Ray Ratto

Raiders showing Rooney Rule now almost a mannequin in a scrimmage

davis-mark-reggie.jpg
AP

Raiders showing Rooney Rule now almost a mannequin in a scrimmage

The Oakland Raiders are clearly prepared to offer up a sham candidate to comply with the Rooney Rule en route to hiring Jon Gruden as their next football overlord, which bothers a number of well-meaning people who note that (a) the Rooney Rule still exists and (b) the Raiders stood first and boldest for minority coaching and executive candidates.

But times are different, and the Rooney Rule, which clearly states that NFL teams must actively consider non-white-male candidates for coaching and executive positions, is all but ignored as even a hurdle to be cleared.

It is all part of the greater NFL trend of being willing to show not only the freshly cooked sausage but the grisly ways it is fashioned and prepared. The Rooney Rule, which once cost the Detroit Lions $200,000 for going from Marty Mornhinweg to Steve Mariucci without interviewing a black candidate, is now almost a mannequin in a scrimmage.

[BAIR: Gruden believes 'there's a good chance' he's next Raiders head coach]

And the Raiders, who gained fame and honor for hiring Art Shell, then Tom Flores, then promoting Amy Trask, are being grilled for not hiding their intentions re: Gruden. For his own recreation-of-past-glory dreams, Mark Davis has long fixated on Gruden and now must work backwards to find a candidate who isn’t one.

And it doesn’t really matter at this point whether the Raiders visually comply with a rule that the league barely recognizes anyway. The job is Gruden’s unless Davis forgets that he is in a position of extreme weakness in negotiations and tries to muscle him.

In that way, the Rooney Rule has been reduced to a talking point with a short shelf life. When an owner in an overtly owner-driven league wants something, rules are really only suggestions, and if the Rooney Rule is just honored as a fig leaf it isn’t really a rule at all.

And the league doesn’t seem to mind that you know that. At least not enough.

 

The four Super Bowl storylines everybody will be talking about

brady-tom-nantz.jpg
USATSI

The four Super Bowl storylines everybody will be talking about

The Monday after the conference championships is devoted to replaying the games we already saw, but Tuesday is devoted to the assembling of the narratives that we will weary of no later than Friday.

And while football purists and gamblers, two demographics on the opposite ends of the Moebius strip of degeneracy, will cheerily break the game down to its molecular level, the rest of us will resort to a few tired carthorses to get us to the start of our individual Super Bowl parties.

Starting with THE INEVITABILITY OF THE PATRIOTS

This will be an argument with no resolution, as those who see history as preordination will see New England as invulnerable, pointing to their record, Philadelphia’s record, and the comfort of the mortal lock. But if it helps you maintain suspense, the Patriots have never won, or even played in, a Super Bowl with a margin as high as a touchdown – the margins have been 3, 3, 3, 4, 4 and 6 in overtime. In short, Bill Belichick’s brain, while always impressive, has never been an overwhelming presence against John Fox, Andy Reid, Tom Coughlin, Pete Carroll or Dan Quinn.

In other words, luck matters, and luck is good.

Next is THE LEGACY

This is ridiculous because the Patriots are in painting-the-gold-bar-gold territory. People long ago made up their minds on Belichick, Tom Brady, Bob Kraft and the rest of the shifting cast of characters – they are either brilliant exemplars, or nefarious cheaters, or both. That’s the great thing about the Patriots – they can be heroes, villains and metaphors for 21st Century America, depending on what you decide. But their place as football figures has long ago been decided, this game will change none of that, and the only thing left is what to carve on the statues.

Third is AMERICA HATES THE PATRIOTS AND WANTS THE EAGLES TO WIN

There are lots of Americas out there, as we are learning every day, and more people probably are rooting for the Eagles just to see something different. That’s not the way to bet, I grant you, but the best way to handle these next two weeks if you do not wear either New England or Philadelphia jerseys is to say nothing. These are two fan bases with reputations, if you know what we mean, and even if you come across gentle souls with a rooting interest, play the percentages. Even the nice ones can turn at any moment.

And finally, JIMMY GAROPPOLO. This discussion only matters of Bob Kraft cops to telling Belichick he ordered him to be moved. Which he won't, damn his eyes. And if Brady looks good next Sunday, they'll take credit for a brilliant move that saved the franchise because history always works best in the rear-view mirror.

NBA All-Star Game more and more reveals personalities rather than skills

durant-kyrie-steph-all-star.jpg
AP

NBA All-Star Game more and more reveals personalities rather than skills

The voting for the NBA All-Star starters was properly instructive to both Adam Silver and the public at large about exactly what the game is meant to be – which is why I totally get their decision not to televise the All-Star draft.

It’s really a personality test for everyone involved, for good and ill.

I think having a draft nobody can see is idiotic, stealing an idea the NHL used and then discarded years ago and then not employing the reason why they did it to begin with, but if the All-Star Game is really an expression of ego, then the next best thing to having no draft is having one nobody can see.

The All-Star Game really only functions as a coronation of the elite by the elite, a festival of mutual backslapping friend-rewarding that has nothing to do with the playing of the game, or the moving of the T-shirts or jerseys or expensive hotel rooms. This is about stratifying the player pool so that everyone knows who’s who and what’s what.

Everything else is irrelevant, and the draft reinforces that. Kevin Durant not wanting to be a captain is strategic thinking by a future industrialist. Stephen Curry not minding being a captain is the perfect who-cares statement for someone who doesn’t mind playing the game because objecting to it takes too much work. LeBron James being a captain is the perfect political muscle-flexing that fits his personality.

Damian Lillard already assuming that he won’t be named to the team is a statement about his being considered the perpetual one-level-down guard. Russell Westbrook being named and then controlling the ball as he would in a regular season game is a statement about how he views his place as a disruptor. And on and on and on – the All-Star Game more and more reveals personalities rather than skills.

Does televising the draft help us understand the actual meaning of the event? Maybe, but the NBA would prefer you consider it a festival of the game itself, which it plainly isn’t. Proof, you say? 192-182 in 2017. 196-173 in 2016. 163-158 in 2015. 163-155 in 2014. There hasn’t been a normal-looking score in 15 years, which means it’s not a game at all.

That isn’t the news, though. It’s that the NBA has made this is a three-day event – the day the captains and starters are named, the day the reserves are picked, and the day that teams are chosen. And every bit of it is about the reaction to that. There is no show thereafter, and the players know it. They care about the selections, because that’s how they’re keeping score.

So go team. Whatever the hell that means.