NFL in hot water again...

[Primeminister]

But you’ll take the word of a message board member over the people who work with that coach? It does check out on this topic.

In this case? Absolutely.

As I said it does check out.

[Snake]

In this case? Absolutely.

As I said it does check out.

Das racist.

[Central_Buc]

But you'll take the players word just cause they said so? Just saying.

No player is going to trash another coach in the media no matter what they think of her or him beind closed doors. Well, in most cases.

Well if @Snake is going to justify his position based on @vivalaReagan claiming players don’t respect the coach then I don’t see why I can’t bring up that actual players disagree with him.

I'm wondering if we are talking about former D assistant Lori Locust who got let go along with Leftwhich? Locust at least played DL in the Semi professional womens football League. So It seems to me she's qualified enough to teach technique, so not sure why players would ignore her (if true).

She's now on the Titans defensive staff.

[Snake]

Bowles isn’t into SJW horseshit posturing like Arians.

She gone.

[Bootz]

Bowles isn’t into SJW horseshit posturing like Arians.

She gone.

Oh so that's why Dave Canelis was hired to replace Leftwich, you say? To "right the wrongs" of the SJW horseshit?

[Central_Buc]

Double post

[Central_Buc]

All the coaches you mentioned at least played at some level.

So do you believe that some one who has no experience in getting hit or being hit is qualified to teach? How do they know other Proper techniques and stance?

By all means go ahead make the NFL into an all women's league. No issue from me

In the NHL, a woman (forget her name) who recently was hired for player personnel got canned not long after getting hired by the Vancouver Canucks. She then tried to make a big stink out of it afterwards screaming "inequality" but frankly it was because she couldn't properly do the job or couldn't keep up with the day to day operations. This is what you get when you are just gonna hire someone for the sake of "WE NEED DIVERSITY!" Plus as an extra bonus she'll take you to court and scream "UNFAIRNESS" even if you were in the right to fire her like the Canucks were.

Here is the article. And there you go @Doctor , she was a video analyst. She claims to have PTSD and that the Canucks knew her diagnosis, But It obviously didnt prevent her from getting the job in the first place. When I watched her talk on a podcast, seemed normal to me.

This article is eyerolling. Most people (and in pro sports) just move on after being fired, so take what you've learned and get on with another team or job. Heck, maybe she would have been given another opportunity somewhere else if she left in a professional manner instead of screaming "wokism." In a tantrum, she isn't getting hired again.

So this just seems like more trouble than its worth.

If being in a highly competitive mostly male dominated industry causes you mental and physical stress than no, no you are not fit and its not personal. And I wonder how many women in the NFL will play the same card in the future after getting fired for performance reasons so we get more cry baby articles like this.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.6666298

I don't see anyone here saying to make a hire solely for the sake of diversity. But if a person is qualified, skin color, what's between their legs, or what gender they prefer to have sex with certainly shouldn't disqualify them.

As for the woman you're talking about in your post above, so what? Because she was an asshole that should disqualify all women from jobs in male-dominated sports?

Talk about a caveman mentality. jfc

Women have already been in the male sports industry for years before our time, check the late majority owner of the Rams before they left LA the first time, Georgia Frontier.

I'm assuming the hockey girl was qualified for the position but she sounded like a spaz right from the start and they still gave her a chance. However, the Canucks weren't forced to hire her, so..

I'm not coming down on you for calling me a cave man I'm just pointing out a potential cause and effect issue, teams (companies) should not be afraid to fire someone because (add trival reason) and receive negative press because the person isnt doing their job or they've breached their contract.

But I guess that is how I originally took your article, teams having to be forced to make hires they don't want to make (to possibly unqualified candidates).

[BuccaNOLEer]

I don't see anyone here saying to make a hire solely for the sake of diversity. But if a person is qualified, skin color, what's between their legs, or what gender they prefer to have sex with certainly shouldn't disqualify them.

Don't you realize that that is what the Rooney Rule is essentially forcing the owners to do? If I owned my own business, I'm going to vet everyone who is interested in the job, interview those who are qualified, and hire whoever I feel is the best qualified, regardless of if they are black, white, red, yellow, blue, or whatever is between their legs. For the life of me, I can't see why I should be forced to interview someone whom obviously isn't qualified just because they are a certain race or gender.

[Bootz]

I don't see anyone here saying to make a hire solely for the sake of diversity. But if a person is qualified, skin color, what's between their legs, or what gender they prefer to have sex with certainly shouldn't disqualify them.

Don't you realize that that is what the Rooney Rule is essentially forcing the owners to do? If I owned my own business, I'm going to vet everyone who is interested in the job, interview those who are qualified, and hire whoever I feel is the best qualified, regardless of if they are black, white, red, yellow, blue, or whatever is between their legs. For the life of me, I can't see why I should be forced to interview someone whom obviously isn't qualified just because they are a certain race or gender.

What you don't realize is that is what YOU would do.

The Rooney Rule was implemented BECAUSE NFL FOs were prioritizing a very specific demographic in their HC searches and not simply looking for the most qualified candidates.

The Rooney Rule has only shined a light on what's still a major problem. NFL franchises prioritize a specific demographic. Its not because of lack of quality candidates outside of said demographic. It comes down to surrounding yourself and your team as an owner without someone you're more relatable and comfortable with.

So while what YOU would do is admirable, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't mean shit. Means nothing. Because in the grand scheme of things, 518 men have been named HC in NFL history. 27 have been minority.

[Central_Buc]

Don't you realize that that is what the Rooney Rule is essentially forcing the owners to do? If I owned my own business, I'm going to vet everyone who is interested in the job, interview those who are qualified, and hire whoever I feel is the best qualified, regardless of if they are black, white, red, yellow, blue, or whatever is between their legs. For the life of me, I can't see why I should be forced to interview someone whom obviously isn't qualified just because they are a certain race or gender.

What you don't realize is that is what YOU would do.

The Rooney Rule was implemented BECAUSE NFL FOs were prioritizing a very specific demographic in their HC searches and not simply looking for the most qualified candidates.

The Rooney Rule has only shined a light on what's still a major problem. NFL franchises prioritize a specific demographic. Its not because of lack of quality candidates outside of said demographic. It comes down to surrounding yourself and your team as an owner without someone you're more relatable and comfortable with.

So while what YOU would do is admirable, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't mean shit. Means nothing. Because in the grand scheme of things, 518 men have been named HC in NFL history. 27 have been minority.

Well We've at least come a long way with the QB. Warren Moon was one of my favorite (non Buc)players and QB to watch growing up and it is a shame they forced him to the CFL at the start of his career. I would have loved to see what he could have accomplished early in his career and the numbers he could have put up.

[_MB_]

I see we have a couple of snowflakes up here who are scared that there's a woman or two out there who would be a better NFL head coach hire than they would be.

What an incredibly fragile ego somebody must have to think like that.

Carry on @Bootz. You seem to have these pussies in check.

[Snake]

I see we have a couple of snowflakes up here who are scared that there's a woman or two out there who would be a better NFL head coach hire than they would be.

What an incredibly fragile ego somebody must have to think like that.

Carry on @Bootz. You seem to have these pussies in check.

Hit another bong bro.

[MJW]

I already knew @Snake & @MJW were bigots. I'm shocked to discover they have company....

Is this the mansplaining I've heard about?

I knew Bootz was sexist, but...

[MJW]

Players' character? Have you been around NFL players and D1 football players? Not everyone is Cheb. He's about 1 in 20.

A woman with no football experience trying to show an NFL player how to do a swim move against a 330# man, when she's never ever done it herself, is a joke. and @Deja Entendu witnessed this in person. He said it was clear the female coaches in Tampa were a joke and the players paid them minimal mind.

You realize most people didn't take too well to blacks in the military either right? Or anywhere else for that matter.
I don't think "Listen, 19 out of 20 are gonna be bigoted assholes so we shouldn't do this" isn't quite the argument you think it is.

Not the military my dude.

This is a for-profit business with a bottom line.

And right now the vast majority of employees who are expected to create a product (wins) will not respond well to such a management decision.

[Bootz]

You realize most people didn't take too well to blacks in the military either right? Or anywhere else for that matter.
I don't think "Listen, 19 out of 20 are gonna be bigoted assholes so we shouldn't do this" isn't quite the argument you think it is.

Not the military my dude.

This is a for-profit business with a bottom line.

And right now the vast majority of employees who are expected to create a product (wins) will not respond well to such a management decision.

No THIS is the mansplaining you've heard about...Well, the (wo)mansplaining...

[MJW]

Not the military my dude.

This is a for-profit business with a bottom line.

And right now the vast majority of employees who are expected to create a product (wins) will not respond well to such a management decision.

No THIS is the mansplaining you've heard about...Well, the (wo)mansplaining...

So you're thinking one of two things here:

One, you think NFL players are a bunch of woke forward-thinking feminists who are incredibly eager to embrace female coaching.
Two, you don't care what they think because you think businesses are the same as government agencies.

Can you clarify which it is so I can disillusion you properly?

[Bootz]

No THIS is the mansplaining you've heard about...Well, the (wo)mansplaining...

So you're thinking one of two things here:

One, you think NFL players are a bunch of woke forward-thinking feminists who are incredibly eager to embrace female coaching.
Two, you don't care what they think because you think businesses are the same as government agencies.

Can you clarify which it is so I can disillusion you properly?

Three, I believe NFL players are for the most part reasonable and aim to get better in their craft and would not have a problem with anyone brought on to teach them the game as long as that person was qualified and had their best interests in mind.

I also think most NFL players are aware of the platform they possess and would aim to use it in a positive way. Now your definition of "woke" here actually is bigoted, as you're assuming out that embracing "female coaching" would make one a "feminist". If the goal overall is to get better in your craft, one would give a flying fuck if the person helping them do so has a penis or vagina. But you and the other bigots in here seem to have a major problem with it.

[kaimaru]

Well said @Bootz. Every player will take the advice of anyone that either lets them stick to a team or get them a bigger bag. They don't give one bit about the race/sex/orientation of any coach that can improve them. They will give them the benefit of the doubt until they show they aren't qualified (unless a son of the head coach) or they aren't helping them get better after trying. Even then, they probably give them the benefit of the doubt if they are not regressing.

[_MB_]

Phil Jackson's ability in the paint was definitely not the key to the success of the 90's Chicago Bulls.

[Doctor]

You realize most people didn't take too well to blacks in the military either right? Or anywhere else for that matter.
I don't think "Listen, 19 out of 20 are gonna be bigoted assholes so we shouldn't do this" isn't quite the argument you think it is.

Not the military my dude.

This is a for-profit business with a bottom line.

And right now the vast majority of employees who are expected to create a product (wins) will not respond well to such a management decision.

I don't understand the implications here.
"This isn't war buddy, this is serious business"

[MJW]

So you're thinking one of two things here:

One, you think NFL players are a bunch of woke forward-thinking feminists who are incredibly eager to embrace female coaching.
Two, you don't care what they think because you think businesses are the same as government agencies.

Can you clarify which it is so I can disillusion you properly?

Three, I believe NFL players are for the most part reasonable and aim to get better in their craft and would not have a problem with anyone brought on to teach them the game as long as that person was qualified and had their best interests in mind.

I also think most NFL players are aware of the platform they possess and would aim to use it in a positive way. Now your definition of "woke" here actually is bigoted, as you're assuming out that embracing "female coaching" would make one a "feminist". If the goal overall is to get better in your craft, one would give a flying fuck if the person helping them do so has a penis or vagina. But you and the other bigots in here seem to have a major problem with it.

Did I say I had a problem with it? Show me where I said or even implied I had a problem with it. You can't. Because I didn't. I said it was ridiculous.

I just don't buy for a second that the most alpha-male centric concentration of testosterone on the planet is eager to listen how to "hone their craft" from women, the vast majority of which haven't played the game beyond flag. Not NOW. I don't think we're there yet. You do? Great. Cool. I think you're wrong. So it goes.

[MJW]

Not the military my dude.

This is a for-profit business with a bottom line.

And right now the vast majority of employees who are expected to create a product (wins) will not respond well to such a management decision.

I don't understand the implications here.
"This isn't war buddy, this is serious business"

Bureaucracies have the luxury of making social experiments the priority.
Businesses are expected to perform or people lose jobs.
That's the distinction.

[_MB_]

Three, I believe NFL players are for the most part reasonable and aim to get better in their craft and would not have a problem with anyone brought on to teach them the game as long as that person was qualified and had their best interests in mind.

I also think most NFL players are aware of the platform they possess and would aim to use it in a positive way. Now your definition of "woke" here actually is bigoted, as you're assuming out that embracing "female coaching" would make one a "feminist". If the goal overall is to get better in your craft, one would give a flying fuck if the person helping them do so has a penis or vagina. But you and the other bigots in here seem to have a major problem with it.

Did I say I had a problem with it? Show me where I said or even implied I had a problem with it. You can't. Because I didn't. I said it was ridiculous.

I just don't buy for a second that the most alpha-male centric concentration of testosterone on the planet is eager to listen how to "hone their craft" from women, the vast majority of which haven't played the game beyond flag. Not NOW. I don't think we're there yet. You do? Great. Cool. I think you're wrong. So it goes.

You're weak.

You'll never give orders to men.

[MJW]

Did I say I had a problem with it? Show me where I said or even implied I had a problem with it. You can't. Because I didn't. I said it was ridiculous.

I just don't buy for a second that the most alpha-male centric concentration of testosterone on the planet is eager to listen how to "hone their craft" from women, the vast majority of which haven't played the game beyond flag. Not NOW. I don't think we're there yet. You do? Great. Cool. I think you're wrong. So it goes.

You're weak.

You'll never give orders to men.

The only orders you'll ever give anyone are their pizza orders.

[Cheb]

There's nothing inherently wrong or impossible about a woman being a football coach.

Women in my experience are capable of being great teachers and intelligent leaders. For an example close to home, my wife is a kickass woman who runs her own restaurant. If she put her mind to it she could teach a kid to block or catch a pass just as easily as she teaches them how to break down a chicken or prep a station prior to dinner service. Teaching ain't the problem; she teaches all the time.

I am not a great cook, but I could go to culinary school to bridge the gap in our skillsets, and given time and schooling I could become at least serviceable in a professional kitchen. But my wife cannot do the same for football. No amount of seminars or books or training courses will replicate the decades of training, study, and most importantly live reps against skilled opponents. I can say with confidence how to tackle a person or shed a block and demonstrate how to do so in front of a student off the top of my head because I've done it personally thousands of times; she hasn't.

And a large part of that is gatekept by me being privileged enough to be born a man and thus having access to this sport at a high level, which being a woman she didn't have the same access to growing up.

If I showed up in the kitchen of a Michelin-starred restaurant as the new head chef, and I had never even worked in a professional kitchen before much less at a high level, I would quickly be exposed as a fraud for being woefully unprepared for the gig, no matter how many books I had read or seminars I had attended or cooking shows I had watched. Because practical experience doing the work matters, no matter what that work may be.

Is it impossible for a woman to be a head coach? No. Is it going to be very, very hard for that first woman to break that ceiling, and keep her head above water when she does? Yes. I wish her luck.

[GreatTimes]

There's nothing inherently wrong or impossible about a woman being a football coach.

Women in my experience are capable of being great teachers and intelligent leaders. For an example close to home, my wife is a kickass woman who runs her own restaurant. If she put her mind to it she could teach a kid to block or catch a pass just as easily as she teaches them how to break down a chicken or prep a station prior to dinner service. Teaching ain't the problem; she teaches all the time.

I am not a great cook, but I could go to culinary school to bridge the gap in our skillsets, and given time and schooling I could become at least serviceable in a professional kitchen. But my wife cannot do the same for football. No amount of seminars or books or training courses will replicate the decades of training, study, and most importantly live reps against skilled opponents. I can say with confidence how to tackle a person or shed a block and demonstrate how to do so in front of a student off the top of my head because I've done it personally thousands of times; she hasn't.

And a large part of that is gatekept by me being privileged enough to be born a man and thus having access to this sport at a high level, which being a woman she didn't have the same access to growing up.

If I showed up in the kitchen of a Michelin-starred restaurant as the new head chef, and I had never even worked in a professional kitchen before much less at a high level, I would quickly be exposed as a fraud for being woefully unprepared for the gig, no matter how many books I had read or seminars I had attended or cooking shows I had watched. Because practical experience doing the work matters, no matter what that work may be.

Is it impossible for a woman to be a head coach? No. Is it going to be very, very hard for that first woman to break that ceiling, and keep her head above water when she does? Yes. I wish her luck.

So what you are saying is a person should be hired/promoted based on merit. Merit being both educational and experience to be selected for a position. Novel concept. Would you expect the same for any position in the real world?

[Snake]

But my wife cannot do the same for football. No amount of seminars or books or training courses will replicate the decades of training, study, and most importantly live reps against skilled opponents. I can say with confidence how to tackle a person or shed a block and demonstrate how to do so in front of a student off the top of my head because I've done it personally thousands of times; she hasn't.

And a large part of that is gatekept by me being privileged enough to be born a man and thus having access to this sport at a high level, which being a woman she didn't have the same access to growing up.

If I showed up in the kitchen of a Michelin-starred restaurant as the new head chef, and I had never even worked in a professional kitchen before much less at a high level, I would quickly be exposed as a fraud for being woefully unprepared for the gig, no matter how many books I had read or seminars I had attended or cooking shows I had watched. Because practical experience doing the work matters, no matter what that work may be.

/thread

[Doctor]

I feel people really over estimate a lot of playing time for a lot of these coaches and front office staff. Also a massive time span. We literally do not play or teach the game the same way as "back in my day," for several reasons.

Of all the experiences that make BB the coach he is today the handful of third string center snaps he got in school 50 years ago probably don't make or break things as much as some seem to think.

[_MB_]

You're weak.

You'll never give orders to men.

The only orders you'll ever give anyone are their pizza orders.

From here on out? Maybe.

[Doctor]

I don't understand the implications here.
"This isn't war buddy, this is serious business"

Bureaucracies have the luxury of making social experiments the priority.
Businesses are expected to perform or people lose jobs.
That's the distinction.

Yeah no one ever loses anything important in war. The luxury being the stakes aren't as high as sports....

Curious, were blacks in baseball also a "social experiment" and a "luxury"?

[Sdbucs]

It’s very simple.

When you hire based on skill, the balance of power between employee/employer tips towards employee. If you don’t take the most talented employee, your competitor will. How do you achieve this? You give a better offer. Employees want the best offers, so they compete amongst themselves to be the best.

End result: More power for employees, more compensation for employees , higher ceiling of employees talent for businesses.

When you hire based on an intrinsic, uncontrollable trait like gender or race, the power consolidates with the entity determining what trait is being hired for. You’re a man fighting to be the best coach? Too bad, NFL decided to hire women this year. Employee: powerless, employer: holds hiring power. As an employee why compete to be better if some group can decide your talent isn’t what they actually want? So less competition amongst prospective employees.

End result: more power for employers, lower employee skill ceiling for employers

It’s pretty obvious which scenario is more desirable

[MJW]

Bureaucracies have the luxury of making social experiments the priority.
Businesses are expected to perform or people lose jobs.
That's the distinction.

Yeah no one ever loses anything important in war. The luxury being the stakes aren't as high as sports....

Curious, were blacks in baseball also a "social experiment" and a "luxury"?

Curious, are you obtuse on purpose or are you just simple?

[Brazen331]

How long before transgender women begin dominating women in this new NFL coaching space as well? But of course that will be all for the best since they are supposedly an even more oppressed and deprived demographic.

[Selmon Rules]

BB isn't a great head coach because he teaches players technique. He is a great coach because he watches film, breaks down what the other team does, and then designs a game plan to defeat that. I don't doubt there are women out there that are fully capable of doing that.

That said, the road to becoming a head coach usually requires one to be a position coach and then coordinator. That is where the roadblock for a woman becoming a head coach is at....

[Central_Buc]

BB isn't a great head coach because he teaches players technique. He is a great coach because he watches film, breaks down what the other team does, and then designs a game plan to defeat that. I don't doubt there are women out there that are fully capable of doing that.

That said, the road to becoming a head coach usually requires one to be a position coach and then coordinator. That is where the roadblock for a woman becoming a head coach is at....

He's also good at roster constitution, knowing how to draft the type of personnel he needs.