 |
Jets head coach
Herman Edwards
|
The best thing about the hiring of Herman Edwards as the new head coach of the Jets was
that not until the ninth paragraph of a story in the New York Times announcing his
appointment was it mentioned that he was black.
When it finally was, however, the paragraph began thusly: "The Jets went to great
lengths to play down the significance of Edwards becoming just the sixth black head coach
in National Football League history, stressing that he was the best candidate for the
job."
One would hope so.
One also would hope that soon the perceived need for the inclusion of such a paragraph
would disappear from American sports reporting.
Why would anyone need to point out the Jets felt Edwards was the best candidate for the
job? Why would he be hired if he was not the best candidate for the job? Because the NFL
is a leader in affirmative action hiring? I think not.
When such a sentence is written, innocently to be sure, it is a subtle continuation of
the long-held but absurdly erroneous belief among too many in America that blacks cannot
lead. It is a form of racism that remains virulent in American society, and it is a most
dangerous cancer because it is not overt. It is covert, which, by its nature, makes it
more difficult to ferret out.
The need to point out in print that a man was perceived as the best candidate for the
job (and thus, by extrapolation, not hired for the color of his skin) is the type of
unconscious bias that has held African-Americans back from pro football’s leadership
positions, such as quarterback, middle linebacker, center and head coach, for decades.
Today, however, they are among the best practitioners at each of those positions.
Did anyone write when Dick Vermeil was hired in Kansas City that "the Chiefs went
to great lengths to play down the significance of Vermeil’s old age, stressing that
he was the best candidate for the job?" If they did, I missed it.
Did anyone write when Marty Schottenheimer was hired in Washington that "the
Redskins went to great lengths to play down the significance of Schottenheimer becoming
just the 6,000th white head coach in National Football League history, stressing that he
was the best candidate for the job?" No, they did not.
Did anyone write when Gregg Williams became the surprise choice of the Bills as their
new head coach over Ravens defensive coordinator Marvin Lewis that "the Bills went to
great lengths to play down the significance of Williams being white, stressing that he was
the best candidate for the job?" I think not.
So what does the magic number of black head coaches in the NFL have to be before the
reports of their hiring do not require a reference to their ethnicity and the requisite
pointing out that it had nothing to do with their selection? If it had nothing to do with
their selection, then why point it out? Just for the record? A picture would seem to cover
that end of it just as well, and far less intrusively.
No one mentions this anymore in the NBA, where there has been a long history of
integration in the coach’s room, as well as in the locker room. Obviously, the NFL
has not yet found a way to follow suit, although of the four candidates the Jets
interviewed, three were black (Buffalo’s Ted Cottrell and Jets assistant head coach
Maurice Carthon were the other two). Since that seemed to make the odds pretty good that
the Jets’ next head coach would be an African-American, why the need to bring it up
at his hiring in such a way as to stress that ethnicity had nothing to do with that hiring
in the first place? Edwards’ shoe size had nothing to do with his hiring either. No
newspaper mentioned his shoe size.
Sometimes, those of us who type for a living forget how insensitive we can be. I plead
guilty and hold a spot at the head of that line, having once called a former Patriots No.
1 draft choice a "slow dwarf." Turned out he was, but it was not the kindest way
to introduce him to the public.
But the sooner we who write about the game stop fixating on Edwards being the sixth
black head coach or the next fellow (perhaps Lewis next year) being the seventh, the
sooner the rest of the world will forget to notice it too. The reverse is also true. When
Williams blew away Tom Donahoe and the Bills at his interview the week before the Super
Bowl, he went from long shot to leader, and poor Lewis wasn’t able to counter when he
interviewed for the job the day after the Super Bowl.
It was not a racial issue that prevented Lewis from getting the Bills’ job, just
as it wasn’t for Giants defensive coordinator John Fox, who is white. Both suffered
from having to prepare for the Super Bowl while Williams could prepare for his interview.
That may mean a systemic change is needed in the NFL so top assistants whose teams are
in the Super Bowl aren’t penalized for their success. But that is not a racial issue,
it’s a logistical one. And any suggestion otherwise demeans Lewis, as well as the
Bills, and should be halted immediately.
This is not to say vigilance must not be maintained. The NFL’s record of hiring
blacks as head coaches remains dismal. This offseason, jobs opened in Detroit, New York,
Washington, Kansas City, Buffalo, Cleveland and Houston. Of those openings, only one was
filled by an African-American, although several blacks were interviewed for other
openings.
Reporters should keep track of that progress, or lack thereof, because it remains a
blemish on the NFL. But what reporters need not do is interject whenever someone such as
Edwards is hired that his team felt he was the best candidate for the job.
Let’s give black coaches the same respect that white ones have so long received.
Slow though the pace may still be, when an African-American gets the chance to run a
multimillion-dollar football team in the future, let’s at least not point out the
obvious — that he was considered the best man for the job. When we do, we are not
honoring him, we’re slighting him.
Ron Borges is a columnist for the Boston Globe |
