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

[skinfan2k]

Remember how we "always" hear those people who think we get screwed by refs bc of our name, well changing our name should help our chances right?  I wonder where those people are. 

[sempre_victrix]

Just now, skinfan2k said:

if the redskins moved to London, I wouldn't be a fan.  I would naturally watch more ravens game.  It's literally the same thing as Orioles/Nats.  Did I go to a ton of Orioles games? hell yeah. Did I root for them to win sure?  I usually went to Os game to see the other teams stars.  When DC got their team, I immediately flipped. 

 

Of course the NFL will allow teams to pick up and move. If you don't support them financially, why would they stay? If you have no loyalty to them, why would they??

 

So, you're loyalty and fandom are about the city and not the team?   As I said, I am not close to either city, so geography plays no role in my fandom.  I like who I like.

 

As I said before, I have been a Redskins fan since I was a football fan.  I'd listen to Colts games and pull for them, but they were only a secondary team and them winning made my mother happy.  When they left town, suddenly, the Balitomre TV station carried Redskins' games, the local paper did Redskins' stories, and  and all was good in my universe.  Then came the Ravens and all of that ended.  You should be glad that your favorite is not dictated to you by football and television marketing gurus.

 

I rarely watch baseball anymore, but I will still pull for the Orioles, suck as they might, when I do turn on a game.  It would never, ever, cross my  mind to change which baseball team I'd pull for.  I did pull for the Nats in the WS because they are still a newer team and I like the story, they were heavy underdogs,  and sticking it to Bryce Harper just put the cherry on top.

 

Not saying I'd turn in my fan card after a name change, but if I did, I would not have a favorite team again.

 

[goskins10]

7 minutes ago, sempre_victrix said:

 

A.  Don't give a **** who you take seriously.

B.  The NFL allows teams to pick up and move based on market conditions and has nothing to do with loyalty to a city.  It's all about marketing and dollars.

 

If the Redskins moved to London, would you still be a fan or would you switch to the Ravens?

 

When the Washington Senators were here (the second ones in the 1960s), I was huge fan even though they sucked. Knew all the players, their stats, everything. Listened to the games in my bedroom on a very old AM only radio. When they moved to Texas, I was no longer a fan (I became a Dodgers fan but that was because my mother was a Dodgers fan.) Had they only changed their name, I would still be a fan today. 

 

And yes, it's about marketing dollars return on investment. The TEAMS may have no loyalty to a city. But the fans do. When they move it's becasue the current geographic location is not supporting the team so they move to a new geographic location that they feel will support the team better financially. But more times than not the large % of fans do not follow them. 

[sempre_victrix]

8 minutes ago, skinfan2k said:

Remember how we "always" hear those people who think we get screwed by refs bc of our name, well changing our name should help our chances right?  I wonder where those people are. 

 

That thought crossed my mind during this discussion.

 

I never bought into the theory, though.  This team has mostly shot itself in both feet for 2 decades.

[Emsworth]

Well there's no chance of choosing a name that doesn't annoy some section of the fan base now, so better to think about what it will be like moving forward over the next 20 years or so. 

 

As for new names, I quite like warthogs with a big ol A10 on the helmet, home game flybys and an excuse to blast that characteristic 'Brrrrrrrrrrt (pause) crackle, crackle, crackle' sound over the stadium sound system at strategic moments.

 

Other alternatives (mostly daft):

 

Washington Hell pigs/ hell hogs (nickname of prehistoric entelodont)

Washington weasels (cartoonish weasel in politician garb)

Washington Wunderwaffen (with V2 logo)

Washington Watergate

D.C. Comics (at least until they win something......)

 

But it'll probably be something bland like the Warriors. No matter how bad though I'll still support the team, though maybe not buy the merchandise if any rebrand is really bad.

[ClaytoAli]

If the name changes to a reference outside of native people to this country, the the Cowboys should be move to the NFC South and the Panthers to the NFC East.

 

lets just do an overhaul....

[London Kev]

 

1 hour ago, UK Skins said:

 

As long as you play the "...come out and play" music when they run onto the field!

 

[dyst]

Just call them Washington Haskins

[sempre_victrix]

23 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

And yes, it's about marketing dollars return on investment. The TEAMS may have no loyalty to a city. But the fans do. When they move it's becasue the current geographic location is not supporting the team so they move to a new geographic location that they feel will support the team better financially. But more times than not the large % of fans do not follow them. 

 

It's a 2 way street.  Continually produce a bad product and you lose fans.  Raise the ticket prices to a point that the only people who go to games are not true fans, but go because it's the cool thing to do today.   Move the team and get some buzz for a while and fill more seats.  If the owner doesn't care about me, as a fan, then why am I going to spend my hard earned dollars on his product when he can roll when the wind shifts?

 

NASCAR did the same thing years ago.  They priced away the true fans and now they are covering up seats during races.

 

Anyway, having wasted too much time debating this topic, time to go do something meaningful to me.

 

Peace.

[Going Commando]

2 hours ago, Panninho said:

And let's be honest, we already know that it is hurting at least a proportion of the Native American community so why disregard their opinions just because other Native Americans might not feel it's derogatory?

 

Because there will be fringe groups that object to any name, and this push for the Redskins to change their name isn't really being driven by Native American groups.  It's overwhelmingly being driven by white liberals and I think the primary motivation is a spiteful cultural proxy war as well as a sort of easily administered and passed loyalty test for woke whites who don't really have a dog in the fight.

 

At worst, Redskins is an old and outmoded term that has pretty much only been used to refer to the football team since it's creation.  If there was a common derogatory usage for Redskins in the past, it has long since died and the term was a derelict claimed and repurposed by the team and football fans.  I haven't really seen a compelling historical argument that the term is a slur, and I'm pretty sure we've seen polling of Native Americans that indicate most don't view it as a slur.  In this case, we can know how the name effects marginalized groups because we asked the group via polling and they were overwhelmingly indifferent to the term.   And I don't think most of the people demanding we change the name can readily articulate why the name is offensive beyond a sort of shallow explanation that we shouldn't use any word that refers to a group by their skin color.  Nevermind the context that the football team has been using it for 90 years without intent or broad usage of the term as a slur.  What you usually get as an explanation from people claiming the name is racist is something like, "it just is."  Argumentum ad populem mostly.  That its offensiveness is now self-evident and dogmatic.  That's why I think the fight over the Redskins name has pretty much just become a proxy fight in a much broader cultural war between left and right orthodoxies in American politics.

 

BTW, I think it's reasonable and possible to make dressing up like Native Americans and mocking them taboo without condemning the Redskins team name and mascot as a slur.  It's permissible and preferable to be nuanced when determining taboos like this.

 

But I also recognize this is an argument we've lost and a majority of the public has accepted the new orthodoxy that has redefined Redskins as a slur.  This is a sacred cow where there are only a small group of interested people to defend against killing it.  So the little history and perspective we Redskins fans have created over the last 87 years been easily overwhelmed and will now be erased.  Poetic irony in that.  It's not much fun when you belong to a small group who gets told by a much bigger outside group what you actually mean and believe.

[spjunkies]

@mods

@TK

@Jumbo

 

Can we please have a separate thread for suggestions only and keep this one for the debate? The name is GOING to change and the debate surrounding the reasons why is simply exhausting. 

[Panninho]

3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Because there will be fringe groups that object to any name, and this push for the Redskins to change their name isn't really being driven by Native American groups.  It's overwhelmingly being driven by white liberals and I think the primary motivation is a spiteful cultural proxy war as well as a sort of easily administered and passed loyalty test for woke whites who don't really have a dog in the fight.

I'm sorry but that is just not true. Look at the list of organizations and persons that spearhead this initiative. It's predominantly Native Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Washington_Redskins_name_change_advocates

 

 

[The Sisko]

2 hours ago, -JB- said:

Even better yet what about White Devils lol

This original Asiatic black man approves.😂😂😂

 

1 hour ago, sempre_victrix said:

...I love the history and imagery.   God, I love the fight song when we score...

 

Yes, Marshal was a terrible bigot towards AA and he's getting his just dues, but all of that was way before my time.  And way before the time of 90%  the people upset with the name.  Based on anecdotes about Marshal, he had no ill will towards Native Americans.

This is an interesting little tidbit, given that for at least part of its history, the line “Fight for old Dixie” was was used instead of “old DC” and the song Dixie was played as a lead in.

Times change. If we continue to allow our team to be a stand-in for policies that obscure racism while allowing it to continue in everything but name only, we might be deserving of the new nickname JB suggested in jest. 

[Corcaigh]

15 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

and this push for the Redskins to change their name isn't really being driven by Native American groups. 

Aside from that not being true, the desperate social plight of many NA communities makes arguing with powerful billionaires about a name drop far, far down this century’s ‘to do’ list.

[Going Commando]

8 minutes ago, Panninho said:

I'm sorry but that is just not true. Look at the list of organizations and persons that spearhead this initiative. It's predominantly Native Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Washington_Redskins_name_change_advocates

 

 

 

Does that list give a better sense of the scale of Native American opposition to the name than the polls did?  I don't think it does, and that list makes it look like the opposition to the name is being driven by prominent political and media figures, most of whom are white and black.

 

But looking at the names on that list, I see why we lost the argument.  Those are powerful people and highly influential cultural leaders, writers, players, broadcasters, etc.  We had zero chance of resisting the determination that Redskins is now taboo and a slur.

[Corcaigh]

4 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

This original Asiatic black man approves.😂😂😂

I think we should build on the prestige and heritage of Notre Dame and name the team the Washington Fighting Irish Neanderthals. We could license the same logo.

[skinsmarydu]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

I have been against changing the name but given current conditions I think it's time.  Keep it close - I heard the Warriors had a lot of momentum. Keep the colors the same and change the helmet back to an arrow or something nondescript. It would be a good way to show support for much needed change in how we view and react to racism - perceived or real. I say the last part as in my heart of hearts I just don't see Redskins as a team name as racist. It's all in how it's used. But Ok, if it will help change the discourse and help participate in the solution to racial inequality, then do it. 

 

In the end it's just a name. Dwayne Haskins has no better or worse chance of being a legitimate starting QB based on the name on his jersey with all other things being equal. 

Like you, this is my team. I don't want the name to change, but I'll live with it and support them...it would take some amazing artwork to make me buy new gear, however. (I've always loved our colors, no changes there please. )

I remember running through Walmart in Winchester with my mom looking for Redskins stuff a few years ago...she asked, "How do you know what you're looking for?"

"Go for the burgundy, Mom." 😄

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, London Kev said:

 

 

 

 

ucb - warriors.mp3

 

I'm going to lose it hearing this played when they come out the tunnel 🤟

[Panninho]

11 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Does that list give a better sense of the scale of Native American opposition to the name than the polls did?  I don't think it does, and that list makes it look like the opposition to the name is being driven by prominent political and media figures, most of whom are white and black.

 

But looking at the names on that list, I see why we lost the argument.  Those are powerful people and highly influential cultural leaders, writers, players, broadcasters, etc.  We had zero chance of resisting the determination that Redskins is now taboo and a slur.

Well the latest poll shows that at least half of Native Americans are offended by it. So where does this then leave us?

https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/02/04/native-mascots-survey/

 

But even if it would just be 20 or 30%, why wouldn't that 20 or 30% count? I mean that's still a lot of people you would offend with that.

[Jumbo]

ok...i just got here and haven't read around anywhere but there was a notice from a member asking out of need for a separate thread for suggesting new names, logos, etc.

 

 

from what i saw yesterday that seems like a good idea---so i will put it in the stadium

 

but when you read this post it means that's it's time to stop posting new name suggestions and logos

 

this thread will remain what it has been for quite awhile: the new version of the rg3ocd thread

 

 

and this thread will remain in the tailgate and be solely for any conversation on ...wait for it....whether to change the name or not

 

 

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

I have been against changing the name but given current conditions I think it's time.  Keep it close - I heard the Warriors had a lot of momentum. Keep the colors the same and change the helmet back to an arrow or something nondescript. It would be a good way to show support for much needed change in how we view and react to racism - perceived or real. I say the last part as in my heart of hearts I just don't see Redskins as a team name as racist. It's all in how it's used. But Ok, if it will help change the discourse and help participate in the solution to racial inequality, then do it. 

 

I don't see how changing the name actually solves any problem, I think it's more about passing a cultural and political litmus test.  But we're overwhelmed.  We're pariahs and will be until we go along with the will of the majority.  We can't keep the name any more because  there has been a tipping point in public opinion against us, and it's already become way too costly to have the name and it will only become more so over time.

[Jumbo]

 

[LetThePointsSoar]

4 minutes ago, Panninho said:

Well the latest poll shows that at least half of Native Americans are offended by it. So where does this then leave us?

https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/02/04/native-mascots-survey/

 

But even if it would just be 20 or 30%, why wouldn't that 20 or 30% count? I mean that's still a lot of people you would offend with that.

 

It is what it is, and it's going to change, but one point that drives me crazy is countless articles mention (insert here a number anywhere from 50-90 depending on which survey you believe) percentage of Native Americans that "aren't offended" and leave it at that without addressing what the real underlying issue is. 

 

It's not that we're "not offended", that makes it sound like we're indifferent and it's much deeper than that. IT'S A SOURCE OF PRIDE.  That's why you see so many of us with Native American heritage who are Redskins fans. 

 

So while I'm certain the change is coming, the irony is that we are continuing to strip the history of our heritage, in order to save what we were told by OTHERS we should be offended by. 

 

There is no right answer that will appease all sides, and I'm certain the name change is happening and very soon, and at this point, at least we won't have to talk about it any longer. But I, for one, pray that at least the name continues to have some ties to our Native American heritage (i.e. Warriors, etc) so you at least acknowledge that you're ripping out the identity of us life long fans who are fans BECAUSE we're Native Americans. 

 

Hail. 

[Jumbo]

new title and you all help police the thread 

 

or else  

 

 

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

 

Just for clarification, stadium thread is for what people would like to see the logo and name to be, but tailgate thread is for what's actually happening and debate around it?

 

I saw this and didn't know where you put it

 

 

Just making sure I'm meeting what you asking for.