I am not big on Quotas either. It never seems to be the right way to solve the problem. Will this coach be treated like an outsider or really be a part of the inner circle coaching brain trust? I guess if teams are smart, they will use this as a way to bring in a capable resource that they can use to help the team. I assume the teams get to pick the person to fill the slot.
Right, but the idea of a quota is that underrepresented people are given a chance, and the hope is it will create new thinking and new opportunities to those that aren't traditionally hired. If all goes perfect and NFL owners start to re-think who they're hiring then the quota system wouldn't be needed any more.
Most NFL owners aren't hiring people because they're white. They're hiring from a pool they're most familiar with it, and it happens to be mostly white men. This forces teams to think about where they get candidates from, who they look at, etc, and hopefully adds new exposure to who is hired from where.
Why stop at coaching? Why can't we mandates quotas be had at every position? I don't see many white CB's.
Because there is zero evidence that white athletes are being denied equal opportunity, and a long history of the opposite in coaching. I don't know if quotas are the answer, but "both ways" arguments are usually based on defensiveness and emotion, not reality.
Do we know this to be true? 13.4% of America is black while 70% of NFL players are black. Blacks seem to be over represented as NFL players and not a minority. Meanwhile, a google search informed me that out of 32 head coaches there are 5 minority coaches, which is 15.6%. So coaches are represented at a percentage that mimics, and if actually sightly above, the American demographic.
With stats like that, 13% of the population but 70% of the player jobs, black athletes clearly have an advantage of some kind when it comes to playing NFL football.
Having an advantage is irrelevant, as there is equal opportunity for others to participate - equality of opportunity is all good in that instance.
In the case of coaching, there is no such equality to this day, so measures are being taken.
Angryguy probably thought his comment was very witty, but it’s just more nonsense.
First, requiring minority interviews would be equal opportunity, requiring hiring is equality of outcome. But if we want to stick with opportunity, a vast majority of NFL player's path, or opportunity, is via division 1 football. The majority (54%) of division 1 football scholarships are given to black athletes even though they are only 13% of the country. Non black athletes are for sure given less opportunities to succeed in this field. There are also blatant race based stereotypes about whites lack of athleticism like white men can't jump, whites are picked last in pick games, etc that could further impede opportunities for non-black athletes pursuing the NFL during the selection process.
A good real life comparison for this type of policy is NYC recently ending their gifted and talented program because Asians who made up approx 12% of the student population was making up adjust 70% of the gifted program. Blacks are 70% of students but accounted for less than 15% of enrollment. All those kids are students so they all had equal opportunity. NYC schools decided that was not good enough and has decided to retool the admission process to gain the outcome they deem equitable. Why wouldn't the same be true for football!
Also, if the percentage of minority coaches matches the country's demographic can you demonstrate for me how there isn't equity?
Topic: NFL changes rule to require minority coaching quota (Read 7344 times)