Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

i know this is a couple days old but i want to know what people think about the oregon legislature trying to require schools to interview minority coaches in football. in case there are people who aren't aware of this, here's the link:

http://www.oregonlive.com/collegefootba ... _scho.html

thoughts?

Must be a bunch of BeaverLeavers with their panties in a bunch over the 'underhanded' hiring of Chip Kelly as Coach In Waiting...

I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing. I don't think it will necessarily result in more minority hiring, but I think it will get a foot in the door which is a good thing.

I think minorities getting hired at the coordinator level is the key to stepping into more head coaching positions. And I also think things are definitely getting better and will continue to do so, regardless of whether the Rooney Rule comes to college.

That said, I think giving current conditions, it's a waste of the legislature's time. Especially since it affects so few colleges.

woundedknees wrote:Must be a bunch of BeaverLeavers with their panties in a bunch over the 'underhanded' hiring of Chip Kelly as Coach In Waiting...

that would be funny. the interesting part is that oregon schools can still hire people who are "bound by contract to promote a member of the institution's current coaching staff." i wonder who that could be hinting at..........

couldn't have said that better myself freedjr. that's EXACTLY my thought process about this whole thing.

mosely says this whole thing was due to the Jerry Glanville hiring...

anyway, my two cents...I like this rule

it is a way to help out those who in the past have not gotten a fair shot (I can quote any number of percentage differences between players and coaches in terms of minority representation) while still allowing competition (I'm a white guy from New York BTW). Sure some candidates will be token representatives, but there is always the chance that someone will come in and knock the socks off of someone and earn a job, and even if it only happens once in a thousand it helps.

I know they aren't requiring schools to hire minorities as their coaches, but even requiring them to interview one just because they are a minority seems silly if you ask me.

I don't care if someone is White, African American, Asian, Mexican, Indian, or from a different planet, if they can coach, then hire them because they are a great coach.

UOducksTK1 wrote:I don't care if someone is White, African American, Asian, Mexican, Indian, or from a different planet, if they can coach, then hire them because they are a great coach.

Unfortunately, not everyone thinks this way.

echo31 wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:I don't care if someone is White, African American, Asian, Mexican, Indian, or from a different planet, if they can coach, then hire them because they are a great coach.

Unfortunately, not everyone thinks this way.

Perhaps, but do you honestly think any of the Oregon schools (PSU, UP, UO, OSU) really care what race/color their coach is?

And even if their decisions were somewhat biased, it would be very minuscule compared to the much greater issues out there.

I will admit that I have been passed over once for a job I desperately needed due to race... And I am white.

Had the guy who got the position been even close to my equal in experience, training, or any one of several factors other than race, I would have forgotten it years ago.

I got over it a long time ago, as I obtained a better position, elsewhere. I have to admit though, that it opened my eyes to how frustrating (And unfair) it would feel if that were the 'norm' for myself.

freedjr wrote:I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing. I don't think it will necessarily result in more minority hiring, but I think it will get a foot in the door which is a good thing.

I think minorities getting hired at the coordinator level is the key to stepping into more head coaching positions. And I also think things are definitely getting better and will continue to do so, regardless of whether the Rooney Rule comes to college.

That said, I think giving current conditions, it's a waste of the legislature's time. Especially since it affects so few colleges.

^^^^^^^^^ Correct ^^^^^^^^^

/thread

I think in today's sports and the need to win now attitude race issues are a thing of the past and rules like this are needed. My issue with this type of movement is when, as wounded mentioned, when the better candidate gets passed over because of pressure of equality and creates an oppsotie double standard and that's equally wrong!

And its not always a Black/White issue, in Canada where I'm from, I remember a number of years ago if you were white you could just forget about becoming a police officer (RCMP) or advancing because unless you were an minority you had "no chance" and that's just not fair and these rules are supposed to make things fair/unbiased...so it can be a slippery slope!

IMO "winning" now-a-days weights heavier than race! (unless you are from the south...kidding )

GO DUCKS!!

Since we are talking about public universities, I don't have a problem with this on an individual rights basis. And if the rule just extends as far as interviews, it's no big deal. But we're on a very slippery slope towards forced hires of minorities, something that doesn't really benefit anyone.

Tray Dub wrote:Since we are talking about public universities, I don't have a problem with this on an individual rights basis. And if the rule just extends as far as interviews, it's no big deal. But we're on a very slippery slope towards forced hires of minorities, something that doesn't really benefit anyone.

Nail on the head. Right now it's a lame rule that I don't really have an opinion on. The problem I have is it's not going to stop here. Next thing you know we will be forced to have a certain number of minorities on staff, on the field, in the AD, etc. I have no problem with having minorities on the staff, obviously. The Ducks have plenty. It's the priciple of these things being "forced" that I don't like.

Question: is this rule just for minorities of a different color skin? Would interviewing a Jewish guy constitute interviewing a minority, or do they have to be not white?

And if it only applies for non-whites, then that's just ridiculous. Why not protect all minorities? Maybe you should have to interview at least one Buddhist, one gay person, and one woman? I don't think having a different skin color is the only obstacle some people have to overcome. If we're going to try to level the playing field by bulldozing over the bumps, we have to level it for literally everyone.