked over people who don't have as well developed a network. Because the coaching ranks skew massively white, this will tend to benefit white coaches over minority coaches, and is therefore contributing to the racial inequity in the coaching ranks.
Like I said, disagree with that all you want, but that's what he's saying. BB is only doing what everyone else does, which is part of the problem, but does not make him a racist, and Flores is not calling him one.