Name Change News

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
piggie
User avatar
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:52 pm

Re: Name Change News

Postby hanburgerheel » Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:09 pm

If Dan Snyder concedes this fight I will cease being a Redskins fan (literally). I have never liked him as an owner for many reasons. I'll simply quit paying any attention to the whole sport of NFL Football. I have a 45-year history as a Redskins fan and I will prefer to keep the memories pure. The team has been a failure ever since he bought the franchise and I would view this as the ultimate and final failure I will endure as a fan. I might possibly renew a fan-hood if he ever sold the team. I will just focus all the more on collegiate sports.

This entire "controversy" has been contrived and invented and embellished into some kind of distraction and politically-correct pacification. The entire culture is suffering intellectually because of this overly-sensitive crap. If people cannot understand how the context of Redskin in The Washington Redskins is completely benign, and actually shows honor, then that is their problem. If you are the owner, or fan, or even casual observer, and you have to bend YOUR version of it, then you're failing even more than the ones who cannot understand you.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:09 pm
Location: Brentwood, MD.

Re: Name Change News

Postby fabe » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:07 pm

Attention people of the Oneida Indian Nation. You are NOT Redskins! WE are Redskins! We are a part of Redskins nation, and we are damn proud of it!

There, now that's settled. Can we move on from it now?

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1643
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:44 am
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Name Change News

Postby markshark84 » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:16 pm

PAPDOG67 wrote:Well if we have to change the name Redskins, you better get on the phone with Notre Dame and tell them they must follow suit. As an American of Irish decent, I am appalled at the depiction of my race as a bunch of drunks always looking for a good donnybrook. Oh, and get Hal Steinbrenner on the phone too. As someone from New York, I do not like to be called a 'damn yankee' by southerners. It hurts my feelings.


While I get your point, I think the "sensitivity" is a result of the word "skins" being in the name (at least that is my take). That said, if they changed the team name to "whiteskins" -- I couldn't care less. The real question is why now --- the name made it through the WWII and the civil rights movement --- yet all of a sudden it has mysteriously become an issue. IMHO, this is another example of ESPN deciding they need to create another controversy.

But the fact is that when dealing with PRIVATE companies --- such as the redskins ---- historically the government has allowed the market to dictate appropriate action. Therefore, if people truly are against the name and deem it culturally insensitive, then those people should boycott games, apparell, tickets, merchandise, etc. If it results in such a signficant financial hit to the franchise, then Dan will have no other choice but to change the name........ But alas ---- that would never happen because no one outside of the about 100 members of the media and activist groups consider it offensive.
RIP Sean Taylor. You will be missed.

piggie
User avatar
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:52 pm

Re: Name Change News

Postby hanburgerheel » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:20 pm

fabe wrote:Attention people of the Oneida Indian Nation. You are NOT Redskins! WE are Redskins! We are a part of Redskins nation, and we are damn proud of it!

There, now that's settled. Can we move on from it now?

AB-SO-FREAKIN-LUTELY!

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:09 pm
Location: Brentwood, MD.

Re: Name Change News

Postby fabe » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:27 pm

If our players and/or coaches start protesting the name, then I'm done. I quit. Seriously. It's bad enough that the team is playing awfully, but now I have to hear about this crap every week?

The worst thing a football team can have is a locker room distraction, and if players/coaches start complaining about the name of the team that pays them millions, then there is something really wrong in the world.

08 Champ
Posts: 13097
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Re:

Postby SkinsJock » Thu Oct 31, 2013 4:10 pm

riggofan wrote:I'm not arguing whether its right or wrong. But I seriously think that the NFL is going to make them do *something* to address this issue. Its not an issue the NFL wants to see being debated week after week, and simply saying "NO" may not be enough anymore.

I may be missing something here … I understand that Dan met with Roger … then Roger was meeting with these people to listen to their views on this issue …

from all accounts, Dan is the only one that can change the name … Dan made it clear to Roger and the NFL, that, while he respects all the parties on both sides of this, he has decided not to change the name at this time …

there may be some changes that the NFL will ask Dan to consider and those might happen but one thing seems fairly clear …

the name, Washington Redskins is not changing at this time =D>
"the things we’re doing are things he’s comfortable with & complement his strengths" Gruden on RG3

RG3 needs to learn to read defenses better & utilize his talents and the players around him better

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 578
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:12 am
Location: Hemet CA

Re: Name Change News

Postby BigRedskinDaddy » Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:40 pm

markshark84 wrote:While I get your point, I think the "sensitivity" is a result of the word "skins" being in the name (at least that is my take). That said, if they changed the team name to "whiteskins" -- I couldn't care less. The real question is why now --- the name made it through the WWII and the civil rights movement --- yet all of a sudden it has mysteriously become an issue. IMHO, this is another example of ESPN deciding they need to create another controversy.

But the fact is that when dealing with PRIVATE companies --- such as the redskins ---- historically the government has allowed the market to dictate appropriate action. Therefore, if people truly are against the name and deem it culturally insensitive, then those people should boycott games, apparell, tickets, merchandise, etc. If it results in such a signficant financial hit to the franchise, then Dan will have no other choice but to change the name........ But alas ---- that would never happen because no one outside of the about 100 members of the media and activist groups consider it offensive.



Excellent points, brother. I hope this controversy follolws suit as you indicated. You sound as if you are familiar with similar situations in the past, and I can take heart from that. (?? not sure I understand what I just wrote, so nobody feel awkward if they don't either) I may have missed the sarcasm, but you don't seriously believe ESPN is behind this do you? I thinl we could put every liberal humanitarian group there is on a dartboard, from the ACLU to the NAACP, hit one, call it the instigators, and we'd be pretty darn close to the truth.
SB 17 - 22 - 26 - ??

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4468
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Re: Re:

Postby riggofan » Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:12 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
riggofan wrote:I'm not arguing whether its right or wrong. But I seriously think that the NFL is going to make them do *something* to address this issue. Its not an issue the NFL wants to see being debated week after week, and simply saying "NO" may not be enough anymore.

I may be missing something here … I understand that Dan met with Roger … then Roger was meeting with these people to listen to their views on this issue …

from all accounts, Dan is the only one that can change the name … Dan made it clear to Roger and the NFL, that, while he respects all the parties on both sides of this, he has decided not to change the name at this time …

there may be some changes that the NFL will ask Dan to consider and those might happen but one thing seems fairly clear …

the name, Washington Redskins is not changing at this time =D>


Of course Snyder is the only person who can legally change the name, but you don't think the NFL can exert some pressure and influence on that decision??? I don't know if Goodell and the other owners would do this or not, but there is no shortage of ways they can pressure Snyder if they want to see the name changed.

I'm sure at the NFL level though its just a business decision. Which hurts business more: negative publicity over the name Redskins or pissing off fans by changing the name?

08 Champ
Posts: 13097
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Re: Name Change News

Postby SkinsJock » Fri Nov 01, 2013 2:01 pm

the NFL (Roger & the other owners) would like Dan Snyder to change the name and they are going to 'manage' the issue by 'supporting' those that want a name change while at the same time they understand (and unofficially support) Dan's decision not to change the name (at this time) My 2 cents.


the issue can be discussed ad infinitum … at this time the name is not changing
"the things we’re doing are things he’s comfortable with & complement his strengths" Gruden on RG3

RG3 needs to learn to read defenses better & utilize his talents and the players around him better

JSPB22
User avatar
Posts: 15915
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:03 am
Location: Location, LOCATION!

Re: Name Change News

Postby Deadskins » Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:06 pm

Sometimes I wonder if certain refs punish us because they don't like the name.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.


Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)

Hail to the Redskins!

DarthMonk
Posts: 4256
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:58 pm

Re: Name Change News

Postby DarthMonk » Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:45 am

Mike Wise
Columnist
By defending Redskins name, NFL’s Roger Goodell is on wrong side of history

I went to SiriusXM this week for Joe Madison’s radio show to be part of a panel on the NFL Name That Dare Not Be Named.

Because no one from the team or league ever shows up at these events to tell Native American people how they’re being “honored,” what usually happens is about 20 to 30 like-minded people get together and ground and pound Daniel Snyder into pulp.

But this week there was a watershed moment: The intransigent team owner was spared the angriest rhetoric. Oh, Dan took a couple jabs, but the majority of the ire was directed at the guy in charge of the most rich and powerful sports league in North America.

“If this name has to be changed for him, Roger Goodell is going to go down next to George Preston Marshall in history,” Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said.

Just like that: the NFL commissioner equated to an avowed segregationist, the original owner of a franchise Marshall loved to call “the South’s team.”

The stunner last Tuesday wasn’t that an NFL body granted a Native American group an audience over the issue of the Washington football team’s name for the first time in decades. No, the stunner was that Snyder was let off the hook, his “never” stance backed up by Gen. Goodell and his wrong-side-of-history cavalry.

The man who months ago said, “If one person is offended, we have to listen,” wouldn’t even deign to meet face to face with actual offended tribal members who want the name changed.

Instead, he met with Snyder to affirm their solidarity to profit off a slur and the next day sent his lieutenants to — get this — defend the name.

Again, let’s be clear: Roger Goodell is on the wrong side.

When David Stern was asked earlier this year whether he would tolerate a team featuring the racial makeup of a people in his league, the NBA commissioner shook his head, no.

“Could you imagine any owner getting approval to use that name for his expansion team today?” Stern told me after a program highlighting his career at the National Museum of the American Indian. “Of course not.”

The days of making Snyder a cretin on this issue are done in this space. He is no longer the target; he’s just a figurehead with financial and emotional backing from the highest-ranking superior in his army.

From foolish money in free agency to callous disregard for people who could no longer afford to pay for their ticket plans, we always knew Dan couldn’t help himself. That’s just who he was.

Snyder needed a strong, progressive leader to silence him, not parrot him on this issue, a person looking out for the long-term economic interests of the NFL and his own legacy.

Instead, he got another kid who wants Robert Griffin III’s autograph.

Of all the people plucked to inherit Paul Tagliabue’s job it had to be a lawyer who grew up on Sonny and Sam, on Gibbs, Riggo and the Hogs.

“I always looked at it as something of an honor,” Goodell said in London two weeks ago. “I walked around our house singing ‘Hail to the [team’s name]’ as a kid, so it’s something I always looked at as a positive thing.”

And I had a burgundy-and-gold rain poncho with the logo in the middle of my chest as a 6-year-old. Though I had no affinity for the team growing up in Northern California, I ordered it out of the Montgomery Ward catalog because I told my grandmother I wanted to be an Indian.

When I became an adult, I met scores of people who told me their culture and spiritual practices have been misappropriated by others for profit. These people never ask for royalties; they only ask that we stop buying our kids ponchos with red-pigmented faces on them so their kids don’t have to look at them. They ask that we respect their intellect, creativity and new-millennium future as much as we respect their bravery during the saddest moments of their existence some 150 years ago.

Goodell’s emissaries didn’t have to tell them they were ready to change the name. But they also didn’t have to insult a race of people who have waited more than 40 years for a meeting to hear a linguistics lecture, held in an office of the same law firm who has racked up hundreds of billable hours the past two decades at the NFL’s expense for telling Suzan Shown Harjo and other plaintiffs in U.S. Patent and Trademark Court to essentially get over it and go back to the res.

Too often, I get the old, “Can you stop trying to make me feel guilty about my football team?” Mostly, they’re right. I have no right to tell you what you should be offended by, just as you have no right to tell me what someone should be honored by.

But for a moment let’s talk logic, not emotion. Take the David Stern litmus test: If you had an expansion team in any sport, do you think that name would be used for a team today?

No.

Now ask yourself what the defenders of the name are really defending — and weigh it against the cost of keeping it. When you weigh those two — the longstanding nickname of a sports franchise vs. offense to the heritage of a group of people — any sense of basic human decency would make someone defer to American Indians who are hurt.

Viewed in that context, who’s really blowing this out of proportion?

To dig in, to take the stance of, “Why should the team be forced to change?” is not about an attachment to a name. It’s about being indignant that someone else is forcing an agenda on you.

Goodell and Snyder are not used to having other people make decisions for them. Their combined stance — “We have every right to have a name in our league regardless of how it makes people feel” — is patently indefensible.

There is no way this name is making anyone feel as good as it’s making some feel bad.

That’s not a left-right, red state-blue state issue. That’s a people issue.

And if Goodell is really short-sighted enough to go to the mat on this for Snyder, that stance will eclipse anything good and right he has done.

This is Snyder’s team, but this is Goodell’s league. The power of the commissioner trumps everything. From now on, until the day the name is changed, he becomes the mark.
Hog Bowl III, V Champion (2011, 2013)

Hognostication Champion (2011, 2013)


Scalp 'em, Swamp 'em,
We will take 'em big score!
Read 'em, Weep 'em Touchdown,
We want heap more!

08 Champ
Posts: 13097
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Re: Name Change News

Postby SkinsJock » Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:42 pm

^^ nothing new here at all … NOTHING


Roger Goodell knows:

The owner of the Washington franchise is the only one who can change the name

The NFL cannot 'make' the owner change the name no matter what pressure is brought to bear

these 2 items are all that counts
"the things we’re doing are things he’s comfortable with & complement his strengths" Gruden on RG3

RG3 needs to learn to read defenses better & utilize his talents and the players around him better

Hog
Posts: 2107
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Re: Name Change News

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:01 pm

SkinsJock wrote:^^ nothing new here at all … NOTHING


Roger Goodell knows:

The owner of the Washington franchise is the only one who can change the name

The NFL cannot 'make' the owner change the name no matter what pressure is brought to bear

these 2 items are all that counts


I agree with you SkinsJock as far as "Goodell knows The owner of the Washington franchise is the only one who can change the name" but that doesn't mean that pressure from the owners, press, minority of Native Americans,government and pc individuals can't persuade ole Roger
to find a way to punish us a la nfl collusion. It is in the NFLs best interest as far as a money making to keep the name though.

08 Champ
Posts: 13097
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Re: Name Change News

Postby SkinsJock » Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:35 pm

I understand your main point but …

The NFL can do a lot of things, there's no way the NFL (or the other owners) are 'making' the owner of the Washington franchise change the name … NO WAY


like I said before - this can be discussed ad infinitum - the name is not changing in the near future

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS
"the things we’re doing are things he’s comfortable with & complement his strengths" Gruden on RG3

RG3 needs to learn to read defenses better & utilize his talents and the players around him better

Hog
Posts: 2107
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Re: Name Change News

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:02 pm

Near future as in tomorrow? Nah. As in the next 5 years yeah probable. It's unfortunate.

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football