• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The Random Thought Thread

Very curious to see how this whole thing plays out. Going to be very hard for Flores to prove that some of these things were race related. We've always known the Rooney Rule is a farce anyways. I'm all about POC getting more opportunities but mandating interviews for guys that know they aren't serious candidates was never the answer.

I think the bigger revelation coming out of this is the allegations against the Dolphins and Ross specifically. We know teams would rather lose sometimes but having active rewards for doing so is a pretty huge deal.
 
I find it so interesting how a couple of you have referred to it now talked about the game now being more of the pass opening up the running game, but this thought started to come into play in the mid to late 80s where many teams were starting to pass more. Definitely not as much but you did have the Bengals with Boomer, Jim Kelly with the Bills and of course multiple wco passing the ball much more frequently due to having the pass game as extension of the running game.
 
Simba said:
Very curious to see how this whole thing plays out. Going to be very hard for Flores to prove that some of these things were race related. We've always known the Rooney Rule is a farce anyways. I'm all about POC getting more opportunities but mandating interviews for guys that know they aren't serious candidates was never the answer.

I think the bigger revelation coming out of this is the allegations against the Dolphins and Ross specifically. We know teams would rather lose sometimes but having active rewards for doing so is a pretty huge deal.
Click to expand...

even more of a big deal in an era of sports betting - i think the point here is that there's substance to everything there and that he's got a legitimate case for an unlawful firing (based on the official reasons given)

i think it's going to be pretty easy to prove the giants issue was race related given the rooney rule and the speed of that hiring process and low number of candidates (including the bare minimum of minority candidates) - probably harder to prove the broncos one just because there's a "he said, she said" element to it with their demeanour and the end result of the hiring

but the ross stuff and the giants stuff there's substance behind those claims

to get something to happen specifically with the racial element though across the league he'll probably need some others to come forward with similar stories to the broncos and giants one he has (and im sure there are a multitude of instances exactly like those but not many will have a BB text exchange to prove it)
 
rossihunter2 said:
even more of a big deal in an era of sports betting - i think the point here is that there's substance to everything there and that he's got a legitimate case for an unlawful firing (based on the official reasons given)

i think it's going to be pretty easy to prove the giants issue was race related given the rooney rule and the speed of that hiring process and low number of candidates (including the bare minimum of minority candidates) - probably harder to prove the broncos one just because there's a "he said, she said" element to it with their demeanour and the end result of the hiring

but the ross stuff and the giants stuff there's substance behind those claims

to get something to happen specifically with the racial element though across the league he'll probably need some others to come forward with similar stories to the broncos and giants one he has (and im sure there are a multitude of instances exactly like those but not many will have a BB text exchange to prove it)
Click to expand...

Not to get too far down the rabbit hole here, but I think the Giants situation is going to be a hard win for him as well. The Rooney Rule puts them in a tough position too. If they found their guy early in the process (and let's be real, they always knew), they should just be able to hire him and cancel the other interviews. It's how it works in a corporate setting too. But instead they were forced to carry on with an interview that they knew was a farce to satisfy these conditions. We're basically to the point now where teams have to interview their 2 POC candidates first.

To be clear, my issue is much more with the Rooney Rule here and how dumb it is in the first place. I know what they're trying to do with it but the end result is often pretty much the complete opposite and that's because it's not well thought out.
 
Simba said:
Not to get too far down the rabbit hole here, but I think the Giants situation is going to be a hard win for him as well. The Rooney Rule puts them in a tough position too. If they found their guy early in the process (and let's be real, they always knew), they should just be able to hire him and cancel the other interviews. It's how it works in a corporate setting too. But instead they were forced to carry on with an interview that they knew was a farce to satisfy these conditions. We're basically to the point now where teams have to interview their 2 POC candidates first.

To be clear, my issue is much more with the Rooney Rule here and how dumb it is in the first place. I know what they're trying to do with it but the end result is often pretty much the complete opposite and that's because it's not well thought out.
Click to expand...

the teams im pretty sure can pay a fine like the raiders did when they hired gruden if they have a guy they know they're going to promote rather than engage in sham interviews

the rooney rule exists to get those coaches in the room - i agree it's not substantial enough - but if teams engage with it in bad faith i.e. make decisions before they even interview all the candidates then that is their own fault

the 1 notable time this rule worked was, ironically, with the steelers when ken whisenhunt was likely to be the next head coach but mike tomlin blew them away in the interview and got the job

the issue here is that flores didnt even get the chance to blow them away

so yes the rooney rule is not fit for purpose but even that purpose is worth more than nothing - the reason it's not working even slightly at all is that teams are viewing it as a chore to find 2 external minority candidates and adding them onto the end of their search rather than engaging in good faith

EDIT:
and worth pointing out that with only 5 teams left hiring, not 1 minority candidate has been hired this cycle yet

when josh mccown is making it to final interviews (and being seen as the favourite) despite never even being a coach and much more qualified black candidates are struggling to even get opportunities to interview in the first place - and that this stuff happens over and over again then its hard to argue there isnt racism involved in the hiring practices still
 
Last edited:
rossihunter2 said:
the teams im pretty sure can pay a fine like the raiders did when they hired gruden if they have a guy they know they're going to promote rather than engage in sham interviews

the rooney rule exists to get those coaches in the room - i agree it's not substantial enough - but if teams engage with it in bad faith i.e. make decisions before they even interview all the candidates then that is their own fault

the 1 notable time this rule worked was, ironically, with the steelers when ken whisenhunt was likely to be the next head coach but mike tomlin blew them away in the interview and got the job

the issue here is that flores didnt even get the chance to blow them away

so yes the rooney rule is not fit for purpose but even that purpose is worth more than nothing
Click to expand...

Of note here that I just realized after reading through some tweets... the Giants had actually already satisfied the requirement by time they allegedly made a decision on Daboll. They had already interviewed Graham and Frazier. So the onus on Flores here is more in proving that Belichick actually knew something. Just think he's going to have a really hard case here with that in mind. I hadn't realized they interviewed Graham.
 
Simba said:
Of note here that I just realized after reading through some tweets... the Giants had actually already satisfied the requirement by time they allegedly made a decision on Daboll. They had already interviewed Graham and Frazier. So the onus on Flores here is more in proving that Belichick actually knew something. Just think he's going to have a really hard case here with that in mind. I hadn't realized they interviewed Graham.
Click to expand...

graham didnt count towards the rule because he wasnt an external candidate so they did still have to interview flores to satisfy the requirements of the rule
 
i dnt like coach firing or wishing it one any coach but if roman was to be let go during season…… sean payton is that you
 
predator-handshake.gif



Flores and Gruden teaming up against the NFL?
 
rmcjacket23 said:
So was two years ago, when they went 14-2, not considered "modern"? What era was that in, then?

Frankly, fans emphasize the playoffs a little too much in my eyes. Its all just recency bias. The playoffs is entirely about matchups. Its just a series of win-or-go-home games that are dependent on how a team matches up and gameplans for another.

I tried to explain this to a buddy of mine, who really only follows the NFL for fantasy, the other day, when I was betting on NFL games.

The Rams were a bad matchup for the Bucs, and the 49ers are a bad matchup for the Rams. Nobody actually thinks the 49ers are a better overall team than the Rams, but when they play them, they went 2-1 against them and obviously were close to winning a third time.

If Tampa had beaten the Rams, I would have guaranteed they'd have beaten the 49ers by double digits. Maybe even by 15+ points. Its a horrible matchup for the 49ers.

I think Buffalo beats Cincinnati a lot if they played each other. Yet, they didn't play. I think New England would have had a pretty good chance to beat Cincinnati a lot too. They didn't play.

This notion that teams should only be evaluated based on whether they win SBs or not is pretty laughable to me. Or when people watch the playoffs and see how teams win, and then they say "o see you gotta play that exact way otherwise you'll never win". Pure stupidity. There's no one way to win in this league. If you ever come across somebody who views losing in the SB as a "knock" against a player or a team, write that person off immediately as somebody that knows literally nothing about football.

Last year everybody told me that all KC needed to do was fix its Oline, and they'd be right back. They damn near overhauled the whole thing, improved it dramatically... and they didn't even make it back to the SB. High quality Oline, Mahomes at QB, playmakers all over the offense, and they came up shorter than they did the prior two years. So where does the goal post get moved to now?

Reason # 272 was RSR football "fans" are clowns.
Click to expand...
So true with the Bengal matchups, I’m pretty upset they avoided the Bills. The Rams seem like a bad matchup for them considering their D line
 
rossihunter2 said:
even more of a big deal in an era of sports betting - i think the point here is that there's substance to everything there and that he's got a legitimate case for an unlawful firing (based on the official reasons given)

i think it's going to be pretty easy to prove the giants issue was race related given the rooney rule and the speed of that hiring process and low number of candidates (including the bare minimum of minority candidates) - probably harder to prove the broncos one just because there's a "he said, she said" element to it with their demeanour and the end result of the hiring

but the ross stuff and the giants stuff there's substance behind those claims

to get something to happen specifically with the racial element though across the league he'll probably need some others to come forward with similar stories to the broncos and giants one he has (and im sure there are a multitude of instances exactly like those but not many will have a BB text exchange to prove it)
Click to expand...
Well, realistically, its a lot simpler than that...

Why is it a legal issue? Failure to satisfy the Rooney Rule isn't a legal issue. It's not a law. It's a policy the league enacted itself. If a team fails to adhere to it, the league inflicts punishment on the offender. Loss of draft picks, fines, etc.

In order for it to be a legal issue, the act of hiring a white coach over a black coach would need to be proven that it was done with the intent of not hiring a minority. The fact that the Giants decided they wanted to hire Daboll before they interviewed Flores, as far as I know, doesn't violate any actual laws.

It's pretty obvious. It's not a legal issue at all. It's a way to generate some public interest and publicly humiliate the NFL (which it will be effective at), and likely, generate some sort of cash settlement from the NFL from a "nuisance suit", which is how the NFL will look at it.

If you're going for an actual legal case, you don't release text messages from a prominent HC. That doesn't prove illegality. If you're going for a legal issue, you don't mention that the GM of a team three years ago may have been hungover for your interview. That doesn't prove illegality. If you're going for a legal issue, an Owner paying you money to lose doesn't prove racial discrimination.

It's all a PR tactic. You file suit after you've been fired and after its becoming more and more clear that no team is going to hire you. You file suit on the first day of Black History Month (obviously planned). You schedule talk show appearances less than 24 hours after filing (already on the books).
 
rossihunter2 said:
the teams im pretty sure can pay a fine like the raiders did when they hired gruden if they have a guy they know they're going to promote rather than engage in sham interviews

the rooney rule exists to get those coaches in the room - i agree it's not substantial enough - but if teams engage with it in bad faith i.e. make decisions before they even interview all the candidates then that is their own fault

the 1 notable time this rule worked was, ironically, with the steelers when ken whisenhunt was likely to be the next head coach but mike tomlin blew them away in the interview and got the job

the issue here is that flores didnt even get the chance to blow them away

so yes the rooney rule is not fit for purpose but even that purpose is worth more than nothing - the reason it's not working even slightly at all is that teams are viewing it as a chore to find 2 external minority candidates and adding them onto the end of their search rather than engaging in good faith

EDIT:
and worth pointing out that with only 5 teams left hiring, not 1 minority candidate has been hired this cycle yet

when josh mccown is making it to final interviews (and being seen as the favourite) despite never even being a coach and much more qualified black candidates are struggling to even get opportunities to interview in the first place - and that this stuff happens over and over again then its hard to argue there isnt racism involved in the hiring practices still
Click to expand...
Ironically, they sort of already have the "fix" in place, or at least part of one.

Making it mandatory to interview minority candidates doesn't work at achieving more hiring. That's obvious at this point. That's not an incentive. It's just PR.

Actual incentives work. Giving compensatory draft picks to teams that both hire or lose minority coaches to higher-management jobs. That's something that actually has value.

The Rooney Rule, as enacted, isn't really an incentive. It's just a dog and pony show. Everybody has known that since the first year its been in place.
 
rossihunter2 said:
graham didnt count towards the rule because he wasnt an external candidate so they did still have to interview flores to satisfy the requirements of the rule
Click to expand...
is 'external candidate' new to the Rooney Rule, because I don't believe it had to be an external candidate before they updated the "Rule" back in 2020.
 
RavensMania said:
is 'external candidate' new to the Rooney Rule, because I don't believe it had to be an external candidate before they updated the "Rule" back in 2020.
Click to expand...
Per Wikipedia (maybe not the best source, but feeling lazy today):
In May 2020 the NFL increased the requirements of the Rooney rule to require two external minority candidate interviews, rather than one, for head coaching jobs. In addition, teams must now interview at least one minority candidate for all coordinator positions. Also, teams and the NFL league office must also interview at least one minority candidate for senior-level positions, including general manager and club president jobs. Finally, for at least some positions, women may be interviewed to satisfy the requirement.[29]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top