Started By
Message

re: This will be a touchy subject

Posted on 5/17/20 at 1:13 pm to
Posted by CheeseTiger251
Member since Jun 2011
361 posts
Posted on 5/17/20 at 1:13 pm to
I feel like this is pointless to try and argue with someone I feel is unwilling to listen, but here goes.

1) what you are describing is nepotism not racism.

Brian belechek got the job because he is Bill’s son. Brian was always going to have more opportunities than others. Black, white, purple, etc. played nothing into that. If Bill was a minority and accomplished what he accomplished the result would have been the same. The world works this way not just the NFL. Will Smith’s children get more opportunities because of their Dad as well. Why would parents NOT elevate their children?

2) Experience alone does not make someone qualified for a job.

It doesn’t matter if benson picked Loomis up at a grocery store check out aisle. He is widely considered one of the best NFL gms right now. So clearly Tom made a good choice. Experience is only one factor to consider when hiring a candidate. Young people who have initiative, are meticulous, are willing to learn, and refuse to fail are elevated above people with 10 times more experience because those traits are more important than a number of years on your resume. Tom saw potential in Loomis and Loomis answered the call.

3) players and coaches have vastly different jobs and require entirely different skill sets.

Just because black players Make up 70%+ of the league doesn’t mean there are an equal percentage that are equipped to be an executive. Those skill sets don’t really translate. In fact many executives did not play football at the highest level. Look at someone like Dave Aranda at LSU. He didn’t play but has a widely respective defensive mind.

More players of one race doesn’t mean their should be an equal percentage of executives of that race. In fact, it would likely correlate to the opposite. Why? Because if a race is overfilling one skill set, then there are less of them to fulfill a different one.

4) this policy is classic window dressing.

If the owners are racist they won’t pass it. If they aren’t racist they might, but it likely changes nothing because they weren’t racist to begin with. Either way they will point to the outcome they come to as being the non racist one.
Posted by Gumbyxl
Gretna
Member since Apr 2004
778 posts
Posted on 5/17/20 at 2:10 pm to
Great analysis however, for it to be nepotism, Loomis would had to be related to Tom Benson. There is no blood line there, so, what would you call it? White privage?
Posted by mrsaints
Member since Dec 2013
107 posts
Posted on 5/17/20 at 7:29 pm to
quote:

CheeseTiger251

I feel like this is pointless to try and argue with someone I feel is unwilling to listen, but here goes.

1) what you are describing is nepotism not racism...
2) Experience alone does not make someone qualified for a job....
3) players and coaches have vastly different jobs and require entirely different skill sets...
4) this policy is classic window dressing...

If the owners are racist they won’t pass it. If they aren’t racist they might, but it likely changes nothing because they weren’t racist to begin with. Either way they will point to the outcome they come to as being the non racist one


This type of spin is one reason this country need a HEAVY dose of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION in every sector of the economy. As long as people pollute the airwaves with affirmation of racism with silly arguments as Nepotism, Experience is not everything, jobs are different, blah blah blah will prevent any minority person for equal opportunities they clearly earned.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram