Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

Monkeydad,

I'm not talking about the larger issue of liberals gone wild. You might be surprised to know that I largely agree with you on that point.

But I think you've gone off the track when you suggest that the names Cotton Balls and Cheesburgers could cause as much furor as the name Redskins. Any equivalent names would refer to skin color and race, such as Whiteskins, Blackskins, Brownskins, or Yellowskins. Who doesn't know that race is a hot button in our society? So I think it would be better for a business like the Washington Redskins to try to avoid contoversial societal issues altogether.

The bottom line for me is that it would not bother me if Dan Snyder were to change the team name.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1007247]While I don't say anyone should go out and purposefully offend someone, it is a ridiculous thought to say that in a society of 300+million, we must try not to offend anyone. The name Redskins has a positive meaning for generations of people, and the level of offense within even the Native American/Indian population is questionable at best based on most surveys.

If the Redskins choose to change their name that's fine, but the notion that for the offense of an extreme minority opinion the government has the right to step in, even though there is no threat of physical harm to the minority, is a ludicrous spin on the role of government.[/quote]

+100000000

Couldn't have said it better myself. And I agree with Monkeydad as well. People need to stop finding things to get offended about. And as for those REDSKINS fans who are FOR the name change, don't give me the "it's not a big deal, just change the name" speech. If it's not a big deal, then there is no reason to change the name and keep bringing it up.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

This whole thing with tyranny is a little much. If the name changes it's not going to lead to the downfall of civilization.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

KI, read this history of the name. The team's name is not based on race or even meant to describe Native Americans.

[URL="http://www.footballperspective.com/the-origin-of-the-name-redskins/"]The origin of the name ‘Redskins’[/URL]

[QUOTE]

And Jim Thorpe coached and starred in a team composed entirely of Native Americans called the Oorang (Ohio) Indians in 1922 and 1923. So it seems unlikely that anyone batted an eye at the name “Redskins” being chosen by Marshall.2 And as the Globe’s article points out, the home stadium for the team was known as the Wigwam (and for a brief period when the baseball Braves were known as the Bees, the “Beehive.”) But that didn’t last long, either, because fifteen days after the name change, the Redskins announced that they were moving to Fenway Park. Here is what the Boston Globe printed on July 21, 1933:

REDSKINS’ FOOTBALL TEAM TO SHIFT TO FENWAY PARK

Fenway Park will be the scene of the home games this Fall of the Boston Redskins, formerly known as the Braves, the local club of the National League of Professional Football, George Marshall, president of the Redskins, announced last night.

In his communication Mr. Marshall emphasized that the change was made solely because of the more intimate advantages of playing in the Red Sox park, where the gridiron may be plotted closer to the grandstand and pavilion seats, and the 5000 temporary field seats are almost flush with the sidelines.

Disassociating the team with the Braves didn’t seem like a good reason to remove the Native American association. Perhaps ‘Redskins’ was chosen instead of ‘Indians’ to make fans think of their new co-tenants, the Red Sox, or perhaps Coach Dietz had some influence on Marshall. I’ll note that in 1980, another account of the situation by the Boston Globe indicates that while the events may have been publicly been announced in that order, the cause and effect may have been reversed:

When the “baseball Braves” hiked the rent for 1933, George Preston Marshall moved his club to Fenway Park and was faced with a dilemma. He didn’t want to give his former landlord the satisfaction of retaining their nickname, but his team’s uniforms were imprinted with Indian insignia.

Marshall solved the problem with a practicality and shrewdness that would become his trademark. He dubbed his team the “Redskins,” a name he kept when he moved his roadshow from Boston to Washington four years later. [/QUOTE]So the team was named really to relate to the fans they were playing for, not to take on some Indian-like identity. They had an Indian head logo , but the name Redskins was not meant to describe it at all.

By now, the Fenway and Boston connection is long gone, but the Redskins name is still full of tradition and actually tells the story of how the franchise was born...not a racially-slanderous monicker.

As usual with these kinds of debates, those who don't know the history have no right to be flapping their lips. (not you, the politicians and ignorant whiners about "racism")

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1007257]Monkeydad,

I'm not talking about the larger issue of liberals gone wild. You might be surprised to know that I largely agree with you on that point.

But I think you've gone off the track when you suggest that the names Cotton Balls and Cheesburgers could cause as much furor as the name Redskins. Any equivalent names would refer to skin color and race, such as Whiteskins, Blackskins, Brownskins, or Yellowskins. Who doesn't know that race is a hot button in our society? So I think it would be better for a business like the Washington Redskins to try to avoid contoversial societal issues altogether.

The bottom line for me is that it would not bother me if Dan Snyder were to change the team name.[/quote]

If it were bad for business the Redskins would have changed it in a heartbeat.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=Mattyk;1007268]This whole thing with tyranny is a little much. If the name changes it's not going to lead to the downfall of civilization.[/quote]

Some of us do not want Government to control our every decision.

That was NEVER the intent of this Government or nation, but now it's sadly becoming expected and even worse, accepted.

I'd think a New Yorker like you would be a little tired of Government overstepping its bounds and pillaging your livelihood with oppressive taxation.



This whole issue has come up again because Snyder is looking at real estate in D.C for a stadium site and the PC-moonbats in the D.C. legislature see an opportunity to push Snyder around with a name change being a stipulation for land deal. Corruption, plain and simple. This is mob-like behavior.

Hopefully Snyder just takes his billion-dollar brand and builds somewhere else. If the District doesn't want that revenue on OUR terms, forget them...Virginia would love to have that money and would be proud to be home of the [B]Redskins[/B].

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

Knowing full well how much our fan base has come to resent any head-cases, would anybody think about possibly trying to poach Blackmon off of Jacksonville in the near future? If we could buy low he could become a star with our team.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1007257]Monkeydad,

I'm not talking about the larger issue of liberals gone wild. You might be surprised to know that I largely agree with you on that point.

But I think you've gone off the track when you suggest that the names Cotton Balls and Cheesburgers could cause as much furor as the name Redskins. Any equivalent names would refer to skin color and race, such as Whiteskins, Blackskins, Brownskins, or Yellowskins. Who doesn't know that race is a hot button in our society? So I think it would be better for a business like the Washington Redskins to try to avoid contoversial societal issues altogether.

The bottom line for me is that it would not bother me if Dan Snyder were to change the team name.[/quote]

Then you might as well change the name of the Vikings.
Then you might as well change the name of the Cowboys.
Then you might as well change the name of the Buccaneers.
Then you might as well change the name of the Fighting Irish.
Then you might as well change the name of the Raiders.
Then you might as well change the name of the Browns.
Then you might as well change the name of the Chiefs.
Then you might as well change the name of the Patriots.
Then you might as well change the name of the Pirates.

The list can go on and on. Most of those I listed are groups that were considered violent toward other ethnic groups, name of a color, or glorifying people who commit crimes. So let's just change anything and everything in our history and culture that may offend someone, so that we can all walk together on eggshells happy and gleeful. [/sarcasm]

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=cdskins26;1007272]Knowing full well how much our fan base has come to resent any head-cases, would anybody think about possibly trying to poach Blackmon off of Jacksonville in the near future? If we could buy low he could become a star with our team.[/quote]

Then he throws a birthday bash for himself and we lose half our roster! :D

He's a stud when on the field. When...

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

there are a couple teams (I think) called the fighting whities. why don't we all go jump their sh@#?

oh yeah, that's right, because no one cares.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1007270]If it were bad for business the Redskins would have changed it in a heartbeat.[/quote]

You know what would be bad for Snyder's business? A rebrand.

It's a huge expense from the team uniforms, the merchandise, the stadium, all promotional/marketing materials, the copyrights and trademarks with legal fees and likely a lot of things we can't even imagine that need changed.

On top of that, you risk losing a lot of fans, especially the long-time fans who are angered by the change.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

Im not joking when I say Bruce and Dan need to approach the DC government and let them know how much they would hate to change the Franchise name from Washington to Virginia if there is a change from Redskins. Let them know they would go ahead not associate with anything within the DC city bounderies. They have significant leverage and believe me, our state would be more than willing to accomadate that change. Fortunately our state unlike DC and Maryland has been managed very well through these bad economic times. We could easily put together a nice package to lure them to Northern Va.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=Chico23231;1007278]Im not joking when I say Bruce and Dan need to approach the DC government and let them know how much they would hate to change the Franchise name from Washington to Virginia if there is a change from Redskins. Let them know they would go ahead not associate with anything within the DC city bounderies. They have significant leverage and believe me, our state would be more than willing to accomadate that change. Fortunately our state unlike DC and Maryland has been managed very well through these bad economic times. We could easily put together a nice package to lure them to Northern Va.[/quote]

Yes, if the DC idiocrats pursue this any further, remove the name Washington. Of course, as I just mentioned, that will be costly but hey, the if the Los Angeles Angels/California Angels/Anaheim Angels of Los Angeles can afford to keep changing their city name without actually relocating, I'm sure Dan Snyder can afford it and he has a legitimate reason for doing it, standing up for his team.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=That Guy;1007276]there are a couple teams (I think) called the fighting whities. why don't we all go jump their sh@#?

oh yeah, that's right, because no one cares.[/quote]

The Fighting Whites (Later named the Fighting Whities based on the media mistaking the Whites for Whities) was meant as a joke to protest Indian mascots being used by College and Professional teams. It was started by a group of people that were primarily White, Indian, and Latino.

The stunt both backfired... and was genius...

It backfired for the cause because it became hugely popular. It was taken as funny, not racist.

It was genius because it became so popular that they commercialized it, sold T-shirts, and became millionaires.

Re: Official Redskins Off-Season News & Rumors-Part Trois
 

[quote=skinsguy;1007267]+100000000

And as for those REDSKINS fans who are FOR the name change, don't give me the "it's not a big deal, just change the name" speech. If it's not a big deal, then there is no reason to change the name and keep bringing it up.[/quote]

The fact that it would not be a big deal to me if the name were changed does not mean that there is no reason to change it. I think there are a number of good reasons for the team to change it. Some of them are simply practical business reasons. Like you, Dan Snyder may wish that opposition to the name would just go away - but it won't.