Random Commanders Thoughts

*insert snarky comment about you never admitting you're wrong*

One has to actually BE wrong in order to actually admit such a thing. :)
 
WaPo column:

"I was most surprised by the finding that 4 out of 5 Native Americans said they would not be personally offended if a non-native person called them a “redskin.” That suggests that dictionaries should add some kind of caveat in defining the word as a slur. Perhaps the reference books should add a second, non-pejorative definition, with a capital “R”: “Redskins: a National Football League franchise based in the Washington, D.C., area.” There’s a good chance that decades of NFL publicity and millions of dollars of promotion have transformed the word’s meaning such that most people, on hearing it, think first of the team."

It's almost like he hasn't got a ****ing clue.
 
I know you think the guy walks on water, after turning it into wine, but please, give me a friggin break.

He may have put his Redskins HC career on the line, but his NFL HC career?

Can you think of a single HC in history that was fired in his very first season as a HC and actually got hired as a HC again? No?

Yes, his chances of getting hired as a HC again would have been miniscule.

Of course he had to let RG3 play his first season. Then stick with him for one TC to see what he picked up. Then he pulled the plug immediately.

Quick, decisive and a huge gamble for a beginning HC.
 
What lost me about that article is he still refers to them as 'Indian.' They're not 'Indians,' they're Native Americans. You want someone to feel disrespected? Walk up to a Bolivian person and call them Mexican. Walk up to an Irish person and call them Scottish or English. Calling a Native American an 'Indian' is as much a misrepresentation as calling them a 'Redskin.'
 
I didn't see that issue either. As a matter of fact my HS football team were the Indians.

Well this guy wants to play the high horse game about respect and proper representation yet he calls them Indians... just a contradiction to me.
 
I'm just glad that we didn't violate the fifth law of thermodynamics here. You know, the one about friction on internet message boards not being humanly possible.
 
What lost me about that article is he still refers to them as 'Indian.' They're not 'Indians,' they're Native Americans. You want someone to feel disrespected? Walk up to a Bolivian person and call them Mexican. Walk up to an Irish person and call them Scottish or English. Calling a Native American an 'Indian' is as much a misrepresentation as calling them a 'Redskin.'

Don't agree there either. They call themselves Indians all the time. They wouldn't generally refer to themselves as NA they would self label with their actual tribe like Lakota. Generically I have heard the term Indian used by Indians a lot.
 
Don't agree there either. They call themselves Indians all the time. They wouldn't generally refer to themselves as NA they would self label with their actual tribe like Lakota. Generically I have heard the term Indian used by Indians a lot.

You are correct. The variance on terms used is quite large.
 
Generally I agree with you, which is why I was so shocked to see someone say "I was wrong. I guess the name is ok."

When does that ever happen? :)


But he didn't say the name is OK, he simply said he won't continue to put forth an effort to change the name. He then went on to use the same misinformation that has been sold as gospel to suggest 50 Democratic, US Senators found the name offensive, when that is a lie. 50 Senators from states across the US did, but there are thousands of them...and there aren't even 50 Democratic US Senators in office today.

Not trying to get political, just trying to suggest this guy is still full of shit.
 
Can you think of a single HC in history that was fired in his very first season as a HC and actually got hired as a HC again? No?

Yes, his chances of getting hired as a HC again would have been miniscule.

Of course he had to let RG3 play his first season. Then stick with him for one TC to see what he picked up. Then he pulled the plug immediately.

Quick, decisive and a huge gamble for a beginning HC.


Umm...Marty Schottenheimer? Not only did he become a coach again, he created a quality team in San Diego.
 
Can you think of a single HC in history that was fired in his very first season as a HC and actually got hired as a HC again? No?

Yes, his chances of getting hired as a HC again would have been miniscule.

Of course he had to let RG3 play his first season. Then stick with him for one TC to see what he picked up. Then he pulled the plug immediately.

Quick, decisive and a huge gamble for a beginning HC.
Getting fired by Dan Snyder, for standing up to him meddling, would have been portrayed as a big win for Gruden.

And, if he's half as totally awesome as you shriek he is, he'd have no problem getting another gig.

He waited until someone else took the lead (Scot) before executing his obligation to the team.

So, he finally made the tough decision, which is what he gets paid quite handsomely for.

He did his job. He did not cure cancer, or end world hunger. Though I'm sure if either of those things ever do happen, you'll find a way to give him full credit for it.
 
Don't agree there either. They call themselves Indians all the time. They wouldn't generally refer to themselves as NA they would self label with their actual tribe like Lakota. Generically I have heard the term Indian used by Indians a lot.

I'll be honest, I have not had an extensive time exposed to that particular ethnic group so you know more then I do about it. I had always understood that the term 'Indian' was give under false pretenses, and based on that I assumed that it would be preferred that not be used.
 
What lost me about that article is he still refers to them as 'Indian.' They're not 'Indians,' they're Native Americans. You want someone to feel disrespected? Walk up to a Bolivian person and call them Mexican. Walk up to an Irish person and call them Scottish or English. Calling a Native American an 'Indian' is as much a misrepresentation as calling them a 'Redskin.'

Aaaah, they're Indians ... :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9VMY8X9rU8
 
I'll be honest, I have not had an extensive time exposed to that particular ethnic group so you know more then I do about it. I had always understood that the term 'Indian' was give under false pretenses, and based on that I assumed that it would be preferred that not be used.

I think the bottom line lesson for all of us here is we can't assume anything on behalf of a group that is no more homogeneous than Latinos are.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 11, Members: 0, Guests: 11)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top