Rooney rule to change
@"medaille" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"medaille" said: There's no requirement to interview women. They have to hire from the pool of minorities, of which women are now included. So in practicality, there's probably not going to be much difference given the small pool of women coaches, but if you do interview a woman, you just have to interview one less person based on race or skin color.Forgive me for not reading the article lol......teams are "forced" to hire from the pool of minorities?
Isn't that the definition of the token black guy?edit....no shit. They have to hire someone for the color of their skin. So in the 2040's when white people are no longer the majority, do we qualify for all these minority programs?
I must have been without enough coffee this morning. They are forced to have at least one minority assistant coach on the offensive side of the ball. That is new. They are forced to at least interview a certain number of minorities (I think 2) before making a hire for high level coaches. This is the same as it's always been, it's just now they can include women to meet the requirement for interviewing a certain number of minorities before hiring.
Correct. I might have quoted the wrong post. But the tread went into ownership. You can’t get ownership to whatever diversity level you want without said diverse candidates having the resources to purchase a hypothetical franchise.
@"Waterboy" said:Yes, links from Brietbart or FoxNews trumps history.@"jargomcfargo" said:So, you have nothing?@"Waterboy" said:History.@"jargomcfargo" said: It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires. Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do. Source??
@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
@"StickyBun" said:There you go.... LOL So if we're going to fix these management issues for one race through specialized quotas, are we going to make sure that whites, Latinos (larger % of population than blacks) and especially white women are proportionately represented on the playing field as well? Seems there is a large and disproportionate number of millionaires running around on the field each Sunday that are not representative of those races / genders. How about transgenders, shouldn't they be represented as well?@"Waterboy" said:Yes, links from Brietbart or FoxNews trumps history.@"jargomcfargo" said:So, you have nothing?@"Waterboy" said:History.@"jargomcfargo" said: It's about opportunity. Black ownership would be a good start toward achieving the diversity the NFL desires. Affirmative action rules don't seem to be very effective but you have to start someplace. Like it or not, it's the right thing to do. Source??
Yeah, let's get rid of this thread
@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
@"medaille" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"medaille" said: There's no requirement to interview women. They have to hire from the pool of minorities, of which women are now included. So in practicality, there's probably not going to be much difference given the small pool of women coaches, but if you do interview a woman, you just have to interview one less person based on race or skin color.Forgive me for not reading the article lol......teams are "forced" to hire from the pool of minorities?
Isn't that the definition of the token black guy?edit....no shit. They have to hire someone for the color of their skin. So in the 2040's when white people are no longer the majority, do we qualify for all these minority programs?
I must have been without enough coffee this morning. They are forced to have at least one minority assistant coach on the offensive side of the ball. That is new. They are forced to at least interview a certain number of minorities (I think 2) before making a hire for high level coaches. This is the same as it's always been, it's just now they can include women to meet the requirement for interviewing a certain number of minorities before hiring.
Interestingly the forced one minority coach on the Offensive side is paid out of a league fund not the individual team ownership. Goodell now has a little more power..great but he is nothing but a water boy to ownership anyway. I really think this a way for ownership to save some face in the midst of the Flores debacle. Notice how fast the whole Gruden thing disappeared with all the connections to the Redskins/Snyder who is also known for very bad behavior (mostly against women). This is a Billionaires club that is very adept at PR that makes you look over there while they are operating for their own benefit over here :) Sleight of hand and a twist of fate - U2 :)
@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
I agree with you, you are guilty of being sexist and judgmental in this case, and it is probably something you need to address on an individual level by getting some type of help to deal with your personal issue. It's not something I have done in the past as I have always made sure to at least phone screen any candidate with qualifications that meet the criteria of what I'm looking for. I also try to involve others in the process and ask them pointedly to give me their opinions candidly. In environment where I have gained my team's trust, the issue of who to hire has almost always ended with a nice diverse team with diverse talents. You can pass every dam law in the book, but they tend to screw over others because no law can be written specifically enough to not end up screwing over somebody. There are many white males being left behind because laws such as these have went overboard, and it's now cool to put it to the white man. That doesn't work over the long-term and we'll see just how popular this crap has been come November. People can only be screwed over so much. Once again, are we also going to level the field of "millionaires" in the player pool that are disproportionately not white? Aren't white men, females, and even Native Americans underrepresented on the playing field? It has proven over time not to work when you're punishing people due to their race and most of these actions today have taken on the form of doing just that. Cherry picking management jobs in the NFL may be an easy target. Unfortunately, it's far from the only one, and other attempts have went off the deep end in terms of supposedly being "fair". Look at the Ivy League swimming results as the extreme in this case. lol
@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
I just don't believe preconceptions or prejudgements based on race or gender exist in the NFL anymore because it is all about winning. This isn't 1962 and owners are going to do whatever they can to win games. Do you really believe an owner would bypass a coach or assistant coach because of their skin color? They dont do it with players so why would they do it with coaches? Again, the Browns just made DeSean Watson the highest paid player in league history.
@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
Because the NFL really cares about women?The teams are the NFL. This is purely marketing. And stupid marketing.
@"supafreak84" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
I just don't believe preconceptions or prejudgements based on race or gender exist in the NFL anymore because it is all about winning. This isn't 1962 and owners are going to do whatever they can to win games. Do you really believe an owner would bypass a coach or assistant coach because of their skin color? They dont do it with players so why would they do it with coaches? Again, the Browns just made DeSean Watson the highest paid player in league history.
Because they care about women.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
That's what you took from MB's example? SMH.
@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
Why did you only have 5 or 6 to choose from? Did somebody pare down your choices by using preconceptions and judgements?Aren't those maybe often good things that are based on history and personal experience? We all say we want our kids to not prejudice, but then we teach them stranger danger, we are taught to prejudice from as soon as we are able to understand others....DONT TOUCH HOT!!!, not all prejudgements or bias are good obviously but think about how many time your pre judgements of people are correct and that is likely why you had that thought on this particular woman in the first place. Would you have missed out, yes, and that would have sucked for you, but your instincts were there for a reason, and quite often they aren't based on unfounded bias or misconception.
@"StickyBun" said:@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
That's what you took from MB's example? SMH.
Yes, he threw out a candidate based solely on her age. In nearly thirty years of hiring, I've never once been guilty of doing something that dumb. I would say he is lucky he hasn't been sued or run into issues post hire when that's his view on people's abilities based on a characteristic. The people that are loudest in these debates against discrimination seem to be the ones most likely to be creating the problem in the first place. Correlated to this are all the hypocrites in government requiring the people to mask up, when they're the first ones to avoid it. Of course, when busted like Nancy, AOC, and the libtard mayors amongst others, they just claim some type of discrimination from those that catch them. It's a lot of fun dealing with the hypocritical environment that's dominating all the discourse today. That will change a bit come November.
@"JimmyinSD" said:@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
Why did you only have 5 or 6 to choose from? Did somebody pare down your choices by using preconceptions and judgements?
Why would you say that? HR obviously pared them down based on experience and qualifications for the position.Your 2nd paragraph made me laugh out loud. Apparently, you think judging people based on race, religion, etc is no different than making a judgement about the temperature of the stove. I'm going to put that one in my notes! LOL.
Well that was fun
@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
Why did you only have 5 or 6 to choose from? Did somebody pare down your choices by using preconceptions and judgements?
Why would you say that? HR obviously pared them down based on experience and qualifications for the position.Your 2nd paragraph made me laugh out loud. Apparently, you think judging people based on race, religion, etc is no different than making a judgement about the temperature of the stove. I'm going to put that one in my notes! LOL.
So now, you're the one who did the racist action, and you're pointing the racism finger at others. LOLI'd love some of you to go to the neighborhoods I worked in when I was working on the South Side of Chicago. If you don't have a little bit of knowledge about your environment, you weren't long for your life. I took one turn down a wrong street and was lucky to come out alive as they saw I didn't belong. There were some learned stereotypes, but any non-moron knew that it doesn't represent an entire race, age, class, sex or whatever, and it doesn't make a candidate of these "lesser" when it comes to hiring for a job. Only somebody with an issue applies it in those situations. Some people are great at exploiting isolated situations that they've experienced and applying the wrong they perpetuated on others to everyone else, and then claiming how great they are. See it every day, and it borders on ridiculous.
@"Waterboy" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"AGRforever" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"supafreak84" said:@"StickyBun" said:@"supafreak84" said: Whatever happened to just hiring the best person for the job (regardless of anything) without having to worry about being branded as a racist or bigot? The NFL is now telling teams they MUST hire a female or minority candidate to work a coaching position that works closely with the head coach. I'm sure that will go over great in the coaching community. Because you can't trust corporations/teams to do that. You act like its common sense and is happening. It isn't. Bias comes into play. So you have horseshit rules like this one. Yes, I don't agree with forcing anyone to do anything like this in principle. But its been proven time and again certain peoples will be prejudiced against time and again if you don't enact these kinds of rules. How do you explain women doing exactly the same job as men and getting paid less? The explanation is because there is inherent bias. And who gives a shit what the coaching community thinks? They'll adapt.Again, I don't like rules like this. Because IMO for sure some women that don't necessarily deserve it will get hired to fill the quota. But if you don't think that some white men that get these opportunities also don't deserve it over black candidates, you're fooling yourself. So now they enact rules that I hate because of this. Give them a shot.
What statistical data or evidence can you point to that supports racist or bigoted hiring practices are going on in the NFL today?
It's not racism or bigotry the NFL is trying to defeat. It's preconceptions, prejudgements. Something we're all guilty of to one degree or another.
I know, and what better way then to require all teams to hire a token black guy. I bet that other guy that missed out on the position will have zero resentment.
People have been saying such things for 70 years. But we never get anywhere unless we challenge our preconceptions.Let me give you an example. I hired a designer a couple years ago. 5 or 6 resumes were filtered through HR. I dismissed one without even looking at her book because, based on when she graduated college, I knew she was older. My unwitting assumption was that an older designer couldn't give me that fresh, edgy kind of design my team was looking for. I interviewed the others. Unimpressed, I brought her in. She blew me away, I hired her and she's been my best designer ever since.
What I did was bullshit. And wrong. It's why companies put measures in place to avoid this kind of discrimination. We all discriminate. All the time. Based on age, gender, race, religion, politics, disability, the minivan in the left lane with the Trump sticker....hell, even the sound of one's name. I'm for whatever measures can help us challenge our preconceptions and help us determine the best candidate regardless of those factors.
Good thing you hired her, otherwise she coulda sued your ass.
Why did you only have 5 or 6 to choose from? Did somebody pare down your choices by using preconceptions and judgements?
Why would you say that? HR obviously pared them down based on experience and qualifications for the position.Your 2nd paragraph made me laugh out loud. Apparently, you think judging people based on race, religion, etc is no different than making a judgement about the temperature of the stove. I'm going to put that one in my notes! LOL.
So now, you're the one who did the racist action, and you're pointing the racism finger at others. LOL
Racist?
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.