What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NFL 2019-20: The Patriots Are A Terrible 11-3 Team!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meh, everyone was always going to hate it. I think it's perfectly cromulent. Maybe even better than cromulent. The logo is nice.


Edit: Until I saw the bottom of it. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/KT_So_It_Goes/status/1488880662073466883?s=20&t=t6utu1Kiujj_7uWeXZ9jcw
FKmREj8WYAE9ISd



THis was the first one I saw. I thought it was decent:
FKmSdCeXMAAqNuz
 
Last edited:
SJHovey said:
It's an interesting complaint if you read it in its entirety, but there is one part of the complaint with which I don't necessarily agree. Over and over they cite the fact that about 70% of the league is Black but only 11% of the coaches, and that this is evidence of discrimination since this overwhelming majority of Black players aren't getting a chance to coach after their playing days are done (I think that is even one of the specific allegations). The thing is, NFL head coaches very rarely come out of the former player ranks, white or black. They basically work their way up from colleges, or even high school.

The NFL has a problem, but I think that is due in large part to a similar problem that we see at the college level in terms of opportunities for black coaches. It doesn't explain why someone like Flores who now has had experience doesn't get a second chance when people like McCarthy do.
Click to expand...

Well that is kind of where the Belicheck texts come in. He texted Flores (thinking it was Daboll) on I believe Monday congratulating him on the job. Flores wasn't even getting an interview until Thursday so no announcement was likely imminent since he wasn't named until Friday. How the hell would BB know someone from another team got the job before someone who is supposedly interviewing for it later that week? The media didn't even know and they have sources everywhere. (everyone knew Daboll interviewed obviously) Something doesn't smell right.

It likely is a coincidence, but it isn't that big of a stretch to think "The Old Boys Network" was in play here. And seeing as the NFL has had a lot of problems of late (i.e. stuff like the revelations from the Dan Snyder debacle and the Jon Gruden one) this is not a great time for them to be accused of racist collusion.

Look I can't speak to the merits of his case (which I will try and read later) but I gotta admit a young coach risking his career to make this type of accusation tends to give it more credence in my mind. And the truth is, even if he has no case the NFL has had this problem for years which is why The Rooney Rule was put into place. Look how long it took Tony Dungy to get a job. How many underqualified White Candidates get chances before qualified Black Candidates? How many failures get second or third chances? It theoretically could be a coincidence but that doesn't pass the smell test.

Maybe Flores is a azzhole who alienated the team...maybe the guy can't coach. I don't pretend to know that. What I do know is he got fired awfully fast after 2 winning seasons (with a team that almost never wins) which no one saw coming. I would bet that in the case of his firing it likely was more that the Dolphins owner is just a pathetic loser who threw a tantrum cause he didn't get his way (there is a reason Watson was rumored to be going to Miami even before he said he wanted out of Houston) with the coach he probably he never really liked. However, the Giants interview and well the overall perception of how Black coaches are treated around the league is a different animal and if there is anything to that you will see a lot of stories come out in the next year or so.
 
Handyman said:
Look I can't speak to the merits of his case (which I will try and read later) but I gotta admit a young coach risking his career to make this type of accusation tends to give it more credence in my mind. And the truth is, even if he has no case the NFL has had this problem for years which is why The Rooney Rule was put into place. Look how long it took Tony Dungy to get a job. How many underqualified White Candidates get chances before qualified Black Candidates? How many failures get second or third chances? It theoretically could be a coincidence but that doesn't pass the smell test.
Click to expand...

IMHO, the Lions are a great example of qualified black coaches not getting the same treatment. In the last almost 40 years, two coaches had a winning record. Just 2. One of them was Jim Caldwell. The other didn't even coach an entire season (Gary Moller). I'll give Wayne Fonts some credit, since he actually won a playoff game.

Since 1972- 16 white coaches with losing records (counting the glory days of Fonts), one white coach with a brief winning record (Moller), and one black coach with a WINNING record- who got fired.

Of the 15 crappy white coaches (Fontes wasn't bad), you can't tell me that there were not more qualified black coaches out there as alternatives than just one. Let alone that SINGLE black coach was more successful than all of the rest of them.
 
I also don't like Commanders as an overly military name. And that's not a knock on the military or anything like that. But a football team picking a name now with military connotations feels like posing, especially when it's the DC football franchise, and again mind you I say that as the board's lone (I think?) fan of that franchise. Remember the stories in the last few years where all of the military recognition and other events at NFL games weren't done by the NFL to be nice; they were done because the NFL got the military to pay them millions to do it. Basically the NFL wants to seem as buddy-buddy with the military as possible, which of course makes sense based on fan demographics, but doesn't want to actually put forth any event or spend any money, they just want the appearance. It almost feels like this should be offensive to and below the military. Especially considering the last 10-20 of the DC franchise and all the crappy things they've done; remember, we're a year or two removed from them selling their cheerleaders to rich guys. That was a thing that actually happened. They're just using the military name to try to make themselves look better and hide behind the flag so everyone forgets that.
 
Also, I mean, it wasn't like they had to rush this. They had two years. They could have even gone with Armada or Redtails, and while neither would have been my choice, they are at least marginally more interesting. I mean, Commanders is about as generic-but-still-military as you can get. It screams decision by committee.
 
Maybe they will go all-in and start running the triple option as their main offensive scheme. They could bring in Tebow for the extra boost in attendance!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top