Fired Colo HC Jon Embree on black coaches: "We get bad jobs and no time to fix it."

[Sportsfan24]

What a completely awesome discussion.

Let's face the facts. Football is king for most academic institutions. If there's one thing we should have learned in the recent juggling of conference alliances, football runs the show with basketball taking a major backseat. Bill Self at Kansas said it perfectly, "Football is driving the buggy" in this case, in reference to none of the conferences desperately pursuing primarily basketball dominated schools, like Kansas.

So when discussing race in regards to Head Coaching decisions, you're essentially saying that a school would rather LOSE with a non-black coach then WIN with a black coach.

Do you have any idea how absolutely f'n ridiculous that sounds? I'm running a major school, I NEED the football team to be good for the betterment of the entire University; I'm NOT going to hire a competent head coach because of his skin color??? That entire notion is offensive and disgusting. Period.

In this day and age, with all of the media scrutiny and available information, everybody in college football knows not ONLY who the rockstar Asst Head Coaches and Coordinators are, they know who most of the elite position coaches are. It becomes abundantly clear EARLY in a coach's career who just plain HAS IT and who doesn't. Head coaching candidates don't get job interviews out of the blue.

If you're continuing to argue that minority candidates aren't given adequate opportunities for Head Coaching gigs, just stop it. You're embarassing yourself. This is a business, and it's about WINNING. If you can get the job done, you'll have a job. It's not difficult to grasp.

Nope, I refuse to believe you are this stupid.

For you to arrive arrive at the dumb ass conclusion above you would have to ignore how those
same Universities for years refused to allow black athletes the opportunity to play for
their schools? Hell, some of them even held on to their racist beliefs after other schools came to realize the error of their ways.

I mean if it were about winning as you say, wouldn't every NFL team looking for a coach hire a black dude? With the exception of maybe two, EVERY black head coach ever hired has made the playoffs.

Hey white people....he's on your team (lol). Now you know how black folks feel when the news comes on and a black person is being interviewed wearing pajamas as clothes with a grill in their mouth. Idiots don't adhere to racial boundaries.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

Nope, I refuse to believe you are this stupid.

For you to arrive arrive at the dumb ass conclusion above you would have to ignore how those
same Universities for years refused to allow black athletes the opportunity to play for
their schools? Hell, some of them even held on to their racist beliefs after other schools came to realize the error of their ways.

I mean if it were about winning as you say, wouldn't every NFL team looking for a coach hire a black dude? With the exception of maybe two, EVERY black head coach ever hired has made the playoffs.

Hey white people....he's on your team (lol). Now you know how black folks feel when the news comes on and a black person is being interviewed wearing pajamas as clothes with a grill in their mouth. Idiots don't adhere to racial boundaries.

No, sorry, I'm not buying it. You're asking the wrong questions. People are asking questions about ratios and why there aren't more black coaches, etc.

The question should be, as I asked, do you really think they would prefer to LOSE with a non-minority coach than WIN with a minority coach? Plain and simple. Do you really think that? This is about coaching ability, the ability to lead a program, build a program, to lead a group of young men towards a common goal. There's more to coaching and leading a program than having been a good player, or knowledge of X's and O's.

Ignoring the past? Really? You're going to compare the racist ideologies and prejudices that were inherent decades ago to how things are now? Is racism prevalent? No doubt about it. But to portray the situation as some kind of conspiracy against minorities, they're not getting a fair shake, etc. is appalling. Comments like Embree's, and those that insist on entertaining those ideas, are what sets back integration (or however you want to refer to it) years and years. He was emotional over getting let go, and made some comments he likely regrets.

So the question remains, do you truly think all of these programs who have not hired minority coaches would prefer losing with a white coach over winning with a minority coach?

 

[GophersInIowa]

No, sorry, I'm not buying it. You're asking the wrong questions. People are asking questions about ratios and why there aren't more black coaches, etc.

The question should be, as I asked, do you really think they would prefer to LOSE with a non-minority coach than WIN with a minority coach? Plain and simple. Do you really think that? This is about coaching ability, the ability to lead a program, build a program, to lead a group of young men towards a common goal. There's more to coaching and leading a program than having been a good player, or knowledge of X's and O's.

Ignoring the past? Really? You're going to compare the racist ideologies and prejudices that were inherent decades ago to how things are now? Is racism prevalent? No doubt about it. But to portray the situation as some kind of conspiracy against minorities, they're not getting a fair shake, etc. is appalling. Comments like Embree's, and those that insist on entertaining those ideas, are what sets back integration (or however you want to refer to it) years and years. He was emotional over getting let go, and made some comments he likely regrets.

So the question remains, do you truly think all of these programs who have not hired minority coaches would prefer losing with a white coach over winning with a minority coach?

I think there are two different arguments here though. I agree that it's highly unlikely that a school would hire a white coach even if they felt a minority was better.

However, I wouldn't doubt that some people's opinions of a coach are skewed because of the color of their skin. It's all about perception. Say you have two NBA players that are exactly the same in basketball ability. Height, weight, shooting, ball handling, defense are all the same. One player is black, one is white. More times than not, the black player will be considered a better player by the general public. I don't think it's hardcore racism or anything, it just the perception most everyone has. Blacks are generally considered better athletes while whites are generally considered better head coaches (again, I'm not saying this is the truth, but is generally how things are perceived in the public).

 

[btowngopher]

I'd really like to see the list of the black coaches and see how they performed. I'd also like to see a list of white coaches who bombed in their first coaching job and were given a second chance. John L. Smith bombed at MSU, but he had success at places before that. Chizik is a rare exception I think.

 

[mntwinsfreak89]

Pretty sure getting destroyed by nearly every team they played had more to do with the firing than the color of their skin.

 

[THE SCOUT!]

the guy was lucky to get a high end job like that with his resume. He gets a nice buyout. Funny he did not have the integrity to call it a crappy job when he signed the contract

 

[RodentRampage]

The question should be, as I asked, do you really think they would prefer to LOSE with a non-minority coach than WIN with a minority coach?

That's the wrong question. If there is bias in hiring and firing, there is no reason to assume that colleges are must be making the calculation that they would rather lose with a white coach than win with a black coach. It could be explained by a belief that white coaches are better coaches than black coaches rather than a desire to lose with a black coach.

It would indeed be unreasonable to think that a school would rather lose with a white coach than lose with a black coach. But it's not the only option.

I don't know to what extent bias plays a factor in hiring and firings, I'm not siding with Embree. But, if someone was inclined, they could look at the prestige of the coaching jobs to see if white coaches were disproportinately likely to get these jobs, and look at job performance, to see what level of performance let you keep your job. Perhaps the results would show that black coaches requires a higher level of performance to keep their job, perhaps it wouldn't show this at all.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

I think there are two different arguments here though. I agree that it's highly unlikely that a school would hire a white coach even if they felt a minority was better.

However, I wouldn't doubt that some people's opinions of a coach are skewed because of the color of their skin. It's all about perception. Say you have two NBA players that are exactly the same in basketball ability. Height, weight, shooting, ball handling, defense are all the same. One player is black, one is white. More times than not, the black player will be considered a better player by the general public. I don't think it's hardcore racism or anything, it just the perception most everyone has. Blacks are generally considered better athletes while whites are generally considered better head coaches (again, I'm not saying this is the truth, but is generally how things are perceived in the public).

Good points across the board. I agree with what you're saying here.

I don't know to what extent bias plays a factor in hiring and firings, I'm not siding with Embree. But, if someone was inclined, they could look at the prestige of the coaching jobs to see if white coaches were disproportinately likely to get these jobs, and look at job performance, to see what level of performance let you keep your job. Perhaps the results would show that black coaches requires a higher level of performance to keep their job, perhaps it wouldn't show this at all.

Let's be honest, bias plays a factor in ALL hiring, across the board. Attractive people get hired over ugly people, tall people over short people, graduates from one school over another, young people more than older people, or vice versa, skinny people over fat people, people without tattoos over people with tattoos. I sometimes have to hire document control/adminstrative people; plain and simple, I look for good-looking young women with big cans. It makes a difference. My clients like pretty women.

Is it possible race plays a factor? Of course it's possible. If it wasn't obvious, I'm taking a somewhat hardline stance to try to make a point. What I'm saying is, if YOUR employment and success, as a University adminstrator, you're going to hire the person you think is best capable to do the job.

I think what we're talking about here is HOW MUCH of a factor it plays. Using arbitrary percentages; if I'm saying it factors about 3-5% into the decision, people like Embree and others who just don't feel like minorities are getting a fair shake think it factors about 30-40% (or more) into the decision. I'm saying that's f'n ridiculous. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Sportsfan24]

Good points across the board. I agree with what you're saying here.



Let's be honest, bias plays a factor in ALL hiring, across the board. Attractive people get hired over
ugly people, tall people over short people, graduates from one school over another, young people
more than older people, or vice versa, skinny people over fat people, people without tattoos over
people with tattoos. I sometimes have to hire document control/adminstrative people; plain and
simple, I look for good-looking young women with big cans. It makes a difference. My clients like
pretty women.

Is it possible race plays a factor? Of course it's possible. If it wasn't obvious, I'm taking a
somewhat hardline stance to try to make a point. What I'm saying is, if YOUR employment and
success, as a University adminstrator, you're going to hire the person you think is best capable to
do the job.

I think what we're talking about here is HOW MUCH of a factor it plays. Using arbitrary percentages; if I'm saying it factors about 3-5% into the decision, people like Embree and others
who just don't feel like minorities are getting a fair shake think it factors about 30-40% (or more)
into the decision. I'm saying that's f'n ridiculous. That's the point I'm trying to make.

You know...the scary part is...people actually have to report to you. Damn, sucks being them.

Here's the deal, for the most part white folks don't sit around thinking...I'm not hiring this guy because he's black or I'm hiring this guy because he is white. This is what I think happens, I call it my half a glass of water theory. Two guys interview for a job, one is black the other is white. For the white candidate the interviewer focuses on the bottom of the glass. He looking at all the things the candidate has accomplished, all the good things. For the black candidate he focuses on the top of the glass, all the things the candidate lacks, things he don't have. From there he makes a decision; he hires the candidate who has the skill sets for the job, the best man for the job. The problem of course is both of their glasses/skill sets were the same. They both had accomplished the same amount and they both were lacking the same amount.

My man, this is why it's not enough to leave hiring leaders to their own devices. Now this is were we are in agreement....always hire good looking women. To hell with a resume or experience, if she has a nice behind (I'm a butt man), the job is hers!

 

[GophersInIowa]

It's nice to have a good discussion about a controversial topic for once. Kudos to all involved.

Here's something a friend of mine mentioned earlier today: Embree has obviously created discussion and even some controversy with his comments. Does anyone think that, all things being pretty much equal, schools might shy away from a minority candidate because they know they'll probably get criticized and scrutinized if they end up firing him early on?

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

Nope, I refuse to believe you are this stupid.

You know...the scary part is...people actually have to report to you. Damn, sucks being them.

Impressive. Twice opening with personal insults to strengthen your argument. By golly, I think you're just about to win me over to your way of thinking with compelling backup like that, although I have to admit this wasn't the strategy I would have expected from you.

For the most part, this has been pretty light-hearted banter at this point. I think it's best to just leave it at that. Safe to say you've made your feelings abundantly clear on the topic.

Hiring staff is the most important thing we do. Period. It's embarassing how casual some people and organizations treat this activity. Regardless of the level within the organization, you're bringing someone into the fold to represent the company, a reflection of YOU, and hopefully lead your organization to bigger and better things. I'm constantly shocked at how little effort and preparation people put into this activity. To me, it's the single most important thing that we do. On more than one occasion, I have opted to not hire ANYBODY than to bring in the wrong person.

Back to Embree. He mentions bad jobs. There are definitely bad jobs. Should he have turned down the job perhaps? Do you take a bad job just to garner the prestige of being a head coach at a BCS school? Let's face it, there are BAD organizations, in both professional and collegiate sports. ORGANIZATIONS fail just as much or more often than actual coaches do.

In Embree's case, unfortunately I don't think he had any choice. You want to be a head coach and you're offered a big-time job, AND it's at your alma mater. Colorado could very well be a horrible situation, bad school administration, poor university support, who knows.

Bottom line: Embree handled this situation very poorly. For every one person that thinks he may have a valid point, there are a handful that thinks it's just sour grapes from getting fired, playing the victim, et al. He did himself and many others a disservice by how he handled the situation it would appear.

 

[corcoran1]

While it sounds like whining on its face, none of us really know enough about the situation to have any idea if this guy was making progress. If he was working for a bad AD, this could be a terrible decision. His background does not inspire confidence for anyone on this site, but the program may have been a shambles. A coaching change after two years in a depleted program is by definition a train wreck, but if he is not the right coach, it is still the right thing to do. It is what Maturi should have done four years ago.

 

[btowngopher]

Have there been 41 black coaches in the FBS, or have there been 41 that have been fired?

 

[btowngopher]

Pretty sure it's 41 that have been hired since 1979, I'm going to try to find some numbers, but I'm guessing a large amount are very recent, and a decent chunk haven't even been fired yet. I don't think I'm going to find much of a difference between black and white coaches when I find some more information. Who are all these failed white coaches that are getting more opportunities??

 

[TexasAggie11]

Upon examination by ESPN they discovered that since 1979, 41 black coaches have been hired at the D1 now FBS level. Of the 41, 13 remain at their schools. The rest were fired.

This guy's not so sure about ESPN's research.

Four years at a D1 FBS school, hired away by another D1 FBS school (and arguably one of the better opportunities given to any head coach in history - at least in hindsight).

 

[STPGopher]

Bill McCartney chimes in...

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8685178/colorado-buffaloes-troubles-leave-plenty-blame-go-college-football[video]http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8683980[/video]

From the article:

"Bill McCartney, Embree's coach at Colorado in the mid-1980s and a Buffs icon, pronounced that Embree didn't get the chance to complete the task of turning around Colorado because he is African-American.

"I feel like, as a minority coach, when you get an opportunity, you want to try to help knock down barriers, help make it easier for the next guy," Embree said Tuesday in a phone interview. "I had an opportunity. I just feel awful that obviously, I didn't make it easier for the next guy. Those are the things that stay with you. ... People don't really realize when we do get an opportunity, we understand that it could be your only opportunity."

The funny thing is, if there was a coach in America who could be excused for not thinking he would be judged by his record, it would be Embree. McCartney went 1-10 in 1984, his third season, Embree's sophomore year. As a junior and senior, Embree played in a bowl game. In 1990, Colorado shared the national championship.

Embree was hired for that connection to McCartney. He took over a program in desperate straits and was given the charge to shepherd it into the Pacific-12 Conference. He coached as if he would have the opportunity to build a program the way that McCartney did."

IIRC McCartney suggested that he take over Colorado and help lay the foundation/ get them thru the lean stretch while grooming Embree, then turn it over to Embree. Allegedly, Colorado backed away from this plan and decided to hire Embree outright. I couldn't find video where McCartney addresses this.

 

[Sportsfan24]

Impressive. Twice opening with personal insults to strengthen your argument. By golly, I think you're just about to win me over to your way of thinking with compelling backup like that, although I have to admit this wasn't the strategy I would have expected from you.
For the most part, this has been pretty light-hearted banter at this point. I think it's best to just leave it at that. Safe to say you've made your feelings abundantly clear on the topic.

Hiring staff is the most important thing we do. Period. It's embarassing how casual some people and organizations treat this activity. Regardless of the level within the organization, you're bringing someone into the fold to represent the company, a reflection of YOU, and hopefully lead your organization to bigger and better things. I'm constantly shocked at how little effort and preparation people put into this activity. To me, it's the single most important thing that we do. On more than one occasion, I have opted to not hire ANYBODY than to bring in the wrong person.

Back to Embree. He mentions bad jobs. There are definitely bad jobs. Should he have turned down the job perhaps? Do you take a bad job just to garner the prestige of being a head coach at a BCS school? Let's face it, there are BAD organizations, in both professional and collegiate sports. ORGANIZATIONS fail just as much or more often than actual coaches do.

In Embree's case, unfortunately I don't think he had any choice. You want to be a head coach and you're offered a big-time job, AND it's at your alma mater. Colorado could very well be a horrible situation, bad school administration, poor university support, who knows.

Bottom line: Embree handled this situation very poorly. For every one person that thinks he may have a valid point, there are a handful that thinks it's just sour grapes from getting fired, playing the victim, et al. He did himself and many others a disservice by how he handled the situation it would appear.

My man, I wasn't trying to win you over or strengthen my argrument....I was just being honest. Not to worry...my wife thinks I'm an idiot 6 days out of 7 too.

I agree you with whole heartedly on Embree. This conversation does not apply to him and would have been better served coming from someone else because as you correctly put it; it comes across as sour grapes.

This is in fact a pet peeve of mine. Black folks who spend their whole lives ignoring or not speaking up on racism (which they are entitled to do). Then when they perceive they are a victim of racism (or want to deflect), all of a sudden they have something to say....OJ Simpson/Michael Jackson. If you spend your life in the public and choose to never address racism and only broach the topic when you get into trouble....it comes across as...I hate this term, but it applies here...playing the race card. Embree had no problem taking this "BAD" job with his limited amount of credentials.

I would have been incredible impressed if he would have said upon getting hired "this is an incredibly tough job for a first time coach and as a black coach history tells us that this is the only chance I will get to succeed. There is an incredible amount of work that needs to be done, but I believe I can get the job done"

Would this have pissed off some people at CU? Most definitely but it would have also put folks on notice as to not only his plight but the plight of all black coaches. And if he wanted to expound on it again after getting fired it wouldn't look so self serving.

 

[STPGopher]

It's nice to have a good discussion about a controversial topic for once. Kudos to all involved.

Here's something a friend of mine mentioned earlier today: Embree has obviously created discussion and even some controversy with his comments. Does anyone think that, all things being pretty much equal, schools might shy away from a minority candidate because they know they'll probably get criticized and scrutinized if they end up firing him early on?

I don't think so. While it might effect whether or not Embree gets hired or not, I think that schools that would be open to hiring a candidate that fits their wants/ needs would be open to a candidate that is a good fit. Regardless of race.

Slightly off topic here. The NCAA or progressive schools (meaning those open to change) may consider having programs to groom coaching candidates in the areas outside of x's and O's. Like others have mentioned, head coaches at the FBS level really are CEOs of football at the school they are coaching.

 

[Sportsfan24]

I don't think so. While it might effect whether or not Embree gets hired or not, I think that schools that would be open to hiring a candidate that fits their wants/ needs would be open to a candidate that is a good fit. Regardless of race.

Slightly off topic here. The NCAA or progressive schools (meaning those open to change) may consider having programs to groom coaching candidates in the areas outside of x's and O's. Like others have mentioned, head coaches at the FBS level really are CEOs of football at the school they are coaching.

As a professional who happens to be blessed to be black (I know some of you are shocked that I'm black). I despise mentoring/grooming programs for blacks. It implies we are somehow broken and need to be fixed.

What needs to be "fixed" is the people who do the hiring. Here's the deal, if organizations truly value and want diversity, why isn't diversity a qualification for those who do the hiring? I don't care what race you are, hiring leaders should have to prove they have a quantifiable diverse skill set. This is literally insane; they keep hiring the same type of hiring leaders and expect different results?

A organization would not hire a person without a financial background to be its CFO. It wouldn't hire a person with no legal experience to head its legal department. Why would it hire hiring leaders with no quantifiable skill sets in diversity? Oh pick me, pick me,.....I have the answer! The answer is; they really don’t value or want diversity. They create meaningless programs like...the new buzz word...diversity and inclusion groups/dept/council! And you know what those groups do? Not a damn thing other than create the appearance/illusion they do something and the organization cares.

You want a diverse group of employees? Heres a thought....hire them.

 

[Killjoy]

As a professional who happens to be blessed to be black (I know some of you are shocked that I'm black!).

LOL - My sarcasm meter almost went through the ceiling when I read that. Good one! By the way I don't consider Obama to be black but that discussion is for another day.

 

[Sportsfan24]

LOL - My sarcasm meter almost went through the ceiling when I read that. Good one! By the way I don't consider Obama to be black but that discussion is for another day.

I know right?

I have been run out of the barbershop on several occasions because of this topic. While I will take him; dude is as much white as he is black. He is only considered black because of the racist 1 drop of blood (actually anything more than 1/8 or 12% black is black) view from the massa days.

I told my barber "if Barry went Jeffery Dalmer, watch how fast yall drop his ass from the club!"

 

[kellyleeks]

At the time I pretty much assumed that when Chizik was hired over Turner Gill at Auburn, based on race. There didn't seem to be any other reason. I have been to Alabama and I am pretty sure they like their head coaches white, or at least the large donors do. Then Chizik wins a national titled and now has been fired. Gill is a HC at Liberty (yup, that Liberty) in the FCS. Will be interesting to see how he does.

 

[Tx_Gopher]

As a professional who happens to be blessed to be black (I know some of you are shocked that I'm black). I despise mentoring/grooming programs for blacks. It implies we are somehow broken and need to be fixed.

I'm curious what you think about programs like the one the NFL has (Bill Walsh Minority Coaching Fellowship--I admit, I had to Google for the name).

Couldn't one argue that these programs don't assume that blacks are "broken and need to be fixed," but rather that they provide exposure to how the "system" works?

 

[Sportsfan24]

I'm curious what you think about programs like the one the NFL has (Bill Walsh Minority Coaching Fellowship--I admit, I had to Google for the name).

Couldn't one argue that these programs don't assume that blacks are "broken and need to be fixed," but rather that they provide exposure to how the "system" works?

I familiar with the NFL's "Rooney Rule" must admit that I have never heard of Bill Walsh deal.

Assuming it's what you say it is, I hate it. If you are to stupid to know how the "Process" works, you shouldn't be hired.

The Rooney rule to a large degree worked really well. It added some color into the lives of GM's who otherwise had no color in their lives. It forced them to interview minority candidates. Mike Tomlinson wasn't even on the radar until he came in and interviewed really well. Is it perfect? Not at all but it's far better than leaving GM's and owners to their own devices.

The Rooney didn't assume minority candidates needed to be fixed, it acknowledged the system was broke and offered up a solution. The Rooney rule did for minority candidates what "24" and the plethora of disaster movies with black presidents did for the political landscape. It allowed a black candidates to seem presidential and as head coaching material. Folks warmed up to the ideal.

 

[Sportsfan24]

I'm curious what you think about programs like the one the NFL has (Bill Walsh Minority Coaching Fellowship--I admit, I had to Google for the name).

Couldn't one argue that these programs don't assume that blacks are "broken and need to be fixed," but rather that they provide exposure to how the "system" works?

Actually I do remember it now. It allows minority candidates a chance to intern with NFL teams during the off season. Sorta of like a networking opportunity. After further thought...yeah thats
cool.

 

[STPGopher]

As a professional who happens to be blessed to be black (I know some of you are shocked that I'm black). I despise mentoring/grooming programs for blacks. It implies we are somehow broken and need to be fixed.

What needs to be "fixed" is the people who do the hiring. Here's the deal, if organizations truly value and want diversity, why isn't diversity a qualification for those who do the hiring? I don't care what race you are, hiring leaders should have to prove they have a quantifiable diverse skill set. This is literally insane; they keep hiring the same type of hiring leaders and expect different results?

A organization would not hire a person without a financial background to be its CFO. It wouldn't hire a person with no legal experience to head its legal department. Why would it hire hiring leaders with no quantifiable skill sets in diversity? Oh pick me, pick me,.....I have the answer! The answer is; they really don’t value or want diversity. They create meaningless programs like...the new buzz word...diversity and inclusion groups/dept/council! And you know what those groups do? Not a damn thing other than create the appearance/illusion they do something and the organization cares.

You want a diverse group of employees? Heres a thought....hire them.

Well you are not alone in being African American. Sorry if that was misunderstood. I was mentioning all coaches. This FBS coaching thing is more and more about business and not molding young men, developing talent, etc. Most people I've known in the corporate world have mentors, have went to business schools etc. Whether BigTen, Ivy League, HBU's/ HBC's,etc., etc. My thought wasn't race specific, It was in regards to the change of FBS level Football with Basketball close behind. There are plenty of programs that don't assume people are broken when they mentor them.

To further clarify, when I said "Open to change", I was referring to teaching coaches to be the business aspect right away. Maybe this is already happening?

 

[Sportsfan24]

Well you are not alone in being African American. Sorry if that was misunderstood. I was mentioning all coaches. This FBS coaching thing is more and more about business and not molding young men, developing talent, etc. Most people I've known in the corporate world have mentors, have went to business schools etc. Whether BigTen, Ivy League, HBU's/ HBC's,etc., etc. My thought wasn't race specific, It was in regards to the change of FBS level Football with Basketball close behind. There are plenty of programs that don't assume people
are broken when they mentor them.

To further clarify, when I said "Open to change", I was referring to teaching coaches to be the business aspect right away. Maybe this is already happening?

Nope, not buying it. All coaches are not racially misrepresented in college football, just you
negro's (lol). No ill will intended, just keeping it light.

By mentioning business aspect (which I also disagree with) are you insinuating that white coaches have this and black coaches don't? The white coaches are getting the jobs after all. By the way coaches coach and recruit, AD's and their dept handle the business aspect.

Mentoring programs? I have worked in the corporate world for 28 years, I can't ever recall a white person who entered into a official mentoring program. Hell, I can't recall a white person ever referring to someone as their mentor. The only people I know who do that are black people who hope that it gives them some sort of legitimacy or says "look y'all, I been fixed!".....told you I'm a
jerk.

Me? I will do my job to the best of my ability, if management believes their organization has diversity issues then my suggestion would simply be; hire more minorities or if you want to fix someone, fix the people who aren't hiring minorities.

 

[Nate]

Mentoring programs? I have worked in the corporate world for 28 years, I can't ever recall a white person who entered into a official mentoring program. Hell, I can't recall a white person ever referring to someone as their mentor. The only people I know who do that are black people who hope that it gives them some sort of legitimacy or says "look y'all, I been fixed!".....told you I'm a
jerk.

we(top 25 fortune 500 company) have a very large mentorship program. I have participated in it as well as my manager and several colleagues. When I partcipated it was a pretty diverse group with different ethnic backgrounds, gender and sexual orientation.

 

[Tx_Gopher]

Mentoring programs? I have worked in the corporate world for 28 years, I can't ever recall a white person who entered into a official mentoring program. Hell, I can't recall a white person ever referring to someone as their mentor. The only people I know who do that are black people who hope that it gives them some sort of legitimacy or says "look y'all, I been fixed!".....told you I'm a
jerk.

I'm guessing you're not a fan of "Seinfeld?"

My experience has been similar to Nate's. Every place that I've worked, there have been both formal mentoring programs, as well as informal mentor/mentee relationships. I've seen both genders and a variety of ethnic backgrounds (including "white") on both sides (mentoring and being mentored).

I agree with you, though, that in some instances there is a stigma to being involved in mentoring programs.

 

[Section2]

I despise mentoring/grooming programs for blacks. It implies we are somehow broken and need to be fixed.

If you aren't broken and victims, then stop playing the race card. You will never know whether decisions are being based on race or not, and it doesn't matter anyway. The way to win is to go to the competitor and kick ass. Black athletes didn't destroy their racial barrier by whining, did they?