Niners seek permission to interview Hue Jackson


The San Francisco 49ers are putting the cart before the horse, interviewing head-coaching candidates before hiring a General Manager.

The possible reason?  The Rooney Rule.

Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that the 49ers have requested permission from the Raiders to interview offensive coordinator Hue Jackson for the vacant head-coaching position in San Francisco.  Interviewing Jackson would comply with the mandate that at least one minority candidate be interviewed for every coaching vacancy.

But this isn’t a Ray Sherman move; Jackson is regarded as a legitimate head-coaching candidate, and his presence on the Oakland coaching staff has fueled reports that head coach Tom Cable will be fired and Jackson elevated into the job.

And that’s likely why talk of a Cable-for-Jackson swap has emerged.  Owner Al Davis hired Jackson with, as many believe, an eye toward promoting him at some point.  And if Davis waits too long to promote Jackson, Davis may not have the luxury of promoting Jackson.

That said, if Jackson has options right now, he may opt to leave Oakland.

He doesn’t have an option in San Francisco yet.  But who knows?  He could end up being the man to work with Trent Baalke in an effort to resurrect a faded franchise.

52 responses to “Niners seek permission to interview Hue Jackson

  1. Al Davis may be crazy/senile; but he won’t allow this to happen. Even people totally out of their minds have moments of clarity.

  2. Jim Harbaugh is the only person I would rather see coaching the Raiders than Tom Cable. Just not sure Hue Jackson is ready to be a head coach ESPECIALLY with the way Al Davis runs the team.

    Al Davis likes Jim Harbaugh style of coaching, Harbaugh was on the Raiders staff during the last successful Raider teams, and the way Stanford played last night is EXACTLY what Al Davis would like to see out of his Raiders.

    Problem…Harbaugh would cost BIG money and want A LOT of control of the roster…Two things that Al Davis has NEVER done in the past.

    Here’s to hoping Al Davis’ New Year’s resolution is to CHANGE.

  3. I didn’t think teams could prevent assistants from interviewing for head coaching positions unless their teams were still playing.

    I’m pretty sure the only way the Raiders can stop him from interviewing is by making him their head coach.

    Anyone got a rule book handy?

  4. packattack1967 says: Jan 4, 2011 9:57 AM

    He looks like a HC.
    How does he look like a HC?

    I’m not hatin, I’m just curious.

  5. after watching the contract hub-bub that Al Davis created after Shanahan left the Raiders, after Kiffin left… makes me think that none of the current Raider coaches are under any kind of multi-year contract.

    So they/Jackson will be able to leave and go to the team of their choice after the NFL year ends.

  6. Well if Marvin decides not to come back to Cincy, then the Bengals should bring him back…. Great coach!!! Good luck to ya Hue

  7. Second post of the day requiring evidence or explanation from one of your claims. This why Ray Sherman shouldn’t be considered as an actual head coaching candidate when this guy didn’t seem to do much. How about some journalistic integrity for once?

  8. #
    cincyorangenblack says: Jan 4, 2011 9:52 AM

    Hello Cincinnati’s new OC

    i don’t believe a lateral move allowed if you are under contract only elevated positions

  9. He’ll end up picking either of the two evils….working for Al Davis or taking on a job in SF that has little talent and higher expectations. The SF job comes with an easier schedule though…that division is, by far, the worst in football.

  10. How is an OC on a 8-8 team head coach material? Shouldn’t you want a coach that at least made the playoffs? (I say this strictly because I want Hue to stay in Oakland, we are on the right track so don’t screw things up now)

  11. This begs the question about this garbage called the Rooney Rule. If a team wants to interview a possible minority candidate, yet is not allowed to do so, have they statisified the rule?
    Seems like it would be another way to get around this horrible implementation of equal opportunity.

  12. ok, stop with the rooney rule crap. EVERY time a minority gets an interview, it’s not because of the rooney rule. yes it exists, and yes teams are supposed to follow it, but its NOT the only reason minorities get interviews. is it maybe possible that the guy has EARNED an interview based on his experience and ability to coach? your insistence on pushing this on us is part of the reason why people think the rule is so ridiculous.

  13. @themage:
    that is one of the more interesting questions i’ve seen regarding the rule. very interesting indeed. you have to wonder about how that would be handled. i think if a team makes a sincere attempt to seek permission, it should not be held against them if said permission is denied.

  14. @joetoronto:

    joetoronto says: Jan 4, 2011 10:09 AM

    packattack1967 says: Jan 4, 2011 9:57 AM

    He looks like a HC.
    How does he look like a HC?

    I’m not hatin, I’m just curious.

    cuz dude obviously has his serious face on! lol….and his headset? how does he NOT look like an HC?! lol…

  15. The Rooney Rule does not require you interview one minority candidate, it requires an NFL team to interview one BLACK candidate.

    Interviewing a Tom Flores doesn’t count. Because apparently in the NFL there is only one minority, and the rest be damned

  16. jedicurt:

    I’ve always wondered about that. I seem to remember the wording being “a minority candidate”, but I agree with you that it really means only “black”.

    The whole thing is a big mess.

  17. No matter what Al Davis does the haters will find something wrong with it. That’s OK because it just means all you haters are always on RAIDER WATCH. As a die hard RAIDER fan I like it. Keep it up….

  18. @jlb10
    i don’t believe a lateral move allowed if you are under contract only elevated positions

    It’s allowed. It’s happened before. When Marvin Lewis went to Washington from Baltimore it was a lateral move. Why wouldn’t it be allowed??

    That said. Hue will not be Cincy’s new OC. That guy is dreaming.

  19. realitypolice says:
    Jan 4, 2011 10:05 AM
    I didn’t think teams could prevent assistants from interviewing for head coaching positions unless their teams were still playing.

    I’m pretty sure the only way the Raiders can stop him from interviewing is by making him their head coach.

    Anyone got a rule book handy?

    Anyone who is under contract with a team be it a Coach, assistant or player must receive permission to speak with the another NFL team if the request is denied than to speak that subject constitutes tampering..!

  20. jedicurt & joetoronto:
    when in the world did they interview tom flores? who (besides you two) says this would not be sufficient? i’m assuming flores is a hispanic name. pretty sure they count as minorities too.

  21. @raiderredleg – I agree, Cable should stay, he has proven he can bring a team back to respectable even under All-Davis-crazy-man-control. That said, Al will probably can him at which point I would love to see San Fransisco grab him 🙂 . Isn’t that usually the path to success? Get canned by Davis then start your real career?

  22. hue jackson has more experience than most other candidates.he has coached many positions,even after being labeled as an offensive minded coach,he has experience on the defensive side,too.he has that patience and the quick to anger mentality,an exact fit as a head coach.his name has been in many teams databases for a good amount of time.all he needs is a shot,like most other coaches that have ever had the title of head coach.i don’t think he is a fit for S.F.,but for teams like Cincy or Cleveland,he would better those teams immediately.

  23. stevenb67 says:
    Jan 4, 2011 12:56 PM
    i don’t believe a lateral move allowed if you are under contract only elevated positions

    It’s allowed. It’s happened before. When Marvin Lewis went to Washington from Baltimore it was a lateral move. Why wouldn’t it be allowed??

    That said. Hue will not be Cincy’s new OC. That guy is dreaming.

    really? dreaming? How about a few years back when Marvin tried to give Hue the OC job and Mike Brown shot it down then let him walk… Marvin is reportedly back—under the circumstance that MB gives him what he wants (indoor practice field, more scouts, and coach/player personnel power) Soooo if Marvin does come back, OC Bratkowski is gone, and Marv can bring in who he wants…ie Hue Jackson

    thanks though

  24. hey SanFran fans,Mike Leach is out there to help 2009,the coaches adjusted the offense to a more spread look for Crabtree,then this year the team went back to a more NFL type offense.the team is still young and not very accustomed to a consistent pro-style offense,so changing for Mike Leash wouldn’t be too hard for the players.Alex Smith can run the spread.

  25. Round robin angle: Singletary, then the 49ers HC, passed on Hue to be his OC and picked Jimmy Raye instead. Raye had previously been Oakland’s OC, which Hue is as of now.

    Maybe Al opts for Hue as HC and fires Cable, who then goes to SF as OL coach. Singletary comes in as Oak’s LB coach and we’ve closed the circle.

  26. what does Marvin Lewis have that Mike Brown should want anymore?Lewis was only hired because Cincy wanted the Ravens defensive style and the personnel/players to run it.that defense still hasn’t shown seems to me that the decision makers as a whole group are the problems in Cincy.they need a complete shake up from top to bottom,including the players.

  27. @steelerdynasty2010

    well when the Raiders interviews Steve Sarkisian who is Armenian (a worldly recognized minority group) it did not satisfy the Rooney Rule.

    And as I recall the league was asked whether or not Norm Chow being interviewed by the Cardnials would have satisfied the rule in 2007, but the league never answered because the Cardnials had already interviewed Jim Caldwell thus counting as their minority candidate, so we never got an answer

    And i brought up Tom Flores as a name because the league damn near forgot that he was the first minority coach to win a superbowl (won 2 of them) when they were making all the buzz about the tony dungy – Lovie Smith first black to win a super bowl

  28. @vaneeghan,nice twist on that.i wouldn’t mind that actually.then the raiders can get Josh McDaniels to be the OC only and never ever as the head coach.then when the draft comes around AL DAVIS can trade Singletary to the Patriots for the raiders original #17 draft pick from the Seymour trade a couple years ago.maybe trade up again using Asoumugha to get Andrew Luck or maybe Cam Newton.the possibilities are endless.

  29. how is it possible that Singletary can run the combines with draft hopefuls and get respect but then becomes head coach of an NFL team and the players reject he too tough for todays players? if that’s the case,he should’ve never been fired and should’ve been given a contract extension!

  30. #
    stealthscorpio says: Jan 4, 2011 10:42 AM

    And maybe San Fran is tweaking their Bay area rival and trying to spook Al into making a hasty/another dumb move.
    That would result in Al Davis making another “hasty” move. Hiring Jim Harbaugh of Stanford.

  31. Sigh.

    bojax34, caucasian is not a minority in California. According to the last census

    And running a good combine and being a good player has nothing to do with being a head coach. And if you recall respecting Singletary, especially when he first became head coach of the 49ers, wasn’t a problem, even when he dropped his pants in the locker room. Being a good player involves natural physical gifts and maintaining peak physical condition while understanding your position. Being a good head coach involves scheming, finding opponents weaknesses and maximizing your teams strengths, balancing the personalities and playing styles and inspiring confidence. Singletary was a great player, he was a mediocre head coach not because the players weren’t “tough” enough, but because he wasn’t good at any of those things except maybe inspiring confidence.

    Personally I think the Rooney rule should be abolished. Maybe it was needed at one time when coaches were all white and there were barriers to be broken down, but now that there have been many successful minority coaches it just serves to demean those who are now seeking jobs. Any time a black coach gets called in for an interview the automatic assumption is it’s solely to satisfy the rooney rule. That’s just counterproductive. Let coaches like Mike Tomlin and Jim Caldwell stand on their own merits, I don’t think they need the help.

  32. jim harbaugh just has winner written all over him.whichever team gets him will become a consistent winner shortly.

  33. one thing is for sure, until there is a cba in place, raiders will not do anything…right now the raiders stand to make approx 125 million if there is no football/no head coach, and approx 8 million if there is………go figure.

  34. Some of you guys just kill me. More of the same “The Rooney Rule is racist” crap that comes from guys who can’t seem to be able to deal with the fact that there ARE inequities with the system and who either can’t remember or wish fondly for the days when an entire crop of NFL candidates that were interviewed every year were 100% white.

    1. The Rooney Rule ONLY requires that they interview; it doesn’t say that they have to hire. Are you afraid that the owners might be offended by the smell that emanates from minority coaches or that he might be tempted to lean over and run his fingers through his nappy hairdo? Just what offends you about them getting a sit down? Seriously, if an owner interviews 10 candidates and 1 is a minority, are you unhappy with the possibility that 1 white candidate didn’t get a chance to interview, even if there wasn’t another white candidate that wanted to interview but there were 10 minorities that did but were denied a seat at the massa’s table?

    2. Since most of the minority coaches ARE black, it would stand to reason that most of the minority coaches that are interviewed by owners ARE — gasp — black but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t non-black minorities that have been interviewed. I’d name them but why not let you do some actual research to find out who but I bet that most of you won’t.

    3. Except for teams in the playoffs, owners can’t deny coaches interviews for promotions and that applies to whites AND minorities. Once their playoff run is over, the owner has to relent.

    4. Some of you are even naive enough to believe MAYBE the rule was needed before but the owners are so much more enlightened but Jerry Jones is solid proof that there are owners out there that would rather lose a EEOC lawsuit than ever give the GM or head coaching job to a minority and that’s even if they suspected that they were “passing” Latinos like Flores.

    5. I remember a time when the owners made excuse after excuse not to interview Tony Dungy, even though his boss, Chuck Noll, pushed hard for him and then they’d hire a guy like Rich Kotite, not ONCE but TWICE and he’d end up being a loser, not ONCE but TWICE. Year after year, qualified minority coaches were denied even a chance to talk face to face with an owner and that’s ALL they ever wanted. The fact is that many of them already knew that they had to have a plan to hit the ground running to create a winner but they never even got a chance to show that while their white counterparts had no problem getting a seat at the massa’s table.

    Oh and BULL and CRAP on the Flores thing. The NFL did make a big deal about WHEN IT HAPPENED and why you think that it has to be a deal when talking about two BLACK head coaches who had a chance to be the first BLACK Super Bowl winning head coach, is beyond me.

  35. bojax34 says:


    Marvin had the guys to clamp down on the defense but then they ended up getting run out of town and not only were free agents reluctant to sign with Cincinnati but the owners were too cheap to go after the ones who might.

    The Bengals ownership got its penny pinching ways from its founder and his family has just perpetuated that crap, even after he’s gone. No real facilities, no real personnel department, draft choices made based on signability and not necessarily talent and an owner who would rather pocket his profit than put it back into the team (and one of the ones that Jerry Jones rails about when he talks about teams that won’t spend their shared revenue to upgrade their team).

    Give all the crap that he’s had to put up with in Cincinnati, I can’t blame Lewis for pushing back because no one really wants to go to the Bengals and they’ve had several of their better players jump ship because they’re tired of the losing and that management won’t make the effort to upgrade their franchise. If Brown finally loosens the purse strings, maybe they can get players to sign with them instead of it being the place where free agents with no other options will take the crumbs that they offer.

  36. @jedicurt:
    how do you know sarkisian’s interview didnt count? secondly, isnt armenia a European country?? unless he’s a native armenian, he aint gettin in the minority club…lol…if he is native, i would say you’ve gone and uncovered an interesting little issue, and one that begs an answer. how does the league define minority? HAS the league even defined minority or do they just assume everyone has the same understanding/definition of what they mean by minority?
    people still take shots at Tomlin and Caldwell. some fans were calling for tomlin’s head last year, and people consistently downplay Caldwell’s ability to coach, saying its obvious he’s just riding Manning’s coattails. but i disagree that their successes should do more to help other minorities get a look. their successes are NOT indicative of ANYONE’S abilities but their own. The rule simply provides others an opportunity to showcase their abilities as well. i do agree on the counterproductivity of the perception the rule creates, that all minority interviews are because of the rule, not because they are qualified. THAT is what’s insulting about it. but people’s perception and cynicism isnt a good reason to abolish the rule. if it were proven to not be helping minorities get interviews, then you abolish it. but by all appearances, it’s helping because minorities are at least getting interviews.
    gotta hand it to you. overall great post but you should’ve left the massa references out. it would have added infinitely more credibility to your otherwise outstanding message. instead, you’ve left the door open for someone to call you a racist and minimize the merits of your points (without the massas).

  37. @steelerdynasty2010

    why do i believe that steve sarkisians interview did not count? because Al Davis, the man who trying to do as little as possible for the NFL, and the man who hired two minority head coaches long before the rooney rule felt as thought it wouldn’t count for the league, hence why when he decided lane kiffin was our guy, he just quickly brought in James Lofton for his who-knows-the-number interview because he has always been our quick rooney rule candidate.

    and as for saying Armenia is a European country, well there is some debate there. Armenia falls geographically south of the main ridge of the Caucasus Mountain Range. So Geographically the country resides in Asia. However, they are a member of the Council of Europe and are trying to join the EU because they feel (and so does Europe) that they are Culturally European, much the same way that the EU believes that the island of Cyprus and Israel are both Culturally apart of Europe even though they are Geographically in Asia as well. Georgia and Azerbaijan also fall into this gray area of are they European or Asian.

    So this does bring up a good point. What defines a minority? is it geographic location? ethnicity? or culture? And more importantly for this discussion what does the NFL define as a minority when it comes to the Rooney Rule? I would like an official answer from the NFL

    I would state that by the first two, Armenians are a minority in this country… the country falls within Asian, and Armenians are an ethnicity separate from those around them dating back to the 1600’s BC and are currently estimated with fewer than 12 million left world wide. Culturally they are not.

    If i were to take African-Americans (note* applying this to only those that are born in the us so this would be comparable to Steve Sarkisian as he was born in the US) Geographically, no. Culturally, no. Ethnicity, Yes.

  38. No, steelerdynasty2010 , those massas mean nothing, one way or the other. to those guys. I’ve already been called that WITHOUT them so NO, they don’t mean a thing and don’t be naive to believe that it does. You, on the other hand, DID give them an out because now they can use your argument to blast what I’ve said.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!