Anyone? OK, then.

*shuffles off*

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_489701.html

It appears as though being that he had only 1 year – albeit a great year – as a Defensive Coordinator under this belt (with the Vikes), it wasn’t all that likely he’d have gotten interviews when there were some very highly-regarded, more established names out there, like Russ Grimm.

Chan Gailey was recommended by Cowher to replace him.

Operating under the assumption that players from each race attempt to become coaches after their playing careers end proportionately to the % of each race in this pool of candidates, and also operating under the assumption that people of all races are equally intelligent, then you’re left with an understanding of why the Rooney Rule exists.

Wasn’t Mike Tomlin arguably a Rooney Rule guy but he blew Pittsburgh’s brass away at his interview?

Why anyone would complain about NFL teams being forced to interview minority candidates is beyond comprehension to me.

I don’t think it makes you racist if you don’t like the Rooney Rule, I just don’t get why someone would care.

One of the parties to a United States Supreme Court decision that said Virginia can’t prevent interracial marriage, was still alive last year! She was only 69, so she kind of died relatively young.

Assuming Mildred Loving had children at the time of this landmark Supreme Court decision, they would be what, 42 years of age right now? Perfect age to start getting legit feelers for a head coaching job for an up-and-comer.

Ignorance of CONTEMPORARY or VERY RECENT United States history is a huge problem.

Anyway, all the Rooney Rule has ever done was to get more interview experience for up-and-coming young black head coaching candidates.

Whether you all like it or not, historical inequities have made it statistically less likely that a young black coach in their mid-30′s or 40′s will have the same shot as a white coach in their 30′s and 40′s.

Its not because the NFL is racist against them NOW, but so many qualified (relatively) young black coaches had to face the same stigma that black quarterbacks face.

Let’s face it: if a black head coaching candidate is 50 years old right now, he was alive during the days of segregation, or was born right afterwards. Its not as if when the NATIONAL GUARD was sent in to desegregate schools by force, a magic button was pressed that ended racism or discrimination.

The 1980′s and 1990′s were, obviously, only 2 and 3 decades after de-segregation, just when these black coaching candidates would normally have been developing as young coaches. I’m guessing we can all agree that there was a competitive disadvantage for them in a society that was a mere 2 decades past a very ugly chapter in our nation’s history? Or once again, you can go with the “magic button” theory that the South being FORCED to desegregate ended SEVERE discrimination and racism and made everything an equal playing field.

Another startling example of how close we are in our nation’s history to this sort of horror: Loving vs. Virgina was decided in 1967. That’s 42 years ago my friends. While many of us were alive, and certainly our parents.

So while the league may be fair right now, quite clearly there is an interest in having the GM’s, head coaches and so forth be representative of society as a whole, kind of like the Supreme Court. Forcing teams to CONSIDER black head coaching candidates isn’t exactly the same thing as Affirmative Action. I’m guessing that opponents of Affirmative Action aren’t offended by it because it forces colleges to CONSIDER admitting potential black students, but because it does give a competitive advantage (which many believe it to counterbalance societal disadvantages but that is another story).