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

[s0crates]

Just bought a copy of this year's "Fantasy Football Index."  This magazine has team reports, with the teams listed in alphabetical order using the full name of each team, from "Arizona Cardinals" to "Tennessee Titans."  That is until you get to the Redskins team report, where the heading simply says, "Washington."  Upon further examination, I found that the word "Redskins" never appears in the magazine.

[Guest Spearfeather]

Just bought a copy of this year's "Fantasy Football Index."  This magazine has team reports, with the teams listed in alphabetical order using the full name of each team, from "Arizona Cardinals" to "Tennessee Titans."  That is until you get to the Redskins team report, where the heading simply says, "Washington."  Upon further examination, I found that the word "Redskins" never appears in the magazine.

 

And not one American Indian is better off for it.

[nonniey]

Just bought a copy of this year's "Fantasy Football Index."  This magazine has team reports, with the teams listed in alphabetical order using the full name of each team, from "Arizona Cardinals" to "Tennessee Titans."  That is until you get to the Redskins team report, where the heading simply says, "Washington."  Upon further examination, I found that the word "Redskins" never appears in the magazine.

Fantasy Football Index. Remember the name Skins fans and never buy that mag.

[Larry]

How about the words "NFCE Champions"?

[Fergasun]

I never had a reason to poke my head in, but saw an article on "Football Outsiders" entitled "Hail to the Redacted". I wrote a response there, but for some reason it caught my response as spam and I was never given an oppurtunity to clear it through their spam filter.  Regardless, I came up with two alternate names... and I even question, are people offended by the logo as well?

 

The best alternate names I came up with:

Washington Proudskins (no logo change necessary, except can't use the script R helmet logo)

Washington Redsons (don't think there would be any need to change logo)

 

I don't think the name is offensive, if so I would like someone to point out who is the target of the name "Washington Redskins".  I'm pretty sure the target is the roster/coaches/general managers.... either way, is it becoming mainstream to say that the team name is offensive? 

[elkabong82]

No, it is not becoming mainstream, it is claimed by a small group of people and internet trolls/team haters. But when the local media doesn't know how to do their jobs well they go for easy ratings by using yellow journalism tactics, so their constantly bringing up the issue may make it seem like mainstream, but it's not. Note that none of them bring up the poll or discuss serious NA issues.

 

90% of NA people ok with the name

79% of the country doesn't think it should be changed

[DC9]

What's up Canuck?

 

"A Canadian, esp. a French Canadian (chiefly used by Canadians themselves and often derogatory in the US)."

 

I've said this for years... this is the most offensive nicknames out there by the book.  But it's also one of the most bad ass nicknames in sports in my opinion.

[Larry]

Just pointing out that "Well, that other nickname/logo/whatever, over there, is worse" really isn;t much of an argument, IMO.  (Just like "well, the Natives have a much bigger problem with poverty than with nicknames.") 

 

It may be true that something else is worse.  But there is no Universal Law that says it's immoral to complain about (or fix) a problem, when worse problems exist. 

 

No, to me, pretty much the only question is "Is the name offensive?" 

 

(Unfortunately for the folks pushing this issue, the answer is "No".) 

[elkabong82]

Only reason I, and others seemingly, brought up poverty issue, Larry, was to show that those claiming the name is offensive are ignoring that the offended largely are not actually offended and that those who supposedly care so much that they champion the name change cause are ignoring the actual problems of the NA communities thus showing that those people care more about being offended than real issues. I don't believe many in here have used poverty and other issues only in the way you mention.

 

Also, I and others have pointed out other team names that could be viewed as offensive as a means to show the fickleness with this one and to question why ours receives so much attention and others receive very little, if any. It is a means to question the logic behind the claim of offense, not a means to simply say other names are worse.

 

Your points are correct though, and some have used them as you say, especially the name. I just wanted to point out that others in here, myself included, have brought up poverty with NA people and other team names, but not only in the ways you mention.

 

IMO, even if it is a small minority of people claiming offense, the legitimacy of their claim should be investigated and part of that is the logic of their claim and their motivations. In this sense, the people claiming offense claim to have the NA people's best interests at heart, yet use their platform (especially the media) to push a name change 90% don't want or care about, yet never mention the issues those people do care about. This is relevant IMO because it shows a serious disconnect between the ones claiming offense and the people they are claiming it for, thus calling their validity into serious question and showing their primary concern to probably be solely with offensivess based on assumption. When you see other names that could be viewed as offensive based on the same logic and reasons cited by the claimants not even be mentioned, then one can't help but wonder why there is only the singular application and thus calls the motivations and true intent of the cause into question.

 

I do think questioning where it all is coming from and why is important.

[grego]

OWhen you see other names that could be viewed as offensive based on the same logic and reasons cited by the claimants not even be mentioned, then one can't help but wonder why there is only the singular application and thus calls the motivations and true intent of the cause into question.

 

I do think questioning where it all is coming from and why is important.

 

 

you said that a whole lot better than i, elk. but, yes, when 90% of your people dont have an issue, when your own people are naming their own sports teams 'redskins', i think its fair to question harjos (and her friends) motivations, cuz something doesnt add up. 

[RFKFedEx]

Did anybody get a recent survey from the team?

 

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/22699140/washington-redskins-survey-asks-fans-if-team-should-change-name

[Bang]

In a situation like this, demographics matter.

i don't think the opinions of non-native Americans matter in the question of whether it's offensive. 

 

~Bang

[Larry]

Now, I remember reading about a survey somebody did, recently.  (The WP?) 

 

The questions were interesting. 

 

Just going from memory, a comfortable margin said that the team should change it's name. 

 

But a much smaller number said it was offensive. 

 

There were, apparently, a whole bunch of people in the "it's not offensive, but change it anyway" category. 

[HeluCopter29]

In a situation like this, demographics matter.

i don't think the opinions of non-native Americans matter in the question of whether it's offensive. 

 

~Bang

 

This times a bazillion.

 

A lot of the "change the name" is really just arrogant white people saying how native americans should feel.

[Larry]

A lot of the "change the name" is really just arrogant white people saying how native americans should feel.

I wouldn't be so quick to attack the motives of people. I assume that there are lots of motives, and the vast majority, their motives are at least what they think are good and honorable.

[HeluCopter29]

A lot of the "change the name" is really just arrogant white people saying how native americans should feel.

I wouldn't be so quick to attack the motives of people. I assume that there are lots of motives, and the vast majority, their motives are at least what they think are good and honorable.

 

I'm not attacking motives I'm attacking reality.

 

I'm sure people think they're being good people trying to make us a more inclusive country.

 

But in reality most of them are speaking out of ignorance.

[Chew]

I wish non-Native Americans who are "offended" would put this much effort into helping the homeless or finding a cure for cancer.  You know, an actual problem? 

 

thanks to twitter and facebook, any d-bag hipster can "like" or "share" something that makes them look like they're on the front lines of whatever cause is trending at the time.

[Guest Spearfeather]

Did anybody get a recent survey from the team?

 

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/22699140/washington-redskins-survey-asks-fans-if-team-should-change-name

 

 

Yes, a few days ago, BUT when I clicked the link to start taking the survey, and clicked " start " ... nothing. So, a few minutes ago, I called the ticket office, and told them what was going on. She transferred me to someone else, and I gave the woman my account number, my name and phone number, ( she also asked where my seats were located ) and she said someone would be calling me and if I didn't here anything in a couple of days, to please call back. I of course slid in to pass along to Mr. Snyder that he was correct in defending the name.

[Guest Spearfeather]

For a number of years I stood among the faithful in RFK Stadium and cheered the Washington Redskins to what I hoped would be a victory. The cheering was deafening, the stomping of feet so thunderous one could feel the concrete stadium shake as the burgundy and gold took to the field. Whether they won or lost, the Redskins were our gridiron heroes. We palefaces and assorted others of color were celebrating the Redskins.

 

 

.http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2013/06/04/3520308/letter-changing-redskins-name.html

Read more here: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2013/06/04/3520308/letter-changing-redskins-name.html#storylink=cpy

[RFKFedEx]

of course slid in to pass along to Mr. Snyder that he was correct in defending the name.

 

Are you concerned about why the team is now polling clientele for opinions on the subject?

 

Given the firmness of Snyder's "NEVER!" comment back in May, this would seemingly be a sign of reconsideration to some outside observers. A hint of thawing if you will; granted, this was likely Luntz' idea and not Danny's.

[grego]

For a number of years I stood among the faithful in RFK Stadium and cheered the Washington Redskins to what I hoped would be a victory. The cheering was deafening, the stomping of feet so thunderous one could feel the concrete stadium shake as the burgundy and gold took to the field. Whether they won or lost, the Redskins were our gridiron heroes. We palefaces and assorted others of color were celebrating the Redskins.

Obviously a lie, since no native Americans could possibly redskins fans since the name is obviously a slur.

Dan Snyder clearly had his new pr guy write that.

[Guest Spearfeather]

of course slid in to pass along to Mr. Snyder that he was correct in defending the name.

 

Are you concerned about why the team is now polling clientele for opinions on the subject?

 

Not at all.

[Larry]

Are you concerned about why the team is now polling clientele for opinions on the subject?

Because customer satisfaction is important?

[elkabong82]

of course slid in to pass along to Mr. Snyder that he was correct in defending the name.

 

Are you concerned about why the team is now polling clientele for opinions on the subject?

 

Given the firmness of Snyder's "NEVER!" comment back in May, this would seemingly be a sign of reconsideration to some outside observers. A hint of thawing if you will; granted, this was likely Luntz' idea and not Danny's.

 

Look at the series of questions. They are clearly ordered in a way to try and make the offended reconsider their position.

[Larry]

Look at the series of questions. They are clearly ordered in a way to try and make the offended reconsider their position.

Or they're ordered that way, because they have to be.

The question "If you knew X, would that change your position" question has to be asked last, because if it were asked first, then the subject would be aware of X when he answered the "if you weren't aware of X" question.