Alaskins

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

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

This is why I am against changing the name. The name is the only identifiable part from an era when we were the top 2 or 3 team in the league. An Era where we were the Patriots. We were duct taping spare parts together into a dominant machine--and doing it without the GOAT QB.

 

But all that remains of those glory years is the name. Nothing else about this team even is a fart-scent of those years.

 

We were never the Patriots.  We played in the toughest division in the league against bonafide glory teams like the Cowboys and cobbled together three titles with homegrown no-names and cast-offs from around the league.

 

The Niners are a much, much closer comparison to the current Pats.  The Gibbs-era Redskins were the Popovich Spurs.

Edited by TryTheBeal!
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings fellow B&G fans. It's been a while since I've posted at ES. it looks like the die-hards are still here. Just want to let everybody know that Rebrand Washington Football (RWF) and allies will hand-deliver 'Change The Name' petitions to The Park on Saturday morning Dec. 7th at 10:00. This will be our 5th consecutive year. We invite any interested parties to join us. No RSVP is necessary unless you'd like to ride the bus from Rosslyn. The cost is free. Bus includes a restroom.  The handoff ceremony usually lasts about a half-hour. Dress warm. 

rwf2019web.jpg

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine the ridiculousness that would ensue if we as a society made changes to everything a "bus load" of people protested.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, redskinss said:

Can you imagine the ridiculousness that would ensue if we as a society made changes to everything a "bus load" of people protested.


When nobody else cares, it happens all the time.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redskinss said:

Can you imagine the ridiculousness that would ensue if we as a society made changes to everything a "bus load" of people protested.

 

Last I read, around 8% of native americans found the name of the team offensive.  

 

According to the US Census, in 2010, 5.2M people reported as being "Native American or Alaska Native".  

 

8% of 5.2M is 416K people.  

 

Hardly a vast majority.  A very small number, compared to the total.  But let's not try to just pretend that there's only a dozen people affected, either.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redskinss said:

Can you imagine the ridiculousness that would ensue if we as a society made changes to everything a "bus load" of people protested.

 

This is ironic living in a country that's constitution overprotects the minority to the point it can in many cases dictate to the majority.  But that was meant to protect the conversation, not to ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Last I read, around 8% of native americans found the name of the team offensive.  

 

According to the US Census, in 2010, 5.2M people reported as being "Native American or Alaska Native".  

 

8% of 5.2M is 416K people.  

 

Hardly a vast majority.  A very small number, compared to the total.  But let's not try to just pretend that there's only a dozen people affected, either.  

My intention was not to imply that only a busload of people were affected but that only a busload of people were protesting. 

 

If 416 thousand people show up at Redskins park then I suggest we change the name, but if only a busload care enough to come down and voice their opinion then it's an extreme minority opinion and shouldn't be given much weight. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

There are about 30-35 people in that picture...

To be fair, if they showed up on gameday that might be double, or even triple, the # of actual fans in attendance.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, GhostofSparta said:

To be fair, if they showed up on gameday that might be double, or even triple, the # of actual fans in attendance.

 

However a headline reading "Protesters Outnumber Fans" just doesn't carry the same weight anymore. The line at Whole Foods tonight outnumbered fans too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often wonder why so many people are hung up on keeping the name Redskins.

 

Do you support the name or the city? All that matters is the Washington part.


 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, dyst said:

I often wonder why so many people are hung up on keeping the name Redskins.

 

Do you support the name or the city? All that matters is the Washington part.


 

 

By all legitimate, tangible facts, it isn't necessary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dyst said:

I often wonder why so many people are hung up on keeping the name Redskins.

 

Do you support the name or the city? All that matters is the Washington part.

 

A lot of folks I've seen say theyd turn on the team with a name change dont live in the area or never did. Jus general observation, not calling a correlation.

Edited by Renegade7
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dyst said:

I often wonder why so many people are hung up on keeping the name Redskins.

 

Do you support the name or the city? All that matters is the Washington part.


 

 


I don’t really care any more.  Thanks to Snyder for that one.  This team isn’t the Redskins I grew up admiring and they haven’t been for years.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a topic on Al Galdi's show this morning, and while it comes from that ass hat Florio, it has some imbedded "news" so I thought I would post it.

 

For the record, Floiro is a Redskins Hater. His observations are obnoxious, and he's a dick.

 

But, UCLA Berkley DID do some type of a study, and it will be released later.  As an important note, it appears as though the study focused on all of the imagery which could be offensive, not just the Redskins name, and Florio, because he's a complete and total ass hat, decided to pick on the 'Skins and didn't even make mention of the tomahawk chop the Chief did DURING THE SUPERBOWL.  

 

Regardless, if you want to be enraged, here's the LINK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the Florio piece. 

 

First of all, he didn't give a link to the study so the reader can see for themselves what it actually says. I'd be interested because in the description of the study, it sounds like a previous study of Native American "caricatures" and specifically mentions the Cleveland Indians mascot, yet didn't talk about the Redskins logo. 

 

This is because the Redskins logo is not a caricature but the Indians is, so a link to a negative psychological effect with regards to that logo isn't surprising. A negative link to the Redskins logo, however, would be. 

 

I'm guessing this will be more confirmstion bias for Florio and his ilk who made up their minds before actually taking the time to look into the topic like a rational, logical person and seem determined to stick by their guns no matter the evidence put before them.

 

If the study is as I suspect (or limited in scope, or a survey of activists as opposed to the general native population, such as another alleged study attempting to show that the only two comprehensive studies done on the topic were somehow wrong), I am sure Florio will not print a retraction because he we will (correctly) count on the fact that people don't do research. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the study itself hasn't been published, and is expected out later this month.  

 

Florio's summary of the results seems to suggest that the percentage offended seems to relate to how native a person considers himself.  That people who consider themselves strongly NA are more offended, and politically active NAs are even more offended.  

 

Which doesn't surprise me.  Seems that you can get a higher number of "percent offended" if you are selective about which NAs you choose to ask.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 1:10 PM, Voice_of_Reason said:

For the record, Floiro is a Redskins Hater. His observations are obnoxious, and he's a dick.

His momma also dresses him funny & she wears combat boots. 

 

tenor.gif?itemid=5645546

 

 

 

  • Haha 2

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.