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

[Califan007 The Constipated]

26 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Believe what you want to believe, US Government has been talking about putting Tubman on the $20 bill instead of Jackson for a while now.  You are seeming extremely out of touch right now, and that's another reason a lot of folks can't stand this franchise.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/the-goods/2019/5/23/18637348/steve-mnuchin-harriet-tubman-20-bill-andrew-jackson

 

If you think this being put out there its tabled until Trump leaves office is also in a vacuum, you are being naive and unrealistic.  These are now global protests by the way, not just riots.

 

Exactly, I already knew about Tubman and Obama's efforts to get Jackson off the $20 bill...and nothing happening right now is speeding up that change. It's not even part of the dialogue in all this. For all intents and purposes, Jackson was to Native Americans what Hitler was to the Jews. yeah, some exaggeration there but not nearly as much as most people realize. So why isn't it being brought up? The Redskins' name is a small and insignificant part in all of this--actually, it was before 2020 as well, but the immediacy, intimacy, and intensity of what has happened this year has made the name change even smaller and even more insignificant.

 

This has been a public debate for 50 years, with the majority of American Indians chiming in throughout that timespan as not having any problem with the name. And I still maintain that if anyone tries to use what's going on now as an opportunity to champion changing the Skins' name, it will not gain any traction outside of momentary message board debates and a twitter hashtag before it fades back into the shadows again. And it could very well backfire...if it's perceived that anyone is using the brutal killing of an innocent black man as an entryway for getting a sports team's name changed? hoo, boy...

 

And the last thing anyone on this site has said about anything I've written, even when they don't agree with me, is that I'm out of touch lol...

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

No

 

The "Suck it up" wasn't actually meant for you lol...should have pointed that out. It was meant for anyone claiming that they want the name changed because they're "tired" of discussing it.

 

Unless you said you were tired, too...then yeah, it's for you as well lol...

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 minutes ago, Koala said:

Is there any particular reason that this thread is suddenly hot again?  Did something happen that I missed?  Or did people just figure, "Well since we already have our pitchforks out anyway..."

 

1) A member of congress commented that the Skins should change their name if they are claiming to be againt racism, and Florio basically said it as well.

 

2) The belief among some that there is a significant cultural change sweeping the country in terms of race and racism, and so the Skins will be perceived as being on the wrong side of this change if they refuse to change their name.

[purbeast]

54 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Would rooting for the 3-13 Warriors be more enjoyable for you? Would cheering for a team that only makes the playoffs 2 times in the next 10 years and never wins in the postseason be acceptable for anyone because we aren't calling them the Redskins anymore? Would Snyder hiring a Bruce Allen clone to run the franchise for the next 10 years be more tolerable because he's ruining the Washington Braves and not the Washington Redskins?

 

 

 

 

More enjoyable?

 

No.

 

Just as enjoyable?

 

Yes.

 

That is my point.  I don't care at this point.  5 years ago I cared A LOT more. 

 

Just because it doesn't offend me doesn't mean it's not offensive.  The majority of outside perspective is that it's a racist name.  When you venture out to sports boards outside of homer ones like this and hear people talking about it, it becomes very apparent.

[bearrock]

26 minutes ago, redskinss said:

Serious question for people who say the name doesn't matter, why dont you cheer for the ravens?

I'm not saying go root for them if you don't like it, my question isn't intended to be combative or snarky.

I really want to know why you dont root for them.

 

 

If your child gets a name change, are you gonna go look for a new child?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

 

 

1

1 minute ago, purbeast said:

More enjoyable?

 

No.

 

Just as enjoyable?

 

Yes.

 

That is my point.  I don't care at this point.  5 years ago I cared A LOT more. 

 

Just because it doesn't offend me doesn't mean it's not offensive.  The majority of outside perspective is that it's a racist name.  When you venture out to sports boards outside of homer ones like this and hear people talking about it, it becomes very apparent.

 

'The majority of outside perspective is that it's a racist name"

 

That's not even remotely true.

[Renegade7]

15 minutes ago, Koala said:

Is there any particular reason that this thread is suddenly hot again?  Did something happen that I missed?  Or did people just figure, "Well since we already have our pitchforks out anyway..."

Bump starts on 499.

[Renegade7]

@Califan007 did you read article i posted from Vox?  I don't think you did, Mnuchin intentionally tabled this for political reasons to save Trumps campaign and congress is calling them out for it. 

 

Why would putting a black woman on the $20 negatively impact his particular reelection campaign?

 

This will be back with a new administration, this thread goes on circles while we can't move back to DC unless we do this. Keep laughing.

[Fan since a Fetus]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

 

And now, taking the field is your Washington Gridlock!

And now, taking the field are your Washington Lame Ducks!

And now, taking the field are your Washington Supremes featuring Diana Ross!

 

Dude, I like the Washington Supremes featuring Diana Ross. We could change Hail to the Redskins into Where Did Our Love Go? But, that should be reserved for when Detroit Lions change their colors and nickname. (not saying that is going to happen).

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

@Califan007 did you read article i posted from Vox?  I don't think you did, Mnuchin intentionally tabled this for political reasons to save Trumps campaign and congress is calling them out for it. 

 

Why would putting a black woman on the $20 negatively impact his particular reelection campaign?

 

This will be back with a new administration, this thread goes on circles while we can't move back to DC unless we do this. Keep laughing.

 

Jackson's still gonna be on the $20 bill. They aren't removing him. That was my point...

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

A small contingent of people are trying to push this. I don’t see a huge groundswell for any of this. If you walk around constantly thinking the team Name is an issue, then I’d say you are in the minority. If the Redskins are forced to change their name then the Chiefs should be too. I don’t see anyone advocating for that. Much to do about nothing maybe? 

[Fan since a Fetus]

27 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

This can get ripped down along with the name change. 

 

 

Agreed, but (and maybe they already have this, haven't been there in 10 years), they need to make a Redskins History section inside the park. Not naming sections after people, but a place you can read about history. We shouldn't forget people like him. We don't want to forget people like him. Because we need reminders to strive to be better. So, yeah, rip down the monument but place something about him inside the park with all of the other notable and better people that have surrounded this team.

[goskins10]

We could be the Washington Demagogues - and put a picture of the Capitol on the helmet. Ok, not gonig to happen but would be funny. 

 

So I was 100% anti name change. But i am moving a bit. Not because I agree it's racist. @purbeast Sorry but the statement that the vast majority thinks it's racist is just not true. It's not even true in my Dad's wife's tribe (she more than 50% Native American - can't remember the tribe). At best even they are split 50/50 - not such a majority.  In fact most people do not care one way or the other. It's not an issue they are interested in. 

 

WHile I do not agree with most Mike F. rant, I do agree it might be a way for the team to be part of the solution to unite us as a nation. I have to agree the major impact it could be if they changed the name and Snyder made a statement something like (I posted this on the Youtube and thought I would bring it here too): 

 

"While I personally disagree that the current team name is racist, I recognize that in this time of open racism and senseless killings and attacks, by changing the team name now, we can possibly be part of the solution since there is clearly now a majority the see it as a racist name. We support people of all walks of life and felt this was the best way in this moment to demonstrate that belief and show our support for those attempting to facilitate change."

 

 

[redskinss]

6 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

If your child gets a name change, are you gonna go look for a new child?

No but then again I don't draft new children every year and my children don't leave me for free agency. 

Not the same thing.

My children are my children and it will always be that way because they're my children but we don't have that luxury in football. 

Unfortunately everything changes in football from owners to stadiums to coaches to players and we move on using the name of the team as the unwavering rock to guide us through all that change.

 

Once the name changes, the rock is gone and it's now something different. 

 

Again, if Washington is enough for some that's great, it's not for me because I'm from new England.

 

It's my opinion, I'm not saying I'm right it's just how I feel down to my core.

[goskins10]

4 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Jackson's still gonna be on the $20 bill. They aren't removing him. That was my point...

 

 

They are not removing him now, correct. And certainly not while a Republican is in office. But I would not be surprised if when the next Democrat gets elected they at least try again. Will they be successful? That would be interesting to see. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

A small contingent of people are trying to push this. I don’t see a huge groundswell for any of this. If you walk around constantly thinking the team Name is an issue, then I’d say you are in the minority. If the Redskins are forced to change their name then the Chiefs should be too. I don’t see anyone advocating for that. Much to do about nothing maybe? 

 

I remember reading an article where NAs were quoted as saying they felt being called "chief" was definitely a slur...

 

Nobody's going after the Chiefs' name because the Redskins are considered the big fish in all of this--even with the low attendance and losing seasons. Get the big fish to fall and the rest becomes easier.

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

 

I remember reading an article where NAs were quoted as saying they felt being called "chief" was definitely a slur...

 

Nobody's going after the Chiefs' name because the Redskins are considered the big fish in all of this--even with the low attendance and losing seasons. Get the big fish to fall and the rest becomes easier.

 

Totally agree with this. If you want to be consistent, why are the Chiefs, Braves, and Indians not being called out? If you ask most Native Americans, being addresses as Chief, if done derogatorily, is worse than Redskin. And Indians are actually from India. So calling Cleveland the Indians and then using a Native American caricature is also a slur. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

They are not removing him now, correct. And certainly not while a Republican is in office. But I would not be surprised if when the next Democrat gets elected they at least try again. Will they be successful? That would be interesting to see. 

 

Could happen, yep...but just to be clear, my point was that removing Jackson isn't being discussed or part of the conversation even with everything going on...if there was some big twitter/hashtag movement and news stories about it gaining momentum I might start thinking differently. But from what I can tell, nothing's changed...If Trump and the GOP lose power Dems would try again to get Jackson removed from the $20 but they would have tried again anyway even without the protests if they ended up in power.

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

@Califan007 Right, I understand. For me Chiefs, and it’s even more prevalent General derogatory use, is why I’d start there.  I don’t see ours as racist. Especially with it’s additional support of the logo,  explicitly showing what we are paying tribute to..

[bearrock]

28 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Exactly, I already knew about Tubman and Obama's efforts to get Jackson off the $20 bill...and nothing happening right now is speeding up that change. It's not even part of the dialogue in all this. For all intents and purposes, Jackson was to Native Americans what Hitler was to the Jews. yeah, some exaggeration there but not nearly as much as most people realize. So why isn't it being brought up? The Redskins' name is a small and insignificant part in all of this--actually, it was before 2020 as well, but the immediacy, intimacy, and intensity of what has happened this year has made the name change even smaller and even more insignificant.

 

The existence of an injustice or issue that is magnitudes greater than the problem is not a justification to ignore the problem.  If I had to choose between the name change and taking Jackson off the 20, I would obviously choose Jackson.  But why not both?

 

Quote

This has been a public debate for 50 years, with the majority of American Indians chiming in throughout that timespan as not having any problem with the name.

 

These polls may not capture the complexity of the thoughts behind the numbers.  Overwhelming majority of Native Americans may say they don't find the name offensive.  What would their answer be if they were asked whether they could understand why a Native American may find it offensive?  What about if they were asked whether they would prefer or be just as happy with another name that is associated with Native American heritage or culture but without any history of derogatory use?

 

Quote

And I still maintain that if anyone tries to use what's going on now as an opportunity to champion changing the Skins' name, it will not gain any traction outside of momentary message board debates and a twitter hashtag before it fades back into the shadows again. And it could very well backfire...if it's perceived that anyone is using the brutal killing of an innocent black man as an entryway for getting a sports team's name changed? hoo, boy...

 

No one is marching out there alongside the protesters advocating for the name change.  But broad events like this can cause internal reflection.  If some of us think "Well damn.  Look at what it is like to live in the country as black person or POC.   I guess we haven't made as much progress as some of us we thought we did.   There are things about these kinds of injustices that's really hard for someone who doesn't live it everyday to relate to."  That principle carries over to the name.  My enjoyment in it is infinitesimal in its importance to the hurt that some native american person would feel.   If there is a different name that could honor the culture and heritage, but without the baggage, why not change it?  

[Riggo#44]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

The country is now tearing down statues overnight and pushing for rooting out every case and reminder of institutionalized racism in our police departments.  We can sit here and wait for them to come for us and try claiming we are right if we want, but we aren't going to win, all things considered.

There are literally 1000s of ethnic mascots from just about every European nationality including Vikings, Knicks (derogatory term for Danish immigrants in NY, eventually used to describe all New Yorkers), Scots, Celtics, Vandals, Arabs, Romans, etc., etc.

 

They can come after it all they like, the Supreme Court pretty much shut it down. So let virtue signaling clowns like AOC and Florio rant. I'll continue ignoring them/laughing at them getting ripped on twitter.

[goskins10]

9 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Could happen, yep...but just to be clear, my point was that removing Jackson isn't being discussed or part of the conversation even with everything going on...if there was some big twitter/hashtag movement and news stories about it gaining momentum I might start thinking differently. But from what I can tell, nothing's changed...If Trump and the GOP lose power Dems would try again to get Jackson removed from the $20 but they would have tried again anyway even without the protests if they ended up in power.

 

 

Agree. And was not disputing that. The current protests and the $20 are two different things not being discussed together, at least not yet. Was just adding that if the Dems get the WH back they will very likely try again.  

 

So very much agreeing with you. 

[Fan since a Fetus]

51 minutes ago, redskinss said:

Serious question for people who say the name doesn't matter, why dont you cheer for the ravens?

I'm not saying go root for them if you don't like it, my question isn't intended to be combative or snarky.

 

 

I stated it somewhat in my post that I cared a few years back. I argued for keeping it and I said the same thing. Why don't you go root for someone else? But mine was meant to be snarky. But these past 4 years have proven that this is such a small issue in the grand scheme of things and I don't give a damn anymore. I'm really close to not giving a damn about football in general. It is a sport that only cares about the billionaires that run it.

 

I love the colors, I was born up there, and have had family members work for the Redskins that were very high up on the chain. I've have tons of memorabilia and experiences. My favorite being a football signed by the whole 91 SuperBowl team. Everyone signed it in black with the exception of my favorite, Art Monk, who signed it in green.

 

So, between me being born there, the colors, the memories, and the constant rooting for this team ever since I can remember, I am not going to change teams. I will however, if they change colors or move the team. The colors are huge for me as is calling Washington home even though they are not in Washington currently.

 

To me, it is not about winning and losing. It is about something that has been in my family for as long as anyone can remember. We all love the team. Even my wife's family loves the team and we met in Florida. But, 90% of us are kind of on a do whatever, we don't really care anymore. 

 

I highly doubt it is going to change and I am good with that. But, if it does, well whatever. I like change in my life and will take it as it comes.

 

I want to wear Maroon and Black for the rest of my days.

 

Furthermore, who the **** wants to wear purple?

 

 

[JSSkinz]

I think we should try to put this to bed, communicate with the Native Americans, ask them if they will support certifying the name and if they don't feel comfortable doing that then let them come up with a new name that pays tribute to Native Americans, that way we keep the tradition and we gain the support of Native Americans while doing so.

 

 

[bearrock]

1 minute ago, Riggo#44 said:

There are literally 1000s of ethnic mascots from just about every European nationality including Vikings, Knicks (derogatory term for Danish immigrants in NY, eventually used to describe all New Yorkers), Scots, Celtics, Vandals, Arabs, Romans, etc., etc.

 

They can come after it all they like, the Supreme Court pretty much shut it down. So let virtue signaling clowns like AOC and Florio rant. I'll continue ignoring them/laughing at them getting ripped on twitter.

 

Law is a floor for morality, not a ceiling.  And if we don't take "but all my friends are doing it too" from children, we should strive to be better than that.

[88Comrade2000]

The name will eventually change.  Especially if Dan wants someone else to pay for his new stadium.

 

I am not attached to the name. The Redskins we love died in 1992, when Gibbs retired. Even, when He came back for 4 years; he couldn't restore that luster.

 

Just let the fans have a say when the change happens.