In the week since I wrote the initial post: “What do Supreme Court Appointments and NFL Coaching Hires Have in Common” there have been some interesting developments.
The most interesting, though not surprising is Joe Biden’s partisan view of black women on the Supreme Court and how he blocked the first black woman appointment. He’ll get the credit for appointing the first black woman to the court, but it is George W. Busch who should.
The story begins in 2003 when Bush nominated Judge Janice Rogers Brown to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The D.C. Circuit is considered the country’s second-most important court and has produced more Supreme Court justices than any other federal court. Brown was immediately hailed as a potential Supreme Court nominee. She was highly qualified, having served for seven years as an associate justice of the California Supreme Court — the first Black woman to do so. She was the daughter and granddaughter of sharecroppers, and grew up in rural Alabama during the dark days of segregation, when her family refused to enter restaurants or theaters with separate entrances for Black customers. She rose from poverty and put herself through college and UCLA law school as a working single mother. She was a self-made African American legal star. But she was an outspoken conservative — so Biden set out to destroy her. Washington Post - Marc Thiessen
That’s right. It has to be the right (or left) black woman. Remember the hyperbole about the filibuster and how it impedes progress from his speech last week?
This is the same Joe Biden, speaking on Face the Nation about Brown’s potential appointment: “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered.”
Next is the suit by Brian Flores against the NFL and three specific franchises for racial discrimination. In the complaint, Flores who was just fired by the Dolphins, claims the NFL is racist in their hiring and retention practices.
I admit to being confused when he was fired. In two years he turned around the team and fell one game short of making the playoffs. But again there is more to the story. It appears there are irreconcilable differences between Flores and the team’s ownership. One specific claim was that Flores was offered 100,000 per game he lost. The object being to obtain a higher draft pick. If that is the case, it is indefensible. Coaches are judged on their records and losing would only hurt Flores. He should have resigned immediately.
He also claims, under the banner of racism, that he was interviewed for several jobs after the team had already made a decision. This is common practice wherever interviews are mandated for any reason. Most organizations have their eye on one or two potential candidates who they would hire without question: If this guy is available we’ll take him. There are no racist implications in this kind of practice in a league where winning is everything.
Flores sounds like a bitter, currently unemployed coach, more than one targeted by racism.
Counter to his argument there might be good reason to hire black coaches in a predominantly black league. Winning the locker room and a coaches connection with his players are almost as important as his playbook. If that is the case wouldn’t it be natural to seek out black coach?
Encouraging minority coaches at the high school and college levels would achieve the goal of diversity in NFL coaches and administrators—not lawsuits and mandates.
And now, the Texans have promoted a black coach from their staff to fill their head coaching vacancy. Flores was a finalist for the job and now claims he was passed over because of the suit. So, the Texans hired a black coach—just not the one who sued his old team. Hmmm.