• Blog Entries

    • By Destino in ES Coverage
         1
      We’re still doing this?  Absolutely!  Despite all the compelling reasons to just let everyone go home and enjoy and extended offseason, this is not an option.  The games must be played, and therefore we the long-suffering fans will feel compelled to watch.  Even games no reasonable football fan would choose to watch like, for example, today’s Redskins Jets game.   

      Today’s convergence of sadness features the 30th ranked scoring offense (Jets 14.4 ppg) versus the 32nd (Redskins 12.0 ppg).  The first team to 15 wins!  With no playoff aspirations the compelling story lines for this game are largely limited to watching young players (hopefully) develop.  Dwayne Haskins gets his first home start and Derrius Guice is back from injury.   
       
      My, reasonable, goals for today’s game:  
      1- Score a touchdown 
      2- Score more than 17 points.   
      3- Haskins throws for 200 yards or more with no interceptions  
      4- Guice runs the ball at least 10 times and finishes at 3.5 yards per carry and healthy.  
       
      Hoping for a win at this point feels like setting myself up for disappointment, so I’m happy to settle for an entertaining loss.  
       
      Special thanks to @pez for some excellent Guinness beef stew.  If you absolutely have to stand in a frozen parking lot at 9am, the best place to do it is at the Extremeskins Tailgate with Pez and @Huly.  Great fans, great people. 
       
      The Redskins have declared for the following players as inactive: 
      Paul Richardson  
      Colt McCoy 
      Deshazor Everett 
      Chris Thompson  
      Ross Pierschbacher 
      Vernon Davis  
      Tim Settle  
       
      The Jets declared the following players as inactive  
      Nate Hairston  
      Darryl Roberts  
      Paul Worrilow 
      Matthias Farley  
      CJ Mosley  
      Jordan Willis  
      Leo Koloamatangi 
       
      1st Quarter - Redskins 0 - 6 Jets
      If you wanted to sit in the cold and watch a football game with some Jets fans at FedEx, but were worried that there were not enough seats available, I have good news.  There’s plenty of space available, so come on down and prove you’re a real fan by sitting though this in person.
       
      Jets dominated the 1st quarter even though they only scored 6 points.  The reason being that Washington managed only 13 yards of offense and a single first down.  
       
      Question: Is it still a check down pass if the QB never looks at anyone else?
       
      2nd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      The Jets have achieved an insurmountable 13 point lead early in the 2nd quarter.  All hope is lost.

      Is there a more perfect example of the Redskins offense than their first scoring drive in the 2nd quarter?  Interception gives the Redskins the ball on the Jets 16 yard line.  They proceed to march 10 yards backwards before kicking a field goal from the Jets 26.  It's perfect.  Two or three more field goals we can call it a day. 

      The Jets score again and if feels like they are are just piling on at this point.  Three touchdowns in the first half for them, just three points for the redskins.  Our streak of no touchdowns has now extended to 15 quarters. 
       
      3rd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      There is a spider slowly descending from the ceiling in the press box and it's the most interesting thing that's happened during the third quarter of this game. 
       
      I have decided to allow the spider to live, provided it does not touch me.  I'm off to get some more caffeine. 

      4th Quarter - Redskins 17 - 34 Jets
      The first wave of Redskins fans, the few that are here, started streaming towards the exits after that 4th Jets touchdown.  As if the Jets didn't have this game wrapped up in the 2nd quarter. 
       
      Jet have now more than doubled their average points per game and have matched their season high of 34 points (and they missed two field goals in this game). 
       
      TOUCHDOWN REDSKINS!  THE DROUGHT IT OVER!  Guice took a short pass from Haskins  all the way to the house.  2 point conversion is successful on a pass from Haskins to Quinn. 
       
      The Redskins score another touchdown!  This feels like an embarrassment of riches, even if we are still certain to lose this game. 
       
      End of Game.
       
      Let's review those reasonable goals I mentioned earlier:
       
      1- Success.
      2- Close enough, I'm counting it
      3- Haskins did throw for over 200, but unfortunately did have an interception. 
      4- Guice was not given the opportunity to run the ball ten times today.  He did however score on a 45 yard TD pass and finish the game healthy.  I'll take it.
       
      Even though the Redskins lost, it was good to see the offense show some faint signs of life and end the streak of games without a TD.  The team looked competitive for much of the second half, and perhaps they could have made this a fun game if they carried that same energy throughout.  It was good to see Guice and Mclaurin show out today.  I think both of them have a future with this team that I look forward to seeing. 

       
       

       
       
       
       
       
Alaskins

The Official ES Redskins Name Change Thread---All Things Related to Changing the Team's Name Go Here

Recommended Posts

In the worst case scenerio, I would rather have Snyder just eliminate the logo but keep the name Redskins. Get rid of the Indian theme. We could be like the Browns who generally do not use a logo. Definitely keep the name.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the worst case scenerio, I would rather have Snyder just eliminate the logo but keep the name Redskins. Get rid of the Indian theme. We could be like the Browns who generally do not use a logo. Definitely keep the name.

 

This is what I've said/thought.

 

The Nationals are named after the "fans" of the Senators... who were called "Nationals" (for whatever reason) back in the Griffith Stadium days.

 

Get rid of the imagery and name the team after the fans.  Keep the colors... keep the same uniform.  Get rid of the logo and use the script "R" if you need one.

 

Boom.  Earthquake.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nationals was the official name of the Senators for the first half of the 1900s:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Washington_Senators_%281901%E2%80%9360%29

 

"The club was founded in Washington, D.C. in 1901 as the Washington Senators. In 1905 the team changed its official name to the Washington Nationals.[1] The name "Nationals" would appear on the uniforms for only two seasons, and would then be replaced with the "W" logo for the next 52 years."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nationals name I believe is in reference to the five different teams that played in the 1870's under that name.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Washington,_D.C._professional_baseball

 

And Redskins comes from the red berries the Delawares used for war paint... and not the Boston Tea Party reference... with a team that originated in Boston.

 

It all depends on the reference you choose to believe.  EDIT:  Mine came from a Len Shapiro book from about 8 years ago.  I don't have it at the house I live at right now, I have it at my house in VA so unfortunately I can pull the reference for you.  I will when I'm back up for Training Camp visits though.

 

Regardless, that's the way that I'd go with the name.  Kill the imagery. 

Edited by DC9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adolpho Birch, the NFL's senior vice president of labor policy and government affairs, was asked by "Outside The Lines": "Is the team name a slur, yes or no?"

"The team name is not a slur," Birch said in a phone interview.

"The team name is the team name as it has been for 80-plus years," he said. "And what we need to do is get beyond sort of understanding this as a point-blank situation and understand it more as a variety of perspectives that all need to be addressed, that all need to be given some weight, so that at the end of it we can come to some understanding that is appropriate and reflects the opinions of all."

He added: "I think that is part of the issue with the question is that it is constantly being sort of put into a point-blank, yes-or-no, yes-or-no kind of context when that's not the reality of the situation that we're dealing with."

 

 

After the interview, NFL spokesperson Greg Aiello told ESPN: "The team and our office have always said the name is intended to be positive and respectful. Why would you name a sports team otherwise for 80 years? ... As Adolpho said, our position is the same as it's been."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11007769/nfl-official-says-washington-redskins-name-not-slur

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just a couple of thoughts/mmediate reactions from reading that part of the article.....

 

on the one hand, snyders been accused of doing nothing as far as involving native americans on this issue in particular. he reaches out the past few months, gets some input, starts a foundations, and gets **** on for it. 

 

now, he's calling leaders asking them to have a discussion. and this person declines?

 

excuse me, but i thought this issue was so important that we have senators taking time to write a formal letter to the NFL demanding a name change? 

 

snyders asking native american leaders for a forum, and this one says no?

 

somethings not passing the smell test. 

 

It's not so much that they contacted the NA leaders--it's the manner in which it was done. Giving someone with that much responsibility just a couple of hours to respond is ignorant and dare I say it "insensitive."

 

It had nothing to do with how the leaders viewed the name, which is positive, at least.

 

However this just another ham-handed PR attempt that makes the Redskins look completely inept. Which they are in this area...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Olbermann being a douche again (wait a tick! I thought the "case was closed!" I'm confused!) He's more dramatic than a 15 year old girl.

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11010984

 

He continues to ignore the facts:

 

85% of Americans, and 90% of Natives do not find it offensive.

Edited by Riggo#44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much that they contacted the NA leaders--it's the manner in which it was done. Giving someone with that much responsibility just a couple of hours to respond is ignorant and dare I say it "insensitive."

It had nothing to do with how the leaders viewed the name, which is positive, at least.

However this just another ham-handed PR attempt that makes the Redskins look completely inept. Which they are in this area...

to respond on if they could make the meeting or not? For all we know the Redskins said we will pay for the flight and accommodations but we need to know in the next few hours because the spots are limited. Would that be so far fetched?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to respond on if they could make the meeting or not? For all we know the Redskins said we will pay for the flight and accommodations but we need to know in the next few hours because the spots are limited. Would that be so far fetched?

 

There is a lot we don't know about the meeting.  To assume we do is silly.  I believe this is the first we heard of a supposed meeting?  We don't know this guys responsibility from a hole in the ground.  We don't know where the Skins got his name, if he was first on the list or dead last?  We can't assume that this story has all of the facts presented. 

 

If there is one thing that I hope that Redskins fans have learned out of all this is that the media lets you hear what they want you to hear.  If it does not fit their agenda, they won't report it.

 

This guy could have said that the Redskins nickname did not offend him.  We wouldn't know.  However, if it did offend him, it would have been in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy could have said that the Redskins nickname did not offend him. We wouldn't know. However, if it did offend him, it would have been in the article.

It's an impossible situation for the Redskins in many ways. Any time a person comes out for the team keeping the name they are painted in a negative light by those writing about the story. Any time a person comes out against the team name they are considered correct and "added to the list" of those against it. The people reporting the story are 100% controlling the narrative.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#1, I said "won Superbowls regularly just prior to him buying the team." This is a true fact. The rest of what you said has nothing to do with what I said. When Snyder bought the team, which is all that matters for a discussion about Snyder, the Skins were a cornerstone franchise and had had as much success as any team during the Super Bowl era with the exception of the Steelers and, arguably, the Niners, Packers, and Cowboys. Snyder bought a gem.

#2, Since Snyder bought the team, they are one of the 3 losing-est teams and, with an occasional glimmer, are an annual ****-show. Snyder turned that gem into a turd.

You don't like the name, you don't like the owner, you don't like the stadium experience, etc., then why bother? Why not just find another team? I can't tell you who to root for, it's your choice, but if I was that miserable, I might consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I've said/thought.

The Nationals are named after the "fans" of the Senators... who were called "Nationals" (for whatever reason) back in the Griffith Stadium days.

Get rid of the imagery and name the team after the fans. Keep the colors... keep the same uniform. Get rid of the logo and use the script "R" if you need one.

Boom. Earthquake.

No. Keep the name. Drop the logo and any Indian theme. Just numbers or letter R in helmet ala Nebraska.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't like the name, you don't like the owner, you don't like the stadium experience, etc., then why bother? Why not just find another team? I can't tell you who to root for, it's your choice, but if I was that miserable, I might consider it.

Then become a Browns fan. Sick of seeing this in here. It's getting old.

http://es.redskins.com/topic/379192-espn-kyle-shanahan-manziel-like-rg-iii/#entry9830208

How many threads are you popping into and telling people to follow other teams? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely don't want to change the name but if it comes to it why wouldn't we go with something like the Natives and just keep the logo? I think it would still work with the fight song.

Warriors might be decent option also

Of course if we want to be anti establishment and political correctness perhaps we go with the MockingJays...the three finger solute work well current QB also...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easiest option is Warriors. They could even go with the spear logo and helmet. If people are going to freak out about Native American cultural appropriation, remove the feather. Point is it's the easiest way out while keeping as much as they can that is already part of the team. The secondary logo would be a W which fits perfectly with a Washington team.

Does Warriors really seem out of place amongst the Giants, Eagles, and Cowboys? No. The NFL is 90% generic old timey generic team names.

Edited by Destino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://es.redskins.com/topic/379192-espn-kyle-shanahan-manziel-like-rg-iii/#entry9830208

How many threads are you popping into and telling people to follow other teams? Just curious.

 

I am not pretending to know what PJ has said in this thread or others, please understand that, but it is a problem if you root for this team, you hate the name, want the colors to change, hate the ownership and the stadium experience.  It really does bring up the question of why are you a fan?

 

The name and/or the colors are enough to send me somewhere else.  If I was actually offended by something such as the name of the football team, I would have no problem rooting for someone else. 

 

I really wonder if people confuse the word offend with dislike.  Sometimes, I don't think people understand what offend actually means.  I cannot fathom how someone can watch and root for the Skins and be offended at the same time.

 

To me, that is someone that says "I have the option to sit through three hours of Redskins football on Sunday that is offensive, and that doesn't even account for the play on the field."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Keep the name. Drop the logo and any Indian theme. Just numbers or letter R in helmet ala Nebraska.

 

Yes.

 

I agreed with you the first time.

 

Evidente you didn't think so? :lol: 

Olbermann being a douche again (wait a tick! I thought the "case was closed!" I'm confused!) He's more dramatic than a 15 year old girl.

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11010984

 

He continues to ignore the facts:

 

85% of Americans, and 90% of Natives do not find it offensive.

 

He's still stinging from the time he brought Cooley on to make him look foolish and then Cooley owned him.

 

Then Olbermann "ran out of time".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much that they contacted the NA leaders--it's the manner in which it was done. Giving someone with that much responsibility just a couple of hours to respond is ignorant and dare I say it "insensitive."

It had nothing to do with how the leaders viewed the name, which is positive, at least.

However this just another ham-handed PR attempt that makes the Redskins look completely inept. Which they are in this area...

I would question if that's the way it actually went down.

"We need your answer in a couple of hours " sounds- to me, at least- like another way to **** on another perfectly good idea by the team in the same way the original Americans foundation got slammed, pictures with native Americans gets slammed, etc.

Everything this team does gets ripped.

This article sounds like more of the same to me.

Daveakl and fan since a fetus beat me to it

----—----------------------

Dc, Patrick-

How do you keep the name?

Or are you saying since there's no Indian on the helmet, the team will say "it could now refer to a potato"?

Edited by grego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easiest option is Warriors. They could even go with the spear logo and helmet. If people are going to freak out about Native American cultural appropriation, remove the feather. Point is it's the easiest way out while keeping as much as they can that is already part of the team. The secondary logo would be a W which fits perfectly with a Washington team.

Does Warriors really seem out of place amongst the Giants, Eagles, and Cowboys? No. The NFL is 90% generic old timey generic team names.

I could live with the Warriors as long as everything else stayed the same.  I never liked the spear logo though.  I don't like the W either.  I prefer us to keep our current logo.  There is absolutely nothing wrong or offensive about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, as an unscientific cultural experiment I decided to wear my Jacoby jersey all around town this weekend.  Got no dirty stares or condemnations, except for one blond who told me my team sucks, but a whole bunch of smiles and nods. 

 

Sure, it means nothing (or very little towards the debate that's ungoing, but perhaps the lack of message is meaningful too.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, as an unscientific cultural experiment I decided to wear my Jacoby jersey all around town this weekend. Got no dirty stares or condemnations, except for one blond who told me my team sucks, but a whole bunch of smiles and nods.

Sure, it means nothing (or very little towards the debate that's ungoing, but perhaps the lack of message is meaningful too.)

I've had quite a few people approach me and ask what I think about the name debate when they have seen me in my redskins visor. Every single one has said it's ridiculous that such a small minority is forcing the issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, as an unscientific cultural experiment I decided to wear my Jacoby jersey all around town this weekend.  Got no dirty stares or condemnations, except for one blond who told me my team sucks, but a whole bunch of smiles and nods. 

 

Sure, it means nothing (or very little towards the debate that's ungoing, but perhaps the lack of message is meaningful too.)

 

You should have asked that blond.....(well you know) ? lol. 

Edited by SWFLSkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dc, Patrick-

How do you keep the name?

Or are you saying since there's no Indian on the helmet, the team will say "it could now refer to a potato"?

Yeah. But it would not surprise me if they will still **** and whine about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.