Other point to consider: If a degree is indeed required to enter the ranks of coaches, then we should look past the raw percentage of players by color, and instead look at players who are granted degrees by race. Also, what is the average SAT by race? If a preponderance of one race owns the lower quartiles, would this explain some of the exclusions of less educated players of one race from entering coaching tracks? How about players disciplined for behavior by race? This too might have an effect if there were a large statistical difference. Unfortunately, these data are likely unavailable, for a variety of reasons, but I would suspect that the same people who would endorse a quota type hiring scheme would also suppress such information if it was politically unpalatable.

How about Hispanic coaches? Can there be incentives to hire them? Maybe they get to fit three recruits into each scholarship spot?

Ask the black college players what their plans are after college and they will say Pro football.

Ask the white college players what their plans are after college and they will say they want to coach.

Ten years later the black players are coming off their NFL careers and the white players have been coaching for ten years. It’s hard to make up that time quickly.

The people throwing around the “dumb southern redneck” shit can eat my ass with a spoon. They seem to be the only people that it is still ok to discriminate against 100% of the time.

There have been some good points put up here, but let’s throw out a few more:

Out of all the openings that have come up in the last three years, how many have been filled by people who did not have head coaching experience?

In 2007, there were eighteen openings.

Six were filled by people with no prior head coaching experience. (You could almost count Bill Stewart here, except for a short stint at VMI).

Out of those six, three were hires from personnel already on the coaching staff. One of those was a minority hire, with Ken Niumatalolo at Navy.

So we have three positions that were filled by people with no prior head coaching experience:

Bo Pelini, at Nebraska
Larry Fedora, Southern Miss
Kevin Sumlin, Houston

Out of three potential positions, one, or 33.4%, were filled by a black candidate.

All three of the hires have an impressive resume, and it is difficult to put up another black candidate that is more deserving than they are.

If I get the energy, I can go back down and do 2006, 2005, etc., but I think a point has been made.

Please, please, please, understand that I am not a racist and would not care if Alabama hired an all black staff and only recruited black players. I don’t care, I just want a team to win.

But I will not ever approve of a coach not getting hired because he is not black, just as I wouldn’t approve of a coach not getting hired because he is black.

Is it a problem? Yes. Is it a big, grand conspiracy by The Man to keep black coaches down? Good grief, no.

One thing that puzzles me is that something like ~21% of Men’s Basketball coaches are black, so how are the supposed racist ADs and alumni boosters avoiding hiring black FB coaches but apparently have no issue hiring black BB coaches?

This leads me to think it’s a kink in the “system” rather than an overarching conspiracy growing unchecked in the most PC portion of America.

(tts dated last year, but this is the only concise link I could find with a quick search: http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stories/053007aao.html )

Maybe there is that glass ceiling for black players. (If you don’t think you’re going to ever be a head coach – what is the point of trying?)

Someone else said it best – pay the GA’s alot more $$ -

I would add – …. and go out of your way to recruit black assistants.

I think the bottom line is the stat from Orson: 3 out of 119 coaches are black. Regardless of your opinion, that is incredibly out of balance. What’s the fix? Obviously no one here is enlightened enough to provide an answer. It appears 116 college presidents aren’t either.

Southern Bama grad dorky white guy out.

This is my favorite website on the internet(s). I visit EDSBS at least three times daily. It is a nice contrast to my job, which is highly stressfull and demanding. I come here to laugh, and to get some actual news without the message board trash. Your humor is smart, and I greatly appreciate it.

I want to offer a bit of unsolicited constructive criticism. Arguably, the biggest game in the history of the SEC is going to be played Saturday between my team and your team. Highly charged political topics like minority hiring should be saved for the post season, when we have nothing left to discuss. If I wanted to read/write about controversial social/legal issues, I’d go back to the brief I’m supposed to be working on instead of visiting your site. Now gimmie some footbawl!

The comment about position coaching salaries particularly hit home. Within a year or two out of school, you can make more money taking a HS teaching/coaching job, than you can working as a position coach at my alma mater. It’s a persistent issue in attracting talent of any variety.

So, here’s the question: Since coaches undeniably do tend to hire younger coaches and GAs from their personal networks, how do we get them to cast a broader net?

I resemble that remark…

Don’t believe me? Take a look at any given game on any given Saturday. Who is the dork wtih the headset, giving the signals to the starters on the field? That’s right. It’s your next GA.

“Ty Willingham has proved beyond any doubt that he is not a good head coach, but people are STILL knocking Notre Dame for firing him. If he was some old white guy who got shiatcanned for stinking up South Bend, nobody would be talking about it four years later.”

Maybe. Or maybe it might help ND’s cause if they didn’t just retain a white coach who has a worse record, percentage-wise, after four seasons than the black coach they wasted no time in firing after three.

[/Not saying... just saying.]