Steve Wilks lawsuit against NFL

[daves]

I assume his point is Keim didn't get fired because losing to get a better draft pick was probably part of the plan they think. So they hired a coach for one year to get a higher draft pick by tanking.

No team trades up in the first round to draft a QB, THEN tanks and plans to force the rookie QB to learn a new system in his 2nd year!

But I do think there's a double standard in that Keim did a horrible job building that team and didn't lose his job over it

Wilks had the worst season and earned the only #1 overall pick in team history.

Keim was also responsible for that result, BUT had a 52-43-1 overall record as GM and was only a couple years removed from three 10-win seasons and two playoff appearances. So, there's a plausible and completely non-race-based reason why Keim was kept.

...dave

 

[jf-08]

Wilks' understating of a situation seems to have not progressed. He had no clue as a coach and had no clue on the merits of this lawsuit.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Did anyone hear the audio of Mike Mularkey basically laying out the case for Ray Hortons claims? He basically said he knew he was getting the Titans job before any interviews happened and felt really bad about the sham interviews that took place.

It was pretty damning audio from some radio show.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Here it is:

Mike Mularkey revealed Titans did sham Rooney Rule interviews after hiring him as coach

Former Titans head coach Mike Mularkey admitted that when he was hired in 2016, the team delayed an official announcement of his hiring solely so they could conduct interviews with minority coaches to satisfy the Rooney Rule.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

The 2018 offense had as many games with fewer than 150 total yards as they had with games over 300 total yards. The season high was 321 total yards against SF and a low of 137 total yards against the Rams. 137 total yards!!! The personnel was bad, but I don't think it was that bad. The whole team got worse as the season went on, too.

The personnel was definitely that bad. Wilks sucked, but so did the whole team.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Not directly related to the lawsuit, but I remember Wilks first game - the season & home opener. I had to miss the game to fly to NYC for work and was SO PISSED. We were playing Washington, which on paper should have been one of our most winnable games of the season. I watched the beginning of the game at a bar in the airport, and then listened to the 98.7 stream on my phone before the flight. I was boarding the plane right as Wash scored to make it 21-0 right before halftime. The whole flight I could only think "Yep, the season is over before I ever made it to a game."

I knew the season was over after the first 2 series.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Here it is:

Mike Mularkey revealed Titans did sham Rooney Rule interviews after hiring him as coach

Former Titans head coach Mike Mularkey admitted that when he was hired in 2016, the team delayed an official announcement of his hiring solely so they could conduct interviews with minority coaches to satisfy the Rooney Rule.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

Just another reason why the Rooney rule is one of the dumbest things in sports and should not exist.

 

[Stout]

You know what take aged really bad:

Draft Nick Bosa and stick with Josh Rosen at QB. Rosen hasn't even sniffed a starting spot after the Dolphins tried him out. Imagine how bad the team would have been with Kliff and Rosen?

I'll hold my hand up and say I thought it was insanity to give up on Rosen so soon and waste a #1 pick on another QB. I was wrong.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

Did anyone hear the audio of Mike Mularkey basically laying out the case for Ray Hortons claims? He basically said he knew he was getting the Titans job before any interviews happened and felt really bad about the sham interviews that took place.

It was pretty damning audio from some radio show.

This is why it's unfortunate these Rooney rule interviews are viewed as shams by some:

When I was in corporate management, part of my job was firing and hiring.... probably not unlike some of you. Many times when I knew a position was open, I would already have in mind someone I liked for the job, who was an internal candidate... someone I knew would be perfect for the job. I would always make sure they interviewed, if interested. The company I worked for always required posting open positions externally, though, even if there was a perfect internal candidate, to make sure we were compliant with any local employment laws. On more than one occasion I can recall interviewing an external candidate that was an even better fit for the position and ended up hiring them instead. So, it does happen.

 

[football karma]

Did anyone hear the audio of Mike Mularkey basically laying out the case for Ray Hortons claims? He basically said he knew he was getting the Titans job before any interviews happened and felt really bad about the sham interviews that took place.

It was pretty damning audio from some radio show.

does it really surprise anybody that in some HC searches, that is the case?

you can compel people to do things -- but all that gets you is for some %, the rule is "compliance" rather than living the spirit of the rule

i feel like in half the searches, you can ID the Rooney Rule interview and know that candidate has a 0% chance. Why is that? Because in half the situations -- there is a super logical past history with a prior coach that fits perfectly. I think this is as much a problem of network as it is race.

As a hypothetical, assume the Cards were looking for a HC and wanted Arians. Everyone looking at the interview process would know that everyone other than Arians had a 0% chance of being hired.

 

[legend]

"It's hard to blend in when you're born to stand out" . . . . (Dear God) . . .

 

[Jetstream Green]

Hey, since Wilks really has no grounds to sue the Cards... can all of us at ASFN sue Wilks for all the emotional damage of his coaching

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

This is why it's unfortunate these Rooney rule interviews are viewed as shams by some:

When I was in corporate management, part of my job was firing and hiring.... probably not unlike some of you. Many times when I knew a position was open, I would already have in mind someone I liked for the job, who was an internal candidate... someone I knew would be perfect for the job. I would always make sure they interviewed, if interested. The company I worked for always required posting open positions externally, though, even if there was a perfect internal candidate, to make sure we were compliant with any local employment laws. On more than one occasion I can recall interviewing an external candidate that was an even better fit for the position and ended up hiring them instead. So, it does happen.

Ditto. Happens all the time. You don’t know what you don’t know. And you’ll never know what you don’t even explore.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

does it really surprise anybody that in some HC searches, that is the case?

you can compel people to do things -- but all that gets you is for some %, the rule is "compliance" rather than living the spirit of the rule

i feel like in half the searches, you can ID the Rooney Rule interview and know that candidate has a 0% chance. Why is that? Because in half the situations -- there is a super logical past history with a prior coach that fits perfectly. I think this is as much a problem of network as it is race.

As a hypothetical, assume the Cards were looking for a HC and wanted Arians. Everyone looking at the interview process would know that everyone other than Arians had a 0% chance of being hired.

If that’s the case it evidences a truly horrid decision making process by the organization. Of course there are going to be favorites for the job, but if it’s a fait accompli the organization is not truly intent on hiring the best candidate.

Also, how better to get into those circles than to get interviewed? You might not win the first opening, but you may have left impression on someone in the organization that hadn’t had any exposure to you previously and now you’re in their memory as a positive.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I'll hold my hand up and say I thought it was insanity to give up on Rosen so soon and waste a #1 pick on another QB. I was wrong.

For all the criticism that Keim deserves, he does deserve a ton of praise for making a move that A LOT of people criticized.

Going forward I would always want my team to make that move. If there is a good chance you can upgrade QB through the draft, you always take that chance. A good QB is worth 5 Nick Bosas.

 

[juza76]

For all the criticism that Keim deserves, he does deserve a ton of praise for making a move that A LOT of people criticized.

Going forward I would always want my team to make that move. If there is a good chance you can upgrade QB through the draft, you always take that chance. A good QB is worth 5 Nick Bosas.

Yes it was a great move to repair his mistakes
Just hope he can learn from his past draft mistakes and have a better draft record moving forward
Especially learning how to draft offensive linemen and receivers

 

[Krangodnzr]

Yes it was a great move to repair his mistakes

Most people would have made the same move. Rosen was viewed as a great value. The real savy part was to identify that he was a turd real quick at to move on.

Just hope he can learn from his past draft mistakes and have a better draft record moving forward
Especially learning how to draft offensive linemen and receivers

I think we can expect better. He has drafted some good players. It's not as bad as his biggest critics portray, and not as rosy as his biggest supporters.

He did find a QB for the team and that's almost half the battle. As good as Lynch has been in San Francisco, do you believe in Lance? I don't, and they used a ton of picks to get him.

 

[DVontel]

He has drafted some good players.

Excluding the Quarterback position, he has only drafted one cornerstone player & that guy is a box safety.

It is clearly as bad as his “critics” say.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

Larry Fitzgerald in late 2018: We all would want Steve Wilks back​

The claim filed by former Arizona coach Steve Wilks against the Cardinals focuses on the notion that he was a “bridge coach,” specifically hired with the notion that he’d be fired, sooner than later, at a time when the team was expected to not be competitive.

As Wilks closed in on the end of his only season with the team, a key player who ultimately only had two seasons left in the NFL made it clear that he was willing to wager his NFL future on Wilks.

“We all would want him back,” Fitzgerald said at the time. “I love Wilks. Great dude. We all play hard for him. That’s the team — not me alone — speaking on it.”

That’s a strong statement from Fitzgerald. It wasn’t strong enough to save Wilks, but it speaks to the quality of the man and the coach. And it breathes some life into the notion that Wilks perhaps shouldn’t have been the fall guy after a failed season.

The fact that Wilks got only one year could become a major issue in the litigation that Wilks joined this week. The lawsuit focuses not only on the lack of Black head coaches who are hired by NFL teams but also on the standard to which they’re held when they get one of the 32 jobs.

Regardless, one of the most popular players in franchise history believed that Wilks should have gotten another chance. Chances are that, at some point in the litigation, Larry Fitzgerald will be asked to state his position (and elaborate on it) from the witness stand.

 

[Stout]

Most people would have made the same move. Rosen was viewed as a great value. The real savy part was to identify that he was a turd real quick at to move on.

I think we can expect better. He has drafted some good players. It's not as bad as his biggest critics portray, and not as rosy as his biggest supporters.

He did find a QB for the team and that's almost half the battle. As good as Lynch has been in San Francisco, do you believe in Lance? I don't, and they used a ton of picks to get him.

He didn't 'find' a QB; he had the #1 overall pick and the QB fell into his lap. At best, you can say he didn't eff up the #1 pick they got because, in large part, his roster building was historically bad the year before.

 

[Krangodnzr]

He didn't 'find' a QB; he had the #1 overall pick and the QB fell into his lap. At best, you can say he didn't eff up the #1 pick they got because, in large part, his roster building was historically bad the year before.

No that's not accurate.

A ton of people believed he should have rolled with Rosen and drafting Nick Bosas/Quinnin Williams.

And a fair number believed Murray wasn't good enough too. He was not a consensus top pick. In fact there were a large number of people saying Murray wasn't even worth a first round pick. Let's not rewrite history here.

So on more than one account, Keim was right.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

No that's not accurate.

A ton of people believed he should have rolled with Rosen and drafting Nick Bosas/Quinnin Williams.

And a fair number believed Murray wasn't good enough too. He was not a consensus top pick. In fact there were a large number of people saying Murray wasn't even worth a first round pick. Let's not rewrite history here.

So on more than one account, Keim was right.

Meh he had literally the pick of everyone available. There was little doubt kyler was the #1 QB in the draft (very very few entertained jones or Haskins as legitimate threats to that status). Did he make the right move? Absolutely. One I supported at the time. But let’s not pretend he plucked some late round gem outta nowhere. He gets credit for pulling the right move, nothing more or less imo.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Meh he had literally the pick of everyone available. There was little doubt kyler was the #1 QB in the draft (very very few entertained jones or Haskins as legitimate threats to that status). Did he make the right move? Absolutely. One I supported at the time. But let’s not pretend he plucked some late round gem outta nowhere. He gets credit for pulling the right move, nothing more or less imo.

Where did I say this? Stop putting words in my mouth.

There were plenty of people who questioned whether Murray was worth a 1st rounder, but that didn't mean late rounder either.

And....right....he deserves credit. Stout didn't give that to him one iota.

It doesn't make up for the fiasco from the year prior. Or all the other mistakes he made leading up to the Wilks year. But Murray wasn't the consensus best prospect in the draft, far from it. And Keim was right, Murray was the best player in that draft.

 

[cardpa]

I just read the paper filed by Wilks and the reasons for filing it and honestly I think he has some legit ground to stand on. Whether it's enough to hold up I don't know but it isn't all hogwash.

 

[Paso Fino]

Wilks certainly was right about who the Cardinals should have drafted as quarterback. And who knows what kind of team they would have had if Josh Allen was the Cardinals quarterback.