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

[Bonez3]

Now that you've cleared that up, then if JayZ buys a team and renames it the Niggas, it's totally ok because we are talking about the name of a team, not a word that can be used offensively.

I know, next you'll point out that my example is imaginary.. I get the drill.

I think it's not exactly apples and apples. The 'n word' or variations there of have defined racial slurs associated. That is widespread through our society and well known.

It is not even remotely proven that Redskin ever carried a derogatory or racial slur association

[Larry]

Now that you've cleared that up, then if JayZ buys a team and renames it the Niggas, it's totally ok because we are talking about the name of a team, not a word that can be used offensively.

I know, next you'll point out that my example is imaginary.. I get the drill.

Well, maybe I'll point out that it's imaginary. Maybe I'll point out that it's not the same word. Maybe I'll point out that there's a difference in the sequence of events, here.

Or maybe I'll simply point out that you forgot, when you invented your imaginary scenario, to include "and 90% of Africans say that they approve of the name, and THEY say it's not offensive".

But the problem with your imaginary attempt to create a false equivalency that you already knew about, before you posted it, is a good enough reason to ignore it, before we get to the other ones.

[elkabong82]

 

This folks did.  http://www.changethemascot.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/NFL-Players-Letter-FINAL.pdf

 

 

 

 

And collectively they are still smaller than the majority who don't take issue with the team name. Do those opinions not count?

 

And that letter you quoted that they all agreed with cites historically inaccurate uses of the word and ignores its context as a descriptor completely, even though NA schools use that context as well. Therefor all those groups that agreed are all grossly misinformed and their opinions on the matter are moot until that changes.

 

I will be incredibly happy because, among other reasons, it will mean that Snyder has completely changed his stripes.

 

Not holding my breath though.  

 

The W-L column is actually irrelevant to whether or not Snyder has "changed his stripes." 

[Bonez3]

These folks did. http://www.changethemascot.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/NFL-Players-Letter-FINAL.pdf

Sincerely,

Akiak Native Community, Councilman Mike Williams

Alaska Inter-Tribal Council

American Indian College Fund, President & CEO Cheryl Crazy Bull

American Indian Higher Education Consortium, President & CEO Carrie Billy

Americans for Indian Opportunity

Anti-Defamation League

Asbury United Methodist Church, Senior Pastor Rev. Dr. Ianther M. Mills, Associate Pastor Rev. Adam Briddell

Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance

California Indian Museum and Cultural Center, Executive Director Nicole Lim

California Valley Miwok Tribe

Center for Native American Youth, Executive Director Erin Bailey

The Central Atlantic Conference United Church of Christ

Central Council of Tlingit & Haida Tribes of Alaska

Children and Youth Ministry, St. Paul’s United Church of Christ, Rev. Lucy Brady

Civil Rights Memorial Center

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Chairman Michael Finley

Colorado River Indian Tribes, Councilman Dennis Welsh, Jr.

The Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement

Cowlitz Indian Tribe, Chairman & COO William B. Iyall

Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry (EONM)

First Nations Development Institute, President Mike Roberts

First Peoples Fund, President Lori Pourier

Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa

Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Tribal Chairman Al Pedwaydon

Great Lakes Inter-Tribal Council, Inc., Executive Director Michael W. Allen, Sr.

The Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development

Honoring Nations

Indian Land Tenure Foundation

Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe, Tribal Chairman & CEO W. Ron Allen

Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma, Committeeman Steven Smith

Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Lenape Indian Tribe of Delaware, Principal Chief Dennis J. Coker

Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians

Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes, Executive Director Scott Vele

NAACP

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

Narragansett Tribe, Councilman Randy Noka

National Congress of American Indians, Executive Director Jacqueline Pata

National Fair Housing Alliance

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

National Indian Child Welfare Association, Executive Director Terry Cross

National Indian Education Association, Executive Director Ahniwake Rose

National Indian Gaming Association, Chairman Ernie Stevens, Jr.

National Indian Justice Center, Executive Director Joseph Myers

National Native American Bar Association

National Urban League

Native American Contractors Association, Executive Director Kevin Allis

Native Public Media, President & CEO Loris Taylor

Native American Rights Fund, Executive Director John Echohawk

Native Village of Buckland, President Percy Ballot

Native Voice Network

Nottoway Indian Tribe of Virginia, Chief Lynette Allston

Oneida Indian Nation of New York, Representative Ray Halbritter

Organized Village of Saxman, Saxman I.R.A. Council, President Lee Wallace

PFLAG National

Plymouth Congregational Church, Senior Pastor Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler

Pueblo de Cochiti, Governor Joseph Henry Suina

Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, Chairman John Berrey

Quinault Indian Nation, President Fawn Sharp

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Chairperson Rose Soulier

Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Chairman Arlan Melendez

San Carlos Apache Tribe, Chairman Terry Rambler

Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Chairperson Aaron Payment

Self-Governance Communication & Education Tribal Consortium

Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation, Chairman Robert Shepherd

Sobobo Band of Mission Indians, Tribal Chairwoman Rosemary Morillo

Sojourners

Spirit Lake Tribe, Chairman Leander McDonald

Stevens Village Tribal Council, Chief Randy Mayo

Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Chairman Brian Cladoosby

Tanana Chiefs Conference, President & Chairman Jerry Isaac

Tribal Law & Policy Institute, Executive Director Jerry Gardner

United Cherokee Ani-Yun-Wiya Nation, Charles Yow, Esq.

United South & Eastern Tribes

United Tribes of Michigan, Executive Director Frank Ettawageshik

Women Empowering Women for Indian Nations

Just seeing NAACP and some other non- NA seeming groups, you wonder what the agenda is.

[PleaseBlitz]

Franchise still is great and proud. Snyder ownership hasn't been good, but it doesn't negate the team's past accomplishments. Some fans deserve better, others get exactly what they deserve.

 

Does a fan who overdramatically acts as if 24 years negates the previous 67, ignores that the team had decades of poor performance prior as well, just because they don't like the current owner, deserve to see the team win? Does that kind of fan even truly want to see the team win under such an owner?

 

I always thought true fans endured even in the face of poor ownership and always held their team's history in high esteem regardless. 

 

I think the fans getting exactly what they deserve are the ones who blindly support Dan Snyder and continue to give him their money.  Redskins fans, as a group, will not receive better until they demand better.  This is mostly a function of wallets.  

 

And there are a lot of true fans who ARE enduring in the face of miserable ownership.  You can support a team and hate an owner.  See Sterling, Donald.  

[War Paint]

To expand on this, how many of us are from the area but no longer live there?

 

I line in Raleigh now and have 4 kids who are fast becoming Redskins fans.  They have 0 connection to Washington, but love the team because their daddy loves the team.  They see me wearing Redskins gear, watching Redskins games, and cheering for Redskins players.  The Washington portion means nothing to them.

 

How much of that future fan base will be lost if the team changes the name?

A lot will be lost.  If a radical change is made, and by radical, I mean changing the name, theme, and colors to the point where the team seems like an expansion team, the Redskin fan base will probably shrink to the size of the Nationals fan base, where the vast majority of the remaining fan base grew up in the Washington area.

 

Reading some of the posts here, it seems like there are some Redskin fans who were raised in the Washington area who don't realize just how much of an impact the team has had in areas outside of Virginia.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

I would support a color change. I would support a complete overhaul of everything.

Me too

[PleaseBlitz]

And collectively they are still smaller than the majority who don't take issue with the team name. Do those opinions not count?

 

 

 

The W-L column is actually irrelevant to whether or not Snyder has "changed his stripes." 

 

 

If it were up to the majority, then minority opinions would not count at all.  The south didn't integrate schools in the 50's because the majority wanted to, quite the contrary.  

 

And I disagree with your second sentence, completely.  

[War Paint]

Me too

Why on earth would you want a change so radical?  What is wrong with burgundy and gold?  Are you under the age of 20 or something to where you never experienced any glory years with the team?

[elkabong82]

I think the fans getting exactly what they deserve are the ones who blindly support Dan Snyder and continue to give him their money.  Redskins fans, as a group, will not receive better until they demand better.  This is mostly a function of wallets.  

 

And there are a lot of true fans who ARE enduring in the face of miserable ownership.  You can support a team and hate an owner.  See Sterling, Donald.  

 

We already did demand better after 2009 and it led to Cerrato being fired and the hiring of a GM and control being given to him and the head coach. W-L column wasn't geat overall under Shanny but the desired change, shift in control, was accomplished and has maintained unless you're a nutbag willing to ignore reality in favor of continuing an agenda.

 

The way the team operates right now, we are getting better. Hopefully it translates on the field, but as far as the FO goes it has a good structure in place.

 

 

If it were up to the majority, then minority opinions would not count at all.  The south didn't integrate schools in the 50's because the majority wanted to, quite the contrary.  

 

And I disagree with your second sentence, completely.  

 

I'm talking about the majority of NAs, their own group. Integration had to do with 2 racial groups. Your comparison is completely wrong. 

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Why on earth would you want a change so radical? What is wrong with burgundy and gold? Are you under the age of 20 or something to where you never experienced any glory years with the team?

I'm 21 lol

I'm not advocating but I wouldn't be upset by it. It's my favorite color scheme in sports but maybe a new identity is what we need ?

That post wasn't really serious

[PleaseBlitz]

We already did demand better after 2009 and it led to Cerrato being fired and the hiring of a GM and control being given to him and the head coach. W-L column wasn't geat overall under Shanny but the desired change, shift in control, was accomplished and has maintained unless you're a nutbag willing to ignore reality in favor of continuing an agenda.

 

The way the team operates right now, we are getting better. Hopefully it translates on the field, but as far as the FO goes it has a good structure in place.

 

Yes, Skins fans hear the same every year.  "its getting better."  "Snyder's learning."  "Last season wasn't THAT bad."  Its the same all over again.  New coach?  Check.  No real GM?  Check.  Splashy free agent signing?  Check.  

 

"I'm talking about the majority of NAs, their own group. Integration had to do with 2 racial groups. Your comparison is completely wrong. "

 

The point, which you missed, was that majority rule has absolutely no bearing on situations of racism and offensiveness.  If a significant portion of a protected class is offended, then whatever it is is offensive.  I suppose you could argue that the long list of signatories to that letter is not a significant portion of the class, but I'd have a hard time believing it.  

[EvilMonkeyBoy]

Why on earth would you want a change so radical? What is wrong with burgundy and gold? Are you under the age of 20 or something to where you never experienced any glory years with the team?

I don't know about him but to give my perspective,

I'm certainly not one who wears much sports gear outside of a game day situation(pretty sure Steelers fans have had their jerseys absorb into their skin) but I might be more inclined to buy merchandise that I can wear if we had a different color scheme.

I've got Nationals/Wizards(after the color change) stuff I'll wear here and there but there's not much room for burgundy and gold in my closet. Sure, fashion is lame reasoning but I'm just being honest.

[Duckus]

Not sure if this has been posted already.

 

Cold calling NA leaders for support....jesus.

 

USA Today reported that "intermediaries" for the team invited a leader of a small Nevada tribe on Thursday to join Redskins owner Daniel Snyder at a media event in Washington next week.

 

Joseph Holley, chairman of the Battle Mountain Band of Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians, informed the National Congress of American Indians that he declined.

 

In a statement provided to USA Today, Holley said that a team representative called him "out of the blue" and asked what he thought of the Redskins name.

 

"They did not tell me what the meeting was about, what I would be doing or who else was invited and wanted my answer in just a few hours," he said. "My answer was no. I've got responsibilities to my community and members here at home and can't be running off to D.C. at a moment's notice to meet with a football team to do who knows what."

 

It's another clumsy bit of damage control for the team, which has faced growing calls from political leaders this year to change its nickname. When Snyder unveiled an "Original Americans" foundation in March, it was met with ridicule by Reid, who said the owner wanted to "throw a few blankets to the Indians and get a tax deduction for it."

 

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/washington-redskins-invite-tribal-leader-declines

[elkabong82]

Yes, Skins fans hear the same every year.  "its getting better."  "Snyder's learning."  "Last season wasn't THAT bad."  Its the same all over again.  New coach?  Check.  No real GM?  Check.  Splashy free agent signing?  Check.  

 

"I'm talking about the majority of NAs, their own group. Integration had to do with 2 racial groups. Your comparison is completely wrong. "

 

The point, which you missed, was that majority rule has absolutely no bearing on situations of racism and offensiveness.  If a significant portion of a protected class is offended, then whatever it is is offensive.  I suppose you could argue that the long list of signatories to that letter is not a significant portion of the class, but I'd have a hard time believing it.  

 

Bruce Allen is a real GM and a good FO structure is in place. That is what is important. This discussion is irrelevant to the thread and obviously you're turning a blind eye to reality so let's just drop it.

 

On to the pertinent topic. The point, which you continue to miss, is that majority opinion matters in situations of racism and offensiveness when it is within ONE group. We're not talking about a majority of whites segregating minority of blacks, we're talking about the majority of NAs not taking issue with the Redskins team name. So, again, your comparison was very poor. If the vast majority of a group, in this case 90% per empirical evidence, is not offended then whatever it is is not offensive, 

 

I'll just argue, as I did previously, that the long list of signatories support a letter rife with historical inaccuracies that doesn't even address the context the team name uses to say they disagree and as such it calls into question the rationale of their argument. Those are all representative groups. Tell me, when's the last time Congress, a representative group, put forth something most agreed with? The letter about the name from the Senate and Reid was blasted by most for wasting time and they clearly don't represent the majority of the country that does not support a name change. 

 

But go ahead and stick with groups who support a letter with historically wrong usages.. I'll stick with the scientifically conducted poll that actually took the opinions of Native Americans across the U.S.

[Bonez3]

I'm gonna stop posting because Elkabong has this on lock IMO.

[Destino]

Just seeing NAACP and some other non- NA seeming groups, you wonder what the agenda is.

 

I want to know what you think their agenda might be?  Please share.

[Bonez3]

I want to know what you think their agenda might be? Please share.

I actually have no clue. I know little about there interest in Native Americans. Seems to be traditionally linked to African Americans

And I see where you're going with this. I sorta bowed out of thread. But don't look to deep.

Fact is there were a couple seemingly religious groups on there I was equally befuddled. Just didn't seem like their particular arena. I listed NAACP as one that just seemed vaguely known to me.

Again, Elkabong pretty much summized my point. I was trying to allude that certain groups may be piggybacking on hot social topic that may only have a more distant connection to the group.

FWIW, I still remain puzzled that the Senate had agenda here.

[elkabong82]

I want to know what you think their agenda might be?  Please share.

 

Possibly groups with strong PC beliefs piggybacking on a PC "hot topic." Many are a part of it because they think a minority group is being racially offended. A strong cause, but also like any other cause where passion blinds some from the entirety of the issue and "feeling good but doing the bare minimum" keeps others from even attempting to discover it. 

 

Best thing team can do is give a national platform to a mass of NAs in support of the team to bring those ignored voices into the conversation. Name change side is completely ignoring them, acting as if they don't exist. While real evidence is on our side, such a thing doesn't matter to those who are self-blinded, so that evidence has to be staring them in the face, if not to shut them up then to get those on the fence due to their loudness back down on solid ground. Perhaps that is the media event Snyder's group is calling around about (which I don't see that issue as a big deal because really how else are you supposed to get people involved?).

[Destino]

The way the team operates right now, we are getting better. Hopefully it translates on the field, but as far as the FO goes it has a good structure in place.

If it doesn't translate to success on the field, then it is a failure.  That's how the NFL works.  There is no "hopefully" about it.  The only question is how long does this new front office structure and coaching staff have to make it work before Dan Snyder feels the need to try something else (something he's had to do far too often during his time as owner).     

[Hunter_R]

I remember somebody suggesting keeping the name, but making the mascot a red skinned devil. Seems like it'd be a good **** you to the oversensitive, and it would fit in with the rest of the scumbags at Capitol Hill.

[elkabong82]

If it doesn't translate to success on the field, then it is a failure.  That's how the NFL works.  There is no "hopefully" about it.  The only question is how long does this new front office structure and coaching staff have to make it work before Dan Snyder feels the need to try something else (something he's had to do far too often during his time as owner).     

 

I was talking about FO structure and Snyder changing. Good people can fail in certain spots. Every coach and GM has failed on other teams at some point. That doesn't mean the structure is wrong, just that at that point in time personnel wasn't a fit. But the results don't negate a good structure and an owner not being in charge, which was the change being discussed. 

 

Let me put it this way: If the team has a bunch of losing seasons for the next 10 years, does that mean Snyder should be in charge again, or would you still want a GM and good FO structure, just with different personnel? I'm guessing it's the latter. So the W-L column doesn't reflect Snyder "changing his stripes" i.e. giving up control. What reflects that change is him giving up control, which he has. So now we have to do what most others teams do, which is hope the FO in place is a good one and that they hired a good coach. The owner, as far as most can see, is out of that picture.

[thebluefood]

I'd rather focus more on the city than the military. That's kinda corny to me

Agreed fully. The Redskins are a civic institution in Washington.

 

Maybe the Washington Dukes in honor of the great jazz pianist Duke Ellington, a D.C. Native. I dunno, just throwin' it out there. 

[PleaseBlitz]

Bruce Allen is a real GM and a good FO structure is in place. That is what is important. This discussion is irrelevant to the thread and obviously you're turning a blind eye to reality so let's just drop it.

 

On to the pertinent topic. The point, which you continue to miss, is that majority opinion matters in situations of racism and offensiveness when it is within ONE group. We're not talking about a majority of whites segregating minority of blacks, we're talking about the majority of NAs not taking issue with the Redskins team name. So, again, your comparison was very poor. If the vast majority of a group, in this case 90% per empirical evidence, is not offended then whatever it is is not offensive, 

 

I'll just argue, as I did previously, that the long list of signatories support a letter rife with historical inaccuracies that doesn't even address the context the team name uses to say they disagree and as such it calls into question the rationale of their argument. Those are all representative groups. Tell me, when's the last time Congress, a representative group, put forth something most agreed with? The letter about the name from the Senate and Reid was blasted by most for wasting time and they clearly don't represent the majority of the country that does not support a name change. 

 

But go ahead and stick with groups who support a letter with historically wrong usages.. I'll stick with the scientifically conducted poll that actually took the opinions of Native Americans across the U.S.

 

Bruce Allen is not and has never been a real GM.  He has never been considered a good personnel evaluator or team builder.  Ever.  He is contract negotiator and cap guy.  Which is why everyone was shocked when he said he was going to be in charge.  Jeez, who is turning a blind eye.  

 

The rest of your post totally misunderstands the history of racism in this country (starting with calling Congress a "representative group").  Then of course the poll that you cite to that was taken over 10 years ago and kind of a lot has changed since then.  

 

So, given the choice between siding with A) a group of native americans claiming they they are, in fact, offended by the name and would like it changed, when the issue is whether the name is offensive to native americans, and B ) someone who thinks that the Redskins are on the right track, that would cite to a 10 year old poll as relevant, AND im guessing is not native american, i will choose the former.  

[codeorama]

Well, maybe I'll point out that it's imaginary. Maybe I'll point out that it's not the same word. Maybe I'll point out that there's a difference in the sequence of events, here.

Or maybe I'll simply point out that you forgot, when you invented your imaginary scenario, to include "and 90% of Africans say that they approve of the name, and THEY say it's not offensive".

But the problem with your imaginary attempt to create a false equivalency that you already knew about, before you posted it, is a good enough reason to ignore it, before we get to the other ones.

I conducted a poll in my classes and 90% of my black students thought that if JayZ bought the team and changed the name it would be awesome. Remember, they use that word every day and it is a term of endearment to them. They don't remember the hurtful was of the word. They hear it every day on their iPods.

Just to clarify, I didn't really conduct a poll. But if I did, I'd bet it would turn out close to what I said with my students.

Also, what's up with the metaphor police? I know you know the point I'm making and your just playing word games. I've been clear on what I mean. If you don't agree. Fine. Not expecting to change any minds.