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

[grego]

Also, I hate all this talk about "the facts are on our side" - first of all, this certainly isn't about facts - and second of all, of course "facts" for both sides can be shifted and misconstrued. This shouldn't be about some quote from some Native American leader. This should be about the spirit of inclusion and not being hurtful. Does a name matter so much that you will stand behind it, even if it means being kind of a jerk?

Ya that would be me. Cuz I'm all about facts, As opposed to feelings.

Actually. The facts really can't be misconstrued. They are what they are. But if you don't know or care to know by now, it's probably too late anyway.

If it doesn't matter to you how many native Americans are offended, how most of them feel about the name, why those who are offended say they are offended, the actual origin of the name, the origin of the logo on the helmet, native Americans use of the word for their own sports teams- as opposed to the actual facts pertaining to these points- then you should absoutely feel free to feel how you like.

Ignorance is bliss. Facts are dumb.

[Bang]

So why don't the feelings of the majority of natives who  say it's NOT insulting matter?

 

If these crusaders truly cared about how people felt, the'd shut their ignorant yaps and listen to them once in a while.

 

~Bang

[s0crates]

Put me down as being on board for a name change, although I think this should not really be high on the list of Congress's priorities.  If they really want to do something worthwhile for the Native Americans, then they should send more money to the reservations.

[skinsmarydu]

Really admiring the way that the ridiculously tiny minority of liars who want the world to revolve around them, and anybody who doesn't cater to them is RABID and jerks.

"How dare you people point out facts to me! Don't you know that this isn't about facts, it's about being inclusive of people who don't have any!"

 

This is exactly what I think Goodell was speaking to when he stated this in his letter::

 

The National Football League takes seriously its responsibility to exemplify the values of diversity and inclusion that make our country great."

Other than "With the 2nd pick in the draft, the Washington Redskins have selected Robert Griffin the third", I think those are the most important words he's said or written. 

[Chants]

I don't know if this question has been answered.

 

If the term "Redskin" is indisuptably racist and even moreso 80 years ago, why would the team name themselves after something they despised?

[MattFancy]

Put me down as being on board for a name change, although I think this should not really be high on the list of Congress's priorities.  If they really want to do something worthwhile for the Native Americans, then they should send more money to the reservations.

 

The bolded part would be the best idea yet. But something tells me that's not gonna happen. All these people that are so up in arms about this could do the same. But they probably won't. They'd rather shout from their soap boxes than actually take action.

[RFKFedEx]

This was in yesterday’s news, but I didn't see it in this thread.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/06/13/redskins-hire-consultant-to-conduct-focus-group-on-thursday/

 

The team has hired political consultant Frank Luntz, who'll host a focus panel to dissect the issue, plan a new PR strategy, etc. Their first session was yesterday, but I've yet to see a follow up in today’s news.

 

 

 

Edit: I want to put a capital R in parenthesizes next to Luntz' name, but ES gives it to me in a circle, like a trademark symbol.

[MattFancy]

I hope one of the new PR strategies is for the team to either A) set up a charity for Native Americans or donate some of the profits to the Native Americans. I think one of those 2 or both, could go a long way to squashing some of this pushback all of a sudden.

[dolver]

 

 

I just don't see how any true blue Redskins fan could give up the fight to keep the name.  I mean, I'm not calling anyone's fanhood into question, but I just don't see how some can just cave in to this.  pennant and various nicknacks).

 

Because it's just a name of a sports team. Of all the things worth fighting for in life, this is basically the bottom of the list for me and I ultimately don't care one bit about the name of the teams I follow including my alma mater. I care about how the do on the field, diamond, ice, etc. When it comes to sports, I'll trade all their names for championships.

 

Is there really a single Redskins fan that wouldn't celebrate just as much if they changed their name to the Washington Whatevers and won the superbowl the next two years? Championships>>>>>Any teams name.

 

Agreed with Hersh here - I am so confused over the absolute RABID fight in the fans on this board who want to keep the name. Because anything besides Redskins "wouldn't sound right"? Really? As Hersh says, a name change is at the bottom of the list and honestly, I don't see how true blue fans could lose any amount of support for the team just due to a name change.

 

Also, I hate all this talk about "the facts are on our side" - first of all, this certainly isn't about facts - and second of all, of course "facts" for both sides can be shifted and misconstrued. This shouldn't be about some quote from some Native American leader. This should be about the spirit of inclusion and not being hurtful. Does a name matter so much that you will stand behind it, even if it means being kind of a jerk?

 

Good for you and your 30th post on a Redskins Forum...where you so eliqouently refute the facts in defense of the Redskins name. 

 

This is pretty much my point. Just because I have posted few times, that means my opinion doesn't matter? Just because a group of people is small, it means their offense doesn't matter?

 

Look - I am trying to, in a civil way, engage here. Although, I guess I shouldn't be surprised to meet unwelcoming, uncivil response in this case.

 

Also - just generally, saying "Actually. The facts really can't be misconstrued." - have you never listened to both sides of a political debate? Facts are misconstrued everyday in every walk of life.

[pjfootballer]

I just don't see how any true blue Redskins fan could give up the fight to keep the name.  I mean, I'm not calling anyone's fanhood into question, but I just don't see how some can just cave in to this.  pennant and various nicknacks).

 

Because it's just a name of a sports team. Of all the things worth fighting for in life, this is basically the bottom of the list for me and I ultimately don't care one bit about the name of the teams I follow including my alma mater. I care about how the do on the field, diamond, ice, etc. When it comes to sports, I'll trade all their names for championships.

 

Is there really a single Redskins fan that wouldn't celebrate just as much if they changed their name to the Washington Whatevers and won the superbowl the next two years? Championships>>>>>Any teams name.

Hersh,

 

I know you are a huge basketball fan.  It's obvious that despite Pollin changing the name from Bullets to Wizards, we both still remain fans of the team.  I never said I wouldn't root for the Redskins if they did change their name, but it would be more devastating then when the Bullets changed their name.  Can you honestly sit here with a straight face and say you enjoy referring to your basketball team as the Wizards?  I'm sorry, but nicknames are part of the identity of that team in that sport, otherwise, Cleveland wouldn't have fought to keep the "Browns", Seattle to keep the "Supersonics" or Charlotte getting back their beloved "Hornets" name.  Again, I call BS on anyone who says the name Redskins doesn't mean anything. And you don't think if Indianapolis or Tenneessee gave up the Colts and Oilers that Baltimore and Houston might not even consider it?  Hell, there was the movie "When Harry met Sally" that revolved around the directors love for the Colts and they had a Colts wedding. Not a Baltimore wedding.

 

 

Then don't watch their shows, don't read their articles and don't feed into their mob mentality. 

 

PJ...

 

Name one media outlet taking our side or NOT discussing how racist the name is?  Personally...I'm not going to black out the very same media outlets that have been a part of my life for 20 years.  It's frustrating as a fan...to see everyone....EVERYONE...on this uneducated ban wagon.  Dan's recent attempt to hire a focus group is already getting the same negative press as the team name itself. 

 

Honoring the military with a team name would be too much?  I disagree.  Too much to who?  Liberals?  The anti-war party?  Perhaps. 

It's not on 24 hours a day.  30 minute shows like PTI?  They do it to get people to watch.  Those kinds of shows are irrelevant and meaningless. I can skip over them or change the channel.  Real simple.

 

So what do you want the team to be called, the Washington Army or Washington Navy or Washington Air Force?  Aren't there already college teams named after the 4 branches.  Overkill with the honoring military thing.  But like I said, that's for another thread that was already discussed.

>>> 

Anything other than REDSKIN will sound awful and wrong.

 

It's a shame that being a relevant team led to this.

 

And I cannot express in words how much I absolutely cannot stand neither UnWise Mike or Mike Wilbon.

 

Agreed, and agreed.  How the Redskins can allow UnWise Mike on their campus...in a Native American tee-shirt nonetheless...and somehow allow him to end up standing next to Robert on camera...without a tape recorder to show that he is actually doing work...just to stir up controversy...is mind boggling. 

 

And truthfully...as fans we aren't helping ourselves by stating incorrect facts on the matter.  Your opinion about being relevant is the source for all of this, for example, is false.  The same people have been campaigning agains this name for 30 years.  Its just w/ social media / the internet / constant NFL coverage now has it in your face 24 / 7.

 

Like I said - its never going away...its going to get worse...and when we actually get to the promise land its ALL they will talk about...all day....every day...in every format...on every network...by every pundit, etc...

 

But pjfootballer thinks we should just "ignore" all that. 

I never said ignore.  I said, you should just not watch.  I mean, you can watch, you can DVR it and skip it or you can change the channel.  Sure it's going to get worse.  Dan and Goodell have already dug their heels in.  We'll deal with it when the time comes. Don't be such a worry wart about it.  Are you getting harrassed on the streets?  Are people bothering you about it?  Like I said, quite frankly, I've never had 1 person say anthing about it.  I've been a fan for about 37 years and no one has come up to my face and said. "you team name is racist."  I have a front plate with Redskins on my truck, a back plate frame and a sunshade in my front window right now that says REDSKINS all the way across the windsheild.  I just don't worry like you do.

 

 

 

PJ - hit me with that link bro.  The search feature can't find it for me - love to dig into that thread.  thx. 

 

http://es.redskins.com/topic/367158-the-phrase-thank-you-to-those-who-defend-our-freedom-why-do-people-say-it/

[RFKFedEx]

Frank Luntz is credited with coining the term "climate change" in the early 2000s, which aimed to replace the more scary sounding "global warming". 

[pjfootballer]

 

I just don't see how any true blue Redskins fan could give up the fight to keep the name.  I mean, I'm not calling anyone's fanhood into question, but I just don't see how some can just cave in to this.  pennant and various nicknacks).

 

Because it's just a name of a sports team. Of all the things worth fighting for in life, this is basically the bottom of the list for me and I ultimately don't care one bit about the name of the teams I follow including my alma mater. I care about how the do on the field, diamond, ice, etc. When it comes to sports, I'll trade all their names for championships.

 

Is there really a single Redskins fan that wouldn't celebrate just as much if they changed their name to the Washington Whatevers and won the superbowl the next two years? Championships>>>>>Any teams name.

 

Agreed with Hersh here - I am so confused over the absolute RABID fight in the fans on this board who want to keep the name. Because anything besides Redskins "wouldn't sound right"? Really? As Hersh says, a name change is at the bottom of the list and honestly, I don't see how true blue fans could lose any amount of support for the team just due to a name change.

 

Also, I hate all this talk about "the facts are on our side" - first of all, this certainly isn't about facts - and second of all, of course "facts" for both sides can be shifted and misconstrued. This shouldn't be about some quote from some Native American leader. This should be about the spirit of inclusion and not being hurtful. Does a name matter so much that you will stand behind it, even if it means being kind of a jerk?

Who in here has said they wouldn't support the team?  All I'm saying is, it will sting 100 times more than when the Bullets changed because I'm more of a diehard football fan than basketball fan.

[dolver]

Also - for the record, I am not contending that a team name doesn't mean anything. It does. But I also think that the Redskins name will likely change at some point, and if so, I want it to be sooner rather than later to start building the new brand.

 

 

I just don't see how any true blue Redskins fan could give up the fight to keep the name.  I mean, I'm not calling anyone's fanhood into question, but I just don't see how some can just cave in to this.  pennant and various nicknacks).

 

Because it's just a name of a sports team. Of all the things worth fighting for in life, this is basically the bottom of the list for me and I ultimately don't care one bit about the name of the teams I follow including my alma mater. I care about how the do on the field, diamond, ice, etc. When it comes to sports, I'll trade all their names for championships.

 

Is there really a single Redskins fan that wouldn't celebrate just as much if they changed their name to the Washington Whatevers and won the superbowl the next two years? Championships>>>>>Any teams name.

 

Agreed with Hersh here - I am so confused over the absolute RABID fight in the fans on this board who want to keep the name. Because anything besides Redskins "wouldn't sound right"? Really? As Hersh says, a name change is at the bottom of the list and honestly, I don't see how true blue fans could lose any amount of support for the team just due to a name change.

 

Also, I hate all this talk about "the facts are on our side" - first of all, this certainly isn't about facts - and second of all, of course "facts" for both sides can be shifted and misconstrued. This shouldn't be about some quote from some Native American leader. This should be about the spirit of inclusion and not being hurtful. Does a name matter so much that you will stand behind it, even if it means being kind of a jerk?

Who in here has said they wouldn't support the team?  All I'm saying is, it will sting 100 times more than when the Bullets changed because I'm more of a diehard football fan than basketball fan.

 

If it doesn't matter enough that you wouldn't support the team, then that means there are certainly other issues, as Hersh mentioned, that are more important.

[grego]

This is pretty much my point. Just because I have posted few times, that means my opinion doesn't matter? Just because a group of people is small, it means their offense doesn't matter?

 

 

Look - I am trying to, in a civil way, engage here. Although, I guess I shouldn't be surprised to meet unwelcoming, uncivil response in this case.

 

Also - just generally, saying "Actually. The facts really can't be misconstrued." - have you never listened to both sides of a political debate? Facts are misconstrued everyday in every walk of life.

 

 

 

 

 

dolver, i dont believe anyone is saying that a small groups opinion doesnt matter. i think the problem is that the small group is claiming to speak for the majority, when its been shown that the majority opinion is just the opposite. 

 

 this small group claims to be offended, so they should change the name? really? susan harjo has claimed that she hates the name because its origin is in reference to native american scalps that were collected as part of a government bounty to kill native americans. ives goddard has proven that (this is one of those facts i'm talking about) to be patently false.

 

what this means is harjos whole claim is false. now, that doesnt mean her voice doesnt count. it just means shes mistaken on the matter. shes convinced herself its some kind of slur and has appointed herself spokesperson for a race. i think its ok to question that. 

 

when i talk about facts regarding this debate, here they are, briefly- native american high schools have chosen the name as their own mascot. native americans came up with the term and have used it since its inception to refer to themselves (see the the ives goddard article). a blackfoot native american named walter wetzel who was president of the congress of native americans at the time approached the redskins about putting an 'indian' on their helmet because he wanted to see his people represented. he helped design the logo, which took the place of the circle R logo. the most comprehensive poll to date has shown that 91% of native americans surveyed do not take any offense at the name. 

 

those are the facts- if you'll notice, you dont read those things in the article du jour about the name. what you do read about is george preston marshall and dan snyder- 2 less than sympathetic figures who have nothing to do with the actual name and how native americans actually feel about it. but, people are lazy. they would rather take shots at things they dont like and believe they are supporting a downtrodden people in the process, rather than look into the subject. 

 

my point is, when you take emotion and bias out of the conversation, its clear that the controversy surrounding the name is BS.

[pjfootballer]

Also - for the record, I am not contending that a team name doesn't mean anything. It does. But I also think that the Redskins name will likely change at some point, and if so, I want it to be sooner rather than later to start building the new brand.

 

 

 

I just don't see how any true blue Redskins fan could give up the fight to keep the name.  I mean, I'm not calling anyone's fanhood into question, but I just don't see how some can just cave in to this.  pennant and various nicknacks).

 

Because it's just a name of a sports team. Of all the things worth fighting for in life, this is basically the bottom of the list for me and I ultimately don't care one bit about the name of the teams I follow including my alma mater. I care about how the do on the field, diamond, ice, etc. When it comes to sports, I'll trade all their names for championships.

 

Is there really a single Redskins fan that wouldn't celebrate just as much if they changed their name to the Washington Whatevers and won the superbowl the next two years? Championships>>>>>Any teams name.

 

Agreed with Hersh here - I am so confused over the absolute RABID fight in the fans on this board who want to keep the name. Because anything besides Redskins "wouldn't sound right"? Really? As Hersh says, a name change is at the bottom of the list and honestly, I don't see how true blue fans could lose any amount of support for the team just due to a name change.

 

Also, I hate all this talk about "the facts are on our side" - first of all, this certainly isn't about facts - and second of all, of course "facts" for both sides can be shifted and misconstrued. This shouldn't be about some quote from some Native American leader. This should be about the spirit of inclusion and not being hurtful. Does a name matter so much that you will stand behind it, even if it means being kind of a jerk?

Who in here has said they wouldn't support the team?  All I'm saying is, it will sting 100 times more than when the Bullets changed because I'm more of a diehard football fan than basketball fan.

 

If it doesn't matter enough that you wouldn't support the team, then that means there are certainly other issues, as Hersh mentioned, that are more important.

Actually there is only one more issue more important right now with the Redskins and that's getting back to the SB.  Or maybe Haslett.  Of course everyone is ignoring the post in which I brought up cities who think their nickname is important, but nobody wants to address that.

 

Sorry I'm popping in and out. I'm reading on my phone, but I can't log in on my phone for some reason and I have to watch my internet usage at work and not get busted.  So if I don't respond right away, I'll eventually get back.

[Bang]

This is pretty much my point. Just because I have posted few times, that means my opinion doesn't matter? Just because a group of people is small, it means their offense doesn't matter?

 

yes, that is exactly what it means.

especially when people of the same group that they claim to represent keep overwhelmingly saying that they do NOT find it offensive.

 

As i said a few times, the woman who is the plaintiff in the trademark renewal case said on the couthouse steps that so long as ONE person is offended, then that is enough to force everyone else to change.

That is patently ridiculous.

Idiotic, in fact, Fascist, even.

 

5 people wan this change. A few "leaders" and a bunch of journalists want this change. The majority of the people they claim it offends do NOT want this change.

 

Lets face it,, somewhere on the planet you can find five people who will be offended by anything. ANYTHING.

Is that the basis of how we should live our lives? Catering to the smallest, agreeing with idiocy, appeasing ignorance?

the fact of the matter is this:

A very tiny small little literal handful of people find this name offensive.

they have used ridiculous logic to back their point.. "you wouldn't call anyone a Redskin to their face"

And that's true, because no one calls anyone that behind their back, either. A slur is not a slur if it's never used as a slur, now is it?

 

When asked, native Americans overwhelmingly say that not only are they NOT offended, they actually LIKE the name.

They are ignored.

You ask why not listen to a group that is small if they feel offended, and i ask you why they don't listen to the people they are supposedly representing when those people tell them they don't agree?

 

 

There are historic facts as to the origin of the name. None of these facts support their claim of it being a slur.

So they ignore them. Just as they ignore the majority of their people when they disagree with this very tiny but loud group.

 

 

 

And that simply isn't right. Minority does not rule, ESPECIALLY when they're wrong, and ESPECIALLY when their own supposed representative group disagrees with them.

 

Why don't we give Westboro Baptist Church any credence?

they're a small group who is offended.. Why listen to this group and not that one?

Is it because we know they're wrong? They claim to speak for Christians,,  and yet when other Christians say "they don't speak for us" we allow that and say, "Obviously not, this is just a small fringe group with an incorrect viewpoint.".

But people do NOT listen to the Native people who say that they are not offended, preferring to stand by these five who claim they are.

 

This itty bitty teeny weeny tiny group of people are wrong. And it's that simple.

And they have yet to prove otherwise. In fact, it's been proven over and over how they're wrong,, but listening just isn't part of the vocabulary among crusaders.

 

~Bang

[Bang]

Frank Luntz is credited with coining the term "climate change" in the early 2000s, which aimed to replace the more scary sounding "global warming". 

well, you guys had your chance to listen to reason, weigh facts and consider the opinions of those who are supposedly represented by this tiny group.

 

You've chosen to ignore all of them unless they fit your pre-determined feelings.

 

So no crying when Snyder pulls in a dirty **** like Luntz to start his own campaign of noise..

If you won't listen to fact and reason, then the alternative is...?

 

~Bang

[RFKFedEx]

Frank Luntz is credited with coining the term "climate change" in the early 2000s, which aimed to replace the more scary sounding "global warming". 

 

 

So no crying when Snyder pulls in a dirty **** like Luntz to start his own campaign of noise.

I think its great that Snyder hired Luntz.

 

Luntz will bring furthur media attention to the issue. More "facts" will be revealed and public opinion will continue to drift in favor of change with each news cycle, just like with global warming/climate change. It's hard to stop a free press.

[grego]

I think its great that Snyder hired Luntz.

 

Luntz will bring furthur media attention to the issue. More "facts" will be revealed and public opinion will continue to drift in favor of change with each news cycle, just like with global warming/climate change. It's hard to stop a free press.

 

 

 

what 'facts' are going to be revealed that will cause public opinion to drift in favor of a name change?

[Bang]

 

Frank Luntz is credited with coining the term "climate change" in the early 2000s, which aimed to replace the more scary sounding "global warming". 

 

 

So no crying when Snyder pulls in a dirty **** like Luntz to start his own campaign of noise.

I think its great that Snyder hired Luntz.

 

Luntz will bring furthur media attention to the issue. More "facts" will be revealed and public opinion will continue to drift in favor of change with each news cycle, just like with global warming/climate change. It's hard to stop a free press.

 

You really have no distinction between reality and this fabrication, do you?

I notice in quoting me, you left out the part that says you completely ignore facts and majority opinions among the natives you're 'championing'.

As if that somehow makes it go away.

I cannot understand why people like you will ignore fact to press for ignorance.

 

 

~Bang

[RFKFedEx]

 

I think its great that Snyder hired Luntz.

 

Luntz will bring furthur media attention to the issue. More "facts" will be revealed and public opinion will continue to drift in favor of change with each news cycle, just like with global warming/climate change. It's hard to stop a free press.

 

 

 

what 'facts' are going to be revealed that will cause public opinion to drift in favor of a name change?

Facts that the public are not widely aware of today, but people in this thread know well, such as...

 

the origin of the word Redskins (body paint v bloody scalp theory), why the name was chosen to replace Braves, who decided to use the Native theme and imagery, public opinion polls, Walter Wetzel, Lone Star Deitz. None of those facts are going to help our cause, and presenting those facts will only backfire in the grand scheme of public opinion.

[grego]

 

 

I think its great that Snyder hired Luntz.

 

Luntz will bring furthur media attention to the issue. More "facts" will be revealed and public opinion will continue to drift in favor of change with each news cycle, just like with global warming/climate change. It's hard to stop a free press.

 

 

 

what 'facts' are going to be revealed that will cause public opinion to drift in favor of a name change?

Facts that the public are not widely aware of today, but people in this thread know well, such as...

 

the origin of the word Redskins (body paint v bloody scalp theory), why the name was chosen to replace Braves, who decided to use the Native theme and imagery, public opinion polls, Walter Wetzel, Lone Star Deitz. None of those facts are going to help our cause, and presenting those facts will only backfire in the grand scheme of public opinion.

 

by 'our cause', you mean those who want to change the name? because all of those things are in favor of those who want to keep the name.

 

im confused.

[Larry]

I think what he's saying is "facts won't matter to the folks demanding that the name change".

And, based on history, and this thread, he's probably right.

I mean, when some guy is yelling "It's offensive", and you show him absolutely inarguable proof that it isn't, and he keeps yelling it anyway, there's not much chance that more facts are gonna make any difference.

[RFKFedEx]

 by 'our cause', you mean those who want to change the name? because all of those things are in favor of those who want to keep the name.

im confused.

 'our cause' meaning Redskins fans as a whole, of which I am a member.  The facts that support keeping the name and Native theme will harm such efforts when presented by the team to the media, even with a pro like Luntz at the helm.

 

I know it can be confusing to interpret my stance, bc I too love the team name, imagery, and Native theme. I always have and probably always will. 

 

My stance is against keeping the name and Native theme bc I don't believe we're going to win in the long run. The battle has already taken a negative toll on all of us. This franchise has been through a similar battle 50+ years ago, and we didn't win that time either.

[Boss_Hogg]

It's a real shame guys like UnWise Mike, Stephen Smith, and the WaPo are given platforms to smear the team and the fans. Why won't ESPN allow counter points from Tribes and other people who are accepting of the name?

 

ESPN is like Fox News and MSNBC.