The Rooney Rule

Spread it!

Share

Email This

The holidays are generally a time for food, family, friends and, if you’re like my family, conversation. Exchanging pleasantries is generally a relaxing way to enjoy each others’ company, that is, until one of these three topics is brought up:
Politics, religion, or the Rooney Rule.

For most people, the first two are a given. Those unfamiliar with sports may not understand or even recognize the third topic. If you fall into that category, then sit back and relax for the next few minutes, because this article is for you.

So what exactly is this Rooney Rule?

Like any question posed after 2001, we begin our search at Wikipedia.

The free online encyclopedia defines the Rooney Rule as the rule which “requires National Football League teams to interview minority candidates for head coaching and senior football operations opportunities. The rule is named for Dan Rooney, the owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers and the chairman of the league’s diversity committee, and indirectly the Rooney family in general due to the team’s long history of giving African Americans opportunities that most NFL teams at one point didn’t give.”

From that definition, it is clear a controversial topic lies at the very heart of the Rooney Rule: affirmative action.

Consider the following case study of the Rooney Rule in action.

Two years ago, the Miami Dolphins hired football legend Bill Parcells as their new Vice President of Football Operations. Parcells was responsible for selecting Miami’s next head coach and general manager – two positions then under Rooney Rule jurisdiction. Parcells had interviewed his good friend Tony Sparano the week before, and it was no secret the job was his for the taking.

In order to comply with the Rooney Rule (not to mention avoiding the $200,000 fine imposed on its violators), Parcells proceeded to interview a young, talented minority assistant coach named Leslie Frazier for a position which he had all but promised to Sparano the week before. Not wanting to cause a stir, Frazier humbly acknowledged the situation in an interview with the Miami Herald:

“I’m just looking forward to sitting down and talking to Bill (Parcells) Jeff (Ireland) and the owner to get a feel [for] what they’re looking for in a head coach,” Frazier said.

Now timeout here.

When did it ever become acceptable for anyone to interview for a position knowing full well the job would be promised to someone else?

Who decided it was OK to comply as a mere formality to an otherwise flawed system?

Frazier did what was best for his career by downplaying the situation, but his interview and many others like it contradict the spirit of the Rooney Rule and everything that it stands for.

Although cases like Frazier’s aren’t as rare as one would imagine, you won’t look long before finding a case which proves the Rooney Rule has been an important stepping stone for minority coaches in the National Football League.
In the seven years since the rule’s conception, remarkable progress has been made in diversifying positions historically closed off to minorities. In that seven year span, the NFL has seen a black head coach (Mike Tomlin) and a black general manger (Jerry Reese) lead their respective teams to Super Bowl victories.

League owners, and coaches, and former players praise the Rooney Rule for it’s aggressive pursuit of what appears to be institutionalized discrimination.

Art Shell, one of the first black head coaches in NFL history, believes the Rooney Rule was essential to Tomlin’s opportunity as a successful head coach.

“Mike Tomlin wouldn’t have gotten this opportunity without this rule,” Shell said.

“He never would have sat down with Dan Rooney.”

The Rooney Rule was put in place to provide minorities with an opportunity they may have otherwise not received. In the case of reigning Super Bowl winning head coach Mike Tomlin, it certainly seemed to have worked out well.
Consider a final, more recent example of the issue at hand.

Following a disappointing end to the 2008 season, the Cleveland Browns fired head coach Romeo Crennel after three losing seasons and a combined 24-40 record. In his search for a new coach, Browns owner Randy Lerner granted Crennel’s defensive coordinator, Mel Tucker, what was seen by many as a token interview similar to the one Frazier received in Miami. Lerner already compiled a shortlist of candidates for the position – not one of which was named Mel Tucker.

The interview took place and Lerner proceeded to hire Jets head coach Eric Mangini shortly thereafter.
Nearly a year has passed since the Mangini hiring, and the Cleveland Browns find themselves in the midst of another controversy – this time for a high profile executive. With the football organization in disarray, Lerner and the Browns sought “a smart, credible, experienced leader” to oversee the team’s day-to-day operations. The qualifications for such a position limited the pool to a select few, and once again the Browns made a hire without seriously considering a minority candidate.

It remains to be seen whether the NFL will take action against the Browns, but the Cleveland’s hiring practices in relation to the Rooney Rule pose an interesting twist to a long-standing debate: are affirmative action programs like the Rooney Rule helpful or harmful to society?

At first glance, it’s hard to argue against mandated equal opportunity employment. As mentioned earlier, the Rooney Rule opened the door for coaches like Mike Tomlin and executives like Jerry Reese to make history as two of the most recent African Americans to win the Super Bowl. Even outside of football, affirmative action affords opportunities to people who may not have been afforded otherwise.

But is it really worth it?

For all of his accomplishments, Mike Tomlin is not viewed as a successful head coach. He is viewed as a successful black head coach. Giants general manager Jerry Reese is not a successful general manager. He’s a successful black general manager.

As long as there is a systematic favoring based on race, the topic will continue to be at the forefront of people’s minds.

And their accomplishments.
Furthermore, situations such as Leslie Frazier’s or Mel Tucker’s seem to suggest the rule is not as effective as it may seem. When it comes down to it, those who hold the cards will make all of the decisions.

Bill Parcells and others have proven that a rule’s effectiveness will only go as far as the people involved.

A change in policy does not equate to a change of heart.

Like anything in life, there are two sides to every question. The Rooney Rule has simultaneously proven itself effective and inept – leaving behind more questions than answers.

Regardless of which side you feel is correct, it is important to continue working to a day where traits like race are simply viewed as an afterthought. Once we get to that point, then maybe the browns won’t be judged on anything but how they perform on the job.

And given the chance, I don’t think they will disappoint.

Tagged as: affirmative action, rooney rule

Article by Chike Erokwu

Chike is a first-generation Nigerian-American currently residing in Cleveland, OH. An avid sports fan, Chike enjoys basketball, football, baseball, and soccer. He is currently enrolled in the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism at Ohio University where he majors in news writing and editing.Chike has contributed several articles to the Bleacher Report, the Cleveland Plain Dealer, CBSSports.com, and FOXSports.com.

Chike has written 1 article(s) for us.