• Blog Entries

    • By TK in ES Coverage
         1
      In today's Divisional Debacle, the Defense under Greg Manusky in the first half, gave up 207 yards of offense (105 rushing/102 passing) and two touchdowns.  That said, they did manage a single INT on which the Offense actually managed to score a touchdown off of. They allowed 12 of 16 passes to be completed . 
       
      In the second half it was 107 yards given up (58 rushing//49 passing) a field goal and a touchdown. They traded their first half pick for a second half sack. However, Dallas completed all five of their pass attempts. 
       
      Don't read that thinking "Well it seems like they tightened up some in the 2nd half."  They didn't. They simply had about half the plays in the second half. 30 plays in the First and 18 in the Second.
       
      So far in two Divisional matchups, the Defense has faltered in the Second half. They start out like a house of fire for the first few drives until their opponents gradually make adjustments. This Defensive coaching staff fails make any adjustments, whether in game or at the very least at Halftime. They've given up over 30 points per game for a total of 63 points given up in two games. While the Bears are up next, the Pats await and they've put up over 70 points in two games. Yeah. Ok. They did shut out the Dolphins today which is looking like the NFL version of ... ahem... shooting fish in a barrel. 
       
      The frustrating thing is Manusky is the DC that the Front Office actively looked to replace during the off season without firing him. When you know they're looking to replace you, most people would make a concentrated effort to show an improvement. Yet Manusky's Defense still keeps acting like it's starring in Groundhog Day.
       
      In his post game presser, when asked directly about if any coaching changes would be made, Gruden said "No, I think after two games – you’re talking about playing two very good offensive football teams and two of the best offensive lines in pro football we just played back-to-back. That’s no excuse whatsoever, but I don’t think we need to hit the panic button yet. We just have to continue to focus on what we can do better to win. Get Jonathan [Allen] in here, get a couple of our corners back in here and let’s go back and strap it up against Chicago [Bears] next week and see what happens.” 
       
      Here's another frustrating thing. The defensive communication was an issue last season as well. Wasn't this supposed to have been worked on during OTA's and Training Camp? It's understandable that the rookies would still be on a learning curve, but NFL vets like Collins and DRC you'd think they would have down by the start of the season. 
       
      Gruden said they're a very talented group on Defense but that they weren't reaching them. When questioned as to why the coaching staff that has been in place for several years, wasn't reaching them, he defended the comment as them being a young defense. “We have some moving parts now. Landon Collins is a veteran guy but this is his first year, [Montez] Sweat’s in his first year, [Cole] Holcomb, it’s his first year, [Jon] Bostic is in his first year. We’re playing Dominique [Rodgers-Cromartie] at corner and this is Jimmy Moreland’s first year, so it’s not like we are the most experienced group. We feel like were very talented, but we`re still fighting through somethings. There are a lot of things to look forward to, without a doubt, but we do have to play better and strap it up and get back to work."

       
       
       
Alaskins

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

Recommended Posts

The fact that the US government resides in Washington DC and at one point in history made the decision to remove Indians and send them wherever they wanted them, then years later wind up nicknaming their football team after them, is pretty damn snarky. If I was Indian, Id be offended on that point alone, nevermind use of the nickname itself over the years.

I never knew the US Government had a football team. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the US government resides in Washington DC and at one point in history made the decision to remove Indians and send them wherever they wanted them, then years later wind up nicknaming their football team after them, is pretty damn snarky. If I was Indian, Id be offended on that point alone, nevermind use of the nickname itself over the years.

 

Interesting....and here all this time I had thought they changed their name from Braves to Redskins when they played in Boston...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the US government resides in Washington DC and at one point in history made the decision to remove Indians and send them wherever they wanted them, then years later wind up nicknaming their football team after them, is pretty damn snarky. If I was Indian, Id be offended on that point alone, nevermind use of the nickname itself over the years.

The name started in Boston. They weren't named the Redskins when the got to DC, they came to DC the Redskins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never knew the US Government had a football team. :)

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

 

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/letter-from-washington-redskins-owner-dan-snyder-to-fans/2013/10/09/e7670ba0-30fe-11e3-8627-c5d7de0a046b_story.html

 

Dan Snyder's letter to the Post.

 

To Everyone in our Washington Redskins Nation:

As loyal fans, you deserve to know that everyone in the Washington Redskins organization -- our players, coaches and staff -- are truly privileged to represent this team and everything it stands for. We are relentlessly committed to our fans and to the sustained long-term success of this franchise.

 

That’s why I want to reach out to you -- our fans -- about a topic I wish to address directly: the team name, “Washington Redskins.” While our focus is firmly on the playing field, it is important that you hear straight from me on this issue. As the owner of the Redskins and a lifelong fan of the team, here is what I believe and why I believe it.

 

Like so many of you, I was born a fan of the Washington Redskins. I still remember my first Redskins game.

Most people do. I was only six, but I remember coming through the tunnel into the stands at RFK with my father, and immediately being struck by the enormity of the stadium and the passion of the fans all around me.

 

I remember how quiet it got when the Redskins had the ball, and then how deafening it was when we scored. The ground beneath me seemed to move and shake, and I reached up to grab my father’s hand. The smile on his face as he sang that song ... he’s been gone for 10 years now, but that smile, and his pride, are still with me every day.

 

That tradition -- the song, the cheer -- it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation.

Our past isn’t just where we came from -- it’s who we are.

 

Full text at link.

 

Thanks, Mr. Snyder. This sums up so much of it for me, at least. Most of us have similar experiences to relate to.

 

~Bnng

Edited by Bang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the US government resides in Washington DC and at one point in history made the decision to remove Indians and send them wherever they wanted them, then years later wind up nicknaming their football team after them, is pretty damn snarky. If I was Indian, Id be offended on that point alone, nevermind use of the nickname itself over the years.

 

What if that team was named "Redskins" when it was still up in Boston?

 

I know... mind blown... and facts and stuff. 

 

But please...continue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

 

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

You can't be serious. The Redskins were founded in 1932. The Cowboys were founded in 1961. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

What's necessary is that you go find the forum rules we have here & read, understand, & follow them. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

 

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

The Redskins predate the Cowboys by nearly 30 years. There was even a big stink about the Cowboys existence because George Preston Marshall didn't want another team south of the Mason-Dixon line cutting in on his turf, which was the entire southeastern U.S. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

 

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

Redskins came WAY before the Cowboys...Marshall had to vote to allow the cowboys to even enter the league....which he got the vote by holding our song hostage...learn your Redskins history...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I mean. And it was unnecessary to lock my other thread. It was actually voting on a name idea, not the conversation in general. I didn't notice this thread until after I posted mine.

 

Which team came first, the Cowboys or the Redskins? I always assumed the two were named to deliberately be rivals of the others and mimicking every boy playing cowboys and Indians.

 

Seriously, though.  Are you that "stats Jeff" guy that always calls in to local talk radio to troll them, too?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Goodell said if even 1 person was offended, the NFL should listen. That is ****ing insane. there will always be 1 person offended by everything. If that is the bar, shutter every business.

 

 

 

The media took that comment to mean: If one person is offended, the name should be changed. That's not what Goodell is saying.

 

As Painkiller said, why would Snyder ever change the name, when he could just " officially " drop it, ( from merchandise, advertising, etc. ), which of course is not  going to happen anytime soon. Instead of being the official nickname, It would become the " unofficial " nickname, as almost every Redskins fan, and a majority of fans from other teams, and even most in the media would still call them " the Redskins. "

Edited by Spearfeather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redskins came WAY before the Cowboys...Marshall had to vote to allow the cowboys to even enter the league....which he got the vote by holding our song hostage...learn your Redskins history...

 

At this point, I highly doubt that he's a Redskins fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Listen" doesn't mean "agree".

I listen to my son ask for the car.   but he's not getting it.

 

~Bang

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, I highly doubt that he's a Redskins fan.

He's not...I saw the thread he started...he's a 49ers fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snyder's letter is great ... Eyes got a little moist.

 

Y'all still think a change is coming anytime soon?

 

I don't.

 

Hail to the Redskins !

 

skinssign913a.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been resigning myself to a change over the past couple months. I even had a few posts in this thread stating so. I do actually care if there are individuals who are legitimately offended.

 

Having said that, in post 1362 I wondered publicly if the team had ever released a "true history" of the team name. Then an hour or so later Dan Snyder published an open letter on the topic. He didn't state the official naming story, but he provided clear points that demonstrate a history of the franchise reaching out to the Native American community, the team's namesake.

 

Snyder's letter was fantastic and really helped to sway me back to believing that the name should and will stay. I think the key is demonstrating that the organization is willing to listen and constantly in touch with relevant Native American leaders about the issue. I think it would also be a good idea to further prove that the team cares about Native Americans by having a small philanthropic department whose role is to funnel money back into those communities. I know that the Redskins and Snyder are charitable to other causes, so this would seem like another logical way to giving back and continuing the team's tradition of HONORING its heritage and Native Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a huge Atlanta Braves fan in middle school I remember the protests and outrage about their name and the tomahawk chop.  I remember being worried that the name would change and my favorite team would lose their identity.  

 

You know what is different then vs. now?  The internet, twitter, ratings journalism, 24/7 news cycle, and the like.

 

The story feeds itself until it consumes itself.  It will go away as other stories present themselves.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the interwebs are already a-flutter with folks claiming Snyder's story is false. I'm not sure how they would know this, or if they were around 80 years ago. I doubt it. But the lines are drawn. You aren't going to convince folks who are offended, or are faux offended to change their minds. Its as unlikely that supporters will want the name changed. They'll just become more accepting of it.

 

Still want no mascot, but you know the idea of a military theme is exciting for the NFL and probably the Skins marketing team. I just grabbed a few pics from that site which was shared a few pages ago.

 

10-9-2013+2-37-14+PM.jpg

 

Don't want it to happen....but can feel it happening. Just hope UnWise Mike is long gone when it does.

Edited by @SkinsGoldPants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snyder's letter is great ... Eyes got a little moist.

 

Y'all still think a change is coming anytime soon?

 

I don't.

 

Hail to the Redskins !

 

 

 

Too bad the idiots on ESPN didn't feel the same way about the letter.  To paraphrase Michael Smith and another media guy (name escapes me at the moment), thought the letter was horrible and it shows how Snyder is a rich, insensitive man.  They said that it isn't for a white man or black man to tell Native Americans how to feel.  What I find amusing is they are the one's telling Native Americans how to feel.  Michael Smith says he sometimes makes the mistake and slips up when he uses the name "Redskins".   I could feel my IQ dropping listening to them.  Those guys are complete tools.  Really, I'm amazed at how idiots land jobs in the sports media.  It must be someone they know.

 

To answer your question, no, I don't think the name will change.  Eventually, this story will burn itself out and the media will just give up on it.  I'm not saying that it will completely go away, but it will run it's course and grow tiresome to those outside of the Redskins fan base. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good letter from Snyder. Sad that those on the otherside will find a way to bash him, even though he presented facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad the idiots on ESPN didn't feel the same way about the letter.  To paraphrase Michael Smith and another media guy (name escapes me at the moment), thought the letter was horrible and it shows how Snyder is a rich, insensitive man.  They said that it isn't for a white man or black man to tell Native Americans how to feel.  What I find amusing is they are the one's telling Native Americans how to feel.  Michael Smith says he sometimes makes the mistake and slips up when he uses the name "Redskins".   I could feel my IQ dropping listening to them.  Those guys are complete tools.  Really, I'm amazed at how idiots land jobs in the sports media.  It must be someone they know.

 

To answer your question, no, I don't think the name will change.  Eventually, this story will burn itself out and the media will just give up on it.  I'm not saying that it will completely go away, but it will run it's course and grow tiresome to those outside of the Redskins fan base. 

 

 

OK so they used the same argument that one other ESPN blogger used except against the Redskins...also, did they not READ the letter it specifically states they consulted Native Americans, have had numerous meetings with Native Americans, and even had quotes from Native Americans, yet they say that Snyder is telling them how they should feel?

 

jiFfM.jpg

Edited by Xameil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some laughs

 

 
Washington Redskins Change Their Name To The D.C. Redskins

 

WASHINGTON—Following an outpouring of criticism from across the country, the Washington Redskins announced Wednesday that they are officially changing the team’s name to the D.C. Redskins. “We’ve heard the concerns of many people who have been hurt or offended by the team’s previous name, and I’m happy to say we’ve now rectified the situation once and for all,” said franchise owner Dan Snyder, adding that “Washington Redskins” will be replaced with “D.C. Redskins” on all team logos, uniforms, and apparel. “It was a difficult decision—and one that, frankly, I’m a little embarrassed took me so long to make. So hopefully we can now put this issue to bed and start cheering on our D.C. Redskins.” In light of Snyder’s decision, Cleveland Indians owner Larry Dolan told reporters he will change the feather in Chief Wahoo’s headdress from red to a “more appropriate” shade of red

 

700.jpg?9603

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good letter from Snyder. Sad that those on the otherside will find a way to bash him, even though he presented facts.

 

I agree. I thought it was well done. The key takeaway (to me) is that as far back as the 1970s, representatives from the organization were meeting and collaborating with Native Americans.

 

I still would like to read an "official" account of how and why the team was named Braves and Redskins in the 1930s. Snyder's letter touched on the fact that a few members of the organization were of Native American descent, but I'd like a brief statement of the mindset when the name(s) were originally chosen.

 

The legend is that they were the Braves and wanted a little more synergy with the Boston baseball team (Red Sox) so they became the Redskins. If that decision was for marketing, I'd like to know factors that went into naming the team the Braves ("...we wanted to honor the bravery and proud heritage of Native American tribes..."). Since Braves and Redskins were obvious synonymous during that time, it would be apt.

Edited by TD_washingtonredskins

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.