Uh, you are probably being too hard on Sylvester Croom. He's been working through a pretty bad situation (they were on probation for his first few years when he took over because of Jackie's stuff) and MSU beat Alabama, believe it or not. I think he probably would have been successful at Alabama.


I think we're still at the point when it's appropriate to celebrate a bit when black people reach the top. I hope we get to the point when the playing field is so level that we don't find it noteworthy, but I don't think we're there yet.

Well, I think more likely during most of that time there weren't many black coaches at all. Not that they would have been allowed to coach in the NFL if they were around. Like I said, its good that things are more open now, but I don't think we need all the rhetoric to go with it.

I like Croom fine, he may be a good coach. That being said, I don't think there are any indications that he is a better coach than Shula was. So if there are two qualified coaches, of comparable ability, and the white one is chosen, I think its pretty ridiculous to go crazy about it.

I still think it is a double standard. If I cheer for a white receiver, because he's white, people are gonna look at me funny. And when I say look at me funny, in Atlanta that means people might point guns at me. What do people expect AD's, GM's and owners to do? Can you name a lot of black candidates who have been shafted in favor of unqualified white candidates? I think things are right where they should be considering the pool of qualified coaches they're choosing from. I think its unrealistic that somebody making a hire cares so much about skin color that they'd sacrifice wins in order to hire a white person. If the quality black coaches are there, they'll get hired. I think its great that 2 black head coaches are in the Super Bowl, I truly do. However, I think to brag about it (this has nothing to do with the person who started this thread) or use it as a selling point for owners is pretty stupid.

I feel different than you do because I do think there was a long time when black candidates were shafted in favor of unqualified white candidates. I don't know enough about NFL history, but I think it's likely that without either intentional or unconscious racism that a black person could have led a NFL team to the Superbowl before now.

I think things have been a gradual process, and you may be right that it wasn't until recently that black coaches were able to get the experience to seem as qualified as whites.

Croom may provide an example. If he had gone to college six or seven years before he did, he would have met George Wallace on the school house steps. Instead, it seems he entered in 1970 (was he sixteen when he started college?) and had a distinguished football career, but when he wanted to enter the SEC to coach, he wasn't good enough. His take, reported from wikipedia is this, "A lot of those [SEC] schools, guys are good enough to play for them, good enough to be assistant coaches and not good enough to be in the positions of decision making and the positions of high financial reward. And they're qualified." At the time the job went to Shula, Shula had ten fewer years of coaching experience.

There are times when I find concerns about race overblown, and I don't generally like double standards. But this superbowl is a historic first that represents the progress of the country. These guys earned the jobs and earned the chance to coach their teams in the Superbowl. It's great.

I still don't see any problem with the Croom situation. Both were position coaches who were pretty mediocre as NFL coordinators. You're an SEC person, so you know the importance of having a big name coach if you're a big name team. Alabama was striking out when the hiring took place, and Shula is a much bigger name than Croom. Of course to really get into this I'd have to talk about how important looking good is to UA, but the point is fairly obvious. In that situation they wanted the biggest coach they can get, and Shula was a name that could keep the rebellion down. I don't think Croom is an inferior coach, but I doubt he'd do any better at UA. After all, they won 10 games last year and Shula still got fired. Plus, if they had hired Croom PC may have mandated they give him more time than Bama prefers to give coaches.

Shut up.....

Shut up.....

Oh, not getting picked to coach at Alabama is it's own reward if you ask me, for a lot of different reasons. But Croom had incredible ties to the university, so I think there were reasons they could have gone with him too. If you haven't looked at the wikipedia entry about Croom, I encourage you to look at it.

My general point is that it hasn't really been that long since people were openly (and as far as state law, legally) discriminated against, like Alabama six years before Croom; and it's nice to look at the progress and celebrate it.

There you have it. Although, I know that open discrimination is not a thing of the past.

Yes, folks are focusing on the teams as they do in any other superbowl but I won't pretend that the black coaches won't also be watched (and not only by blacks who are proud of this accomplishment).

I wonder if Tom Earp will rush into a thread talking about the superbowl halftime act and inform people that we should focus on the teams and not the extranneous stuff.

I'm so tired of people telling other people what and who they should celebrate or what should be important to them.

Yeah. But I think this thread started with people who were happy just saying they were happy.

I think the element of direction came in only when others jumped in saying that they didn't think it was anything to be happy about.

I was very excited and proud (not that I had any hand in it) to see this. Also, my Pittsburgh-born roommate was excited about the new Steelers coach.
I would also be proud if someone from my college were playing in the Superbowl, but they're not.

DSTS, I'm alright, thanks.

That's what she's referring to.

I applaud Dungy and Lovie Smith, absolutely......but I really don't think it should be made into a huge deal either. I'm more happy that Dungy is coaching in the Superbowl because of his horrible loss in the death of his son last year.....not because he is black. I'm rooting for Lovie Smith because he is an East Texas boy, same deal. People are acting like these are the only two black head coaches in football....there were seven this year. Considering they coached two of the top 4 teams in the league......I figured for quite some time that they would probobly meet in the Super Bowl.

I really don't think you can make this claim. Hell, I don't think any of us can make that claim. I'm pretty sure none of us are or have been an interviewing general manager or owner of an NFL team. Neither you nor anyone can assert that there was most likely a time when qualified blacks were shafted in favor of unqualified whites. First of all, why would an owner want a bad coach simply because he was white? That is absolutely ridiculous.....to sacrafice wins just to have a white coach. I certainly don't know what an interview process is like for an NFL team, now or in the past, but I would guess it is extremely difficult and a very arduous task trying to find 1 guy out of a short list or whom you think is the best to coach your team......so I have a hard time listening to people who want to bring talks of discrimination in NFL coaching.

The irony of this announcement is overwhelming.