• Blog Entries

    • By TK in ES Coverage
         0
      The Bill Callahan era began here at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami. For the first quarter it was really,really bad football being played by both teams. 
      The Redskins were determined to establish the Run game. The First Quarter all they established was that they still couldn’t run. Or pass. Or do much of anything. 
       
      It wasn’t until the 2nd Quarter that Peterson was able to start ripping the worst Run D in the League for chunks of 18 & 24 yards. The Skins managed to score a TD with a 25 yard pass to Scary Terry McLaurin. 
       
      The Dolphins would open the Second Half only managing five plays before the Redskins would get the ball punted back to them. They would run a balanced run/pass attack of six plays for 70 yards in 1:25 ending in McLaurin’s second touchdown of the day. The Defense would then get a turnover allowing the Offense to get to Field Goal range and add another 3 points to make the score 17-3. 
       
      To open the Fourth Quarter, Hopkins would miss a 55 yard Field Goal, leaving the score at 17-3.  After being sacked five times, the Dolphins would pull their own switcharoo at QB and go to Ryan “Neckbeard” Fitzpatrick which resulted in a touchdown drive for them, making it 17-10. They went for & recovered the Onside Kick. They also managed to not score any points after that. The Dolphins would find theirselves with ball at the 2:00 Warning. Fitzpatrick would take them on a 9 play 75 yard touchdown drive with six seconds remaining on the clock. Miami went for the win with the 2 Point Conversion and failed. The Redskins would recover the onside kick by Miami and Keenum took a knee to get the Redskins their first win of the season. 
Alaskins

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

Recommended Posts

The first question is "Redskins is racial or racist".  Most would agree it refers to a race.

Demographics are out of whack, something about questions being asked at a pow wows?  Not really a random sample.  Sample size half of the much maligned Annenberg poll.  Poll designer appear biased.

 

exactly. 

 

the wording of the question is key. of course, one could say redskins is 'racial'. however, racial does not equal 'racist'.

 

its a ridiculous question.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New survey of Native Americans is out: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur

Obviously it's tough to determine how scientific this is compared to the Annenberg poll but this one seems to have been controlled more strictly. I'm ready to move on. Change to Warriors. It's inevitable and this will continue to be a distraction until the change happens.

Link to a PDF presenting some of the results from the survey. (Including the actual questions.)

 

Observing that his survey, in order to count somebody as Indian, not only required people to prove their membership, but that the surveys were conducted at tribal Powows.  Which, to me, seems a little like surveying all white people by polling people at Republican Party caucuses.  He's not just restricting his poll to Natives, but to those Natives who are the most politically active. 

 

However, I don;t see that as a reason to just dismiss the results out of hand, either. 

 

I, myself, am a registered member of a Native tribe.  But I'm willing to entertain the argument that maybe my opinion shouldn't count as much as that of some hypothetical person who looks Indian, who's lived on a reservation, someone who has had a vastly different live experience, when it comes to racial discrimination, than I've experienced. 

 

So, yeah, he surveyed a different demographic.  But I'm not sure that it's not a more valid one. 

 

(I think he went too far, probably.  I could see verifying tribal membership.  Maybe even restricting it to people on reservations.  But  restricting to political activists on reservations, I think is going too far.) 

 

----------

 

I will also observe that the professor who (apparently single handedly) conducted this poll, has been a lifetime political activist campaigning against the use of Native themes in all sports teams, and that the work he's most proud of is a similar poll concerning Chief Wahoo. 

 

But I wouldn't seize on that as an excuse to just dismiss the thing out of hand, either. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New survey of Native Americans is out: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur

Obviously it's tough to determine how scientific this is compared to the Annenberg poll but this one seems to have been controlled more strictly. I'm ready to move on. Change to Warriors. It's inevitable and this will continue to be a distraction until the change happens.

 

What makes it "inevitable"? Because I see it as just the opposite.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

skins, 

 

you reject the "highly respected public policy center" annenberg poll, ("only" 700 self identified native americans), but you accept a poll of 98 native americans?

 

The solution is clear then, a much larger pool of Native Americans is needed but it should rely on superior verification of native american heritage.  Do we all agree that the results of this poll should determine the fate of the Redskins name or shall we start hedging our bets now?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ya, i have a big problem with an activist with an agenda doing this poll, along with sample size and the wording of the question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ya, i have a big problem with an activist with an agenda doing this poll, along with sample size and the wording of the question.

And the lack of geographical diversity among the sampled population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New survey of Native Americans is out: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lindseyadler/native-americans-offended-by-racial-slur

Obviously it's tough to determine how scientific this is compared to the Annenberg poll but this one seems to have been controlled more strictly. I'm ready to move on. Change to Warriors. It's inevitable and this will continue to be a distraction until the change happens.

 

The first question, what the 67% is based on, is bogus and doesn't actually ask if it is offensive or if the name should be changed. It says "The Redskins team name is a racial or racist word and symbol." Who's going to argue that it isn't racial? It is racial. 

 

Then, looking at the other 4 questions asked, it seems VERY apparent that the creator of the questions is biased against the name. 2. The name-symbol Redskins is disrespectful of Native Americans. 3. Pro teams should be allowed to use racial terms and names like Redskins. 4. If Indians, or Natives, use Redskins it is not racial/racist and ok to use. 5. If non-Indians or whites use Redskins it is racial/racist and unacceptable.

 

So right off the bat he is equating anything racial as being racist, and he doesn't directly just ask if the person thinks we should change the name. He also doesn't include the results for questions 2, 3, and 4. 

 

His poll found whites were only 44% disagreeing that it is racial. Yet every other poll out there has it at 75% or higher the team should keep the name. He states that most of his latino respondents were collected on a college campus. He only allows those who say they are active in the community, so many Native Americans are excluded even though they hold valid opinions on the subject as well. 

 

There is ZERO mention of his polling methods, of how he found these people. 

 

And then you see his background, he is of NA descent, teaching in California, a sociology major and previously worked against the Chief Wahoo mascot (fine on it's own since it is a cartoonish caricature)but these are all red flags in terms of neutrality.

 

Annenberg Poll was scientifically conducted by a neutral source, asked a direct question about the team name's offensiveness, and although it relied on self-identification, the numbers matched the population % and mathematically the odds that they randomly got so many false-identifiers that were pro-name that it skewed from 67% down to 10% are virtually impossible.

 

As Larry pointed out, he focused on pow-wows, had no randomness in his polling methods, so he only got one demographic, which was politically active members, and we don't even know which locations he went to or why he chose those ones. This is far more dubious than 700+ found through random calling across the country. This is specific and thus unreliable, skewed data. The opinions of those NA members should not be discounted, but you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that the author's methods are a better representation of the majority of NAs across the country than Annenberg's methods.

 

This author seemed to move the goal posts very far from what Annenberg did in order to achieve desired results, and even with his skewing he got 67%, which means an entire THIRD even among politically active and in his chosen locations, didn't take offense or were neutral. I think that is a damning fact for that survey. 1/3 is a considerable chunk, and that was the result of a very skewed data set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna be interesting, watching how many people who have been attacking the Annenberg poll, because it only polled 750, randomly selected, natives, in all 48 states, who will hail this survey of 98 natives, at political rallies, surveyed by 2 grad students (In the So Cal area?  I don't know) as scientifically accurate. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ya, i have a big problem with an activist with an agenda doing this poll, along with sample size and the wording of the question. 

 

The gist of my long post, he set this up to favor his desired outcome, and still among his selected group got 1/3+ of respondents that disagreed with him or were neutral. IMO it may verify Annenberg further when 1/3 of a politically active arena hand-chosen by an activist disagree with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first question, what the 67% is based on, is bogus and doesn't actually ask if it is offensive or if the name should be changed. It says "The Redskins team name is a racial or racist word and symbol." Who's going to argue that it isn't racial? It is racial.

I think you hit a big point, there.

I'm amazed that the answer wasn't 100% on that question. (Only reason I can think of, is that people heard the word "racist" and didn't pay attention to the other part of the question.)

I mean, is there anybody who thinks the name of the football team doesn't refer to a race?

(But then, it's at least arguable that so does the Vikings.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised the "is the Redskins name racial" question didn't get a higher score. You might as well make a poll asking "is the sky blue." I think the fact that question wasn't in the 90% "yes" range should be proof that the name isn't offensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I've solved the name change issue. We'll take a page from the New Zealand National Rugby team:

 

post-117877-0-26411100-1402018650_thumb.

 

It has a feather to fit the current scheme. The only thing we need to do is change the color & name to Reds.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like they've been on burn-n-churn mode when it comes to the big guns hired to fight this battle. 

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24584605/redskins-hired-lobbying-firm-mcguirrewoods-consulting-in-may

 

Every few months or so, we'll read of a new big Washington name hired help in Ashburn, but then we don't hear much about them after the initial hiring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great ad and it makes a compelling point.  Let's get ahead of this thing and go to the "Reds" or "Red Warriors" and be done with it.  Keep the colors, keep the history and go back to this helmet...

 

$(KGrHqZHJBME63Uw4Y8SBOzOSKl13w~~60_35.J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they got permission to use our imagery.  It looks like they might have done some copyright infringement there.

Edited by War Paint
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it's at least a legitimate Native group.

Yeah, people like Harjo and Hallbritter are easily dismissed. But the pressure is coming from legitimate sources, now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they got permission to use our imagery.  It looks like they might have done some copyright infringement there.

 

It's likely acceptable under the fair use doctrine.

 

Also..."our" logo?

Edited by Lombardi's_kid_brother
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they got permission to use our imagery.  It looks like they might have done some copyright infringement there.

That's a good point. I too wonder how the law works.

 

If the brass in Ashburn were foolish enough to pursue legal action, the Native group would probably claim the image is being used as a reference, and not for commercial purposes. Just my guess. Lavar and 106.7 sure lost that battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'"native americans call themselves many things- the one thing they dont..."

 

well, thats not true. but, it makes for a good soundbite, so.....

Edited by grego
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we do change the name, the Post and everyone else who hates the team and Snyder will just keep pushing some other agenda against us. We will forever be known as the team that had the racist name and logo. Just like we are constantly reminded that we were the last team to integrate.

Unfortunately, more and more people are going to listen to the news and ESPN and believe all the crap they are fed. Most people don't know anything about the name or the logo, nor do they care to. The news is telling them it is bad, so now people are running around saying it is bad.

I was at Publix and recently and both the cashier and bagger asked me about the name, but they both thought the whole racist issue was overblown and they did not want to see it changed. They weren't Skins fans either.

Also, most people don't have any stake in the fight, so it doesn't matter if it changes. Even a lot of Skins fans are saying they don't care anymore. I for one care, but I am starting to realize that it will change within the next 10 years or sooner. I have to say that it ****ING SUCKS and I hate these supposed 'reporters' even more now.

On top of that, the American Indians/Natives cannot even agree on what to be called. I was talking to an Indian one day and he said not to call him that because it is racist and shows my ignorance about their people. At one time, there was a website for American Indians against being called Native because it has a negative connotation, it basically said that it implied that they are stupid. I cannot find the website right now.

The commercial playing tonight is basically saying that they don't call themselves Redskins, but the use of the name on some reservations contradicts that.

Honestly, there is no winning when the media has made up their mind to attack something as a group. I really hope that a **** ton of other stuff comes down with our name so that way people can see how idiotic the U.S. is getting when it comes to being PC.

For craps and giggles, I called my new Asian friend yellow this past weekend. I have always called my black and white friends, black and white. I did call my one friend from India red one time and it didn't bother him. So, I called him yellow. Everyone laughed, it was a little funny, but it didn't bother him at all. He couldn't care less that I called him a color.

People are getting so upset about saying white, red, yellow, black, etc., but does it really matter? You call me Caucasian, eh, fine. But some of my black friends don't like being called African American. They are kind of like me and just want to be referred to as an American. Plus, they have never been to Africa. Well, one did go on a safari for a week over there, but that doesn't make her African.

Of course it goes the other way too. I had a Philippian friend who was a girl and she would blow up at anyone that accidentally referred or even asked her if she was from another Asian country. Needless to say, I didn't hang out with her for too long.

I wish everyone could come together and just think of things to call each other and stop being so damn confusing and offended every time you are not categorized the way you feel you should be.

Not that I care about defending the team name anymore, but fans, especially around here, seem to be too stupid to know how much they feed the animosity/bitterness that blankets this entire city.

 

I see/hear most criticism directed at the team(s) more than the hack journalists who deserve a lot as well.

Unfortunately, that is media/people in general. They feed you crap because you tune in. If everyone said that they finally had enough of it and quit tuning in, things would change. But we live in a world that thrives on violence and hate. As long as the news keeps promoting those, then people will keep turning in. However, my household has bowed out from that.

It also sucks that people repeat whatever drivel they hear out of a reporters mouth. In fact, reporters aren't really reporters at all. They are just biased people who have your attention.

I honestly believe that we would have a little less violence if the news didn't promote it so much. Every time one little thing happens, they blow it up into this big mess. Then the stupid want to repeat or make it bigger, like the gun shootings. Hey lets post their pictures and immortalize them in our history so that way others can follow suit.

  • Like 3

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.