RFKFedEx Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 People would moan initially, but they'd be back. ---------- Post added March-17th-2011 at 02:09 PM ---------- I would bet my bottom ten bucks that none of those people who chime in and tell you how racist the name is are native Americans. It's the general perception of racism that's bad for business long term. You have to look at the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 People would moan initially, but they'd be back.---------- Post added March-17th-2011 at 02:09 PM ---------- It's the general perception of racism that's bad for business long term. You have to look at the big picture. the big picture that keeps this horribly BAD football team as one of the top earning sports franchises in the world? Perhaps I'm missing something here. Other than a few lawyers trying to cash in on a name change suit for the last 20 years and some whiny people n the internet,, how has this perception hurt the team? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail_Skins Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I tell you what, if I hearded cattle for a living, then a certain Dallasss team would certainly be offensive to me. I'm a man not a 'boy'! Lets get it straight, before I sue your ***! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Bowl XVII Posted March 17, 2011 Author Share Posted March 17, 2011 Another theory. Back in the 1930s the football team shared the nickname of the baseball team or a likeness whom they shared a stadium with. New York Giants' date=' Brooklyn Dodgers, New York Yankees, Chicago Bears (with the Cubs) of course were all football teams. When we were the Braves we shared the Boston Braves' baseball stadium. When we moved out of Braves Field to Fenway we became the Red Skins(Red Sox). Like I said, just a theory.[/quote'] according to the "redskins encyclopedia" the name was changed when marshall moved the team to the redsox stadium and the name was changed to make it more synonymous with the RED sox. This sounds right, but why "skins." I don't see where that came from. Red Sox and Red Skins. I see the "red" part obviously, but skins? Does anybody know where that came from? Great points are being made, but nobody is mentioning the "skins" part. Maybe they thought of "red" and then decided on "skins" because of Lone Star and some of the Haskell players on the team. Maybe it was because that was the only name they could think of with "red" in it that had to do with the previous name, Braves. It seems like only part of the question is being answered. If you look back at my OP though, you will see that GPM's daughter said he named the team Redskins because of Lone Star. So, I am guesing a combination of these theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 i have posted this countless times so let me make it clear.according to the "redskins encyclopedia" the name was changed when marshall moved the team to the redsox stadium and the name was changed to make it more synonymous with the RED sox. The Boston BRAVES. The name was changed to the Redskins when the team moved to another stadium in Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 The Boston BRAVES. The name was changed to the Redskins when the team moved to another stadium in Boston. yes they were the boston braves but when he couldnt reach agreement with the braves over field usage and fees he rented red sox stadium and changed the team name... just as i stated. ---------- Post added March-17th-2011 at 01:57 PM ---------- This sounds right, but why "skins." I don't see where that came from. Red Sox and Red Skins. I see the "red" part obviously, but skins? Does anybody know where that came from? Great points are being made, but nobody is mentioning the "skins" part. Maybe they thought of "red" and then decided on "skins" because of Lone Star and some of the Haskell players on the team. Maybe it was because that was the only name they could think of with "red" in it that had to do with the previous name, Braves. It seems like only part of the question is being answered. If you look back at my OP though, you will see that GPM's daughter said he named the team Redskins because of Lone Star. So, I am guesing a combination of these theories. best i can figure is that since we were the Braves... and indians were known to be the RED MAN.... i assume when it was changed from braves to RED for RED SOX, he GPM, used the term skins since it referred to the understood color of the american indan. thereby creating his own brand name and preserving the identity to reflect the american indian and their fighting spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 yes they were the boston braves but when he couldnt reach agreement with the braves over field usage and fees he rented red sox stadium and changed the team name... just as i stated.---------- Post added March-17th-2011 at 01:57 PM ---------- best i can figure is that since we were the Braves... and indians were known to be the RED MAN.... i assume when it was changed from braves to RED for RED SOX, he GPM, used the term skins since it referred to the understood color of the american indan. thereby creating his own brand name and preserving the identity to reflect the american indian and their fighting spirit. The term redskins was what the Europeans often called the warriors in an American Indian war party. GPM wanted to preserve the uniforms, logo and any marketing he had going for him. Could have called them the Indians but that was the name for the Cleveland team and would have lost the marketing connection with a baseball team, could have changed the name completely (say to the Red Sox) but then he'd have had to come up with a new logo and a new marketing program for a business in the red also, he may have already been considering a big move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 The term redskins was what the Europeans often called the warriors in an American Indian war party. GPM wanted to preserve the uniforms, logo and any marketing he had going for him. Could have called them the Indians but that was the name for the Cleveland team and would have lost the marketing connection with a baseball team, could have changed the name completely (say to the Red Sox) but then he'd have had to come up with a new logo and a new marketing program for a business in the red also, he may have already been considering a big move. makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byner21 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I'm a fan of the tradition established in the 80s (too young with Joe Gibbs, Darrell Green, Art Monk, Riggo, Theismann, the Hogs, the Smurfs, Olkewicz, Monte Coleman, Dave Butz, Mann and Manley, Doug Williams, the Posse, and a ton of other players and people involved with the organization. I'm not cheering for the name or the uniforms. I think the name is racist, even if it speaks to positive stereotypes associated with Native Americans. We can come up with something that doesn't depart too far from the image the two team names thus far have tried to project...basically bravery, courage, keeping up the fight no matter what. Keep the ugly colors, change the ugly name. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 i will say this.... if the name changes im no longer a fan. i am a REDSKIN fan not a Washington "?" fan. if the name changes then the franchise becomes nothing more than a team in Washington by a new name. it wont BE the REDSKINS to me anymore. so.... IF the name change takes place... consider me a Titans fan. You and me both. I won't say that I am no longer a fan, but I don't know if I would be able to make the transition. I have no connection with the DC area. I would still be a fan of the LA Redskins or Memphis Redskins if that were to happen. I like the name and the rags they wear. A name change with the same logo, MAYBE I could stay with them, but if the unis and logo changed too then I'm done. I would not be able to identify with a team called the Washington Thunder with blue and black team colors. BTW, I chose "Thunder" as singular nicknames seem to be all the rage now (Heat, Magic, Wild, Mercury) and I think they sound totally stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B55Green Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I hated that the Bullets were changed to the Wizards. I'd be devastated if the Redskins changed their name. Agreed, thankfully Leonsis is working on bringing it back. The one positive thing about Snyder, throughout all the hates he gets, is he constantly fights to keep the Redskins name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champskins Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Agreed, thankfully Leonsis is working on bringing it back. The one positive thing about Snyder, throughout all the hates he gets, is he constantly fights to keep the Redskins name. in all fairness, he grew up a 'Skins fan as well. You don't want to lose the team name that you were always rooting for... and the business side would be that if you changed it, you bet your ass the support of the fans will diminish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 No matter what the name of our team was or will be, Dan Snyder has and will ruin it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskin Nut Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 [ From what I understand we were actually a defunct franchise rights bought and restarted. Duluth Eskimos. It was the Newark Tornados Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devastate Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Oh please please please can we have a cool name like when the Bullets became the Wizards?? Can we have Warlocks? or Elves? or Ooooo The Washington Brownie's.. No thanks.. Redskins is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oversized Toddler Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I hear we got our name because Mr. George Marshall was a Native American hating racist, and we are all racists by default for supporting them. At least, that's what I read in the paper once I guess the fact that he actively recruited native Americans to play for him must not matter, because that would undermine the whole racism claim of the critics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 [From what I understand we were actually a defunct franchise rights bought and restarted. Duluth Eskimos. It was the Newark Tornados which came from Duluth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cowboy Bamma Rocker Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Each to their own prerogative, but I'll stick with the ol' adage "If it aint' broke, don't fix it."Hail. Ironic you use that term seeing as we're pretty broke. And need fixing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spearfeather Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Hey, Einstein, they're saying that for the explicit purpose of getting under your skin. If we change our name they'll simply find something else to rib you about. Beat me to it. Agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Everybody knows that "Redskins" was chosen as a name to root FOR, right? What do those same PC idiots think of this logo? Someone saying that "Redskins" is racist, is just someone you should point and lol at. OMG, that reminds me! Look at the incredibly racist holiday we had this week!! ::excited: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonoman Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Washington 'Arrows" Works for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 I think the name is racist, i would agree with 'racial', as in, it refers to race. but not 'racist'. not sure how you come to that conlusion. Keep the ugly colors, change the ugly name.Hail. i love the colors. they are distinct. nothing else quite like them. and the name, obviously, i feel refers to postive qualities, not negative ones. i think they are both great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oni23 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Personally, I agree that the name probably coincides with the team's move to a new stadium and appeasing the Red Sox organization. But, has anyone ever thought that the term Redskins, "might", IN PART, have something to do with the color of the team's jersey's? Shirts-vs-Skins? NO pun intended and I know that term wasn't in use at the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANSKINS98 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 When I introduce myself as a Skins fan on other NFL boards, someone will usually chime in about the name being racist. It gets old knowing that it's never going to stop as long as we have the name. It's like GPM fighting integration for as long as he could, all the while knowing that eventually we'd have to give in as a team. Of course with our name and symbol/decale/logo they have this correlation of our name being racists, but do you automatically think we should chage our name because of that? I don't, just change our logo thats it. Our logo has changed before but our name basically stayed the same. We could change our logo to something that has no correlation with Native Americans and then be done with the racists talk. But a name change should never be an option. I will always favor a logo change rather then a name change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 People would moan initially, but they'd be back.---------- Post added March-17th-2011 at 02:09 PM ---------- It's the general perception of racism that's bad for business long term. You have to look at the big picture. Its been 75 years,that isn't long term enough for you? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.