Paintrain's all encompassing 'discuss all things offseason' thread (Version 2.0)

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Disrespectfully disagree.

Having 2 pools and 16 cabanas at an NFL stadium is just too awesome. Now if only it was at FedEx Field instead of the darn EverBank Field, you can bet your a** I do my best to make the trip up there to see a Skins game sometime soon(the money, of course, wouldn't be a problem at all. LOL).

One thing that is BS is having NFL Redzone showing on the screens in the endzones. This is Jaguars football; don't show other teams scores' during the game! What's that going to do to the home fans?

Guy #1: "Yeah, I'm here at EverBank Field watching my favorite team play, but it's so crappy, I think I'll watch NFL Redzone so I can see someone besides our opponet score. Hey, dude, check it out; there's actually a team that's putting up points!"

Guy#2: "Yeah, and here we are with a score of a million to zero. That's depressing, bro, let's go home."

Guy#1. "We suck. Jaguars suck."

See what I'm saying?

No , seriously and with no disrespect intended .Watching the scores of the other teams especially the ones in your own division have always been part of the game but if you want to go to the beach go to the beach just no need for that type of promotional BS in Football ,have a good product on the field and fans will come to the games .

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Giantone

No , seriously and with no disrespect intended .Watching the scores of the other teams especially the ones in your own division have always been part of the game but if you want to go to the beach go to the beach just no need for that type of promotional BS in Football ,have a good product on the field and fans will come to the games .

In the meantime though, why not add some cabanas? This is a great idea by a team whose fan base is woefully underappreciated to begin with

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

In the meantime though, why not add some cabanas? This is a great idea by a team whose fan base is woefully underappreciated to begin with

Anyone who can be devoted to the Jags has my respect. That's hardcore fandom.

[Chico23231]

Anti-Redskins commercial to air during NBA Finals | ProFootballTalk

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Not believable imo. Why say that years later?

Exactly.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by mooby

Jacksonville Jaguars to have poolside cabanas in stadium - ESPN

I thought it was interesting that this article mentioned we have the highest population turnover of any NFL city, figured I'd share. I knew we'd be up there but had no idea we were #1. At least now we can claim we are #1 in something.

Maybe the Hooters girls can serve food and drinks!! I like this idea of a developmental league
Developmental league has support, no launch plan - The Washington Post

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by budw38

Maybe the Hooters girls can serve food and drinks!! I like this idea of a developmental league
Developmental league has support, no launch plan - The Washington Post

Both your ideas sound great!

Seriously though, a developmental league is a great idea, provided it's in the States and not Europe or somewhere else. The NFL talent level and so many players, specifically thinking of UDFAs, would benefit.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Anti-Redskins commercial to air during NBA Finals | ProFootballTalk

That is a powerful ad.

As I said before, Dan Snyder is on the wrong side of history with his stand on changing the team name. In today's cultural and political climate, the letter from 50 Democratic U.S. Senators calling the name "racist" and asking Snyder to change it should have borne much more weight with him.

I wonder how many Republican Senators would have signed that letter if the political parties didn't distrust and obstruct one another so much that the Democrats didn't even bother to circulate it among them?

This time around, the pressure isn't going to fade away. Snyder might as well claim to have had an epiphany and agree to change the name. He'll be forced to do so eventually. If he does it now, he can look like a born again good guy while finding a thousand ways to make money off the name change.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

That is a powerful ad.

As I said before, Dan Snyder is on the wrong side of history with his stand on changing the team name. In today's cultural and political climate, the letter from 50 Democratic U.S. Senators calling the name "racist" and asking Snyder to change it should have borne much more weight with him.

I wonder how many Republican Senators would have signed that letter if the political parties didn't distrust and obstruct one another so much that the Democrats didn't even bother to circulate it among them?

This time around, the pressure isn't going to fade away. Snyder might as well claim to have had an epiphany and agree to change the name. He'll be forced to do so eventually. If he does it now, he can look like a born again good guy while finding a thousand ways to make money off the name change.

I said this when they aired it around the SB. If you throw in clips of Native American High Schools that still use the Redskins name and logo(with the voiceover saying football player one time and Redskins the next), clips of Redskins game footage (with voice over saying athlete) and fans singing Hail to the Redskins, and a couple simple other edits, the ad would easily be more honest and also support the name, as most Native Americans currently do. Like most propaganda/commercials, it's bias is pretty obvious, and built on half truths and relies on people not using a shred of critical thinking - so it probably will work.

[SmootSmack]

If you read one column about the Redskins name issue, make it this one

True Lies and the Washington Redskins

[over the mountain]

Heard DS hired a lobbyist firm to take over this issue.

Good move - BA should only have to worry and spend time and effort on football operations, not necessarily PR and senate action issues this is becoming.

Bad - that is a lot of money that could been spent on reducing the cost of parking, upgrading a facility or a zillion other things that could have made the fan or player experience better.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I said this when they aired it around the SB. If you throw in clips of Native American High Schools that still use the Redskins name and logo(with the voiceover saying football player one time and Redskins the next), clips of Redskins game footage (with voice over saying athlete) and fans singing Hail to the Redskins, and a couple simple other edits, the ad would easily be more honest and also support the name, as most Native Americans currently do. Like most propaganda/commercials, it's bias is pretty obvious, and built on half truths and relies on people not using a shred of critical thinking - so it probably will work.

I do not believe that most Native Americans support the name. It certainly offends enough Native Americans to incentivize tribal and other organizations to campaign against it.

By the way, what percentage of any racial group needs to be offended by any racially descriptive word for that word to be eliminated from common usage? Well under 50% as a group, I would think. Only one person would need to be offended for me to stop using the word if I'm talking to a Native American who is insulted by my use of it. Why not err on the side of being respectful?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

If you read one column about the Redskins name issue, make it this one

True Lies and the Washington Redskins

Mic drop. Well written and informative.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

If you read one column about the Redskins name issue, make it this one

True Lies and the Washington Redskins

That is a good article in some ways, especially if one substitutes the phrase "empirical evidence" for "imperial evidence."

But it problematically cites many polls in favor of the name. There are many positive polls but I haven't seen one that has a scent of scientific rigor. Without polls done with sound methods, those polls will not convince opponents.

I am with KI Skins Fan on this: in the long run it doesn't matter what the true history of the word is or anything else like that. In the long run, either the trademark will be vacated or sponsors (rightly or wrongly) will withdraw money from the NFL. When either of these things happens, the name will change. The article hints at this outcome, too.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I do not believe that most Native Americans support the name. It certainly offends enough Native Americans to incentivize tribal and other organizations to campaign against it.

By the way, what percentage of any racial group needs to be offended by any racially descriptive word for that word to be eliminated from common usage? Well under 50% as a group, I would think. Only one person would need to be offended for me to stop using the word if I'm talking to a Native American who is insulted by my use of it. Why not err on the side of being respectful?

What empirical evidence do you have to support that belief. If the Oneida tribes could have any poll that showed their point of view I believe they would be touting them across all the major networks, and also reference it in that "powerful" ad you linked.

As for what percentage, I think 25-30% would be enough in my opinion. Basically the so-called super majority used in most legislative actions. Dirtbag said it earlier and I agree, if an unbiased authoritative polling institution issued a comprehensive poll that showed that more than 30% of Native Americans felt the name was a major negative influence, then the team ought to begin the process of changing the name. I definitely don't think policy or especially private business ought to be driven by the thought that if only 1 person is offended, basically that creates untenable conditions, and I am willing to bet that you can find one person (or one sliver subgroup) who is/are offended by any type of naming.