SkinsHokieFan Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Believe it or not, the function of your government is not to be your boss or tell you what to do. There would have to be a Constitutional amendment for the government to "force" a privately owned business to change its name. Public pressure? Sure. Dispute to the holding of the trademark? Okay, that might do it. But when did we become a populace who believes the government can just do whatever it wants. Here is where it could happen If the Redskins ever wanted a stadium in DC again, more specifically the RFK site (which is federally owned) Congress could pass a law making transfer of the property to DC for building a new NFL stadium contingent on the name changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffmark1 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 There is a crowd source to raise 6Bil to buy the Skins. That number is closer to reality. Anything under 2billion is not going to happen ever. I don't care about any "evaluations" Snyder bought the team highly leveraged for almost a billion IIRC. They own their stadium. They want some ROI if there was a sale. If I was snyder or an investor I'd want a 10x return on investment at least which pegs the sale price at around 8 billion. So we will likely have to wait until an offer is in that realm. May be another 20 years, Snyder is super young he bought the team at 34. Snyder loves the team and it just prints money for him, theres no reason for him to sell so the evaluations don't imply a true market value. It'd be like a Van Gogh that is evaluated at10million but it brings 100million at an auction, but this Picasso is owned by someone who doesn't want to sell, enjoys the view, and people pay a ton to see it. Here is where it could happen If the Redskins ever wanted a stadium in DC again, more specifically the RFK site (which is federally owned) Congress could pass a law making transfer of the property to DC for building a new NFL stadium contingent on the name changing. the redskins own their own stadium, which is different from many teams. its possible we will get a new owner before a new stadium. Its not exactly small, and it has a ton of premium seats. Even from an environmental impact view it'd be silly to abandon FedEx for around 20 more years. We just need to win and maybe the experience will suck less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 IMO...nothing short of imprisonment and/or seizure of all assets is going to pry this franchise from Snyder's grubby little hands. That being said, if Snyder should decide to sell, or an ownership change occurs for whatever reason, the name and imagery will retire. Buffett would understand this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 IMO...nothing short of imprisonment and/or seizure of all assets is going to pry this franchise from Snyder's grubby little hands. That being said, if Snyder should decide to sell, or an ownership change occurs for whatever reason, the name and imagery will retire. Buffett would understand this. If so, that would be a shame...because the imagery is due to Native Americans themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffmark1 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 If so, that would be a shame...because the imagery is due to Native Americans themselves. its weird how our first owner was part native american. Most native american's hate being called Indians but don't mind Redman or Redskins as thats how they referred to themselves throughout history. But the cleveland indians get a pass, every writer who writes about this and refers to the Native Americans as indians gets a pass, but the reality and origins of the situation is not discussed. This is just other people being offended for the Native Americans. PC does not equal reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick7423 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Here is where it could happen If the Redskins ever wanted a stadium in DC again, more specifically the RFK site (which is federally owned) Congress could pass a law making transfer of the property to DC for building a new NFL stadium contingent on the name changing. This is not the same thing as having the Government become the name police. Washington already forced the Skins to integrate in the early 60's for the rights to use RFK. If the Skins wanted to go to DC, that city, and by default the Federal Government, have the right to demand the name be changed as it then becomes a direct reflection on that city. The team also has a right to decline and make a home somewhere else and still keep the 'WASHINGTON Redskins' name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 its weird how our first owner was part native american. Most native american's hate being called Indians but don't mind Redman or Redskins as thats how they referred to themselves throughout history. But the cleveland indians get a pass, every writer who writes about this and refers to the Native Americans as indians gets a pass, but the reality and origins of the situation is not discussed. This is just other people being offended for the Native Americans. PC does not equal reality. I think you mean coach, not owner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffmark1 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I thought GPM was as well but I'll check that out. It was my understanding GPM was part native american like a grandparent and that it wasn't publicized but he did sort of poke fun at himself about it and the name was part of that. Dietz was. But can we agree GPM didn't coin the term? I think there is ample evidence it was used throughout our recorded history of interactions with the Native Americans as far back as we have records for they called themselves the redman or redskins like the Chinese said they were from the middle kingdom. I think if we just set up a fund for Native Americans and donated a piece of the profits we could keep the Redskins name. It seems to me that most Native American, if they have an objection is that they were treated terribly and now others are making money on their likeness, i think giving back to them would address this concern and maybe bring us some needed positive PR. Does a sale imply a name change? I don't know but we are hyper PC as a society right now, maybe we won't be in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I'm at a point where I feel it's just to convenient to blame Snyder for how much we've sucked. He's spent an ungodly amount of money on this football team, is more than willing to outspend any other owner to improve his team, it just hasn't worked. He's hired the great college coach, the legend, the well-respected and for some reason they've all failed for the most part. Sure he can be a douche and a lot of the disdain from the fans has been well earned however I personally love having an owner who is willing to do anything to win. I'm tired of blaming Snyder, at some point the coaches and players need to do the job they've been paid handsomely to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 If I were in the Dan's shoes (never going to happen - I wear an adult size 11) I'd offer Buffett a limited stake in ownership since he's a lifelong fan. Why not? Let's make sure real Skins fans own the team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 At this point, I don't really care if a new owner were to take over. For a while I wanted to win under Snyder to show that we could. Now, I want to win under Snyder simply because it seems he'll be the owner for most of the rest of my life. If a rich guy came in and took over the team, that would be kind of exciting. As for the name change, if that's the only thing standing in the way of a better ownership group, I'll happily root for the Warriors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Here is where it could happen If the Redskins ever wanted a stadium in DC again, more specifically the RFK site (which is federally owned) Congress could pass a law making transfer of the property to DC for building a new NFL stadium contingent on the name changing. If he really wanted to take them back to DC, the RFK site is not the only place he could go. I'm sure there is some private land somewhere with some dilapidated old buildings that he could purchse the land to build on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.