NoCalMike Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 It's weird how the media is making strides to go anti-"redskins" as the actual protesting of the name by groups seems to be a non-issue. It's like no one cared about the issue when the team sucked, but now that the team is sort of becoming a talked about team again, it's time to throw gasoline on this even though the root of the issue seems to care less and less. Native American groups themselves on the whole seem to generally care less about this than some of these media members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I stopped readying when they ranked the pass happy New England Patriots at number SEVEN.......7......7.......7.....7....??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autoidiodyssey Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I think you do him a dis-service. He had a few lonhg TD runs last year and I don't recall him being caught from behind too much. He had a 39 yard TD against the Bucs, a 32 yard TD against Dallas, and plenty of other 25+yard runs. I don't remember him being caught from behind either. The run against Tampa would have been a TD from 60 yds. He might have been caught on the Dallas run if it had been from 45 or 50 yds. Look at a guy like Emmit Smith. He was not the fastest RB out there but he rarely got caught from behind. But really he never broke that many long runs. Of the 4400 carries he had less than 20 went for more than 40 yds. Lack of "breakaway speed" was not an issue for those Cowboy teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 "Movement" toward "change"....I'm laughing my ass off at these pretentious losers that think changing the Redskins name is going to actually make the world a better place. Does anybody actually think Peter King is talented? He's just a lucky tool. Okay, can someone explain to me how the team name "Redskins" is considered racist? To me, racism is the implication of one race being superior over another, simply due to race. The simple label of a race doesn't qualify. (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 7, 2013 Author Share Posted September 7, 2013 Okay, can someone explain to me how the team name "Redskins" is considered racist? To me, racism is the implication of one race being superior over another, simply due to race. The simple label of a race doesn't qualify. (?) Don't hold your breath lol... If you get an answer at all, it will fall into one of three categories: 1) "It's the exact same as 'Blackskins' or 'Yellowskins'." No...it isn't. 2) "You're referring to an entire race by their skin color, which is racist." No...it isn't. "White" and "Black" are still used to this day without any issue. 3) "Native Americans are offended by it, and that's all you need to know." Translation: "I don't know why it's racist, but I don't need to know why." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 7, 2013 Share Posted September 7, 2013 Or somebody could suggest taking that question to the "name change" thread. (Mods probably a bit touchy about this topic, since they've been poked with a stick at least twice, that I know of). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rpredskins Posted September 7, 2013 Share Posted September 7, 2013 Based on team rushing stats, this list is a joke. Based on leading rusher's stats, this list is a joke. Based on actual game film, this list is a joke.There is literally zero justification for any of this unless somehow #2 running back counts for 40% of the score. Not putting Adrian Peterson first, regardless of who is backing him up, is a travesty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.