Rules are in place for a reason. To create order and prevent chaos. To right a wrong that’s been in place for so long. That was the reason the NFL implemented the “Rooney Rule” as it’s called today. It was established in 2003 and named after Steelers owner Dan Rooney (pictured left) to help with the hiring of minority candidates being interviewed for head coaching and front office positions. It is not to force teams to hire minority candidates, but to get their names in fold for the positions.

The stats don’t lie. In 2003 there were only two minority head coaches. Tony Dungy (Colts) and Herman Edwards (Jets). As of today there are now six. There is a lot of speculation as to whether the rule should still be around or if it should be expanded. Many feel it is doing enough to satisfy its intention. I’m one to believe that the rule is doing good, but at the same time, it seems there are quite a few teams breaking this rule.

Now this year is not the first year the rule has been broken. In the rules first year, the Detroit Lions were fined 200,000 dollars for not interviewing a minority candidate when they hired Steve Mariucci. This year the Washington Redskins, who before firing Jim Zorn, interviewed assistant Jerry Gray for the head coaching position to satisfy the rule. Soon after, Zorn was fired and Mike Shanahan was hired. Does that satisfy the rule? No and no. Later on, the Seattle Seahawks fired Jim Mora Jr. and immediately it was reported they were after Pete Carroll of USC. Before they announced they had Carroll, they went to Minnesota to interview the Vikings defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier. Frazier appeared to have no chance at the job, but they did interview him. Does that satisfy the rule? Yes and no.

To explain the Redskins case, to interview an assistant before you fire the head coach is pretty bad. To do it only to prevent the NFL from coming down on you for not interviewing a minority candidate is worse. They knew they pretty much had a deal in place with Shanahan, but according to the rule they did interview a minority candidate. The Seahawks knew who they wanted, but they interviewed someone from another team. They get more of a break here, but they still acted as if it was an inconvenience to interview Frazier.

With all that is said about the rule and what teams do to either comply or avoid it, the rule does need to stay. To say that it needs to be expanded is ludicrous. The only way you can expand it is by making the interview process longer and more obvious than it already is. It would either force teams to interview a certain number of minority candidates or you must hire a minority candidate. To get rid of it would do a disservice to the idea that there are other names out there that are just as good as the prominent ones. I’m not referring to race, but coaching ability. It’s to help the minority candidate, but it really helps everyone. The coordinators on offense and defense are stepping stones for a head coaching position in the NFL no matter race.

When you get interviewed and that GM/Owner thinks you did a good job, even if your not hired they will tell their friends and they will tell their friends and so on. People in management positions will hire those for which they know most of the time. If they don’t know you, but were told by others they know of your skills, they will consider hiring you. It’s not what you know, but who you know. That is said in today’s job world constantly. The rule is here to stay, but it must be closely watched by the league when cases like Washington and Seattle use it in their favor to try and avoid scrutiny.