Brian Flores attorneys say NFL-related recruiting memo used racial stereotypes about Black head coach hires

Brian Flores’ attorneys say new material in his ongoing NFL discrimination lawsuit includes a recruiting-firm memo they characterize as filled with racial stereotypes related to how teams talk about potential Black head coaching candidates.

Flores is one of three figures named in the case, which also includes former NFL head coaches Steve Wilks and Ray Horton. According to the reporting, their legal team argues the memo they obtained uses language and examples that reflect biased “talking points” about whether and how Black coaching candidates should be viewed during the hiring process.

The lawsuit itself centers on allegations of racial discrimination in NFL head-coach hiring. In this latest development highlighted by CBS Sports, the attorneys contend the memo goes beyond general recruiting practices and instead reflects a pattern of stereotypes tied to race, particularly in the context of “Black head coach hires.”

For the NFL, head-coach recruitment is one of the league’s most sensitive decision-making pipelines. Hiring decisions often become a proxy for how an organization evaluates leadership backgrounds, interviews, and candidate fit, and the case argues those evaluations have been influenced by race in ways the memo allegedly demonstrates.

The Flores lawsuit has previously raised broader questions about the NFL’s coaching hiring culture and the transparency of its process. This new filing, as described in the reporting, adds a specific document type: a recruiting firm memo that attorneys say captured the kind of internal framing they claim teams use when discussing Black candidates for top jobs.

Because this is an active legal matter, the NFL has not been established as having violated any specific legal standard in the way the memo is being presented. The memo’s contents, the circumstances of how it was obtained, and the legal significance of the document will remain points for the courts to evaluate rather than something that can be resolved through reporting alone.

What to watch next is whether the case produces additional corroboration around how these hiring “talking points” are generated and circulated, and whether the league responds with a dispute over the memo’s authenticity, relevance, or interpretation. A memo like this, if treated as credible evidence, could shape how the court assesses intent, pattern, and responsibility in the hiring process.