$100 MILLION-10 YEARS-GUARANTEED!!!!!?????

Stephan A Smith was ranting about that today. He replaced Ryen Russillo on the ESPN radio afternoon show. Smith must bring up some racial issue 3 or 4 times in every show.

I really don't see the point. If I was a black coach I wouldn't want to interview for a job I knew I wasn't going to get. Maybe if I was young and upcoming and wanted the experience of an interview so that I could get better at it with a real opportunity but otherwise, no. I could understand it if every job was an open process but lots of times an owner will already have his mind made up who he is going to hire.

I wonder any white coaches are interviewed when an owner has his man already picked but is complying with the Rooney rule and interviewing black coaches.

 

That’s not the point. Backroom deals without considering/interviewing other candidates, of any race, is not open minded, and is in fact racist.

 

Or it might be called filling a square. If I was an up and coming, young black coach I might consider being interviewed to gain some experience in the interview process. However, if I was a veteran black coach and was pretty well convinced I was only being interviewed to fill a square, I would say no thanks.

 

So, wait, they knew who they wanted... offered him, and he said yes. And then the leap to racism was made? Six minute abs!

 

Bullshit. If I own a business and I already know who I want to fill a job opening I will hire that person to fill it. That's not racist. Same goes for a team owner. For years Jon Gruden was everybody's fantasy hire. Whether he lives up to that is beside the point. And there are other considerations besides his coaching ability. With the move to Vegas it will sell tickets and increase profitablity. It's a special circumstance. Was it racist for Jeanne Buss to hire Magic Johnson to run the Lakers without interviewing any white or Hispanic candidates?

 

I don't disagree with you about the details you describe. But, the "process" itself needs to include interviewing people that may not have been considered before. I'm not talking about interviewing someone who doesn't have the qualifications to match the position. I'm referring to having an open process in which, admittedly, going in, you may have a candidate in which whom you have a strong interest and is the frontrunner, but you also interview others. Some interviewees will surprise during the interview process, and then, even if you don't hire that person, perhaps you pass on information to another GM/team about your impression of the quality of that candidate whom you did not have prior intimate insight about. There are many positives that come out of that which aren't obvious on the surface. The NFL has adopted this policy for a reason. Individual teams aren't in a vacuum like a single small business may be. Processes and policies in place for many years in larger organizations, and in government, etc, often inherently exclude some. It's sometimes not intentional or conscious, but the effect is the same. For those of us who are not a minority, the effect is not easy to see.

Race is a sensitive issue that can result in charged emotions. Many of us don't realize our prejudices, and I'm not here to call anyone out. I'm also realistic to know that it's unlikely I'll change lifelong tendencies. But, thinking about something in a broader scope can at least bring light to different angles that aren't always obvious to those not affected.

 

That's not racism. It could be nepotism favoritism or anything other than racism.

 

semantics. favoritism and racism aren't far off. call it what you want.

broadly, in a large organization, it is important to have policies in place that promote open consideration, and minimize favoritism. Studies support that when wider diversity exists in business, there is more innovation, and more economic success. So, it is in the best interest individually for a person of minority, and more broadly for the success of business and invention.

 

Still not racism. Huge difference.