Hello, Chicago Bears fans! As our Lester Wiltfong wrote, per Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, the NFL has confirmed that the Chicago Bears will not receive compensatory picks for Ian Cunningham taking
the general manager position with the Atlanta Falcons. Lester notes this fact has been rumored to be true in reporting for weeks, and he notes the reasoning the NFL has cited in denying the Bears compensation. Namely, that the NFL’s interpretation of the Rooney Rule is that compensatory picks are only due a team when it involves the head coach or the “primary football executive.” Since the Atlanta Falcons reported their “President of Football Operations” as the “primary football executive,” their GM is not the PFE, and thus no compensation is due.
Here are five reasons why I believe that the NFL’s decision is indefensible and egregiously wrong:
#1 It Violates the Original Intent of the Rooney Rule
Before I get into the reasons I think the NFL is wrong, I want to note what I won’t be getting into. I won’t be getting into whether the NFL should have the Rooney Rule to begin with. That is a debate for another time. The Rooney Rule, as it is colloquially termed, was originally adopted in 2003 by the NFL, based on the NFL’s Workplace Diversity Committee, which was then chaired by Dan Rooney, the late owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers. The purpose of the rule was to redress the NFL’s historical pattern of hiring a low number of minorities in coaching positions. The Rooney Rule was expanded to other positions, including the “primary football executive” (we will get to that term in a moment), to women, and to require teams to interview a minimum number of external minority candidates for, as the NFL describes it itself, “open head coach and GM positions.” In 2020, team owners approved the provision of two third-round draft picks when a team lost a minority executive or coach to another team, “who developed minority talent that went on to become GMs or head coaches across the league.”
The intent of the Rooney Rule, as it was originally instituted, an intent that has remained consistent with regards to the later amendments, was to encourage NFL franchises to hire and develop minority candidates in the front office and senior coaching positions for the teams across the league. Well, that is precisely what the Chicago Bears did. Ian Cunningham was hired by the Chicago Bears from the Philadelphia Eagles as the Assistant General Manager under Ryan Poles. Cunningham regularly interviewed for GM positions during his tenure with the Chicago Bears. The Bears allowed Cunningham to interview for Atlanta’s GM position even though Atlanta had decided not to hire Cunningham for its “President of Football Operations” position in favor of Matt Ryan, as he was interviewing for a General Manager position – a position he subsequently accepted. This kind of promotion is exactly what the rule was intended for – and yet the NFL has decided otherwise. Ergo, this interpretation of the Rooney Rule that the NFL has made in denying the Bears compensation is fundamentally at odds with the original intent of the rule.
#2 The Atlanta Falcons Themselves Contradict the NFL’s Position
The Atlanta Falcons have consistently expressed the fact that their GM position’s duties and responsibilities have not changed under their new front office structure, with a President of Football Operations. At the press conference announcing the hiring of Ian Cunningham as their general manager both the owner of the Atlanta Falcons and their new President of Football Operations made it clear that the GM position in the organization was not changing and that it would have all of the responsibilities and power that it had previously
Further, Matt Ryan doubled down on this fact in a recent interview:
If the Atlanta Falcons are saying their GM position hasn’t changed (a position that has already resulted in one instance of the Rooney Rule compensation), and that Ian Cunningham will have control of the roster and the draft – then it is fair to ask why the NFL is insisting otherwise. At best this is a paper work technicality – but one that is entirely within the control of the Falcons – not the Bears. Yet it is the Bears who are being denied compensation. That is simply unfair.
#3 The Rooney Rule Compensation Terms are Ambiguous
The NFL’s position is that the rule gives compensation for only the “primary football executive,” the Falcons designated their President of Football Operations as the primary football executive, therefore the Bears are not due compensation. But here’s the problem: the rule language specifically lists “General Manager” as an explicit example of a primary football executive. It says nothing in the language of the rule about what happens when a team has a general manager but other executives higher in their office with football responsibilities. It makes no mention of the draft picks being conditional on whatever position the hiring team reports as their primary football executive to the league. It simply says compensation is due if the hire is for the primary football executive and lists a singular example of a primary football executive: general manager. At best the NFL is applying a technical interpretation of the rule rather than adhering to the spirit of it. But even given the language, there’s a solid argument that the NFL should be barred from asserting this technical definition.
There is a principle in contract law called the contra proferentem rule (Latin terms are common in the law), which states that any ambiguity or unclear language is construed against the drafter. Think about it this way, let’s say you and I had a bet. I agree to give you a lollipop if you can name twenty NFL teams from memory. I write it down like this: “I promise to give a lollipop to Bears Fan if he can name twenty NFL teams from memory.” We both sign it – we have an accord! You then proceed to name twenty NFL teams, but in your twenty, you include the Chicago Staleys and the Houston Oilers, along with the Chicago Bears and the Tennessee Titans. You then demand your lollipop. I refuse, arguing, you have double listed two teams – as the Staleys were just the Bears back in the 1920s and the Houston Oilers became the Titans in 1999. We go to a judge to adjudicate our dispute. The judge, in interpreting our contract, would construe that ambiguity against me – because I had the opportunity to be specific and clear when I wrote out the promise. You get your lollipop. While NFL rules are not contracts per se, the adoption of rules to govern league operations is negotiated among teams, the NFL itself, and the players thus effectively represent a contractual relationship. Well, the NFL itself wrote the Rooney Rule and its subsequent amendments – in other words, the NFL is the “drafter” of the rule in this context.
So now let’s consider whether there is an ambiguity in the NFL’s Rooney Rule with respect to draft pick compensation to teams. First off, the NFL, as it describes it in its published rulebook and on its page about the Rooney Rule, has used the word “and” rather than “or” when referring to compensation and the PFE and the GM.
From the NFL Football Operations site.
In 2009, the policy was amended to include general manager and primary football executive jobs, requiring each team to interview a minimum of two external minority candidates.
OK, you say, but that’s just on the website and isn’t the rule itself. Fair enough. Let’s look at the rule itself fron a 2021 PFT article:
(i) The employer-club of a minority employee who has been hired by another club as its Head Coach or Primary Football Executive (General Manager) shall receive Draft choice compensation in the form of a compensatory Draft pick in the third round in each of the next two Drafts for an employee hired as either a Head Coach or Primary Football Executive, or for the next three Drafts if it has two employees hired for both positions. The reference to the hiring of employees into “both positions” could be by the same club or different clubs. The following will apply to the Draft choice compensation:
a. Any compensatory Draft picks awarded pursuant to this Policy will be at the end of the third round following all compensatory Draft picks awarded to clubs pursuant to Appendix V of the NFL-NFLPA Collective Bargaining Agreement.
As we can see, it says that the team “shall” receive the draft compensation – that means it isn’t a conditional offer. If you meet the terms, the draft picks will be due to the team – it isn’t optional. Second, we get this phrase: “Primary Football Executive (General Manager)” – I would argue that there are two ways to interpret that phrase, both come down in favor of compensation. When an example is provided in a contract, they are either “illustrative” or they are “exhaustive.” In other words, the example is either intended to say “this and things like it” (illustrative) or it is these and only these that qualify (exhaustive). So, if it is an exhaustive list, then both the PFE and the GM “shall” qualify for compensation. However, even if GM is an illustration of a PFE – the NFL itself has this admitted, in the rule, that a GM, by the rule, qualifies as a primary football executive.
#4 It is Inconsistent with the NFL’s Rooney Rule Precedents
Since the NFL passed Resolution JC-2A, the amendment to the Rooney Rule providing draft pick compensation, in 2020, the NFL has always awarded draft pick compensation when a minority executive with another team, who was not already a general manager, was hired as the general manager. Every. Single. Time. The Los Angeles Rams were the first to receive compensation when the Detroit Lions hired their director of college scouting as GM. And indeed, it has happened six times since the rule was implemented.
Further, those GMs, in several cases, answered to a “President” in the hierarchy of the organization. For example, Rod Wood was the President/CEO of the Detroit Lions when they hired Brad Homes in 2021. Ted Phillips was President when the Bears hired Ryan Poles from the Kansas City Chiefs. Of course, the problem here is that Matt Ryan was hired as the “President of Football Operations” – thus the argument that he is the PFE (his protestations to the contrary notwithstanding). And yet, in the case of Terry Fontenot and the Atlanta Falcons, Rich McKay retained “oversight” of football operations until the current restructuring that reflects our current controversy. The NFL is relying on a restrictive interpretation of its Rooney Rule that it has never applied in any other case in the past. And arguably, if it were consistent in this interpretation, it should have denied draft pick compensation before this current circumstance with the Bears, the Falcons, and Ian Cunningham.
#5 It Creates a Perverse Incentive for NFL Teams Hiring Minorities
Given the NFL’s interpretation denying the Bears compensation for losing Cunningham to the Falcons, it put the Bears in the position of denying Ian the opportunity to interview for the GM position with the Falcons, despite the fact that it was a clear promotion from his current position, in terms of responsibilities and compensation, in order to either keep Cunningham in house or in anticipating Ian getting a GM position in a later season where there was no complication with the hiring team’s hierarchy. In other words, the Bears were incentivized to prevent the very thing the Rooney Rule is supposed to encourage: teams promoting minority candidates for coaching and executive positions. Kudos for the Bears in permitting Cunningham to interview and take the job despite this fact – but it is simply indisputable that the NFL’s interpretation of the Ronney Rule here incented the Bears to actively prevent a minority candidate from taking a promotion with another NFL team.
Also consider the incentive this decision creates for teams interested in hiring a minority candidate away from another team. While the two third round picks provided under the Rooney Rule are compensation picks tacked on to the end of the third round and are not taken from the NFL team that makes the minority hire, the NFL is a highly competitive league. The NFL draft is a zero-sum game – any advantages or benefits one NFL team gains is to the detriment of all the other teams. Thus, this interpretation of the rule creates a perverse incentive for NFL teams restructuring their NFL front offices. They can prevent other NFL franchises from getting draft compensation for hiring a minority candidate as their GM simply by designating a different position as the “primary football executive” and giving that position to someone else who doesn’t qualify for compensation to other teams. While there is no evidence this was what the Atlanta Falcons had in mind when they passed over Cunningham for Matt Ryan, the logic of doing so is clear. And now the precedent has been set – an NFL team can attempt to deny Rooney Rule compensation under these same circumstances.
Well, Bears fans, that’s what I think about the NFL denying Rooney Rule compensation to the Chicago Bears for the loss of Ian Cunningham to the Atlanta Falcons.
But what do you think?
Tell us in the comments below!
