For all you non-football fans, you may not know the NFL levied a fine of $200,000 against the Detroit Lions for their failure to interview any minority candidates for the head coach position that went to Steve
Mariucci.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/2003/0725/1585560.html

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/2003/0727/1586270.html


It was no secret that General Manager Matt Millen openly coveted Mariucci after the San Francisco 49ers fired him. Millen says he asked several black coaching candidates to interview, but they all declined. It was felt that Mariucci was a lock for the Lions job and the black coaches opted not to be interviewed for a job that wasn't really open.

This raises several issues. Herman Edwards, one of the NFL's three black head coaches, strongly suggests that minority coaching candidates should at the least interview for positions. If nothing else, their names become more familiar to NFL managers and owners and they learn from the interviewing process. Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy is on his second head coaching job after years of waiting and being passed over. One criticism of Dungy was that he didn't "interview well" and he learned from the rejection.

Additionally, can the Lions really be blamed if they ask candidates to interview and they are refused. They can't drag someone in who doesn't want to sit for an interview.

On the other hand, it's understandable if a minority candidate doesn't want to be part of a dog-and-pony show that covers the butt of the team that already knows it want to hire a particular white coach, but has to go through the motions of "diversity hiring" to satisfy the NFL.

Additionally, when the Dallas Cowboys hired Bill Parcells as their head coach they ducked under the minority interviewing process when owner Jerry Jones placed a phone call to Dennis Green, a personal friend, to ask Green if he was interested in the Cowboys job.

The NFL crafted this policy partially in response to a threat from Johnnie Cochran and other activists about the lack of black coaches in a league that is 73 percent black.

But is the NFL taking diversity hiring too far? The Detroit Lions have one of the most racially diverse coaching staffs and front offices in pro football, but now they've been made the bad guys who won't give a black coach a fair shake. Are they getting a bad rap or do they deserve the stiff fine the NFL imposed?

I love NFL football, especially the Denver Broncos and I have to say the Lions are getting a bad rap here. There are only 32 head coaching positions available in the NFL, and if we're going to run the numbers, 3 black head coaches out of 32 isn't that far off compared to the general population. It's a pretty small sample though, so I'm not sure that numbers apply here. In the Lions' situation, there was no racial thing going on there at all. Mariucci is a proven NFL head coach who has had previous success with the 49ers, and when he became available to them, it was a no brainer for them to snap him up. Anyone with an ounce of football knowledge would know that, and those with such knowledge would include any other potential candidate for the job. Going through the motions of interviewing black candidates would have been demeaning to those individuals. They would know they were only being interviewed because of their race, and that would be wrong.

Seems to me if someone wants to make an issue of numbers here, and I don't, but one could. One might ask how 'fair' it is that 73% of the NFL players are black. Once they've answered that in the spirit of 'fairness', then we can talk about the NBA.

I agree with most of what you posted Aquilla, but I don't think there's any big deal about the way the numbers break down racially in the NFL.

What sports a certain racial group gravitates to may be an issue to the leagues trying to market their product, but if there aren't a lot of white cornerbacks in the NFL, there's probably a shortage of Hispanic wide receivers, Asian point guards in the NBA and black goalies in the NHL.

Different strokes for different folks.

I'm trying to get a grip on what you're saying here. Are you saying that its okay for the NFL to ignore the 73% black player rate based on marketing? As you've noted, there aren't a lot of white cornerbacks in the NFL, but there are a lot of white cornerbacks in college, and even more in highschool.

On the one hand, yes the Lions got shafted on this ruling. However they could have gone further to be in compliance. This NFL rule will create some unfortunate situations where interviews will be done when no real interest is demonstrated.

I bet if the league had posted the fines and said that there would be a $200,000 fine for not being fully in compliance this unfortunate situation would not have happened.

Exactly...

Except in the future, "token" interviews will be given to candidates in whom the ownership has no real interest in hiring. This rule is idiotic and insulting to black coaches.

I cannot agree that simply because a certain percentage (in this case 73%) of one group of workers is a certain minority, that the same (or similar) percentage has to apply to other positions within the company. The jobs have completely different skill sets.

What's next, the NFL will "decide" that they need 5 black coaches (there are currently 3, I believe) and so the next 2 teams who are looking will be forced into choosing the minority coaches?

What's totally ludicrous about this entire Detroit Lion thing is that of all of the businesses in society, probably the LEAST racist one is professional sports. Pro sports are about winning contests, period. In order to do that, you need the best players, regardless of their race. Imagine if Phil Jackson (white) when he was the coach of the Chicago Bulls decided he didn't want to play Michael Jordan (black). Guess who would have been out the door. What would have happened to John Elway (white) if he refused to hand off the ball to Terrell Davis (black). I'll tell you, no Superbowl rings for John Elway. What happens if Warren Sapp(black) of Tampa Bay decides he doesn't want to play for Jon Gruden (white) because he replaced Tony Dungy (black)? Warren Sapp gets no ring either.

I think a person would be hard-pressed to prove there was any racism in professional sports nowdays, that's just not where their heads are. They are into performance and putting the best people they can into competition. This entire thing is absolutely ridiculous and I wish the NFL head office had the guts to tell Mr Cochran and company to go shove it.

Edited to Capitalize the city of Detriot, even though they've had a horrible NFL team......

Emphasis added by me

This is the lamest thing I've heard in a while. What more do they want? You want the team owner to drag some poor minority into his office, strap him to a chair, and FORCE him to be interviewed?

- Maybe we should have bribed them instead.

- Should they have contacted Al Sharpton and said: "look, none of the minorities we've asked to interview have agreed. Do YOU know of any who might be interested in this job?"

Detroit did nothing wrong, and went out of their way to ensure compliancy with the rules surrounding minority hiring. It is not their fault none took them up on the offer.

They said they didn't want to. And they didn't want to only because it APPEARED like another person was going to get it. Who knows, a black person might have just passed up an awesome job. But he will never know.

The only person who should be fined, is the person who fined Detroit in the first place.

--cheers

Maybe I was unclear Bikerdad.

I am not saying if 73 percent of all NFL players are black the league should hire a proportionate number of blacks as head coaches. In pro football there is no place for coaches--black or white--who aren't prepared to achieve at this level.

Additionally, most NFL clubs are privately owned. There are a lot of eccentric types that own teams, but no overtly racist ones that I know of.

What I meant is that there isn't much call for a slow-footed white cornerback who can't move his hips or an underweight black offensive tackle who can't get his pads under an onrushing lineman. If you run an Olympic record speed, but you can't catch a slant pass over the middle you're not going to be playing long for a Bill Parcells or Marvin Lewis no matter what color you are. The NFL is very primal in some aspects. If you can't compete at this level you're history, no matter how great you were in college.

Parcells continues to get work in the NFL for one reason: he gets the job done and makes winners out of losers. That counts a helluva lot more than skin color.

Lewis took the job of coaching the hapless Cincinnatti Bengals, possibly the worst team in pro football. Some sportswriters said he should have gotten a more plum job with the 49ers or Cowboys. However, there are no high expectations for Lewis with the Bengals. Reaching .500 would be a major accomplishment. If Lewis can take a perennial sad sack like the Bengals and make them first respectable, and later a winner then he can write his own ticket and will be a hot candidate for a more prestigious job in the future.

The NFL should not ignore the fact that there are only three black coaches out of 32 possible positions, but it's only a matter of time before the hiring (and firing) of black coaches becomes as routine as it is in the NBA.

Five or ten years from now this will be a non-issue. It will be based on the performance of a coach, not his skin color, that determines who gets hired or fired.

You're not unclear, you're contradictory.

On one hand, you say that the NFL shouldn't strive to hire a proportionate number of blacks as head coaches, then you turn around and say the NFL shouldn't ignore the fact that there are only 3 black head coaches out of 32. Why shouldn't they ignore it? Three in thirty two is a ratio, a proportion.

The only possible reason for finding fault with the 3/32 is because it somehow represents something other than what "should be." Well, what "should be"? 4 in 32? 23 in 32? 0 in 32? What is the basis for the "should be"?

BTW, let's hope everybody gives a sound pasting to the Raiders, eh!

Once again, having less people with blue eyes doesn't mean you are discriminating against blue-eyed people. The only discrimination here is coming from the NFL.

Its an amazingly simple concept.

I would prefer that the NFL be forced to INVESTIGATE the team when they have so few people of one race or another, rather than just being treated like bigots outright, and fined.

The basis of what "should be" is if blacks can compete at every position on the playing field they should have an equal opportunity to compete for every position (general manager, head coach, assistant coach) off the playfing field.

The NFL can reach this parity by one of two ways. Through a deliberate process and plan of action on their own or imposed upon them through a court of law in a class action suit against the league for substained and systemic acts of racial discrimination. Ignoring the league's miserable record in minority hiring is NOT an option.

Now which option would you prefer they try?

NT, you keep using troublesome terms like "parity." Parity is a mathematical concept, one that lends itself to use in equations, such as ratios, proportions, etc.

Nor have you established that blacks don't get an equal opportunity to compete for every position off the field. Hell, for what its worth, they have 9.375% of the head coaching positions, which is pretty darn close to statistical proportionality to the general population. Hire one more black coach and they'll be overrepresented, although not to the same extent as they're overrepresented on the field.

NFL teams hire coaches and other off-field folks the same way they hire players: who's going to give us the best performance. That's it. Find one black head coach candidate who was available that has the credentials of Mariucci.


Just one....

BTW, did any white candidates other than Mariucci interview? Were they seriously considered, or simply pro-forma to make the search look good?

I'm not sure I'm understanding your point, Bikerdad.

Parity may be a mathematical concept, but this is a systemic problem in the NFL. The three black coaches presently employed by the Bengals, Jets and Colts make up nine percent of the head coaches in the NFL.

Blacks make up 73 percent of the players in the NFL. Mathematically, you may think hiring a fourth or fifth African-American head coach is skewed in proportion to the general population, but we're not talking about the general population. I thought we were discussing the NFL?

By contrast, major league baseball is up to 38 percent with non-white managers running six of the 30 teams. In the NBA, black head coaches are common sights on the bench. The NFL by contrast didn't hire their first black head coach until 1987, when the Raiders elevated Art Shell to the top job.

You want a black candidate whose credentials are a match for Steve Mariucci? How about Dennis Green?

I guess you'll have to define "credentials" for a head coaching candidate. Green's winning percentage of .634 is better than legendary coaches such as Curly Lambeau (.624), Paul Brown (.621), Bill Walsh (.609), Tom Landry (.605) and Chuck Noll (.566). Mariucci's winning percentage is .594.

Neither coach got their teams to the Super Bowl.

Green, who was an assistant coach to Bill Walsh, would have been my choice over the relentlessly mediocre Dennis Erickson whom the 49ers (my favorite team) hired after firing Mariucci. Among Green's accomplishments as a head coach:

Most trips to the playoffs 1992-2000: 8: Vikings, all under Dennis Green, with 7 different quarterbacks.

2nd most trips to the playoffs since 1992: 7: 49ers and Cowboys, with the same quarterback each time.

The only coach to reach the playoffs in each of the five seasons of 1996-2000.

The only team to qualify for the playoffs each of the four years, 1997- 2000.

1998 - 2000 best three seasons in a row stretch in team history.

One of only three to coach team to win 15 games in a single season.

Wins regardless of the playing surface, temperature, home or away. Coached winning records outside (33-24), in domes (59-28), on grass (23-20), on artificial turf (69-32) and in temperatures below 40 degrees (7-3).

One of only eight men in NFL history to lead his team to the playoffs in each of his first three seasons ('92-94) as a head coach

Highest winning percentage in Vikings 40 year history.

Best record percentage in the National Football League of all active coaches.

Best League record 1992-2000: 92 wins against 52 losses (.639).

And how would I know if Detroit interviewed any white coaching candidates besides Mariucci? Nobody has made the claim that white men are underrepresented as head coaches in the NFL.

Nighttimer, are you claiming that the Lions didn't hire Dennis Green because he's black?

Nope.

From what I understand Aquilla, Dennis Green was one of the black candidates who declined to be interviewed by the Lions. It was no secret that he coveted the 49ers vacancy created when they fired Mariucci.

As it turns out, despite Walsh campaigning for him and Green almost drooling on television how badly he wanted the job, the 49ers didn't even interview him. The 49ers gave two black assistant coaches, Greg Blache and Ted Cottrell an interview and a follow-up interview before choosing former Seahawk coach Dennis Erickson.

Green's name was mentioned for vacancies with the Lions, Cowboys and 49ers and he missed out on all three.

Eventually he will be a head coach in the NFL again, but next time he might not want to be so choosey about what team comes calling.

Oh ok, that's more of a football thing than a race thing then. From a football standpoint, I happen to agree with you, but since I'm a Bronco's fan and not a niner's fan, I really don't care if they hire Erickson. One less team I have to worry about that way.

I do agree that Dennis Green will get another chance, maybe next season, or even this one, but the 49er's job would have been perfect for him. Dumb mistake on their part I think. Just keep him the heck out of the AFC West.

Okay, I have to backtrack on Mariucci's qualifications, because I was inadvertently placing him as one of the coaches who racked up the Niner's Superbowls. I just had lunch with a big Niner's fan, and he gave me the history and backstory on this situation.

Still, I stand by my point, only suggested thus far, but now articulated flat out. This is not a race thing, and any attempt to make it into one gives credence to the perception that anytime a black gets beat out on something like this, they're going to whine "racism, racism."

As noted, there are only 32 NFL head coaches. To succeed as a head coach requires a very special mix of characteristics, and that mix varies depending on who the coach is, who the coach is working for, etc. I no more find it odd that a GM or owner would set his sights on a particular coach than a coach setting his sights on a particular player. If Kobe gets sent to the Big House, the Lakers are going to be looking to replace him. Do you think they're going to hold interviews or tryouts? No, the management will sit down and decide who they want, and then try to get that player. If that doesn't work, then they'll move on to the next choice.

Over time, more blacks will become coaches in the NFL, when more work their way through the system the same way everybody else does. Getting to the level of head coach takes 10 to 25 years... how many black coaches are there who've been at it that long? How many are in the pipeline?

I don't have any idea why Green didn't even get interviewed for the Niner's position. Maybe management simply decided that Green's style didn't fit into their vision. That's their perogative. Frankly, I think interviewing people that you have no intention of hiring, unless the interviewee knows its simply for show and is OK with that, is simply a form of theft. You're stealing a person's time, and hopes.

Wrong. Dead wrong.

There are approximately 500-520 assistant coaches in the NFL. There are only slightly more than 65 black assistant coaches. This, in a league where two out of three players are black.

But let's take your point that "getting to the level of head coach takes 10 to 25 years...how many black coaches are there who've been at it that long."

Not long ago, Jon Gruden was breaking down film, serving as Sherm Lewis' understudy in Green Bay, but he has gotten two head coaching jobs before he turned 40. At age 60 with two decades of experience, Lewis is still waiting for his first head coaching job.

Guys like New England Patriots defensive coordinator Romeo Crennel (21 years of experience) and New York Jets defensive coordinator Ted Cottrell, who's coached in the United States Football League and the NFL over the last 21 years, are still waiting for jobs, along with Chicago's Greg Blache.

Yet, Jack Del Rio was still wet behind the ears, having served just one year as a defensive coordinator with the Carolina Panthers, when he landed a head coaching job with the Jacksonville Jaguars in the same off-season that his former boss with the Baltimore Ravens, Marvin Lewis, got his first opportunity with the Cincinnati Bengals. (Stephen A. Smith/Philadelphia Inquirer)

Black assistant coaches in the NFL frequently have more coaching experience than their white counterparts. I refer you to an excerpt from a 1998 essay entitlted "Racial Discriminaton in the NFL" by Martha Kim:

Owners of NFL franchises argue that the practice of hiring a head coach is not a racial issue but one based on objective criteria. They believe that when more black assistants become accomplished and gain more experience the doors to head-coaching positions will open with the same frequency as they do for their white counterparts. Yet a survey of who holds head coach and assistant coach positions in the NFL reveals that subjectivity based on race is a primary factor in NFL hiring practices.

Of the 30 current NFL head coaches, the three black head-coaches, Ray Rhodes of the Philadelphia Eagles, Tony Dungy of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and Dennis Green of the Minnesota Vikings, have a combined 33 years of coaching experience as either an assistant coach or coordinator in the NFL, for an average of 11 years each. In comparison, the 27 white head-coaches have an average of 6.3 years of total NFL experience, almost 5 years less than the average black head-coach. Rhodes, Dungy, and Green have an average of 6.7 years as an assistant coach and 4.3 years as a coordinator, but their white counterparts are still behind with 3.8 years as an assistant coach and 2.5 years as a coordinator. Why does it take Dungy and Rhodes 15 years in the NFL to become a head coach, while there are two white coaches who had absolutely no prior service in the NFL before being named to their first head-coaching position? Why is the road traveled by black head-coaches so much longer? Two of the most popular explanations given by team owners are that quality comes before quantity, and that the lack of collegiate head-coaching experience severely cripples black candidates.

Yet if we look at the resumes of the three black head-coaches, there is little if anything to prove that they were unsuccessful during their tenures. Considering the records of the teams Rhodes, Dungy, and Green served on, there is no reason to doubt their abilities. Ray Rhodes, as a San Francisco 49ers assistant coach and defensive coordinator, has five Superbowl wins to his credit, as many as anyone in the history of the 49ers organization. Dennis Green, has been a Big Ten coach of the year, and Tony Dungy led Minnesota to a 60-percent winning streak in four years as defense coordinator. While it is true that only Dennis Green had prior collegiate head-coaching experience, it is a common misconception that all the current white NFL head-coaches formerly held collegiate head-coaching positions. In fact, only about one third of the white head- coaches have held head-coaching positions at the collegiate level–the same ratio of experience that the black head-coaches have. Further, among the 10 white head-coaches who were previously college head-coaches, four of them held that position for a minimal two years or less.

The usual excuses offered for the scarcity of black head-coaches in the NFL–unremarkable winning percentiles and slight collegiate head-coaching experience–aren’t accurate and don’t explain the disparities at all, but rather lend credence to the suspicion that race is an underlying factor in NFL hiring practices.


Fifty-Percent Turnover in Two Seasons Changes Nothing


In modern football, as the pressure to succeed becomes increasingly dominant, head coaches are held largely accountable for the standings of their teams at the end of the season. Today, unsuccessful coaches are fired and productive ones are lured away at such a rapid rate that few NFL coaches become identified with any one organization. Nowhere is the evidence more preponderant than in the coaching changes of the past two years. Fifteen head-coaching positions have opened in the current season, including four new starting coaches. This means that in the past two years the turnover rate for head coaches in the NFL is 50 percent. One would assume that such a high turnover might drastically alter the overall character of the NFL head- coaching roster. Even though 15 head-coaching positions have been refilled in the past two seasons, the face of the NFL remains exactly the same as it was before–white.

Of the 15 head coaches hired since the 1997 season, five of them–Jon Gruden, Kevin Gilbride, Chan Gailey, Jim Fassel and Steve Mariucci–are rookie NFL head coaches. Among them they have averaged seven years of NFL coaching, with an average of four years as an assistant coach and three years as a coordinator. These statistics are significantly lower than the collective averages of the three current black head-coaches.

The criteria of high winning percentiles also seems to be flexibly generous in favor of white assistants and coordinators. Although all of the new white head-coaches except for Gruden had prior experience as collegiate head-coaches, Mariucci was California head coach for only one season, and that was a losing season in which his team lost six of its last seven games. And Fassel, who had a losing record as collegiate head coach, compiled a 45-51 record as a coordinator for four NFL teams in the six seasons before he became NFL head coach. Chan Gailey, the new head coach of the Dallas Cowboys, has like Rhodes been to four Superbowls. But Gailey’s teams, unlike those of Rhodes, lost all of their Superbowl matches. So why is it that the white candidates, who have fallen short of the standards set by owners, are chosen to lead their teams? Is there no one else that measures up to the criteria?

It is a moot point to argue that one of the three black head coaches is a more qualified candidate than one of the five new rookies, since Green, Dungy and Rhodes were already serving their teams in the capacity of head coach. However, the same issue is pertinent when comparing top black candidates and the white rookie head-coaches chosen in favor of them. Owners, no matter what their preference, could not have selected between Rhodes and Gruden nor between Dungy and Gailey. However, in the final round of musical chairs, they did have the opportunity to select between Gilbride and Emmitt Thomas of the Washington Redskins or between Mariucci and Sherman Lewis, offensive coordinator of the Green Bay Packers.

A comparison between any one of the top black candidates and the five rookie head coaches calls into question the standards that African American assistants and coordinators are being measured by. Lewis, Thomas, Terry Robiskie, Tyrone Willingham, and Ray Sherman, among the notable black candidates, have nearly twice the cumulative experience as the five rookie head coaches. And although these black coaches have on average almost four more years of NFL experience than their white counterparts, they are repeatedly overlooked. Sherman Lewis, for example, is a 15-year NFL veteran who has directed the infamous West Coast offense for the 49ers and the Green Bay Packers and along the way has managed to win four Superbowl championships. Yet Steve Mariucci, formerly a quarterback coach serving under Lewis, and Jon Gruden, an assistant coach whom Lewis mentored, were hired as head coaches of the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders, respectively. Even more glaring is the fact that neither team requested an interview with Lewis. In fact, for all 15 of the vacant head-coaching positions, there was only one African American candidate interviewed.

Sherman Lewis is still waiting for a job while Jack Del Rio, Dennis Erickson and others with less experience and credentials pass him by. What you blithely dismiss as "whining" seems to be a systemic pattern of exclusion of qualified black coaches. Apparently it seems the most outstanding of the "very special mix of characteristics" it takes for a coach to succeed in the NFL seems to be having white skin.

Maybe "anytime" a black gets beat out on something like this doesn't qualify as racism, but for guys like Sherman Lewis who has watched guys he mentored get head coaching jobs while he doesn't even get a courtesy call, all the time certainly DOES qualify as racism.

And one more point, Bikerdad? The Detroit Lions GM Matt Millen didn't get socked a $200,000 fine by a whiny black man. It was the very white commissioner of the NFL, Paul Tagliabue who did him in.

That was the result of a shakedown of the NFL by Cochran and crowd. Jesse Jackson has been doing stuff like that for years. $200,000 is the cost of Political Correctness nowdays I guess. There are alot of white assistant coaches in the NFL who have had more success than Sherm Lewis who have never been offered a job as a head coach. Gary Kubiak of the Broncos comes to mind and he's an offensive coach, ie. more prone for advancement than a defensive coach is. Larry Coyer of the Broncos has been coaching forever and never had a shot, and as far as the stats you cited on the number of black assistant coaches in the NFL, I am suspect of them. The Denver Broncos staff has 18 assistant coaches on it and 6 of them are black. Unless the Broncos are especially 'progressive', and they are more about winning than anything else as are all NFL teams, I find the numbers cited in your article suspect. But, oops! I forgot, this isn't about numbers is it? This is about competition. That's why it's ok that there is an overwhelming number of, disproportionate actually, of black players in the NFL. It's not about race, it's about winning........

So, we accept the fact that there are a disproportionate number of black players in the NFL because the best players should be the ones who get to make the rosters. Fair? I think so. However, now we use that percentage as an argument for why there should be more black head coaches? Fair? No, it's not. You can't have it both ways.

The Detroit Lions wanted Mariucci because he has the reputation of developing young QBs, and the Lions have a good young QB in Joey Harrington. Mariucci inherited a horrible salary cap situation in San Francisco and basically had to rebuild his team with young people, exactly what's needed in Detriot. He was the natural choice and EVERYONE in the NFL knew that. Interviewing black "candidates" for a job they weren't going to get would have been a horribly racist thing to do, it would have been tokenism at it's worst.

This fine is nothing more than a token pay-off to a black shakedown artist and it's disgusting. Paul Tagliabue is a wimp and should be replaced by someone with some character. I hear Condi Rice is interested in the job. I betcha she wouldn't have fined the Lions.

You can believe or disbelieve the figures I quoted as you wish Aquilla. Your disclination to accept facts doesn't invalidate them.

Are you seriously trying to make the case that Gary Kubiak with his nine years of coaching experience is a more worthy (or just as worthy) candidate for a head coaching gig than Sherman Lewis with his 21 years of experience? How many coaches have worked under Kubiak and later went on to become a head coach AND win a Super Bowl as Jon "Chucky" Gruden who worked under Lewis?

You compare Lewis's bio http://www.detroitlions.com/bio.cfm?bio_id=106 with that of Kubiak's on the Broncos website and it's not even a close comparison. Lewis is an offensive coordinator, same as Kubiak, so according to your theory about being an offensive-minded coach they're both on equal footing. Funny thing though about that theory. Of the four guys that got head coaching jobs in the NFL this year (Jack Del Rio, Marvin Lewis, Bill Parcells, Steve Mariucci) all but Mooch are known as defensive oriented coaches.

Secondly, what young quarterbacks are you talking about Mariucci mentoring? He inherited a fragile Steve Young and replaced him with the 33-year old Jeff Garcia. Other "young" quarterbacks Mooch "developed" as the coach of the 49ers Tim Rattay, Giovanni Carmazzi and Jim Druckenmiller. No candidates for Canton in that lot.

Your comment about a "token pay-off to a black shakedown artist" is an opinion I've come to expect when black activists point out the disparities of the NFL, but it's just your opinion.

Got any facts to back up the rhetoric?

Some comparisons...

1. (Dallas)Parcels vs. Green: I'd take the big Tuna over Dennis Green any day. The reason is simple, what has Dennis Green won in the NFL? Where are the Superbowl rings? Where are the NFC championship trophies? Winning a lot of games is nice, but where is the Bling Bling? Parcels numbers don't stand up to Green's, but somehow if you were Jerry Jones, you would have picked Parcels as well.

2. (Detroit)Mooch vs. Lewis: How many years of head coaching experience does Lewis have? ZERO, Mooch has six. Mooch, like it or not, has experience at the position. Mooch, like it or not, is a winner in the position that Lewis has no experience at. Lewis has had the benefit of coaching for teams that had the likes of Montana, Young, Favre. Mooch got the tail end of Young. I have to admit though, Detroit with those two coaches is a very scary thought....

You brought up Lewis and Chucky. If Lewis is such a good mentor, why wasn't he given the head coaching job over Chucky? You can't say Al Davis is racist, after all he did hire Art Shell as Head Coach. Could there be other intagables other than one's resume, like personality, salary, etc.?

How many black NCAA coaches are there? How many have won the National Championship? Steve Spurrier had no difficulty landing a job in the NFL. Do you think Bobby Bowden would have a problem getting a job in the NFL if he wanted to make the transition? I'm guessing not.

It is whining. Just because someone else got to take a shortcut (Mooch, Chucky, Del Rio), doesn't mean everyone gets to (Spurrier, Parcells, Fassel). Instead of complaining, go to the college level and prove you're a winner. If Lewis won the National Championship or several major bowls as a head coach, he'd would be much more sought after.

Go Raiders!!!

I think at present time, in D I-AA, there are 5 or 6. Out of 118 or so teams. Wicked scary. And 0 have won national Championships, which I really don't see what has to do with anything .



As I said above, the percentage of African-American college coaches is dreadful. The problem is not that a few white coaches have gotten to take short cuts, it's the fact that usually get those shortcuts over qualified black coaches. You also make excuses for white coaches that got to take shortcuts yet then lambast black coaches for "whining" and tell them to "go to the college level and prove you're a winner." It's this prevalent attitude that will keep blacks from getting those head coaching jobs. (BTW, if anyone wants to keep by-passing Crennel in N.E., be my guest. That guy can coach, keep him with my Patsies )

I just have one question. Why is it so terrible that there are so few black coaches, yet it's not a problem that 73 percent of the players are black? Hmmm.... probably because Cochran isn't threatening to sue on behalf of white people. This is hipocracy at it's best. Everything has to be made into a PC race game.

Eh? I don't really understand what you mean here, but really apples and oranges. NFL teams will constantly take the best athletes to perform for their teams. But when it comes to needing a face and voice for that team and organization, they look for the white guys. That is the problem.

Actually...that is probably precisely WHY tis an issue. If 73% (using your figures) of the players are black, it seems logical that coaching staffs (who generally come from a pool of former players who then went the coaching route) would be at least closer to 50/50...at least that is logical to me. Not every former player is cut out to be a coach just as not every coach started out as a player. Most coaches were once players themselves so you would think that among this 73% there would be more than a handful of potential coaches. I think it's highly suspect, but that's just me.

Are there people who make race an issue when it's not? Yes, yes there are. But when a league is predominantly black yet its coaches are predominantly white (and the players are pretty much without exception, taken on "merit" and "talent" and "potential" because that's the nature of the beast...so if it's 73% black, then that's where the current "talent" lies), it certainly looks awfully suspicious. Coaching and playing are NOT the same, no...but I think most would agree that generally coaches are better when they have that playing experience. My husband wants to get into coaching football (defense) when he gets out of the Army. He only played Pop Warner (he's too skinny to play football - he's 6'2" and just over 150 lbs. - ALL muscle, but he'd be broken in two on a football field), but he has a tremendous knowledge of the game and an 'eye' for things as well as an ability to be a great mentor/teacher/leader. I would think (based upon my knowledge) people like him are the exception, not the rule. It's not just the NFL either...it's the NBA as well. I know pro-sports are FAR more complicated (with respect to the administrative stuff) than what we are privy to, so I'm sure that there is a LOT of inner circle dealings (hiring coaches within certain circles...a "who you know" thing just like most other jobs) without ever really opening up the "application" to others. In a league where 73% (again, using your figures) of the players are black, it certainly seems odd that such a small percentage of coaches are black. If it were the other way around (majority white league, with lots of black coaches) it would be equally strange (actually MORE strange because that's just not how things usually work in the U.S.). I don't know enough about the Detroit situation to really say one way or another.

Soooo....Should there be more white players on the Lions team? Why wouldn't that be a parity issue? It's not as though being a player means being paid some paltry amount of money, certainly more than a factory worker would make. And there's the fame (which, for the Lions, is sometimes)...

Looms has a point here. What's wrong with parity across the board?

(And for that matter, why don't we ever have a President of the U.S. who isn't white and male?)

Does anyone think for a moment that any owner of any of the 32 NFL teams wouldn't hire a coach because he is black? Doesn't this strike you as ludicrous?

Just imagine that you own a team valued at nearly a billion dollars. Your sole mission as owner is to produce a winning team. It's in your financial interest to win. If your team wins, you get a few hundred million more to play with. You are willing to pay tens of millions of dollars in salary to any overweight football player, regardless of his race, as long as he can compete. In fact, nearly 75 percent of your players are black. The community that your team calls its "home" is an urban market with a substantial black population and a City Council or Board of Supervisors that treats "diversity" as a religion. Yet, for some reason---perhaps your latent racism---you are going to hire lesser-qualified white coaches over better-qualified black coaches? – Ward Connerly

Johnny Cochran is threatening a lawsuit unless the NFL begins to “award any NFL team that hires more black coaches extra draft choices, and, in turn, withhold draft picks from teams not willing to play along.”

According to the article Cochran publicly called on the NFL to hire and fire coaches and team executives by race.

Does anyone have a problem with this, besides me? Isn't the the exact opposite of what the civil rights movement was all about?

Where are the cries from Mr. Cochran and civil rights groups to “…ensure that more Vietnamese and Jews get to play offensive tackle. Or, even more Hispanics and Native Americans as running backs.”

The NFL caves in to Johnnie Cochran

Connerly ignores some key facts in his quote here. The money in the NFL, make that all of sports, is not truly made on the field. It is made in the marketing and selling of apparel and tickets. Watch the NFL today, watch it Monday night, take a look at the fans and their breakdown...mostly white. The stadiums, by and large, are not in inner-city neighborhoods, but outside of city limits. I wish I had statistics for this, but I do not...(I will search). For example (and I know this is only one team), my beloved New England Patriots play their games in Foxborough, MA. A white, majority upper-class suburb of Boston, not a hight minority population. Another fact,(again don't the official statistics, I will search) is the selling of apparell. I heard a stat from the NBA a few years ago, that number 3 or 4 on the top jersey sellers was the white Jason Williams of the Memphis Grizzlies. White fans were buying his jersey in redicilous amounts compared to other players of similar ability. The reason..he broke the "white player" mold of the NBA. My reason for bringing this up is this. do we think the fans of the NFL will be that drastically different? I am willing to bet that jerseys of white players probably out-sell those of black players with similar ability. Last season's top jersey sellers...in order. (Source: Charlotte Observer/NFL)

Brian Urlacher (No. 54) Bears--white

Tom Brady (No. 12) Patriots--white

Michael Vick (No. 7) Falcons--black

Brett Favre (No. 4) Packers--white

Ricky Williams (No. 34) Dolphins--black

Donovan McNabb (No. 5) Eagles--black

Emmitt Smith (No. 22) Cowboys--black

Terrell Owens (No. 81) 49ers--black

Drew Bledsoe (No. 11) Bills--white

Shaun Alexander (No. 37) Seahawks--black

Yes, we have more black then white players here. But out of the top 5, three are white. That is telling in a league where 75% of the players are black.
So, we have white fans and white jerseys selling well, it is that much of a reach to assume the organization wants a white face and voice for their majority black players?? I don't think so. Of course, that doesn't make it right, although it does make it "white".

Interestingly, you have 10 items listed from 10 different teams. I would argue that each person is the best player on his team and it has nothing to do with race. If I think of the Bears, I think Urlacher. Bills=Bledsoe. Falcons=Vick. 49ers=T.O. What's so telling about that? A person normally has a favorite team, and most people will buy one jersey of the best player for that team. I guarantee you I'm buying a Portis or Plummer jersey before I even think about buying a Brockermeyer or Foster one! And it has nothing to do with race!

According to the coaching staff pages on NFL.com (teams chosen at random):
The KC Chiefs' coaching staff consists of 12 guys with NO pro experience, 1 with 1 year of CFL, and 7 guys with extensive pro playing experience
Atlanta has 13 with no pro experience and 3 with. NE has 10 with no experience and 4 with. St. Louis has 12 with no pro experience, 5 with.
The assumption was made that coaching staffs 'generally come from a pool of former players who then went the coaching route', and that assumption appears to be wrong. So comparing the racial makeup of players to coaches is irrelevant. With that in mind, perhaps considering the rate of african-american coaches to the general population would be a better indicator. After all, if the majority of these coaches are not coming from the NFL, why should the rates in the NFL be quoted to prove a point?

You can rattle off the black coaches with years of experience, but their are a ton of white coaches with resumes just as long. I don't see what that has to do with it. Keeping a job (or continually getting a new one) doesn't mean you deserve your own team!
Umm, Brett Favre when he was QB coach in Green Bay. And Garcia may have been 29 when he started with the 49ers and Mariucci (not 33 as you stated), but he was still an unproven QB in the NFL (it was his first year) and you can not argue that he is pretty damn good. Mariucci definitely deserves some credit for that, especially when you consider this season without Mariucci when compared to the rest of his career with him!

And how does that prove that Lewis would make a good head coach? I don't understand the logic in this connection.
And he was a head coach, compiling a 37-41-1 reg. season record, 1-2 playoffs, no Super Bowl appearances.
And he was a head coach, with an impressive 97-62 regular season record, but just 4-8 in the postseason with no Super Bowl appearances.
Still a head coach, 64-48 record regular season, 2-5 playoffs, no Super Bowl appearances.

This doesn't mean other black coaches shouldn't get a shot, I'm just pointing out that when the quoted article states 'there is little if anything to prove that they were unsuccessful during their tenures', I think their head coaching resumes don't prove that they have done anything especially great, and in the case of Rhodes was actually pretty bad.
Really? I bet you that most people recognize Daunte Culpepper and Randy Moss before Mike Tice. My point is that the players tend to be the face of the team and get more press coverage than the coaches do. That's why the league is so particular about player conduct both on and off the field.

If this was the case, wouldn't the list be topped by all of the major markets?! Green Bay is a tiny market, how could Farve be so high on the list if everyone is buying the jersey of their favorite player? Buffalo would also be a bit of smaller market so Bledsoe appears unnaturally high here too.



This is going back to a former poster that claimed coaches all had to go through the system before becoming a head coach. So, then why is the case that a white coach working under a black coach becomes a head coach before his mentor?? Is there another plausible explanation other then race, if so, I would like to hear it.

You are incorrectly assuming that only people living in a certain market are fans of that team. I live in Arizona but am a Bronco fan. I know people in this town that are die-hard Packer fans, some of which actually own shares in the team! Guess which jersey they buy? Furthermore, a recent national poll (which ranked popularity) found that the Dallas Cowboys and the Green Bay Packers tied for first in the poll (and Green Bay has been in the top 3 in each poll since 1998), with both teams receiving 12 percent of the vote. The results of said poll can be found here. And when you're talking about Bledsoe, remember that you have all of his 'new' fans in Buffalo, plus his 'old' fans in New England. A lot of fans that like Bledsoe with the Patriots will keep being a Bledsoe fan no matter where he goes.


I'll quote an article I found from 1999 regarding this very topic (Lewis and Gruden) :
Article here.

Interesting article, but a bit dated, especially when debating Sherm Lewis. Lewis has served under Ray Rhodes for the past few years and I believe calling the plays, but alas no job. This is even hinted at in the article:



The Packers didn't so great but now Lewis is in Detroit as offensive coordinator. Don't know if he is calling the plays. However, he now has experience calling plays and is still desirable as an offensive coordinator, so the argument stated in your article is out the window. Thanks for the read though.


On your other list, the Bucs are fourth in popularity. Unquestionably, Warren Sapp is their star player, he is nowhere to be seen in the top ten jerseys. The Vikings are number 7, where is Randy Moss? The Rams are 11, where is Marshall Faulk? I understand your thinking and it makes sense, but there are many exceptions that would seem to prove both our points. (Another interesting read though, thanks)

Actually, Ray Rhodes was only coach in Green Bay for one season, going 8-8 in 1999. Lewis did call the plays that year, but the results were mixed. His play calling led to Favre having more INTs than TDs for the first time since 1993, his lowest rating since his 2nd full year as a starter, and the team missing the playoffs for the first time since 1992. Hardly a ringing endorsement for his playcalling abilities.



Sapp and Moss are star players, but let's face it. They have just as much negative attention surrounding them as they do talent on the field. It's pretty easy to see that while they are the most famous player on their team, they are not really very popular with the fans. A lot of message boards on the net have fans of those two teams calling for those players to be traded because their attitudes detract from the team (look at Keyshawn Johnson in Tampa Bay for proof that attitude will get you in trouble with your team and fans alike). I will give you Faulk. He has never achieved a popularity level on par with his on-field accomplishments. He wasn't even listed in Beckett's football card pricing until after his move to St. Louis and their achievements there (prices are set by demand from a lot of the same people that spend their money on jerseys). He was categorized as a 'star' player, but his value to the fans has never been that high. I could see the argument that the Rams are loaded with talent, however, and the fans would be split between him, Holt, Bruce, and Warner.

Detroit fans have little to cheer for lately, so I am not surprised to see the jersey for Charles Rogers crack the top ten, especially when you cosider he also attended college at Michigan State. This would keep a lot of fan support for him, similar to the way Plummer was insanely popular in Arizona when he was first drafted. As for Palmer, I think him being on the list would have much to do with being the #1 pick, a quarterback, and the supposed savior of the Bengals franchise. I don't think Cincinnati fans would care if the guy were purple with two heads as long as he could run and throw. Both of these guys have popularity that surpass the teams they play, so they would supplant a few teams from the jersey list.

I understand your position as well, but I am having a really hard time acceptin the notion that the NFL has this racist motivation behind it's hirings. And I'm all for the best man getting the job, regardless of race. I just don't think the Johnny Cochrane method of hiring NFL coaches is the right approach at all.