The Official ES All Things Redskins Name Change Thread (Reboot Edition---Read New OP)

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Please stop putting the friggin Cleveland Indians in our corner. It doesn't help.

 

It seems like all the fans for every team do this:

 

Indians: Chief Wahoo is fine. It's the Redskins with the racist name.

 

Chiefs: Our name is fine. It's Chief Wahoo that is the problem.

 

Actually....everyone seems to agree that Chief Wahoo is the real enemy.

[ram29jackson]

a cartoon indian face is not offensive and hurts no one. All indian teams should be in the same camp no matter what and stomp this stupidity

[Bang]

I don't think it's conjecture. At a time when Southern states were suddenly adding the stars and bars to their state flags, Marshall added "Fight for Ole Dixie" to his team's fight song. At a time when the league was integrated and his team was winning one or two games a year, he was looking to build a new stadium and saying that he would integrate the Redskins when the Globetrotters integrated.

 

This was a man who had a provision in his will that the money set aside for child welfare programs not go to integrationists.

 

GPM was deeply (and, at times, weirldly) racist. And his business was tied to the South. I think his racial and business instincts were perfectly aligned. He was not faking racism to appeal to Southern whites.

This is also a time in which radio coverage was huge and a terrific medium to make money. If you could get southern fans on your side, you had what,,  50 markets all to yourself to sell advertising or broadcasting rights?

Television was new. How much vision would it take to think that maybe the same rules would hold true, especially by 1960?

 

I don't argue against Marshall's racism, but i think the gold mine that many potential customers presented,,  with NO real competition would be a much bigger reason to pander to them.

His racial and business decisions did not align, this was proven by his refusal to integrate and thus make his team better,, and he may have done that to make sure he kept his southern audience (as well as his own racism.)

I think businessmen tend to look at the dollar first. Where are the most of them, and what's the best way to get them.

and a market like that ..  it's all his if he can grab it. 

 

 

Edit:

In re-reading this page, i think we're arguing two nuances of the same point. I think you're right, and I think I'm right too. I'm thinking both reasons were apt to be on his mind.

 

~Bang

[@DCGoldPants]

 

 

Decided to load up on some gear while we still have the name/logo.

[Bang]

Honestly, i love the team, but that color looks TERRIBLE on me.

 

Always with the white shirt or grey Ts for me

 

~Bang

[@DCGoldPants]

When I see the 80th Anniversary true burgundy and gold colors compared to the Red/Yellow today I ask myself "How do they not adapt current designs to these colors ASAP?"

 

and Bang, I'm sure you look like a BAMF regardless of what you're wearing.

[Destino]

It seems like all the fans for every team do this:

Indians: Chief Wahoo is fine. It's the Redskins with the racist name.

Chiefs: Our name is fine. It's Chief Wahoo that is the problem.

Actually....everyone seems to agree that Chief Wahoo is the real enemy.

That's because it's blatant and especially so when fans painted red wearing costume feathers confront Native Americans.

a cartoon indian face is not offensive and hurts no one. All indian teams should be in the same camp no matter what and stomp this stupidity

The arguments made in defense of the redskins logo makes it impossible to support both. The head logo is constantly referred to as respectful and designed to with respect, not as a caricature. Chief wahoo is the opposite.

[@DCGoldPants]

Telling you folks. There is no separating the Indians from the Redskins from the Chiefs from the Blackhawks. I don't care what those fanbases say. They want to use a dictionary as the end all? Good luck with that.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

 

Edit:

In re-reading this page, i think we're arguing two nuances of the same point. I think you're right, and I think I'm right too. I'm thinking both reasons were apt to be on his mind.

 

~Bang

 

I get what you are saying generally.

 

I think people overplay several points when talking about Marshall, and they (sort of) emerged in your original post.

 

1. That he was only racist because of money. I think his actions show that his racism was not cynical.

 

2. That he was a product of his times. Yes, racism was more prevalent and open when he was growing up and in business. But that was not true for everyone, and he was an active racist. And he never showed any sign of wavering.

Telling you folks. There is no separating the Indians from the Redskins from the Chiefs from the Blackhawks. I don't care what those fanbases say. They want to use a dictionary as the end all? Good luck with that.

 

What if you don't want to defend Chief Wahoo?

 

Larry....do you want to defend Chief Wahoo?

[ram29jackson]

 

 

Decided to load up on some gear while we still have the name/logo.

 

 

 

not new, had for a while

[@DCGoldPants]

 

What if you don't want to defend Chief Wahoo?

 

Larry....do you want to defend Chief Wahoo?

 

Its not that I think the Wahoo logo is anything like the Redskins or Blackhawks logos. Is that like Ms. Blackhorse said. Its going to be all or nothing (not really nothing). So, I'm not even going to get into their battle. But I won't pretend that one name is worse than another.

 

I thought we were talking names. Mainly today for me, the Chiefs.

[War Paint]

a cartoon indian face is not offensive and hurts no one. All indian teams should be in the same camp no matter what and stomp this stupidity

Yeah, I still don't get the outrage over Cleveland's cartoony mascot.  I know some caricatures exaggerate a person's features that can be offensive to some, but I don't really see their mascot as doing that.  The only exaggeration I see is the Indians' mascot's teeth are big.  Do NAs naturally have big teeth or something?  If so, then I can see why it would be offensive.  If not, I don't get why a cartoony image is offensive.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yeah, I still don't get the outrage over Cleveland's cartoony mascot.  I know some caricatures exaggerate a person's features that can be offensive to some, but I don't really see their mascot as doing that.  The only exaggeration I see is the Indians' mascot's teeth are big.  Do NAs naturally have big teeth or something?  If so, then I can see why it would be offensive.  If not, I don't get why a cartoony image is offensive.

 

[War Paint]

Lombardi, you love trying to pick out the most racially provocative pics of black people and try to compare it to the Indians.  You are stretching.  Here is where you're logic is flawed.  All the caricatures you post of black people are obviously offensive.  Why?  Because they are in fact exaggerating racial features and poking fun of black people.  Black people naturally have fuller lips than a lot of races.  So when you post a caricature of a black person with big lips, it's obviously making fun of black people.

 

Again, do NAs naturally have big teeth? That is the only exaggeration I see with their cartoony image. Have you seen their mascot with comic book quotes around him saying racial things like "Me scalp white man?"  If not, you're really throwing crap at the wall and hope it sticks.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

 

Again, do NAs naturally have big teeth? That is the only exaggeration I see their cartoony image. Have you seen their mascot with comic book quotes around him saying racial things like "Me scalp white man?"  If not, you're really throwing crap at the wall and hope it sticks.

 

Um....look at the color of Chief Wahoo. Do ya think that might me a little bit exagerrated?

[Destino]

Yeah, I still don't get the outrage over Cleveland's cartoony mascot. I know some caricatures exaggerate a person's features that can be offensive to some, but I don't really see their mascot as doing that. The only exaggeration I see is the Indians' mascot's teeth are big. Do NAs naturally have big teeth or something? If so, then I can see why it would be offensive. If not, I don't get why a cartoony image is offensive.

Do you really think the hat on the right stands out in this group?

[War Paint]

Um....look at the color of Chief Wahoo. Do ya think that might me a little bit exagerrated?

Still stretching man.  Look at the Vikings logo.  What color is he?  I mean, do you want to ban skin color on brand images now?

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Still stretching man.  Look at the Vikings logo.  What color is he?  I mean, do you want to ban skin color on brand images now?

 

 

 

He's actually the color of a real human being and not a red M&M.

[Destino]

He's actually the color of a real human being and not a red M&M.

And they aren't the Minnesota Whites implying that the cartoon is a representation of white people.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

PS

 

I don't like that Chinamen logo on an orange background. And the Jews hat needs to be the color of the Star of David. That's just bad marketing across the board.

We also probably need to spend a few moments talking about Chief Wahoo's nose.

[Bang]

I get what you are saying generally.

 

I think people overplay several points when talking about Marshall, and they (sort of) emerged in your original post.

 

1. That he was only racist because of money. I think his actions show that his racism was not cynical.

 

 

Well, i don't think he was racist because of money. I think he was just racist.

But i think as a businessman trying to do business in the South, he had that aspect to consider as well.

And because he is what he is, he's going to default to whichever he thinks will please the white audience anyway.

 

~Bang

[Boss_Hogg]

I've always detested the Indians logo.

 

The Redskins logo was at least designed by a Native American Sioux.

[War Paint]

Do you really think the hat on the right stands out in this group?

Well, the Jews is one that is obviously a caricature poking fun of Jews, because of the nose.  The chinese one has the slant eyes.  Now if NAs are known to have big teeth, then I would see where you guys are coming from, but I've never heard anything about NAs naturally having big teeth.

 

Honestly though, I think that many people, especially those owners who chose to name their teams with NA themes, such as Indians, probably viewed the name as something like Cowboys or Vikings, instead of a racial group.

[planter]

Whose forefathers do you speak of? Mine were in Europe until the mid 20s.

They left because my Great Grandfather was smart enough to see what was happening in Germany and Russia and everywhere else.

My ancestors had absolutely no involvement in ****ting on any Native americans.

And that stands for a GREAT many of us. A LOT of us cannot trace our american roots back past 100 or so years when the great European migrations occured.

(By the way, those people who **** on the Natives **** on all of our families too. Immigration was not well received in the decades surrounding the turn of the 20th century.)

see how hard it is to make the white guilt "look what WE did to them" argument?

This is a sideshow anyway,, there's a simple way to solve this issue.

Ask the native Americans.

If you pro-changers really gave a damn about doing what the native wanted, you'd demand to know what that actually might BE.

~Bang

Does it really matter which generation s*@#!^d them over?

[War Paint]

Um....look at the color of Chief Wahoo. Do ya think that might me a little bit exagerrated?

Hey man, you're the one who's gone way out on a limb here.  Again, since when is the color of skin off limits when drawing a cartoon?  Would it be less offensive if the Indian had pale skin?  Besides, the Indians skin color is probably just to match their team colors, Navy Blue, RED, and white.