Brian Flores files discrimination lawsuit against Giants, Dolphins and the NFL.

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

Interesting how you logically jump from this single issue to "everything." I'm not surprised.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

I already explained that. If the only two GMs being paid to lose also have Black coaches, it ought to get the question rolling in the head to any reasonable person who is also at least a novice in basic logic. Could it be a coincidence? Sure. Could it be related to killing two birds with one stone (tanking and getting rid of the Black guy you regret hiring)? Yes. It logically could.

We must await the EVIDENCE before deciding what is likely among the possibilities, rather than resolutely stating as a matter of principle that no racial element exists.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

No. You are failing to grasp the logical difference from what is alleged in this case and your company. The subtlety is escaping you. The two situations are not logically equivalent because they are not identical. Your company didn't circumvent a diversity program, and even in the case here with the Giants, we don't know to what degree race played a role.

I will try to be kind here: think harder. Think more meticulously. Think more systematically. And take a course on logiic

Yeah you right, nothing is just a coincidence, it's racist!!!

No. The question, which I asked you in my last post, is this: could it conceivably be related to racial discrimination or preferential treatment?

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The lawsuit is more than about racial discrimination, if I understand it correctly.

Now, if there are two instances of paying the GM to lose, and in both cases the coaches are Black (which appears to be the case), it does indeed smack of something potentially racist.

Regarding knowing who you're hiring before interviewing your required minority candidates, it could be related to racism and it could not be. However, one undeniable problem here is that the teams circumvented the rule. Whether or not that is deemed actionable by a judge, the NFL is still going to come down hard on those teams.

Your analogy with your company, by the way, is not a one-to-one comparison, because as you said yourself, "person we opened up the position for is a minority." So yeah your entire paragraph of your personal experience is thus completely irrelevant.

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

I think you are misreading the whole situation. The allegations of racism are not really vs Miami so ignore Ross and pay to lose which is tanking that's a different thing. It more involves the Giants who hired Daboll. The allegation is they made the decision to hire Daboll yet conducted an alleged sham interview with Flores. Flores was tipped off several days prior to his interview that they are hiring Daboll by BB who by his own words effed this up.

I get that but again how is that racist? The Giants just hired a Bills assistant to be their GM. That job had Daboll written all over it. They also interviewed other minorities. I guess they should have stopped at one?

Sigh. Can you not imagine a situation — a particular set of circumstances — in which it would be motivated by racial preference or discrimination?

You are correct. Ultimately it will have a very high bar to prove discrimination. You would essentially need some smoking gun email saying we the NY Giants are choosing the lesser white candidate over the better minority candidate. Flores has basically already won due to optics. The commish is white as are most of the owners. So from a PR standpoint it's just a bad look to have 70% black player base and 0 black owners. Watch the Denver ownership will be steered toward a minority owner even if it means the league supplements the ownership from a financial sense. Goodell is out imo Troy Vincent is in.

I don't know this coach's personal journey or what he faced recently, what is reality, what is perceived, so no comment there.

All I know is, if it's a business, then the owner of that business wants to make money. Hence, the owner will hire people who will get him the most money (wins in this case).

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by evil:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by evil:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by evil:
I'm more curious about his claiming he can prove it. Like go on Hue, we all listening baby.... show and tell time.

This. If its true and he can prove it, then Cleveland ownership needs to go, and Hue will never coach at any level again because any coach that accepted money to try and throw games is pathetic.

Right now one team is for sale. Soon that number can jump to 3 or higher if more allegations that can be supported by evidence come out....unprecedented times ahead

Removing an Owner sounds pretty difficult, especially when you consider that the only guy outside of ownership that can propose to remove an owner is the Commissioner whom himself is an employee of the owners.
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/dan-snyder-news-can-nfl-owner-be-forced-to-sell-team/65-37099b6a-5901-441c-8887-5b273e4b5525

Pretty sure this would be step one given the negative impact it would have on the league :

Verify researchers found a copy of the bylaws on Penn State Law's website. Article 8 states the NFL Commissioner can suspend, fine, or cancel a contract with any owner, shareholder, or partner "who has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football."

I get the fact the article exists but the commissioner is still an employee of the owners. Just look at the investigation that went into the WFT and how J.Gruden a coach of another team was the one that got punished...what about Snyder?

Don't disagree with you, just saying that throwing games will be a much much bigger deal in the media if evidence is released to support that, as compared to what Snyder did.

This will be a mess that likely won't be able to be swept under a rug.

See I think we should just let the owners choose who they want, interview who they want. Those truly "progressive" (hate using that term in regard to race) teams will win out in the end because they will be hiring the best from a much larger pool of candidates. IMO rules like the Rooney Rule are a show and is used by the NFL to hide/shield themselves from public scrutiny. "See we got this rule, See see?" while the same ol practices continue. I think rather than forcing a team to do something per mandate the NFL should focus on rewarding teams for providing people of color opportunities, like rewarding draft picks for having a minority hired to a HC or GM position as we benefitted from last year.

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The lawsuit is more than about racial discrimination, if I understand it correctly.

Now, if there are two instances of paying the GM to lose, and in both cases the coaches are Black (which appears to be the case), it does indeed smack of something potentially racist.

Regarding knowing who you're hiring before interviewing your required minority candidates, it could be related to racism and it could not be. However, one undeniable problem here is that the teams circumvented the rule. Whether or not that is deemed actionable by a judge, the NFL is still going to come down hard on those teams.

Your analogy with your company, by the way, is not a one-to-one comparison, because as you said yourself, "person we opened up the position for is a minority." So yeah your entire paragraph of your personal experience is thus completely irrelevant.

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

I think you are misreading the whole situation. The allegations of racism are not really vs Miami so ignore Ross and pay to lose which is tanking that's a different thing. It more involves the Giants who hired Daboll. The allegation is they made the decision to hire Daboll yet conducted an alleged sham interview with Flores. Flores was tipped off several days prior to his interview that they are hiring Daboll by BB who by his own words effed this up.

I get that but again how is that racist? The Giants just hired a Bills assistant to be their GM. That job had Daboll written all over it. They also interviewed other minorities. I guess they should have stopped at one?

Look into the league rules. My understanding from The Undefeated it is a violation of league rules to conduct a sham interview. I'm not certain I'm no legal rules expert but it is being reported.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The lawsuit is more than about racial discrimination, if I understand it correctly.

Now, if there are two instances of paying the GM to lose, and in both cases the coaches are Black (which appears to be the case), it does indeed smack of something potentially racist.

Regarding knowing who you're hiring before interviewing your required minority candidates, it could be related to racism and it could not be. However, one undeniable problem here is that the teams circumvented the rule. Whether or not that is deemed actionable by a judge, the NFL is still going to come down hard on those teams.

Your analogy with your company, by the way, is not a one-to-one comparison, because as you said yourself, "person we opened up the position for is a minority." So yeah your entire paragraph of your personal experience is thus completely irrelevant.

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

I think you are misreading the whole situation. The allegations of racism are not really vs Miami so ignore Ross and pay to lose which is tanking that's a different thing. It more involves the Giants who hired Daboll. The allegation is they made the decision to hire Daboll yet conducted an alleged sham interview with Flores. Flores was tipped off several days prior to his interview that they are hiring Daboll by BB who by his own words effed this up.

I get that but again how is that racist? The Giants just hired a Bills assistant to be their GM. That job had Daboll written all over it. They also interviewed other minorities. I guess they should have stopped at one?

Look into the league rules. My understanding from The Undefeated it is a violation of league rules to conduct a sham interview. I'm not certain I'm no legal rules expert but it is being reported.

It's like many of the rules in the NFL that don't get officiated consistently on the field this one doesn't get followed the off the field. Rooney Rule is the issue here and it creates the environment for this situation to happen.

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The lawsuit is more than about racial discrimination, if I understand it correctly.

Now, if there are two instances of paying the GM to lose, and in both cases the coaches are Black (which appears to be the case), it does indeed smack of something potentially racist.

Regarding knowing who you're hiring before interviewing your required minority candidates, it could be related to racism and it could not be. However, one undeniable problem here is that the teams circumvented the rule. Whether or not that is deemed actionable by a judge, the NFL is still going to come down hard on those teams.

Your analogy with your company, by the way, is not a one-to-one comparison, because as you said yourself, "person we opened up the position for is a minority." So yeah your entire paragraph of your personal experience is thus completely irrelevant.

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

I think you are misreading the whole situation. The allegations of racism are not really vs Miami so ignore Ross and pay to lose which is tanking that's a different thing. It more involves the Giants who hired Daboll. The allegation is they made the decision to hire Daboll yet conducted an alleged sham interview with Flores. Flores was tipped off several days prior to his interview that they are hiring Daboll by BB who by his own words effed this up.

I get that but again how is that racist? The Giants just hired a Bills assistant to be their GM. That job had Daboll written all over it. They also interviewed other minorities. I guess they should have stopped at one?

Look into the league rules. My understanding from The Undefeated it is a violation of league rules to conduct a sham interview. I'm not certain I'm no legal rules expert but it is being reported.

It's like many of the rules in the NFL that don't get officiated consistently on the field this one doesn't get followed the off the field. Rooney Rule is the issue here and it creates the environment for this situation to happen.

Well it is near impossible to demonstrate what is a sham interview and what isn't. In this case being tipped off several days before your interview that they are going Daboll would be the smoking gun, this is at least what the lawsuit contends. The lawsuit even admits that without this bizarre situation of Belichick texting the wrong Brian, coach Flores would really have no way of knowing if it was a sham.

tanking isnt illegal.

the monetary incentive to tank is.

18 U.S. Code § 224 - Bribery in sporting contests

Isn't it the way it works? It's easy to pull a race card all the time it seems.

Here is an example. I am a hiring manager for a small department at my company. We are currently a start-up that is now ready to move into an IPO very soon.
I had an employee that left in December. An employee I inherited when I moved to the company.

I have a former employee who worked for me for 8 years at my last company. I am recruiting her bigtime and she is awesome and I want her.

Although I have pretty much made up mind I am required by HR to go thru a series of interviews to meet certain laws. So although nothing will stop me from going after Erika I will set up a series of interviews per HR requirements. This is at almost any company you go to. Even if you have a candidate in mind you must go thru a series of interviews.

This process is no different than the NFL. You typically like to hire a candidate with a proven track record and you have had visibility with your own eyes. Erika never received a lower performance rating below excellent. But I will set up a series of at least four interviews to satisfy company requirements. What happens in the NFL happens everyday at your own places of employment.

Does this make me a horrible manager or the company a horrible place to work? I think not.

Originally posted by boast:
tanking isnt illegal.

the monetary incentive to tank is.

18 U.S. Code § 224 - Bribery in sporting contests

Not a law expert but imagine spending $2000 to take a family to an NFL game and it is revealed at a later date the team deliberately threw the game. You would have a case here.

Imagine wagering on the game where sports betting is permitted and a team involved is throwing the game. You would have a case here.

Tanking is, if not criminal itself without the monetary incentive, it is at least in violation of the league rules and also potentially liable in a civil suit. I would never have spent the money on going to the event if I was aware the participants were throwing the match. This is essentially fraudulent and fraud is illegal.

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Hmm kinda sounds like everything is potentially racist to you.

Interesting how you logically jump from this single issue to "everything." I'm not surprised.

How is paying to lose racist? I know you will come up with something so please enlighten me.

I already explained that. If the only two GMs being paid to lose also have Black coaches, it ought to get the question rolling in the head to any reasonable person who is also at least a novice in basic logic. Could it be a coincidence? Sure. Could it be related to killing two birds with one stone (tanking and getting rid of the Black guy you regret hiring)? Yes. It logically could.

We must await the EVIDENCE before deciding what is likely among the possibilities, rather than resolutely stating as a matter of principle that no racial element exists.

So in my analogy if we hired a non minority then it would be racist? Got it.

No. You are failing to grasp the logical difference from what is alleged in this case and your company. The subtlety is escaping you. The two situations are not logically equivalent because they are not identical. Your company didn't circumvent a diversity program, and even in the case here with the Giants, we don't know to what degree race played a role.

I will try to be kind here: think harder. Think more meticulously. Think more systematically. And take a course on logiic

Yeah you right, nothing is just a coincidence, it's racist!!!

I'm so shocked you feel this way.

I will say again when over 70% of your labor force is African American and you only have one African American head coach that speaks pretty loudly of what you think of them.

Originally posted by 9erson3:
Isn't it the way it works? It's easy to pull a race card all the time it seems.

Here is an example. I am a hiring manager for a small department at my company. We are currently a start-up that is now ready to move into an IPO very soon.
I had an employee that left in December. An employee I inherited when I moved to the company.

I have a former employee who worked for me for 8 years at my last company. I am recruiting her bigtime and she is awesome and I want her.

Although I have pretty much made up mind I am required by HR to go thru a series of interviews to meet certain laws. So although nothing will stop me from going after Erika I will set up a series of interviews per HR requirements. This is at almost any company you go to. Even if you have a candidate in mind you must go thru a series of interviews.

This process is no different than the NFL. You typically like to hire a candidate with a proven track record and you have had visibility with your own eyes. Erika never received a lower performance rating below excellent. But I will set up a series of at least four interviews to satisfy company requirements. What happens in the NFL happens everyday at your own places of employment.

Does this make me a horrible manager or the company a horrible place to work? I think not.

Don't get smashed the night before you do interviews

Originally posted by LB49ers:
I will say again when over 70% of your labor force is African American and you only have one African American head coach that speaks pretty loudly of what you think of them.

Why are you limiting the labor force to players? Do coaches not count too?

I'm curious what is the racial make up of all head coaches, coordinators, position coaches, assistant coaches, etc. etc.

Is it still 70%? Honest question.

If it was, ok you may have a point. If not, then it's reaching.

Coaching and playing are two different professions altogether. If you want to go down the former player route, for every Harbaugh and Rivera you have a Singletary and Dan Campbell. That's just players. Most of the legendary coaches of the game weren't former NFL players. Maybe at most college players.

One should look at the breakdown of race for college players and coaches.......I'm pretty sure that 70% will drop a bit for the players.....possibly below 50%, maybe lower. Coaches might be lower than that too.

If I were to go out on a limb, my guess is as you go from pee wee to high school to college to NFL your white players go down while your black players go up (by percentage). White coaches increase at each stop, because they didn't make it as players.

I think the issue is more complicated than we think. I had a black friend tell me yesterday "owners are comfortable with people who look like them, act like them"....

Ok assuming that's true, then maybe it's just a preference and not actual RACISM??

Racism used to be Jim Crow, back of the bus, different bathrooms, etc. Now it's anything that isn't deferential......

If I wanted to be a big shot at BET as a non person of color, do I have a right to get it if those don't want me there assuming I'm qualified?

People would probably laugh it off, but it's the exact same thing.

End of the day, unless you're that outed racist owner of the Clippers (?), you go with who really think would win. Even that guy probably would be ok with a black coach.

Whatever, LOL....