2022-23 NFL Season Discussion Thread

[thehef]

Originally Posted by pilight

I do know that NFL coaches getting fired immediately following multiple winning seasons is very rare. All the talking heads were very surprised when he was let go.

Rare, I'm sure. But I'm also sure that when you find those rare instances, there were extenuating circumstances. Things like butting heads with your owner and GM (regardless of whose at fault, that can get you fired). Also things like not performing to expectations, late-season collapses, and being the cause of rifts in the locker room can factor in... And when you have a bozo owner who appears to be predisposed to quickly canning head coaches, black or white, well, the most-logical & likely explanation becomes clear, and it isn't racism, even if that's what many want it to be to fit a narrative.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Hef. How would Flores prove to you he was discriminated against?

Good question. Absent something obvious (like recordings of Ross or other potential NFL bosses making racially inflammatory statements), I'd start with being able to show that he was treated differently - despite nearly identical records - than his white predecessors as Dolphins head coach. And by somehow showing that his otherwise impressive ascent thru the Patriots coaching ranks was thwarted somehow by racism.

Don't get me wrong: If Flores & his legal team are able to prove racism and he makes the NFL pay for it, then good for him. I'm just saying that there's very little to indicate that due to discrimination Flores was fired by Miami and and not hired by other teams.

One of Flores' key contentions is that he was fired for not agreeing to tank. Well, as odious as some of us think tanking is, it's quite common; surely many coaches of any color have been asked - directly or indirectly - to tank as part of a rebuild. But if anyone thinks they can get hired and then directly contradict what their boss wants them to do, without repercussions, they're nuts. Could that be grounds for wrongful termination? Perhaps. But, IMO, in order for that to be discrimination there would have to be some evidence that Flores was being treated differently in a tanking situation than a white coach would be.

So to go back to your question, I would need to see evidence - beyond the fact that Flores is black and got fired after a short and moderately-successful-at-best tenure - that racism actually factored in.

I think I am more inclined to believe their was racism in Flores' other interviews (post Miami). But his firing from Miami - and his airing of Ross' dirty laundry - don't point to discrimination, to me anyway. I'm certainly willing to listen to other evidence and arguments.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by thehef

Good question. Absent something obvious (like recordings of Ross or other potential NFL bosses making racially inflammatory statements), I'd start with being able to show that he was treated differently - despite nearly identical records - than his white predecessors as Dolphins head coach. And by somehow showing that his otherwise impressive ascent thru the Patriots coaching ranks was thwarted somehow by racism.

Don't get me wrong: If Flores & his legal team are able to prove racism and he makes the NFL pay for it, then good for him. I'm just saying that there's very little to indicate that due to discrimination Flores was fired by Miami and and not hired by other teams.

One of Flores' key contentions is that he was fired for not agreeing to tank. Well, as odious as some of us think tanking is, it's quite common; surely many coaches of any color have been asked - directly or indirectly - to tank as part of a rebuild. But if anyone thinks they can get hired and then directly contradict what their boss wants them to do, without repercussions, they're nuts. Could that be grounds for wrongful termination? Perhaps. But, IMO, in order for that to be discrimination there would have to be some evidence that Flores was being treated differently in a tanking situation than a white coach would be.

So to go back to your question, I would need to see evidence - beyond the fact that Flores is black and got fired after a short and moderately-successful-at-best tenure - that racism actually factored in.

I think I am more inclined to believe their was racism in Flores' other interviews (post Miami). But his firing from Miami - and his airing of Ross' dirty laundry - don't point to discrimination, to me anyway. I'm certainly willing to listen to other evidence and arguments.

So your requirements are video/audio evidence (which is provided by the quotes & the screengrabs.)...............

.............or Miami would have had 2 coaches w/the same exact records, the same exact circumstances, and the white got one extra year.

And you don't see the high threshold your excuses have set for proving racial discrimination?

[pilight]

Race probably played a part in the Flores firing, but things are hardly ever as cut & dried as people want them to be. There were undoubtedly many other factors that went in to the decision.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

So your requirements are video/audio evidence (which is provided by the quotes & the screengrabs.)...............

No, I wouldn't say requirements, but solid video/audio evidence certainly works... That said, the screengrabs from Flores' communications with Belichick are not evidence of discrimination. They are certainly evidence of the shortcomings of the Rooney Rule and the Giants' efforts to skirt it. But just because the Giants identified who they wanted to hire before they finished going thru the charade of the Rooney Rule doesn't mean that Flores was the victim of discrimination. In order to be discrimination, there would have to be evidence that Daboll's and Flores' race played a part in the Giants' hiring process. AFAIK, there is none.

And I'm not sure to which quotes you are referring, but quotes of people saying the NFL has a discrimination problem in it's coach-hiring process is different from evidence that Flores was discriminated against.

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

.............or Miami would have had 2 coaches w/the same exact records, the same exact circumstances, and the white got one extra year.

Not exactly sure what you're saying here but the previous 5 Dolphins coaches under Ross lasted for similar tenures:

Sparano, 3.8 seasons, .475%, 1 playoff game
Philbin, 3.25 seasons, .462%, 0 playoff games
Gase, 3 seasons, .479%, 1 playoff game
Flores, 3 seasons, .490%, 0 playoff games

If you didn't know the names, etc., tell me which one is the black guy who was held to a different standard?

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

And you don't see the high threshold your excuses have set for proving racial discrimination?

You say "excuses" but I'm just laying out the facts. You may feel my threshold is pretty high. Fair enough. I would say that yours is pretty low: It seems to me that your threshold is basically just a) Flores being black, and b) Flores claiming he was discriminated against.

Finally, I'll just remind that a) I am arguing against the idea that there is solid evidence that Flores was discriminated against, and not against the idea that there is institutional discrimination in the NFL; and b) this discussion seemed to start with debate over whether Flores shot himself in the foot. Perhaps he will get hired despite his lawsuit. But I don't think he did himself any favors by filing the lawsuit, as just or unjust as it may be. Forget for a moment the racial angle: If I'm an NFL owner, do I want to hire someone who exposed the inner workings and musings - shady that they might be (tanking & tampering) - of his previous employer's front office? Hell no. His lawsuit may be righteous from other perspectives, but it very likely did his desire to again be an NFL coach no good... So I guess I would go back and replace shot himself in the foot with did himself no favors if his goal is to be a head coach again...

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by thehef

Call me an edgelord (had to look that up and can only assume you're referring to me...) if you like, while at the same time completely ignoring the facts

Either that, or show me how Flores was treated differently that his predecessor white Dolphin coaches.

Syd's latest thing seems to be calling people (some form of) edgy. I think it's designed to make people think they've taken it too far and that they should walk their argument back.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

If I remember correctly, NBA still had tanking problems and had a random process. Which led to the Knicks getting Ewing and accusations of it being rigged.

The better solution to me is to base the order on the last 3 seasons W/L record. No one is tanking for 3 seasons.

But I don't think they will ever completely end tanking unless they put some $ into it. Namely, the better your record, the higher % of shared revenue you get. Owners won't give a flip about a better draft pick then

I think the straw that broke the camel's back was when Orlando got Shaquille O'Neal. But it wasn't just totally random, right? For example, didn't the non playoff team with the best record have 1 ball. The next best 2, and so on? Then they added a lot more balls for the worst records.

Your suggestion would be perfectly fine. Even what I explained in the above would be fine. Hell, totally random would be better than what we have now.

[Ragnar]

How many people here believe Belichick sent that text by mistake?

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by thehef

Don't get me wrong: If Flores & his legal team are able to prove racism and he makes the NFL pay for it, then good for him. I'm just saying that there's very little to indicate that due to discrimination Flores was fired by Miami and and not hired by other teams.

One of Flores' key contentions is that he was fired for not agreeing to tank. Well, as odious as some of us think tanking is, it's quite common; surely many coaches of any color have been asked - directly or indirectly - to tank as part of a rebuild. But if anyone thinks they can get hired and then directly contradict what their boss wants them to do, without repercussions, they're nuts. Could that be grounds for wrongful termination? Perhaps. But, IMO, in order for that to be discrimination there would have to be some evidence that Flores was being treated differently in a tanking situation than a white coach would be.

Just keep something in mind. Just because there is no evidence, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just because someone wasn't charged with a crime, or charges were dropped, doesn't mean something didn't happen. I'll admit, I am not familiar with the racism claim by Flores, just that he was offered money to tank.

I have a really hard time believing Flores would need to throw racism in there if it never happened. The tanking was enough. He would have to be of really low character to do that. I don't think he is. I believe it is what he truly believes. He's not just flat out lying. Could he be mistaken? Absolutely. Sometimes people interpret things the wrong way. But gun to my head and God is my judge, I'm probably not picking mistaken.

[cephasjames]

Perception is everything. Something doesn't have to be real for it to be perceived to be real. Perception does not always equal reality. But that's why investigation, and digging deep, and not taking things at face value is important. Especially when things are nuanced.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Perception is everything. Something doesn't have to be real for it to be perceived to be real. Perception does not always equal reality. But that's why investigation, and digging deep, and not taking things at face value is important. Especially when things are nuanced.

Agreed 100%. But we all have our opinions.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by thehef

No, I wouldn't say requirements, but solid video/audio evidence certainly works... That said, the screengrabs from Flores' communications with Belichick are not evidence of discrimination. They are certainly evidence of the shortcomings of the Rooney Rule and the Giants' efforts to skirt it. But just because the Giants identified who they wanted to hire before they finished going thru the charade of the Rooney Rule doesn't mean that Flores was the victim of discrimination. In order to be discrimination, there would have to be evidence that Daboll's and Flores' race played a part in the Giants' hiring process. AFAIK, there is none.

It also shows a black man had no opportunity to earn that position. W/o fully going through the interview process, they chose someone they liked, not someone who was clearly the best after they did their due diligence on their homework.

And I'm not sure to which quotes you are referring, but quotes of people saying the NFL has a discrimination problem in it's coach-hiring process is different from evidence that Flores was discriminated against.

So the NFL can admit to being a thief, but not admit to what they stole & that is OK with you?

Not exactly sure what you're saying here but the previous 5 Dolphins coaches under Ross lasted for similar tenures:

Sparano, 3.8 seasons, .475%, 1 playoff game
Philbin, 3.25 seasons, .462%, 0 playoff games
Gase, 3 seasons, .479%, 1 playoff game
Flores, 3 seasons, .490%, 0 playoff games

If you didn't know the names, etc., tell me which one is the black guy who was held to a different standard?

Dude, thanks for providing exhibit A. He had a better record than all 3 yet 2 of them got extra time.

You say "excuses" but I'm just laying out the facts. You may feel my threshold is pretty high. Fair enough. I would say that yours is pretty low: It seems to me that your threshold is basically just a) Flores being black, and b) Flores claiming he was discriminated against.

My threshold isn't low. I don't know for a fact he was discriminated against. I object to you dismissing the case because are looking for the reasons to disprove it. The truth is, unless you have Ross on tape saying "let's screw Flores cause I hate black people" anybody can make an excuse for any action that took place. If that's what you want to do. So it is impossible to prove to people like you any discrimination takes place. Cause you think discrimination is an overt, obvious act. Rarely is it. Discrimination is often subtle even subconscious. You and I can do it and not even be aware it is occurring. And if the people who claim to want to understand the affects of race in America don't get that thru their thick skulls, we will never be just "one human race".

Stop making excuses.

Finally, I'll just remind that a) I am arguing against the idea that there is solid evidence that Flores was discriminated against, and not against the idea that there is institutional discrimination in the NFL; and b) this discussion seemed to start with debate over whether Flores shot himself in the foot. Perhaps he will get hired despite his lawsuit. But I don't think he did himself any favors by filing the lawsuit, as just or unjust as it may be. Forget for a moment the racial angle: If I'm an NFL owner, do I want to hire someone who exposed the inner workings and musings - shady that they might be (tanking & tampering) - of his previous employer's front office? Hell no. His lawsuit may be righteous from other perspectives, but it very likely did his desire to again be an NFL coach no good... So I guess I would go back and replace shot himself in the foot with did himself no favors if his goal is to be a head coach again...

And I will argue as long as people w/your position are willing to play advocate for the defense on these issues, discrimination will be a permanent fabric of not just the NFL, but of mankind.

And you still don't get it w/changing to "did him no favors". The words imply he victimized himself. The law says no one should fear recrimination for filing a complaint about discrimination. So any fallout that causes him not to be "hireable" is at the fault of the employer, not the employee. And if NFL owners don't hire him because he "had the nerve" to stand up for himself, then they made Flores their victim, not Brian.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

How many people here believe Belichick sent that text by mistake?

Like I believe his video crew in Cincy filmed the Bengals sidelines by mistake on their own.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Agreed 100%. But we all have our opinions.

Absolutely. I thought about going back to add something along these lines but didn't. Flores' perception of what happened is perfectly fine to have. Time will tell if his perception is correct or merely just his opinion.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Syd's latest thing seems to be calling people (some form of) edgy. I think it's designed to make people think they've taken it too far and that they should walk their argument back.

No, pretty much just you for the “guuuuuys, if you can call Pat Mahomes half black I can call him half whiiiiiiite I am a very smart person” comment.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

No, pretty much just you for the “guuuuuys, if you can call Pat Mahomes half black I can call him half whiiiiiiite I am a very smart person” comment.

Oh, I'd be completely wrong to call him white. Because he's not white, he's biracial. That's the point.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Oh, I'd be completely wrong to call him white. Because he's not white, he's biracial. That's the point.

No, please keep going on with telling black people who they should and should not consider one of their own. It’s a very good look for you and not edgy at all.

[pilight]

Even better, tell Mahomes how he should consider himself

https://www.gq.com/story/patrick-mah...le-august-2020

Originally Posted by Patrick Mahomes

I’ve always just had the confidence and believed in who I am. And I’ve known that I’m Black. And I’m proud to be Black.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by pilight

Race probably played a part in the Flores firing...

I'm not aware of any evidence that race played a role in Flores' firing. There's certainly credible contentions - perhaps evidence, perhaps not - that race may have played a role in Flores not getting other jobs.

Originally Posted by pilight

... but things are hardly ever as cut & dried as people want them to be. There were undoubtedly many other factors that went in to the decision.

Without question on both accounts. Although some seem to be ignoring the other, obvious factors.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

How many people here believe Belichick sent that text by mistake?

The idea that Belichick sent that text on purpose is, IMO, absurd. Sure, it's possible. But highly unlikely. Brian Flores started at a very young age as some obscure assistant-to-an-assistant or something under BB and rose through the ranks over several years, so BB obviously liked Flores and respected his work as a coach. And BB has a long record of re-hiring his assistants after they failed as head coaches elsewhere. Common sense would suggest that the overwhelmingly-most-likely explanation is that it was a simple mistake on BB's part, confusing the two Brians in his phone who were up for the same job. (Who among us hasn't sent a text message to the wrong person; usually, it's nonsensical or funny; sometimes it's embarrassing...)

It's clear - to me anyway - that the purpose of including the Flores/Belichick text exchange in the lawsuit was to demonstrate that the Giants were skirting the Rooney Rule; NOT to demonstrate malice on BB's part.

And Belichick may be cranky as hell, but - love him or hate him - he's genuine.

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Just keep something in mind. Just because there is no evidence, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just because someone wasn't charged with a crime, or charges were dropped, doesn't mean something didn't happen. I'll admit, I am not familiar with the racism claim by Flores, just that he was offered money to tank.

I have a really hard time believing Flores would need to throw racism in there if it never happened. The tanking was enough. He would have to be of really low character to do that. I don't think he is. I believe it is what he truly believes. He's not just flat out lying. Could he be mistaken? Absolutely. Sometimes people interpret things the wrong way. But gun to my head and God is my judge, I'm probably not picking mistaken.

Totally fair. My only perspectives on this are that he presented zero evidence of racism regarding his Miami tenure & firing. (Again, the tanking and tampering allegations do not look good on Ross, and are certainly believable, but they don't make him a racist...) As for racism applying to his other job interviews, prospects, etc., I don't think he has presented any direct evidence, but I don't doubt that he feels discriminated against, and that he has presented some circumstancial evidence (certainly circumstancial evidence of institutional - rather than direct to him).