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

[Spearfeather]

 

 

 

i see this debate as a bit of a one-way ratchet.... each time it comes up for discussion a few more people are convinced to be squeamish about the name...

 

 Maybe with some in the media, but the polls in general, really don't reflect much change at all, over the past few years. There was actually a slight increase in support between the 2013 AP Poll, and the 2014 AP Poll.

[zoony]

.

If there's anything i can't stand it's this smug self serving attitude of the Newly Offended who pretend that their constant farts have nothing to do with why the room stinks.

Peter King ignores all facts about this controversy that might get into the way of the spotlight he wants to throw on himself, and now he simultaneously ignores and overstates the effect he has had in creating the 'groundswell' he pretends to have nothing to do with manipulating, and how it may be distracting the President / GM of the team because he signed a letter.

I couldn't stand him before, and now i have even less respect for him as a 'journalist'.

~Bang

At the end of the day, most of these assholes are raging narcissists, looking for ways to love themselves even more than they already do

[Commander PK]

Where is this groundswell of opposition to the name?  I don't see it at all.  If they think self-promoting blowhards in the media taking a "look at me" stance on the name by not using it is creating a "groundswell" these people are even more arrogant than I thought.

 

There is no groundswell against the name.  Read the majority of comments beneath every single article or piece in print about this topic on just about any medium available.  

 

There is no groundswell of opposition....only significant and legitimate ANNOYANCE at this topic from just about everyone fan and non-fan alike.

[Zazzaro703]

Where is this groundswell of opposition to the name? I don't see it at all. If they think self-promoting blowhards in the media taking a "look at me" stance on the name by not using it is creating a "groundswell" these people are even more arrogant than I thought.

There is no groundswell against the name. Read the majority of comments beneath every single article or piece in print about this topic on just about any medium available.

There is no groundswell of opposition....only significant and legitimate ANNOYANCE at this topic from just about everyone fan and non-fan alike.

This is exactly what they think. They think that since they are the ones with the spotlight their opinion matters more than everyone else. All of them are a bunch of idiots. It's gotten comical to me now to see grown adults stamp their feet like 5 years stating they won't use a name with tons of evidence in front of them that most people don't care. Even the people that should have an opinion either like the name or are indifferent. Anyone in the media that is there to cover the NFL that won't use the name Redskins should be fired for injecting their personal bias into their craft that isn't supposed to be biased. You want to be offended... I'm extremely offended at what passes as journalism these days. Articles without fact checks, proof reading, stories raced to the public that are wrong to hopefully get credit for being first with a "whoops my bad" when they are wrong. That's offensive.

[SWFLSkins]

Did everyone see the new partnership between the Washington Times /Redskins? Could be a sign the team is finally showing its disappointment with the WaPo's constant one sided point of view on the team name.

Strong candor from @MikeWiseguy on the Washington Times/Redskins partnership. pic.twitter.com/bKVtNZisli

 

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorite 
•  More

 

 

1. SWFLSKINS ‏@johnnylocal  58m

   @BallHogsRadio @MikeWiseguy Mike who?

   Details

   •  Reply 
   •  Delete 
   •  Favorite 
   •  More
2. KyleP. ‏@HailToTheReds  26m

   @BallHogsRadio the Post has become unbearable w/ Wise, Jenkins and daily name-change articles

http://skins.dcsportsnexus.com/

 

Possible Redskins Name Changes

Posted by The Dugs Sports

Here are a few potential names that the Redskins could take should Dan Snyder ever decide to change the name:

Washington All-Skins

A way to insult everyone, no matter what the color of their skin.  We can have racial caricatures of EVERY race on the helmet to even things out.  Equality.

Washington No-Skins

Just take the current Redskins logo, remove the skin, and bam.  No longer racist.  Now just gross and morbid, kind of like the team's typical performance.  Plus the Cowboys fans calling them the Deadskins would be less of an insult.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

 

i see this debate as a bit of a one-way ratchet.... each time it comes up for discussion a few more people are convinced to be squeamish about the name...but almost nobody is EVER convinced to go the other way (changing their mind AWAY from thinking it is offensive).   its hard for me to imagine the name not having been changed 10 years from now.  

 

 

That's likely part of it. The other part of it is there are a fair number of people who probably are generally sympathetic to the idea that all the Native American names and images in American sports is just odd. And they have that idea reinforced everytime there was some little groundswell against it.

 

I remember when St. Johns changed their name. A friend of mine who always dressed in St. Johns gear despite having never been to New York City was devastated. My thought was, "Yea...I guess that makes sense." I never had a good counter-argument as to why teams SHOULD use Native American names. And the the groundswell would die and we would all move on with our lives.

 

What the opponents of the name have figured out is that if you keep the noise level constant, the people who don't have a great counter-argument but who alos don't particularly care are pretty much stuck.

 

I've read most of these pages and I've heard all the counter-arguments.

 

Lone Star Dietz!!!

Symbol of Pride!!!!

Bodies painted red!!!!

Oklahoma!!!!!

High schools on Reservations!!!!!

 

And none of them have persuaded me that the vague feeling of not being comfortable with the name is wrong.

 

This is the story to me: Our virulently racist owner had a weird obsession with Native Americans and Native American football teams (which were trendy at the time). He had a (maybe!) Native American coach. And he played in the same stadium as the Red Sox. So, primarily for marketing reasons, he went with Redskins. A word that is probably the functional equivalent of "Darkie" or "Colored" in modern parlance. Was it intended to be offensive? Certainly not. It was intended to be praise in some wierd, patriarchial 1930s kind of way. Is it an anachroism? Almost certainly.

 

Should it be changed? Depends on if you are the type of person who sees weird historical anachromisms as problematic. Most people probably don't.

[Kosher Ham]

LBK, One could argue that... they are pushing to eliminate representation of NA's all over again...

They are irrelevant and don't need recognition...hmmm ?

 

One could argue that... these people are still beneath us is the mentality of several people trying to change the name.

 

One could argue that... this is taking away a name and imagery that has national reference and has never been used in that negative fashion, so many do indeed see it as a symbol of pride.

 

Just to add some more. Still got love for you though.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

LBK, One could argue that... they are pushing to eliminate representation of NA's all over again...

They are irrelevant and don't need recognition...hmmm ?

 

That's a neat piece of counter-intuitive thinking. I'm not sure I buy it. Primarily because aside from weid outliers like Notre Dame, there is no other ethnic or racial group represented in this fashion. Is commerical exploitation better than no repsentation? I don't know the answer to that.

[MattFancy]

That's a neat piece of counter-intuitive thinking. I'm not sure I buy it. Primarily because aside from weid outliers like Notre Dame, there is no other ethnic or racial group represented in this fashion. Is commerical exploitation better than no repsentation? I don't know the answer to that.

 

I wonder how some things became infamous for team names. For example, who decide Pirates should be glorified? I mean we have the Pirates, Raiders, Buccaneers. Glorifying thieves seems weird.

[Kosher Ham]

Then you have to ask why NAs would use the representation themselves...No ?

 

Why would they use it ?

 

Same thing ?

 

Exploitation is a strong word that I really don't believe fits with what you are meaning. In no way are any NAs being exploited by the Redskins name or logo (especially if they use it themselves). The term, nor logo are considered offensive by most NAs to begin with. It's an attempted money grab by those people including the media.  

 

I could as a NA easily be offended by Bills (as Bang often states), or even Cowboys if it was agenda driven.

 

There is zero reason for anyone that is not NA to try to tell me what I should be offended by.

[Kosher Ham]

I wonder how some things became infamous for team names. For example, who decide Pirates should be glorified? I mean we have the Pirates, Raiders, Buccaneers. Glorifying thieves seems weird.

 

I have never heard about anyone in my life called Orange.

 

Unless they had a pitiful spray tan.

 

EDIT : Taiking about Syracuse...formerly known as Orangemen, women, etc.

[RFKFedEx]

The term, nor logo are considered offensive by most NAs to begin with. It's an attempted money grab by those people including the media.  

 

Where is the profit potential in this "money grab"? Aside from journalists getting clicks.

[Kosher Ham]

Where is the profit potential in this "money grab"? Aside from journalists getting clicks.

 

Are you serious ?

 

Think Haynesworth for media.

 

The Natives that are against the name are at odds with the other Natives that embrace it.

 

They want a piece of a billion dollar business.

 

Worth a shot right ? Roll the dice, spin the roulette wheel...bet on red.

 

I'll support the name if you pay the piper.

 

I thought you followed politics.

[RFKFedEx]

But how would the activists get a piece of the billion dollar business?

 

Are you envisioning reparation demands which could become court mandated measures? i.e. league/team is forced to pay out settlement $ to NA groups, etc?

 

 

Not sure what you mean with the Haynesworth reference. 

[MassSkinsFan]

I have never heard about anyone in my life called Orange.

 

Unless they had a pitiful spray tan.

 

EDIT : Taliking about Syracuse...formerly known as Orangemen, women, etc.

 

Ironically, it started as an NA mascot... http://archives.syr.edu/history/mascots.html

[Kosher Ham]

Ironically, it started as an NA mascot... http://archives.syr.edu/history/mascots.html

 

I realize that. My Mom grew up in Syracuse and went there.

 

My point was have you ever heard of people being called Orange ?

 

The mascot is secondary in the Redskins situation, they are claiming the name is offensive.

I don't see a logo and mascot as one and the same however.

But how would the activists get a piece of the billion dollar business?

 

Are you envisioning reparation demands which could become court mandated measures? i.e. league/team is forced to pay out settlement $ to NA groups, etc?

 

 

Not sure what you mean with the Haynesworth reference. 

 

Now you are being obtuse again. Same as when this thread started.

 

Ugh.

 

Haynesworth was built up by the media and it is an example of the media being influencial.

[grego]

But how would the activists get a piece of the billion dollar business?

 

Are you envisioning reparation demands which could become court mandated measures? i.e. league/team is forced to pay out settlement $ to NA groups, etc?

 

 

Not sure what you mean with the Haynesworth reference. 

 

about the 20 minute mark, this guy starts talking about halbritter. halbritter intentions are a no brainer. he goes into who is behind the debate, their backgrounds and motivations. interesting stuff in this video.

 

two other voices, harjo and blackhorse, i believe are true believers. lunatics, in other words, who believe their own delusional rants. so, i dont necessarily believe they are motivated by $. 

 

and you already mentioned the clicks driven interest by every other blogger or 'journalist'.

 

[RFKFedEx]

Now you are being obtuse again. Same as when this thread started.

 

Ugh.

 

Haynesworth was built up by the media and it is an example of the media being influencial.

Blaming Haynesworth on the media sounds like something they would do in Ashburn. 

 

Again, where would the money come from?

[Kosher Ham]

The hype.

 

New contract, new deal, revenue streaming. Same concept.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

 

Haynesworth was built up by the media and it is an example of the media being influencial.

 

I have no earthly idea what this sentence means.

The hype.

 

New contract, new deal, revenue streaming. Same concept.

 

Native Americans are going to get money out of revenue streaming?

 

Are they going to end up owning the Redskins?

 

I really don't see the profit motive other than the potential for fundraising and maybe consultant gigs for some of the major activists.

[Bang]

 

Lone Star Dietz!!!

Symbol of Pride!!!!

Bodies painted red!!!!

Oklahoma!!!!!

High schools on Reservations!!!!!

 

 

 

 

Ask the Native Americans!?

 

it's really the only argument that matters.

 

~Bang

[Bang]

Where is the profit potential in this "money grab"? Aside from journalists getting clicks.

hello, i am the lawyer who made the NFL bow.

How can I help you?

Speaking engagement?

Sure,  I'll send over my fee request

 

Television appearance? sure. I can swing that. I'll send over my fee request.

A book deal? Wow,, that's cool,, do you have a ghost writer? I'll send over my fee request.

 

Legal services? Sure,, hang on, i have a new rate card to fax over. It has increased significantly since my huge victory over the biggest sports league in the US.

.

 

 

Do people really ever need to wonder where profit potential comes from?

 

I really don't see the profit motive other than the potential for fundraising and maybe consultant gigs for some of the major activists.

Considering there's only 5 or so of them, I'd suggest that a win has the potential make them all very wealthy in a variety of ways.

~Bang

[grego]

I really don't see the profit motive other than the potential for fundraising and maybe consultant gigs for some of the major activists.

Other than political pressure always resulting in political favor (again, look at halbritter and how he makes his money), I would agree with you.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

hello, i am the lawyer who made the NFL bow.

How can I help you?

Speaking engagement?

Sure,  I'll send over my fee request

 

 

 

I suppose. I just don't see a ton of speaking engagements coming out of this.

 

This isn't the concussion issue, where there are dollar signs all over the place for potentially thousands of people.

 

It seems that if I was in the business of making a quick buck, the whole casino business would be the focus of my attention.

[Bang]

This is a society that cares what Kim Kardashian wears out to dinner.

Don't underestimate the ability to make money off of practically anything once you have the ear of the Herd.

that said, i don't think Harjo is in it for the money.. i think she just wants to make everyone do what she wants regardless of how they feel about it. She's a crusader, and crusaders always think they are right no matter what.

~Bang