The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

https://twitter.com/tomecurran/status/1488616096378859525

I'm working so I didn't read it fully yet, but it looks like Flores was texting with Belichick 3 days prior to the Giants interviewing him and Bill said the Giants are going with Daboll. This would imply the interview was a sham and they were only interviewing him to satisfy the NFL's Rooney Rule. I don't know what the punishment to the Giants would be if there is any at all, but this is the fault of the Rooney Rule, not the Giants. If they wanted Daboll from Day 1, they get in trouble for not interviewing a black man for the job first so this forces them to setup interviews with no intent on hiring someone. I don't see what else they could've done.

The lawsuit also says "JOHN DOE TEAMS 1-29". Does that mean the whole league?

From a legal standpoint, Flores probably can't prove this either. Doesn't matter what Belichick says, the Giants are the ones who say when Daboll was the one they wanted and if they officially offered the job to him after the Flores interview, case closed.

As far as Flores goes, if he doesn't get a job this offseason I think he is done in the league. Who would want to hire someone who sues teams?

This is the actual filing: Filing PDF (https://www.wigdorlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Complaint-against-National-Football-League-et-al-Filed.pdf)

This is the excerpt pertaining to the dolphins:


If true and this is from Flores, then I don't see how this makes Ross look bad. It was a tanking season on purpose to get the #1 pick. He in fact directed Flores to lose games to get a better pick and Flores won them against his wishes.  Then when they drafted Tua, (instead of Burrow that they could have had) Flores doesn't want to play ball with Tua and undermines him due in part to a situation that he created by his own admission.

If nothing else, what happened in 2019 was justification in firing Flores. Good firing Ross, 100% justified.
I don't see the racism angle here though. He was a crap coach that couldn't manage a game and self admittedly went against the owners specific instructions.

He can kiss any other offers goodbye.

Brian Flores is a black and white guy in a grey business. It's a collaboration and few people get to do what they want when they want.

You can't bribe your coach to coach poorly and lose games, that's bad and probably cause for the NFL to force him to sell the team. As a fan, I'm all for tanking but in the "start the young QB and see what we got as opposed to the 38 year old vet who might actually win meaningless games that hurt us in the long run" way. Not telling the coach to run on 3rd and Long.

There is no racism angle that is believable either. He was basically fired by the black GM who has been with the team for 26 years. I think the Giants even interviewed Leslie Frazier after Flores too, which if true, just negates this entire lawsuit.

There is definitely some gossip here that I want to know more of, like what QB are we talking about? Watson? Was Flores the one who benched Tua and screwed up the injury stuff or was that a call from above? I definitely want to know more, but it just sounds like dysfunction as opposed to any kind of racism and this basically ended his career in the league.

I think you nailed it. Everyone has a boss, even Belichick. Some have many. You can't just do whatever you want, everyone has to be on board and sometimes they draft a guy you don't want or tell you to start players you don't want to.

Start the guy we traded a second pick for and if we lose I'll pay you money to help you deal with the negativity surrounding it doesn't sound illegal to me. BTW ... why is this in a lawsuit about the Giants interviewing him for nothing?

Ross can't "bribe" Flores. It's not "bribing" your own coach, he works for you.  You give him directives and offer a bonus for the performance you want to see.

There is 0 chance that the NFL forces anyone to sell anything. Teams tank all the time. It's purposeful. There's a reason the Colts ended up with Peyton Manning. There's a reason the Bengals ended up with Joe Burrow.  There's a reason that the Jags ended up with Lawrence. That was on purpose. The scandal here is that Flores said "fuck this, I know better" and then was surprised when it didn't work out for him in the long run.

You absolutely cannot pay a coach to lose games in the NFL. That's not illegal but that is absolutely against NFL rules. Everyone tanks but they do it on the GM level, they don't tell the coaches to lose on purpose.

Sorry .. but I didn't see that anywhere here:
https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2021-nfl-rulebook/

...what?  That doesn't make sense.

Suppose you are an owner and you want the team to lose for the chance to draft (what you believe to be) a generational player.  The GM and HC are putting their own careers at risk by doing this.  So how do you compensate them for that risk?  With, um, money.

The owner can tell the GM to trade away the best players (as, um, Grier did).
The owner can also tell the HC to prioritize playing young prospects over short-term winning (which Flores did not, specifically with Rosen and Fitz).
Neither of those things are against the rules, and I don't see how it could be against the rules for an owner to give his front office financial incentives for outcomes that are against their own personal self-interest.

I think this makes Ross look awful and if this is true, he should probably sell the team.

Skirting the rules to directly ask your coach to fail is bad form.  But outright breaking the rules to try to get Flores to meet with a QB on an active roster is very bad.  Then, pushing Flores out based on his non-compliance, if true -- also BAD.

I agree. It's time for Ross to find another hobby.

You can't purposely lose, you can "rebuild for the future and see what the young kids can do". I'm not saying an owner hasn't or that it isn't beneficial to a team in the long run, I'm just saying you can't pay a head coach financial incentives to basically take a knee on 3rd down and punt in order to lose.   Even if that is not in the rulebook, there will be an investigation into this and if that idiot Ross actually has financial documentation tracing "Losing Bonuses" from him to Flores, the NFL will come down hard on him.

There is no way the league would let that stand and you can screenshot this for if it is ever proven. I will take the heat if I am wrong but I'm more confident of this than I am that we will fuck up our next HC hire.

The sham interview allegations if proven are league rule violations that will draw a half millions dollar fine.  Not a good look but not a serious consideration for a billionaire.

OTOH, offering an incentive to someone to purposely lose a game violates federal anti racketeering laws.  This is big.  Probably the biggest sports scandal in the past 102 years rivaling the 1919 world series.

Apparently, Belichick texted Flores thinking it was Brian Daboll. Thing is, the other texts say "Hear from Buffalo and NYG that you are their guy". That is not someone who officially knows anything, that's an old boss half congratulating you because he thinks you're getting the job. I wonder how Bill feels about Flores including his texts in a lawsuit like a week later.

Ross was dumb not to fire Flores after the Jacksonville loss. What excuse could Flores have had then? It's seem very clear now that Flores is an asshole bordering on mental illness. Another stain on this franchise due to shitty management.

Can't really prove the sham interview allegations since it's just a matter of opinion. I'm definitely with you on the losing on purpose thing though, if it can be proven. If it can, should be easy as there will be a financial trail.

Sham interviews can be proven, it requires evidence or testimony that a decision was made prior to the interview or that Flores was not actually under consideration.  Hard to prove without a cooperating witness, easy to prove if someone with knowledge won’t lie under oath.    But that is minor. 

Ross may have committed a serious felony. 

One team losing on purpose (as opposed to two teams colluding to fix the result) has nothing to do with racketeering.

Given that the applicable teams are certainly part of the lawsuit, I would imagine that communication records will be subpoenaed.
So it's probably not likely to remain "a matter of opinion" for long.

Now I see why Flores got fired.  He's truly a piece of shit.  He's done in this league now

Wrong, you don’t need both teams in on it to fix a game.  By default teams try to win.  The Cincinnati Reds weren’t aware or participants in the 1919 scandal, they were trying to win because that is what teams do.  Only time both teams would need to be in on it would be to orchestrate a tie.

 

This would imply that the Giants sent out emails stating things like "We're going with Daboll but let's call up a black guy first to meet league requirements before we announce it". Granted, some of these guys are REALLY stupid so I can't 100% discount emails like that exist. However, barring any emails like that, he has no case. He needs definitive proof of a sham interview and even then, so what? The team will just say they were forced to by the NFL and the Rooney Rule and that will be the truth.

He may have better luck with Ross and his financial bounty but once again, so what? What is the damage he is saying he suffered? He got more money to suck? Even if everything is proven, I don't see how the teams pay him out in a lawsuit. Can't prove racism without confessions from these teams that they are racist, it's a very arbitrary thing.

He's doing the talk show rounds starting tomorrow so this is his new career now.

Just like affirmative action, the Rooney Rule has outlived it's usefulness. If there are no suitable minority candidates, no minority candidates that you are interested in hiring, or no minority candidates that you are going to hire. But the Rooney Rule says that you "Have" to interview one. Then of course the interview is going to be a sham. It's a sham because the whole rule is a sham. These days no team is passing over a minority candidate if they think they have the head coaching skill to win them games.

As far as Ross paying Flores to lose games. I'm fairly certain that happens every year in the NFL. Is there actually any proof that Ross did any of this? Or is it a he said, he said situation?  

In my opinion, Flores is a disgruntled employee who was fired for not making the playoffs after a certain period of time. Now, if he has an issue with the Giants hiring practices. Sure, go ahead and address it. However, to drag Miami into it kind of proves that he's just pissed off that no one is blowing his phone up to hire him as HC and his ego (that we all know and love) won't let him accept this reality. If he had a problem with anything Miami did, it should have been addressed at the time he was fired. Not when his coaching career does a crash and burn. What a prick!!!!

I think an e-mail saying something to the effect of "Well, go ahead and start preparing the announcement of Daboll's hiring, but we can't release it until after the mandatory interviews are done" is not exactly unlikely.

And I'm saying that what you're describing has nothing to do with racketeering.  So if it is against the law, it's not racketeering law.

It's not impossible but it is unlikely since those emails would be between Owners and GM's and they would probably discuss that in person. Certainly could happen because they can be idiots but I don't think they will find anything.

Another scandal? Most cursed franchise in sports since 62-7

Well, looks like I misread this badly.

Ross also invested over $17M in a gambling startup in November 2019 (https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/nfls-owner-stephen-ross-invests-in-betting-analytics-platform-action-network/), right around the same time he was paying his head coach extra to lose games.  This is... not good.

You can make whatever arguments you want about tanking - and many of us have complained that the Dolphins did not tank egregiously enough in 2019 - but when gambling also gets involved, you are in big trouble.  Like, "forced to sell the team"-level trouble.

The Rooney Rule was never really useful to begin with.  No more of this forced diversity bullshit.   You hire the man you think is best for the job, regardless of race.  The SCOTUS is about to make a decision whether or not to ban racial considerations on college and job applications.   If that's the case, the Rooney Rule could and should be included in that.

If there is any kind of paper/money trail that Flores can produce to back up his argument of being paid to lose, this is going to be serious trouble for Ross.

Throw in the accusation that he approached/tried to woo an opposition QB under contract during the season, and it's the cherry on top suggesting he's unfit to be an owner.

Of course all of this requires Flores to be able to prove it - and he'd better hope he gets a big fat $$$ settlement out of this, because after burning all these bridges I doubt he'll be offered a job in the NFL again.

Playing Devil's Advocate here, but if the Giants are somehow found guilty of racial discrimination because of the Rooney Rule, then they might sue the NFL in response and that could be the end of it. After all, they were only doing what they had to do or face a large fine. Going to be very interesting from a legal standpoint.

Actually, the more you think about it. Ross would have made sure Flores was on board with tanking and losing games before he hired him and during the hiring process. Unless Ross is a very stupid man, surely he wouldn't have done it after a full offseason and after the regular season started. That just doesn't make any sense.

And if that's the case, that means Flores agreed with the tanking plan in order to get hired and was complicit when he was hired. Whether he actually followed through with tanking as a HC is irrelevant. Something isn't passing the smell test with this whole situation.

Edit: IF all of these allegations are true, then Flores, Grier, and Ross should all be punished. Even though Flores is the whistleblower, he stayed on for two additional seasons with no intention of resigning after this season. If he was willing to stay on with the Dolphins, then he was part of the problem and again complicit in the tomfoolery. He could have resigned after 2019 and reported what happened, but he didn’t. Best case scenario is that Flores is a disgruntled liar. Worst case scenario, they're all dirty

Agree with you up to last sentence.  Like “up to 20 years in a Federal pen” level trouble.

The meaty thing about this though is the Flores accusation that Ross put a price on every thrown game to the tune of $100,000 a pop - so in theory anyone can effectively fix an NFL game by bribing the coach $100,000.  In any sport that is match fixing which is ugly enough in itself. You add this juicy little bit (courtesy of Spidey) and it's way, way beyond that - you are talking about a huge corporate fraud.


Flores could well be just an angry employee who burnt his bridges everywhere and is lashing out with all sorts of shotgun bullshit to damage as many people as possible... it's a huge headline now, but if he can't back it up it will go no further and he will disappear from the NFL forever (either richer or poorer)

But if he has some kind of proof and this shit sticks to Ross... I don't care how much money the guy has. I don't think he's Teflon.

If Ross truly was upset that Flores didn’t lose games, then good luck to Grier and Ross in enticing free agents to sign with Miami.  Players want to win, not tank.

It's darkly comical in that when I said back in 2019 if we won games in December, it would hurt the franchise long term. I never would've thought this is it meant in a million years.

We literally have the top pick in the 2020 draft playing in the Superbowl while the owner could be forced to sell the team. All because we had to play Fitzpatrick over Rosen. Very interesting Butterfly Effect.

In this day and age when lawyers can spin doctor pretty much anything unless he has some serious proof of each of these then he's going down hard. I can't see Brady amitting any illegal contact with Ross as it would hurt his legacy and we all know he'a already pissed about deflaye gate.

Brady can bury Ross without admitting to anything.  “There was an incident in which I thought I was going to meet with some investors regarding TB12 brand and to my surprise the owner of the Dolphins was at that meeting.  He tried to talk me about my impending free agency and I politely told him to contact Don once I was officially available and left.  I notified BB of the encounter and left it to coach to decide if this was worth filing a tampering allegation with the league office.  As best I am aware he choose not to.”

He would have to want to bury Ross. I can't see him doing it just to save his own butt.  This type of thing is very common and him being a Patriot was a technicality as the season was over but his contract had not run out.

This has the potential to be such a big scandal that when people look back at sports scandals in early 2000s everyone immediately thinks Dolphins and as an after thought there was also a relatively, minor issue with NE in comparison.   I don’t think Brady would mind being in second in this case.  How many people remember that Micheal Jordan announced his comeback on 9/11/01?  It was the top story for almost a half hour that morning then everyone seemed to stop talking about it and talking about something else.

Sadly I must agree.  Flores is acting like a petulant little child.  I don't see him ever being employed by an NFL team again.

You should make your wishcasting slightly less overt.

Do you also believe that Bountygate was a huge scandal that made everyone forget about the Patriots?

I personally think nothing comes of this.

Scandals? You don't have room to talk about scandals. You're just a bit salty since we swept your ass this year and NE will be fighting for scraps like the rest of the bottom feeders.

Just for you Hoodie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkRL_O3p-xk&ab_channel=Tosh.0)

Some token moves by the NFL might come from this, but I don't think he can prove anything and the lawsuit might be thrown out quickly. The justice system isn't like Hollywood, I can't accuse someone of wrongdoing and immediately be granted access to all their personal financial and communication records. I would have to show a judge some decent evidence first before he granted these requests. If Flores got nothing, then it should die quickly. Things like "He looked kinda drunk" don't count since that's an opinion and not illegal anyway.

I knew he was talking about Elway before I saw it was about Elway, it’s an open secret here that Elway is a lush.

Here's the thing, Elway very well could've been a drunken asshole but that isn't illegal and it can't be proven. So, filing a lawsuit like that is for ESPN and CNN, not the legal system.

For sure, I’m just saying, at least that bit by Flores is totally believable. It’s been rumored and talked about here for 15 years at least. Maybe he knew the rumors and ran with it, but on this part at least I believe Flores.

Being a drunken asshole is not illegal per se.  Showing up to an interview an hour late and drunk is very strong evidence (although not conclusive by itself) that the person wasn't taking the interview seriously. 

Exactly, it supports that part of Flores’ case, and I find it totally believable.

Do you find it provable years later? Also, if it was such an issue for Flores why did he wait until years later to address it? This whole thing is nothing but a shake down by Flores, lmfao

Not provable and I don’t care what Flores’ motivations are I’m only saying, knowing Elway, I believe that he showed up to the interview with a massive hangover.

I don't doubt it either, but if it can't be proven it's a moot point. But I can't believe you don't care what Flores' motivations are. Hell, that's one of the most important things since his moves don't make sense.

Very provable.

Atty : Do you recall the day Elway interviewed Flores?

Sec for Elway: Vaguely.

A: Do you recall when the meeting was scheduled to begin?

S: No, I don’t remember the exact time, but I do remember that Flores was waiting in the outer office for about 90 minutes.

A: Do you know why Elway was late?

S: Yes, John mentioned he overslept because he was hungover.

If Elway was late there was witnesses.  If he wasn’t late there are witnesses of that to.  Eitherway it is very provable.

Yeah, good luck with that. Interesting that you didn't address why Flores didn't bring it up until years later if it was such an important issue. Par for the course

But, it doesn't prove anything in a court of law. It just proves he was late because he was drunk. Unprofessional? Sure. Can it be swept away with a "I used to have a problem and I no longer do"? Sure can. Someone being unprofessional is not proof that they never intended to hire someone, it just means they're a dick.

I don't think it's fair to discredit Flores for when he made the complaints.  I guess it's fair to criticize him for playing along, if that's what happened.

...but it's totally common for a whistleblower to play within the system until they realize they're powerless to affect change and then to drop all the bombshells at once.

How we strive for diversity is going to be ever-changing.  A Rooney Rule might be good for some time and then it may outlive its usefulness and become more detrimental to progress at some point.   ...so, these are conversations that we need to have and Flores' case is making us look at hiring practices.  Ultimately diversity is good for the health of the sport.

Flores may be difficult to work with and also correct -- he might be an imperfect messenger.

There's also another issue that's indirectly tied to race, which is hiring from the same few coaching trees.  It's not specifically racist, but hiring the same couple of guys from the same few families and who they hand-pick probably isn't providing the best candidates and growth for the sport.  The fact that we're looking at the same names in the same pool isn't allowing for new ideas, which holds things back.

And I'm guilty of this too.   I'm a big Lane Kiffin fan and he's from the same network of privilege and famous names.

He's not a whistleblower. He hasn't claimed anything that we didn't already know. He's actually just a disgruntled employee that happens to be black. Hell, now he's complaining that the Texans hired Lovie Smith instead of him. Hell, most smart people would hire Lovie Smith instead of him.

What happens when diversity clashes with who are actually considered the best candidates by the teams. You can't hire minorities just to say you hired minorities. The actual results on the field are what matters. People point out that ex players aren't represented enough in NFL coaching. But as noted earlier, playing doesn't equate to coaching. In fact, most coaches have previous experience coaching and start in college or shortly thereafter as assistants to actual coaches and work their way up over the years. And as far as I can tell, more white people go into coaching earlier. Whereas black people go into playing earlier and work their way up over the years. That is why black people are over represented as players.

They are two different career paths that are determined by actual individual choices which results in experience. Common sense would dictate that most of the time most teams are going to hire the person with more experience doing the job that they are applying for. Who seems more likely to land a coaching job? Someone who has been at some level of coaching for 10-15 years or someone who played football for 10-15 years?

If you reverse the situation, I don't see many ex coaches being hired as players. Nor should they be since they lack the experience and tools needed to be successful to win games as players. NFL teams are not rejecting black coaching candidates if they think they are the best option to win them games.

I get what you're saying but if "integrity" is your reasoning behind why you came forward then you will be questioned for playing along in the game unitl you were released.

I don't know the motivations, but both things can be true.  The NFL can have shitty hiring practices for African Americans.  It's also possible that Flores only brought these facts up when he could use it to his advantage.

You don't have to have integrity to be right about something.

That's absolutely true. But he said because of his integrity he had to speak up but based on his actions it looks like he is a liar first and foremost. I don't doubt there is some truth to his claims I just doubt his integrity and think revenge is his actual motivation. Like I said previously the guy could have elevated any number of black assistants yet he kept hiring white guys to lead. That goes directly against what he says is the problem as well. What he says and what he does is conflicting at best.

The first time it happens isn't a pattern.

When Flores was interviewed by DEN and Elway was allegedly drunk, it's easy to chalk that up to one case of bad management.  Flores' argument is that the actions of Elway, Ross, and Mara combined indicate a larger problem with the system as a whole, instead of just one bad apple.

More specifically: that ex-players are selected as coaches far less in the NFL than they are in MLB or the NHL, two sports with a much higher percentage of white players.

And by "work your way up over the years," you mean "spend exactly one year coaching in the college ranks before landing an NFL coaching job."

This neglects to consider that there are also many black college football players who don't make it to the NFL.  Yet these players are NOT placed on the coaching fast track, then hired by NFL teams less than two years out of college.

Given that age is a factor in the ability to play, this point doesn't even make sense.

I have to wonder how many even want to coach? Not attacking black coaches but if you look at the history of their tenures they have selected white coaches to help them lead. I find it really hard to belive that they purposely overlooked "qualified" minority coaches in favor of a white guy. The truth, at least to me, is that they selected the assistant coaches based on who they thought could help them win. Our current coach wasn't selected because he had a former playing carreer. He came in as an intern and worked his way up and earned a reputation as a coach. As a matter of fact that's how out GM came in as well. Nothing was given to either of them.

I think we are looking at the problem backwards. We don't need to be looking at the number of coaches until you start filling the bottom with qualified interns. To me sports is the all around even ground for people because I belive that rarely is someone promoted or held back based on their color. It has way more to do with what you can do to help me win. As white kids with "Karen" mothers continue to pull their boys out of football you will see an even greater discrepancy in the league but that doesn't mean you will see more black coaches unless you start seeing more minority interns. Hell ... Dan Marino was one of the best ever but based on what people have said he'd make a terrible coach.

Agreed.  The problem isn’t just at the head coaching ranks but the entire pipeline.  There needs to be more minorities and women hired as interns so they can be promoted up the ranks.

And I have seen racism at the high school sports level.  Not the out and out exclusion type but best athlete on the team is black, second best is white. The black player is a significantly more accurate passer.  White player is slightly faster.  Both can catch the ball.  Both want to play QB.  Best passer on the team plays  WR, fastest player is QB.


If not for racism the better passer would be qb and the faster runner would be a wr.  But alas the QB is the face of the team and in my community we can’t have the face of the team wearing dreadlocks.

Take a look at most little league teams.  Ever notice there are more minorities in the outfield than on  the mound. There are just enough minority pitchers for people to deny the problem, but statistically it is impossible that on that many teams so many of the best pitchers are all white.

It's not neccesarily a race issue. Different coaches have different priorities see what they can get out of a QB. Kind of funny but we had two QBs in school. Many (including blacks) thought the white guy was the better QB but the black guy won out and the white guy became a reciever. The black guy went on to have a fourteen-year career in the NFL. He amassed 21,711 passing yards, with 134 touchdown passes, and 99 interceptions. He also ran for 2,027 career rushing yards and 14 touchdowns while making 100 career starts. The white guy owns a drilling company. hahaha

For better or worse, this is what the Rooney Rule is trying to accomplish.

My initial thought is that football players wouldn't be any less likely to go into coaching than baseball or hockey players.  Hockey, in particular, seems like a really good analog.

Like I said in the other thread, without knowing how many different minority assistant coaches they hired, I can't comment on this with confidence.  If they had white coordinators but have a diverse staff of assistant coaches, then they're trying to fill the pipeline so that a larger number of qualified coaches are available for promotions in the future.  I don't know if they did.

This is a good point and something I want to address in another thread after all the head coaching spots are filled.  I think it's true for players, but not so much for coaches.

We're talking about football, specifically the NFL.

I mean like:

Mike Tomlin who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in college in 1995 and entered NFL coaching in 2001. 6 year transition.

Andy Reid who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1982 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1992. 10 year transition.

Dennis Green who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1972 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1979. 7 year transition.

John Harbaugh who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1984 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1998. 14 year transition.

Lovie Smith who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1983 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1996. 13 year transition.

Bruce Arians who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1975 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1989. 14 year transition

David Culley who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1978 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1994. 16 year transition.

Pete Carroll who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1973 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1984. 11 year transition.

Romeo Crennel who worked his way up the coaching ranks starting in 1970 in college and entered NFL coaching in 1981. 11 year transition.


The information above directly contridicts your assertaitions. As a side note, even if that was true, which it's not. It's an extra year of coaching experience added to a resume for a job that mainly requires experience. And extra year experience that a player doesn't have.

So players who wash out should be put on a fast track when they could have went straight into coaching to begin with if that's what they wanted to do? Normally if your career path doesn't work out, you don't just get to skip ahead in line when you change paths.

Of course it makes sense. So you're saying they're too old after saying that they "spend exactly one year coaching in the college ranks". How old are they after coaching for one year at the college ranks? Let's take a look...

Mike Tomlin 23 years old in 1995.

Andy Reid 24 years old in 1982.

Dennis Green 23 years old in 1972.

John Harbaugh 22 years old in 1984.

Lovie Smith 25 years old in 1983.

Bruce Arians 23 years old in 1975.

David Culley 23 years old in 1978.

Pete Carroll 22 years old in 1973.

Romeo Crennel 23 years old in 1970.

Math is math, the percentage of black coaches in the NFL is comparable to the black population of the country. That's equality

The revised one is.  I support it.