The Case Against Brian Flores' Lawsuit
"The lawsuit by Flores and his counsel is frivolous on its face. Flores has not made any substantive allegations of law violations by the NFL or the teams named in the suit."
News & Commentary
The former coach of the Miami Dolphins, Brian Flores, has filed a class-action lawsuit against the National Football League (NFL), the New York Giants, the Miami Dolphins, and the Denver Broncos. In the lawsuit, Flores alleges that the NFL's hiring process is racially discriminatory.
After being fired by the Miami Dolphins, Flores was interviewed for multiple head coaching jobs. Including the opening for head coach of the New York Giants. The lawsuit alleges that the Giants had already decided to hire a different head coach, Brian Daboll, prior to interviewing Flores. The lawsuit asserts that Flores was only interviewed to satisfy the NFL's, Rooney Rule. The plaintiffs argue that this constitutes racial discrimination.
The Rooney Rule requires NFL teams "with a head coaching vacancy to interview at least one or more diverse candidates." It is worth noting that the Rooney Rule openly violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans employers from discriminating in the hiring process on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Regardless, the NFL has continued to mandate that teams offer interviews on the basis of race since 2003.
The lawsuit by Flores and his counsel is frivolous on its face. Flores has not made any substantive allegations of law violations by the NFL or the teams named in the suit. Additionally, there is no evidence to prove that Flores was racially discriminated against in the hiring process. Nor any evidence to prove that the NFL's hiring process is inherently racially discriminatory. The complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is essentially a 58-page legally baseless critique of the NFL and its hiring process. Unfortunately for Flores, it will take more than his unsupported opinion for this lawsuit to go anywhere.
Even if we operate under the plaintiff's assumption that the Giants decided to hire Brian Daboll before interviewing Brian Flores, the plaintiff's argument is still illogical in many regards. I will address five areas where Flores' lawsuit is detached from logic and reality.
First, and most importantly, the Giants' decision to hire Daboll instead of Flores does not constitute racial discrimination. It simply means that the Giants believed Brian Daboll was the best coaching option. Flores has presented no evidence to show that the Giants refused to hire him due to his race. It is exponentially more plausible that the Giants declined to hire Flores due to his lackluster performance as the Miami Dolphins head coach. Flores finished with a mediocre record of 24-25 with the Dolphins. Additionally, he was entirely unable to develop quarterback Tua Tagovailoa into a successful NFL quarterback.
Second, Flores argues that the NFL hires black individuals for coaching and executive jobs at a disproportionately low rate. In turn, Flores asserts that this is evidence of racial discrimination. Flores' argument is entirely untrue. According to the plaintiff's own data provided in the court filing, the NFL hires black coaches and executives at a rate equivalent to or higher than their share of the population would predict. The plaintiff's claim that,
"• Only 1 of the NFL's 32 teams (3%) employs a Black Head Coach;
• Only 4 of the NFL's 32 teams (12%) employ a Black Offensive Coordinator;
• Only 11 of the NFL's 32 teams (34%) employ a Black Defensive Coordinator;
• Only 8 of the NFL's 32 teams (25%) employ a Black Special Teams Coordinator;
• Only 3 of the NFL's 32 teams (9%) employ a Black Quarterback Coach; and
• Only 6 of the NFL's 32 teams (19%) employ a Black General Manager."
Black individuals make up thirteen percent of the United States' population. According to the plaintiff's data, black individuals are hired at a rate greater than their share of the population would predict for the roles of defensive coordinator, special teams coordinator, and general manager. Black individuals are hired approximately on par with their percentage of the population for offensive coordinator and quarterback coach roles.
The role of head coach is the only job where it appears black individuals are hired at a significantly lower rate than their share of the population. Yet, the number of black head coaches provided by the plaintiffs is entirely misleading. The plaintiffs claim that black individuals make up three percent of the NFL's head coaches. In reality, during the 2021 NFL season, there were three black head coaches. Two of those coaches, Brian Flores and David Culley, were fired. Those vacancies were filled with other black head coaches. Mike McDaniel replaced Flores, and Lovie Smith replaced Culley. The lawsuit intentionally misrepresents the number of black head coaches by claiming that there was only one black coach in 2021. In reality, there were three black head coaches throughout the 2021 season, and there will be three going into the 2022 season. Black individuals make up 9.4% of the NFL's head coaches, which is approximately on par with their population share.
My goal in pointing this out is not to say that companies should hire employees in proportion to the racial makeup of the United States. That is an entirely ridiculous idea in a meritocracy. However, I wanted to point out the absurdity of the plaintiff's claim. It is logically inconsistent to argue that black individuals are hired at a disproportionately low rate when the NFL hires black executives and coaches at a rate equivalent to or higher than their share of the population would predict.
Third, Flores alleges that any disparity in the number of white coaches and black coaches is evidence of racial discrimination. This is patently untrue. There is no evidence to support his claim. The plaintiffs have utilized the left's unsupported systemic racism narrative, claiming that any disparity in outcome among racial groups results from racial discrimination. In reality, many factors impact which coaches are hired in the NFL. These include the candidate's work ethic, coaching ability, leadership qualities, demeanor, and willingness to place work ahead of personal and familial obligations. Just because a racial disparity exists does not inherently mean that discrimination occurred.
We can see this in the racial makeup of NFL players. Despite only making up approximately thirteen percent of the United States' population, seventy percent of NFL players are black. This disparity in the NFL's racial makeup for players does not mean that the NFL is racist against white individuals. The NFL employs the best players based on their skill, ability, and work ethic. It just so happens that the overwhelming majority of the best players are black. The same principle applies to hiring coaches.
It is also logically inconsistent for the plaintiff’s to argue that a league made up of seventy percent black players would racially discriminate when hiring coaches. If the NFL were to engage in widespread racial discrimination against coaches, they would logically do the same thing with players. Yet, this is not the case.
Fourth, Flores alleges that the Giants and other teams engaged in "false compliance" with the Rooney Rule by interviewing black candidates to fulfill the Rooney Rule requirement. However, when the NFL determines whether or not a team complied with the Rooney Rule, there is no such thing as "false compliance." Either a team interviews a minority candidate for head coach, making them compliant with the Rooney Rule, or the team does not interview a minority candidate for head coach, in violation of the rule. The Giants complied with the Rooney Rule by interviewing Flores. To characterize the Giants' compliance in any other way is openly dishonest.
Fifth, Flores compared playing in the NFL to slave plantations. The lawsuit claims that,
"In certain critical ways, the NFL is racially segregated and is managed much like a plantation. Its 32 owners—none of whom are Black—profit substantially from the labor of NFL players, 70% of whom are Black. The owners watch the games from atop NFL stadiums in their luxury boxes, while their majority-Black workforce put their bodies on the line every Sunday, taking vicious hits and suffering debilitating injuries to their bodies and their brains while the NFL and its owners reap billions of dollars."
This assertion by Flores and his counsel is absurd on its face. NFL players are willfully working in the NFL. They are among the highest compensated people in the world. NFL players are glorified in the media and revered by the public. In contrast, enslaved people were tortured, beaten, raped, treated as property, and forced to provide uncompensated labor. Comparing the NFL to slavery is not just absurd and dishonest; it minimizes the atrocities resulting from the evil institution of slavery.
Flores' lawsuit has no logical coherence or factual basis. The case will almost certainly be thrown out on procedural grounds because it does not meet the criteria for a class-action lawsuit. The plaintiffs, in this case, are not similarly situated. However, the court will undoubtedly rule against Flores if it rules on the case's merits. Namely because there has not been a violation of law by the NFL or any of the teams named in the lawsuit.
Since Brian Flores filed this lawsuit, Flores was named the senior defensive assistant and linebacker coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Garrett Gillespie graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of Central Florida with a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science.
The Gillespie Report is a weekly news and conservative commentary column written by Garrett Gillespie. Subscribe to receive the newest edition each week for free.
The "Rooney Rule" is stupid and unenforceable.
You can't tell an owner of a business who to hire. They will almost always hire the best qualified, regardless of race.