Bang Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I think I'd prefer that if we ever did change it, we just become the colors. the Washington Burgundy and Gold. I think it would be a lot easier for me to swallow that. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 and that is basically what I'm getting at. You have to drop the whole thing, because it's obvious that nothing Native American is ever going to be acceptable to many of these people. I think we could name the team honoring our Warriors who have given the ultimate sacrifice. Goes along with the Nationals theme (although I am an Orioles fan) and is nothing as cringe worthy as the Wizards. Besides, having a team honoring the Armed Forces in some way, would also be a giant **** YOU to our biggest rivals who aren't getting behind us on this. How could a team honoring the Armed Forces not be considered "America's Team?" Let's see, a team honoring America's war dead, or a team honoring hicks with big hats? Easy choice there. That seems like a very logical choice given the location, but something about honoring the armed forces in a team name doesn't excite me. I don't mean to sound like I don't appreciate the service, etc. but I don't really want my sports team named like that. I could see that being the direction they go though. I think I'd prefer that if we ever did change it, we just become the colors. the Washington Burgundy and Gold. I think it would be a lot easier for me to swallow that. ~Bang Different reason for it, but the Browns provide some precedent for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I've always said IF we had to change the name, I think it would be to something that represents DC. Warriors wouldn't be bad if you tie it to the military. Could go Generals, Federals (the old USFL team), Senators (although prolly best not to be associated with Congress right now), etc. I also thought it would be cool to go with Red, White, and Blue colors to match the rest of the city teams, but with the Giants already being red, white, and blue it would be kinda strange to have 2 teams in the same division with the same colors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 how about the Washington Freedom (Although some in our current government may not like it) Red White and Blue colors with stars and stripes. The Freedom against the Cowboys. The Freedom against the Browns. The Freedom against the Giants. If we have to do this, I would want the team to be named after something that everybody in the country could get behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 how about the Washington Freedom (Although some in our current government may not like it) Red White and Blue colors with stars and stripes. The Freedom against the Cowboys. The Freedom against the Browns. The Freedom against the Giants. If we have to do this, I would want the team to be named after something that everybody in the country could get behind. That sounds like a WNBA team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I've always said IF we had to change the name, I think it would be to something that represents DC. Warriors wouldn't be bad if you tie it to the military. Could go Generals, Federals (the old USFL team), Senators (although prolly best not to be associated with Congress right now), etc. I also thought it would be cool to go with Red, White, and Blue colors to match the rest of the city teams, but with the Giants already being red, white, and blue it would be kinda strange to have 2 teams in the same division with the same colors. Kind of off topic, but I really like the idea of cities having consistent color schemes for their sports teams. As much as all the teams annoy me, I love that Pittsburgh has black and gold for the Pirates, Penguins, and Steelers. The problem in Washington is that the Bullets, Caps, and Nats should have adopted the burgundy and gold of the Redskins. There's history and tradition there. Because of that, I wouldn't want the Redskins to change after 80 years. However, if they did change the entire thing, I'd want them to use red as their primary color to give DC some consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 The thing that gets lost in this debate is the fact that Dan Snyder really holds most of the cards. Does the NFL have the power to force a name change over his objection? Would have to look at the By-Laws. Apparently the NFL is an unincorporated association, but its executive committee has broad powers to sanction its "members." So what will make Snyder change? 1.) Pressure from fellow owners? Don't see that now. 2.) Pressure from Goodell, and the "executive committee?" Don't see that either, at least publicly. 3.) Pressure from sponsors? Don't see that yet. 4.) Pressure from Obama? Not really (and who honestly cares). 5.) Pressure from DC Mayor Gray(sp?)? He's a buffoon and will be gone sooner rather than later. 6.) Pressure from the Courts? Nope. 7.) Pressure from the fanbase? Nope. 8.) Pressure from the Media? Yes, but we all know how Snyder views the media. Of course, all of these factors can change, but for now (unless there's something going on behind the scenes with the owners) I don't see the avalanche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I'm not THRILLED with Warriors but I like the fact that it would allow us to keep the logo or use the spear logo. Don't forget that Snyder has owned the rights to that name for more than a decade. It was supposedly to explore an arena football team with that name, but given there was never any move to start a team I think it was hedging his bet on the name fight. Shrewd business move on his part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 That sounds like a WNBA team. perhaps, but it would be original, and again my first choice is the Washington Redskins. Call this my idea for plan B. People have expressed they don't want something overused, or high schoolish. I don't think Freedom is used at all, and it would be fitting of the Nations Capital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 how about the Washington Freedom (Although some in our current government may not like it) Red White and Blue colors with stars and stripes. The Freedom against the Cowboys. The Freedom against the Browns. The Freedom against the Giants. If we have to do this, I would want the team to be named after something that everybody in the country could get behind. The Washington First Continental Congress. Honestly, if we did try to honor Washington, I'd want it to be historical not current. I think that's what I don't love about honoring the armed forces. It might be copying the Patriots a little, but I'd want to tie it back to the early years of our nation. Somehow reference the Declaration of Independence or the Revolution or something. We're one of a few teams in an area that was in the original colonies and I'd prefer that we look back to that time of our history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I wonder what UnWise Mike and the other cause heads feel about Columbus Day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Washington Colonials Washington Regimentals Washington Minute Men (lol) Washington Continentals Washington Monuments Washington DMV Just brain storming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I could also get behind something completely unrelated to the DC area but honoring some aspect of history. Something like the Knights or Bison or Dragons. Just something original that could fit into our colors. For those mad about a possible change, we could use Teddy Roosevelt's term for BS (Bullfeathers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I could see myself cheering for The Washington BS. (But somebody would probably say it's offensive.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I actually like Warriors if we can use an Armed Forces theme. I like Burgundy and Gold too. I really like "The Football Club of Washington" I would like Griffins too, but what the star player last name being Griffin, that just wouldn't work at all now. What if we go tech and name the team, The Washington Motherboard. The Washington Wi-Fi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HBnotBlades Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 For those mad about a possible change, we could use Teddy Roosevelt's term for BS (Bullfeathers). I love that idea. It wouldn't happen, but the team could keep the feather helmet while giving everyone the finger at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 You want to keep the "new" name 2 syllables so that it fits into "Hail to the Redskins" without jacking up the whole song I would also prefer a name that began with R. Of a DC/national capitol region nature I came up with Riflemen "Hail, to the Rifle MEN, Hail Victory!" The rest of the song works from there Rangers would also work, however you have the New York Rangers already or the Texas Rangers. I think a "Rangers vs Cowboys" game would be pretty cool. Hopefully people wouldn't find the imagery of "Riflemen" offensive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Maybe Bob got some heat from some people and felt like he had to change his tune ? Is Reilly just full of crap? Taking his dad in laws comments out of context, knowingly ? I don't know. Really odd turn of events. Nothing makes sense at the moment. Who could he have gotten heat from? And if he did, isn't that proof that there is a bigger movement against the name than some here have argued? My argument on this remains the same. The only way to win this argument (and I don't think it can we won) is to convince people that in the very narrow, very specific use here, the name "Redskins" is not offensive. You can take the Larry approach and say that the name is not offensive and that everyone who thinks it is wrong. But then you have to go to someone like Reilly's father in law and say, "No, you are not an Uncle Tom for supporting the name. We mean no offense. Please read this pamphlet on how the nearly cartoonishly racist founder of the team meant to honor your people through the use of Native American imagery." But at that point, you are arguing against the dictionary. You can take the Bang approach and say "To hell with you PC idiots! I'm allowed to be an offensive jerk if I want. 'Merica!" But....I dunno....does that impress anyone? At that point, you might as well bring out a Chief Wahoo type logo and Chief Nockahoma mascot and really push the envelope. This Reilly episode is really a microcosm of this entire debate. The people arguing that the name is not offensive are almost always, powerful white people saying "No, no, no. Native Americans LOVE the name." Because aside from a few sketchy activists, we are dealing with a practically invisible minority. A minority that is invisible in part because of the actions of people who have stolen Native American imagery to "honor" them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 i would not want to associate with anything political, or nationalistic. i also don't much care for teams named for a concept.I think that typically sounds pretentious. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I could see myself cheering for The Washington BS. (But somebody would probably say it's offensive.) Bulls. They don't have feathers and how dare someone like Dan Snyder lump them in with birds. i would not want to associate with anything political, or nationalistic. i also don't much care for teams named for a concept. I think that typically sounds pretentious. ~Bang That's exactly why I'd tolerate something completely historic, fictional, or mythical (Dragons, Knights, Crusaders, etc.) even if it has nothing to do with DC. The Washington Templar Knights!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Who could he have gotten heat from? And if he did, isn't that proof that there is a bigger movement against the name than some here have argued? My argument on this remains the same. The only way to win this argument (and I don't think it can we won) is to convince people that in the very narrow, very specific use here, the name "Redskins" is not offensive. My brother and I talk about this. If you walk through an airport yelling "Redskins! Redskins" people will be wondering why you are bragging about being the fan of a 1-3 team. If you yell "n-word, n-word" most likely you will get beat up. I think if the organization and fans want the name to stay beyond 2015, the approach you talk about has to be used, that hey, when we say Redskins we are talking about Joe Gibbs and Gary Clark and Mark Rypien, not whatever you think it means i would not want to associate with anything political, or nationalistic. i also don't much care for teams named for a concept. I think that typically sounds pretentious. ~Bang I think it is a DC thing. We have the Capitals and Nationals. The Wizards are just an abomination. The Washington Republic? "Hail to the Republic! Hail Victory!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 My brother and I talk about this. If you walk through an airport yelling "Redskins! Redskins" people will be wondering why you are bragging about being the fan of a 1-3 team. If you yell "n-word, n-word" most likely you will get beat up. I think if the organization and fans want the name to stay beyond 2015, the approach you talk about has to be used, that hey, when we say Redskins we are talking about Joe Gibbs and Gary Clark and Mark Rypien, not whatever you think it means I think it is a DC thing. We have the Capitals and Nationals. The Wizards are just an abomination. The Washington Republic? "Hail to the Republic! Hail Victory!" I mentioned Teddy earlier and got me thinking about the Rough Riders. I don't remember what their purpose was and I'm pretty sure they weren't anywhere close to DC, but it sounds cool. I'm with Bang though...I don't want my football team to have anything to do Capitol Hill or government. That's so lame to me. I actually despise a lot about Washington and politics so I'm cool with our team being slightly detached from the city in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I think if the organization and fans want the name to stay beyond 2015, the approach you talk about has to be used, that hey, when we say Redskins we are talking about Joe Gibbs and Gary Clark and Mark Rypien, not whatever you think it means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I think if the organization and fans want the name to stay beyond 2015, the approach you talk about has to be used, that hey, when we say Redskins we are talking about Joe Gibbs and Gary Clark and Mark Rypien, not whatever you think it means While true, the problem you would have is that anything tangible that is associated with Native American imagery would have to go. Modernize a version of the throwback uniform. Simple Burgundy and Gold theme. Acknowledge the team as Redskins, but now the reference would be only to the players that played for the team. Nothing Native included. Braves and Warpath in the song become metaphors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I mentioned Teddy earlier and got me thinking about the Rough Riders. I don't remember what their purpose was and I'm pretty sure they weren't anywhere close to DC, but it sounds cool. I'm with Bang though...I don't want my football team to have anything to do Capitol Hill or government. That's so lame to me. I actually despise a lot about Washington and politics so I'm cool with our team being slightly detached from the city in that regard. Agreed. "Washington" is offensive, to too many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.