Football Topic and Racism - Stay Out If You Don't Want In

[Daz]

http://www.freep.com/sports/lions/johnnie5_20030205.htm


This strikes me as one of the stupidest and racist anti-racism
movements I can think of in recent days. You *Must* interview
a minority candidate? That is about stupid. How would you
feel as a coach, knowing you were selected so the NFL can say
'we have black coaches, too.'

Mariucci was a godsend for the city of Detroit, where the Lions
have become a laughingstock. He is probably one of the most
able, qualified applicants they could have gotten.

Instead, they are being charged with racism.

They didn't hire a white coach, they hired a winning coach.

[Sylvos]

**DISCLAIMER: I do not follow football. I do not like the sport, and freely admit to only the most basic of knowledge of it. **

That's totally lame. There is a pathetic push for equality for all by granting special privledges to minority groups. Oxymoron? Hell yes. I have never, ever agreed with the idea of 'reserved' options or placements for members of a minority group.

I do heartily support the idea of equality for all regardless of ethnic background, gender or anything other than their skills and abilities. This equality cannot be forced upon anybody; it is a mindset that must be learned or taught by wiser minds than me.

The article speaks of minority coaches who were approached but didn't want a 'token' interview. Do people honestly believe that minority members who land a job, or university posting, solely due to their background are happy with that? Sure they're probably happy for the opportunity, but pride is a very real element for every human being and to grant a position based on something other than skills or qualifications is just another form of racism. 'You're not good enough to get this job/posting on your own merits, but because you're X you can have it anyway'

Feh

[Laralas]

I live in metro detroit, and I'm a HUGE lions fan. There are really two issues here. First, I don't think anyone has a problem with the Lions hiring Mooch. It was the perfect fit for the team, he runs close to the same system that Marty ran and hes a proven winner with close ties to the state.

Second, the problem is the way they went about the hiring. The league has rules in place that state if you have a coaching position open they you must interview at least one minority for the position, unless it is filled internally. That means that when Marty was fired the lions were required to announce they were going to find the best canadite for the job. They didn't do that, Matt Millen, the president and GM of the lions, said that Mooch was the front runner, however they would follow the league rules and interview a minority to make sure they didn't break any rules. Thats what the lawers are pissed about. By saying Mooch was the front runner it in essence bypassed the ruling from the NFL. It made any black coach that interviewed for the job look like an Uncle Tom, thats why they couldn't get any blacks to interview.

Mooch would have gotten the job no matter what, Millen just should have keep his mouth shut until they completed all the necessary interviews. Actually, the real problem here is the completly stupid rule in the first place, but thats another post...


Laralas the Grey, Lions fan

PS anything written by beat reporter Curt Sylvester needs to be taken with a grain of salt, hes one bitter SOB

[thanuk]

What else did you really expect from the NFL?

[rylan]

Yeah, we might as well give extra points to certain minorities too... oh wait, we already do that in colleges and govermnent jobs :roll:

[thanuk]

Next thing you know, every team will be required to have one short, slow wide receiver who can't jump. (read: white)

[Vahok]

Next thing you know, every team will be required to have one short, slow wide receiver who can't jump. (read: white)

Sweet, Denver already has one one those! McCaffrey isn't short, does that still count?

[Musi]

*rant* It was a good thing to try to have equality because for a long time, minorities and women could not get hired. But now white men are the most discriminated against (usually). :(

I've been passed up for so many jobs in the past three years because the ads usually say "Women and minorities encouraged to apply", so when I go to apply, IF I'm lucky enough to get an interview, they see that I'm a white female and they need a black male or an asian female, I don't get the job. Even if I have more education and experience :evil:

If the economy ever gets better, and I do somehow get a job, I'll always wonder if I got it because of my knowledge in that area, or because they needed to fill a quota :roll: I want to know that I got it because I was qualified, even if that means waiting for a company that really sees me for what I can do. */end rant*

Sorry if I went a little off the topic about football :oops:

[Gurns]

Bah, the fookin' BBS ate my attempt at posting. Here's a brief reconstruction.

Please stop discussing hiring, "reserved slots", and the like, in terms of this policy. Policies like the one mentioned usually say "be able to demonstrate you considered minority applicants." They don't say anything about hiring, that's a different policy. (The NFL is dum, they say 'interview'. You'd think with a million lawyers, they'd know better.) Such policies don't say anything about school admissions, those are different, too.

In this particular situation, you want equality? How do football coaches and other rare occupations traditionally get hired? Open applications? Web search of resumes? Heck, no. It's classic "old boy network". You don't even get considered unless you know the right people, and to some extent, unless you are the "right people".

So this policy says "Please be able to pretend you had an open, meritocratic selection process, before you hire the guy you were going to hire anyway." The only reason it's going to work in favor of anyone is if, by encouraging a broader process, the organization discovers someone better than the person they were going to hire, someone they wouldn't have found otherwise. (Theoretically. As I say, hiring is a different policy, a different process, a different debate.)

I would agree that to sue in this case...um, maybe I better not say anything potentially slanderous about certain lawyers.

[Gurns]

If the economy ever gets better, and I do somehow get a job, I'll always wonder if I got it because of my knowledge in that area, or because they needed to fill a quota

Even if you accept the most cynical view of minority hiring (which I do not), your own post points out that you'll never be hired "because they needed to fill a quota." Companies employ "enough" white females already. So they'll only hire you because they think you'll be good at your job.

Or because you went to the same school as the boss. Or because the Personnel Manager likes the way you look. Or because somebody who works there plays golf with your husband. Or any of the hundreds of other reasons people get hired, which have no relationship to their expected job performance.

Feel better?

[Kossuth]

Next thing you know, every team will be required to have one short, slow wide receiver who can't jump. (read: white)

Yeah, and this rule will go down in the books as the "Chrebet clause". 8)

[thanuk]

Yeah, and this rule will go down in the books as the "Chrebet clause". 8)

Exactly! The Jets don't have an undersized, overrated receiver, they are just anticipating a future equality rule! What a great bunch of guys, they realize some things are more important than winning!

God damned flashlight.

[Tasan]

Doesn't anyone else see that J. C. just likes high profile cases that pull a lot of media attention? He feeds off the emotions of the country, using shoddy media reports and misconstrued evidence. Makes me sick.

Twinshadow

[Musi]

If the economy ever gets better, and I do somehow get a job, I'll always wonder if I got it because of my knowledge in that area, or because they needed to fill a quota

Even if you accept the most cynical view of minority hiring (which I do not), your own post points out that you'll never be hired "because they needed to fill a quota." Companies employ "enough" white females already. So they'll only hire you because they think you'll be good at your job.

Or because you went to the same school as the boss. Or because the Personnel Manager likes the way you look. Or because somebody who works there plays golf with your husband. Or any of the hundreds of other reasons people get hired, which have no relationship to their expected job performance.

Feel better?

No I don't feel better because your argument made no sense. You went one way with it, then backtracked and took another side. I've tried networking and nothing good came of it. I've busted my ass at all my other jobs and it's gotten me nowhere. So now what the hell am I supposed to do? Go get unemployment? Tried that, but I didn't make enough to get it thanks to my shitty temp jobs. I also can't get medical benefits that I desperately need because my husband makes too much money (we're lucky to have $2 at the end of the month, and we don't go and blow money on shit we don't need). To go on his insurance is $200 extra A MONTH! Gee, maybe I'll start doing what some people I went to school have always known...have tons of babies, don't work, and get free food and money from the people that have jobs and are trying to feed themselves and their own families. Sorry, but I have my pride.

[cherzra]

Post edited... Racist jokes are not welcome here. -- Kossuth

[thanuk]

Doesn't anyone else see that J. C. just likes high profile cases that pull a lot of media attention? He feeds off the emotions of the country, using shoddy media reports and misconstrued evidence. Makes me sick.

Twinshadow

He's just an opportunist, man. It isn't his fault that the NFL put that stupidass rule into effect, and it isn't his fault that the Lions didn't follow the stupidass NFL's stupidass rule. If you need to blame someone for this fiasco, get Paul Tagliabu on the phone. Seriously, this guy must be half-retarded or something.

J.C. just saw a chance to get into the pockets of one of America's most lucrative institutions (not the lions, dork, the NFL) and he is damn well going to take a shot at dipping into their scrooge macduck-like pool of money. I don't blame him at all. But one of the NFL lawyers is about to get fired :twisted: and lawyers getting fired should make everyone happy.

[cherzra]

Post edited... Racist jokes are not welcome here. -- Kossuth

Whatever. Long live your political correctness. Woe should anyone ever say something remotely, distantly 'racist'... even if it is an on-topic joke related to football. Everyone knows who the REAL minority is these days. White, working males.

[thanuk]

Everyone knows who the REAL minority is these days. White, working males.

I thought it was Native Americans?

Oh well, soon it will be Iraqis:)

[Gurns]

[quote="Musi]No I don't feel better because your argument made no sense. You went one way with it, then backtracked and took another side.
[/quote]
Yeah, I know. Probably shouldn't have done it in response to your post, given you're job-hunting, which is a real pain even in the best of circumstances. Which yours aren't. My apologies.

I did, indeed, have two points. One was, given current circumstances, you really don't have to worry about being hired to "fill a quota". So if you're hired, you're hired because they want you for some reason. *cheer Musi* And from our interactions in the mud, certainly they should want you! That's the real "feel better" part.

The other point, though, was that most of the time, nobody really knows why people are hired. Oh, sure, they say they do, but if you look at education and work experience and employment applications and employment tests, and how well all those relate to subsequent job performance...Well, in most occupations, things are more than a bit, um, remote. Thank goodness when they hire pilots, they actually test whether they can fly the plane! Er, I think they do, anyway, though there are stories of exceptions. So the point was, you won't ever really know why you were hired, and it might have little to do with your expected job performance. So that was the ironic "feel better" part.

I do hope you find a job soon, that pays decently, and where they value you for your no doubt excellent work performance! Even if that probably means you wouldn't have as much mudding time. *sniff*

[Musi]

Gurns,
Sorry I took that post the wrong way :oops: I've just been having a really hard time with classes (I'm not going back after this semester) and trying to find a job on the side. I hope I do find a job in my field soon, but I'll probably end up going back to temping if nothing else comes up :(

*hugs*

[Mikayla]

me personally if i owned a pro and sports team, i could give a rats ass if the coach is red,green,blue,black,purple or what ever as long as they could win games

[Zen]

As long as we maintain any policy or ideas that require us to factor race into the equation, we will remain racist, as a nation, as corporations and as individuals. Affirmative action may or may not be necessary to even the playing field so to speak, but these issues will not go away until affirmative action is abolished. Personally, I believe our nation has moved forward enough to no longer need affirmative action. If it has not, I hope it will soon.

For myself, I believe that every man, woman, and cherzra has the right to rise and fall on their own merits.

-Lorgan

[Mitharx]

I've studied racism and "inherent racism" for a long time now. (Briefly through school, but that was mostly systems theory) The idea behind policies such as affirmative action, or affirmative interviewing or whatever is that "equal oppertunity" is not equal chance, but equal results. By attempting to balance the ethnicity of a population around a business with the people who work in that business, judges on the supreme court are attempting to provide equality in results not ideas. So whether or not you believe that highering a minority over a non-minority is wrong or right, it doesn't matter because the result (or who works there or whatever) is what is trying to be acheived. Inherent racism is the idea that racism is so deep in our way of thinking and life that we can't see it. People are racists without meaning to be, or even knowing they are. Example:

A white person asks why a black (and I mean African-American here, I'm simply using this term for my example) person talks the way he does because he finds it unusual or odd. That same white person (caucasion if you will) says that it causes problems for the black person because they may not develop the proper linguistic skills to get a very high paying job.

Now, some would say that the white person has participated in inherent racism. He doesn't necissarily hate, he seems to actually show some concern about the way in which African-Americans may be affected by their life-style, but still he is racist because he does not accept or believe that the way in which the African-American chooses to live is valid. This is inherent racism. It's invisible and so to combat this social force, policies that force or at least push companies to higher or at least evalute a minority for a certain job, regardless of who is the most qualified, is an attempt to create equality in society. What seems like racism to some is equality to others.

Now, I'm not saying here what my point of view is. For me, life is too complicated to come up with an all power social opinion. I will say that inherent racism seems to be a trap sometimes. If you are doing your best to understand and cooperate with a minority (or visa-versa) then these types of rules shouldn't need to be applied. However, if someone tells you that you are guilty of a certain type of racism you didn't know existed and you can't tell you have, how do you argue with them? It's frusterating at times. I have more to say on this, e-mail if you are truly interested or have more comments that go beyond what we can say or thing on BBS posting. I don't want hatemail or racist remarks either just thoughts or ideas on what you think. Many people don't know the information I have posted here and at first glance it seems lame and maybe a "cop out," but it does have it's valid points.

These are just some thoughts, do you what you will with them. Once again, I have not posted my opinions here:P

[Gerad]

Be they black, or white, sometimes people who speak in the 'eubonics' sort of way, can be very difficult to understand. I have personally made a conscious effort to learn how to listen through accents, so for me its not a problem. But unfortunatly most people have not done this. Hiring someone who speaks so deebly in 'eubonics' into a position where good comunication is nessesary, might as well be the same as hiring someone who speaks broken french english. In many cases, its like a whole other language. Maybe i have just participated in 'inherant racism' or whatever you want to call it, but it is a fact. If you cannot be easily understood by others, especially the person interviewing you, you are not very likely to be hired.

-g

[Ashiwi]

I personally believe whomever is the most qualified for the job is who should get it. I also believe there should be complete equity without racial discrimination in the workplace in hiring practices.

I also believe the two ideals are are in direct contradiction with each other in our society at this present time.

[Gurns]

The idea behind policies such as affirmative action, or affirmative interviewing or whatever is that "equal oppertunity" is not equal chance, but equal results.

Some affirmative action policies were designed as equal results policies. The Supreme Court has ruled those are unconstitutional (although there is a possible, very limited, loophole). Some were designed as equal chance policies. Those have not been deemed unconstitutional. But they're tricky to design: How do you know you've got an equal chance policy unless you get equal results, and then isn't that an illegal equal results policy?

The loophole is that you have to show that diversity is critical for the organization's purpose. And you have to show that the policy leads to the sort of diversity you want, without being an equal results policy. I don't think this loophole has been subject to a full test by the Court, yet, but appears in one of the opinions which said equal results policies are unconstitutional. So it's one Justice's idea of what might be a constitutional policy. (Caveat: I'm not a lawyer, this is what I think I remember off the top of my head, you want to get it right, look it up yourself, or ask a lawyer familiar with such cases.)

If it gets to the Supreme Court, that's what the U of Michigan will argue. (1) The extra points for being a racial minority are necessary to ensure a racially diverse campus. (2) An experience with diversity is a necessity for an educated person today. (3) A diverse student population leads to an enriched educational experience. (4) The points assigned don't ensure that minority students are admitted, it just "levels the pool of applicants" (my phrase, and a horrible one, but you get the idea) to provide an equal chance.

I would say all of that is probably true. However, my guess is that if it gets to the Supreme Court, UMich will lose, because there are many sorts of diversity one wants in a student population, and I think (a) they only give points for racial minorities, not rare groups based on other criteria, and (b) they lump all racial minorities together, and that can easily be attacked as being "non-diversifying". Michigan has very few Latinos, Asians, etc., so in practice that probably has no "non-diversifying" effect, but that's not going to matter on a legal level, nor should it.

[Abbayarra]

I know what I have seen. I work with people who are not caucasion. They do not get paid what I get paid even though we do the same job. Another person who has the same level of experience and does the same job I do gets paid quite a bit more, maybe because she is older. I know that this is a very difficult subject. I may be wrong and it has just worked out this way.

On another subject, Tim Dwight, another white receive, not very tall, but he is fast.

[Vahok]

I know what I have seen. I work with people who are not caucasion. They do not get paid what I get paid even though we do the same job. Another person who has the same level of experience and does the same job I do gets paid quite a bit more, maybe because she is older. I know that this is a very difficult subject. I may be wrong and it has just worked out this way.

On another subject, Tim Dwight, another white receive, not very tall, but he is fast.

Yeah, but Timmy can't catch a cold....

[Gurns]

Personally, I believe our nation has moved forward enough to no longer need affirmative action.

Great Jumpin' Jehosaphat, someone thought Thanuk was a liberal, and now Zen reveals himself to be a starry-eyed optimist. Let's see, war in the Middle East and...what's the fourth sign of the Apocolypse?