The Name Change

Random Redskins Thoughts

A good first step for Redskins fans would be a 100% boycott of PFT and the Washington Post (and any local sports radio programs incessantly beating the drum). I mean even banning posting of their articles or tweets on Redskins boards. Look at the pressure that fans brought to bear in Zorn's last year - it needs to be universal. If I were Snyder, at this point I'd ban those folks from the lockerroom and press areas. This is a vendetta now and the only ones not recognizing it are the Redskins.

I am going to open a name change thread tonight since I am hijacking this thread again after asking fansince62 not to. It's obvious that we have to discuss this topic here as long as we keep it to the specific issue and don't drift get too far into the political aspect of it.
 
tr1 said:
Not sure what your point is. I saw a lot of Native Americans in a lot of different situations during the commercial...including some poignant shots of poverty.

I thought it was a pretty effective ad about some folks very proud of their heritage.
Click to expand...

My point... pretty simple. They didn't portray the race in a realistic manner visually. The majority of the add was bright and shiny, which is not an accurate portrayal of the race as a group. Has nothing to do with their pride in their heritage, nor has that ever been part of the issue. To me it showed that some of the people have vibrant celebrations, with native dress, and customs, and live a good life. What would you estimate the percentage of the race get to live in that manner ? I think that the add actually helps the teams cause. Had they went hard line, with lots of sad, depressing images, more would likely be sympathetic to their plight, and fight the perceived injustice of a team being named Redskins 80 years ago continuing to use the name.
 
The strange irony behind the tag line here 'native americans call themselves many things...the one thing they don't....' is that it's 100% correct. And NEITHER does anyone else - in other words, the idea that anyone in the modern era is running around using 'Redskins' as an epithet, it's just ridiculous. And what's most offensive to me is that even though the term itself is a very old one, and chosen as the team moniker 80 years ago - even then it wasn't known as an epithet. In some ways, it's like equating 'nigga' with '******', when any sensible person knows, the connotation, context, and meaning one takes from the two terms is not similar.

I guess if you put soaring music and beautiful pictures behind an idea, then it must make sense...
 
It's all politics Boone. The people pushing this are complete frauds.

I'm done with it.
 
I've renamed and reopened this thread so myself and others can stop hijacking the Random Redskins Thoughts thread. There's plenty to discuss here without attaching what's driving the 'name change' zealots politically.
 
For me if the name changes, I will never buy nor wear anything that is not Redskins. I will always refer to them as the Redskins. I think the backlash of a name change could be far worse than what anybody can imagine.

As Mike said we have a state in this country that means "red people", but people choose to forget that and go after a team's logo that is nothing but respectful.
 
Boone said:
A good first step for Redskins fans would be a 100% boycott of PFT and the Washington Post (and any local sports radio programs incessantly beating the drum). I mean even banning posting of their articles or tweets on Redskins boards. Look at the pressure that fans brought to bear in Zorn's last year - it needs to be universal. If I were Snyder, at this point I'd ban those folks from the lockerroom and press areas. This is a vendetta now and the only ones not recognizing it are the Redskins.

I am going to open a name change thread tonight since I am hijacking this thread again after asking fansince62 not to. It's obvious that we have to discuss this topic here as long as we keep it to the specific issue and don't drift get too far into the political aspect of it.
Click to expand...

Yup. They can only win by getting to enough people and making them feel guilty for supporting the name. Don't feed it. There are no more facts that can be provided, the conversation from a technical standpoint is finished. Everything else is just noise at this point.
 
SC_RedskinsFan said:
For me if the name changes, I will never buy nor wear anything that is not Redskins. I will always refer to them as the Redskins. I think the backlash of a name change could be far worse than what anybody can imagine.

As Mike said we have a state in this country that means "red people", but people choose to forget that and go after a team's logo that is nothing but respectful.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I think the only response would be to totally ignore the change in every possible way...
 
My take on the bs related to comparing "redskin" to "n*****" is this: There is indeed a word that has more linkage to that for Natives. Both words have been used to brand a race, often times negatively. Both of them are widespread in their use, and were used to oppress the group. Both are still in common use, sometimes used by the race themselves, and sometimes used by others to insult them. Both were used to brand the race by the majority group.

What is that word that links that way, so akin to how "n*****" is used? It's Indian. Look at Cleveland's baseball team. Their mascot is the exact Native equivalent for blackface. The mascot that should be changed is them.
 
Speaking of PFT...

This name change thing was not an issue until Florio went bat snap boockoo the last couple of years. For nearly a decade, he didn't give the name any kind of attention. So, what happened?

NBC bought the rights to PFT and kept Florio. I won't get into the politics of it (rules are rules here), but the minions at MSNBC all but pull the strings there. Close to the same time frame, Comcast acquires NBC holdings.

So where is Comcast based? Yep, Philadelphia. Remember when the rights to "Hail To The Redskins" was copyrighted/bought? Well, that was the impetus for getting the NFL into Dallas. Minions in Philly trying to blackmail the team name? You can bet that they are playing a big part in it.

So, who has the rights to broadcast fights at casinos in UPSNY? Casinos owned by Halbritter. Yep, that same Comcast/NBC. No full disclosure much, eh?

If the team is somehow forced to give up the name, who would get the rights to it (and all monies in the future)???

As always, follow the money trail and the politics of it. Deep down, it has nothing to do with the name - just the money.

Stand firm Mr. Snyder. The other side is small and petty. You will prevail.
 
All due respect Ken, I think you are vastly underestimating the power of the media to create pressure, enough pressure to bring down just about anyone they desire to bring down. What's ultimately driving it doesn't ultimately matter, but Goodell and NFL are only going to support the Skins until it's clear this isn't going away. I see very little likelihood that he's got the will and backbone to withstand this kind of bad publicity long-term.
 
ABC is not banging this drum. Ditto for CBS. CNN - just a bit. FOX - nada.

However, don't think of me as being naïve on the subject of pressure.
 
It is not far-fetched. Halbritter owns those casinos and the NBC Sports Network owns the rights to broadcast those events.

I lived in the Philly area (until recently) nearly twenty years and I am quite familiar with Comcast.

Harjo has made no secret of wanting the trademarks and profiting from them. You can bet that Halbritter is in the same mold.

Just saying.
 
Boone said:
The strange irony behind the tag line here 'native americans call themselves many things...the one thing they don't....' is that it's 100% correct.
Click to expand...
Wrong.

The video I posted, Red Skin Girl, along with the Indian teams that call themselves Redskins, shows this. Some DO call themselves Redskins. All in a positive way. So, that statement is a lie.

This entire BS movement's only hope is _______ politics. The state of which, including it's history, method, fault, and ultimate goals, cannot be discussed here anymore, in any comprehensive, meaningful way.
They are __________ ___ _______. Does anybody think they give a damn about our football team, or it's fans, history, etc...?

Modus operandi for our _______ brethren.
 
I think that video simply demonstrates there may be exceptions but in general native Americans don't use that term. Where most Redskins fans differ is with the flawed logic that this automatically equates to the term being a slur.

We can and will discuss this topic here because it's important to Redskins fans. And as I've said I think as long as we steer clear from blaming a particular side of the aisle for the 'controversy' there isn't any reason why we can't track what happens with the Skins name discussion.
 
Boone said:
I think that video simply demonstrates there may be exceptions but in general native Americans don't use that term. Where most Redskins fans differ is with the flawed logic that this automatically equates to the term being a slur.
Click to expand...
Was just pickin' nits over the statement being 100% correct.

I think as long as we steer clear from blaming a particular side of the aisle for the 'controversy' there isn't any reason why we can't track what happens with the Skins name discussion.
Click to expand...
Reality makes this near impossible to do. And still be honest.
 
must resist. must resist...... :)

I'm not as fatalistic as some abt this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top