This is a 1st!

by **Countertrey** » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:44 am

welch wrote:
ACW wrote:
GoSkins wrote:In my view this is a non negotiable issue. We are the Washington Redskins. That's who we are and that should always be who we are.
Not sure about that. The name was given by a racist douchebag. Yes, our founder was a racist douchebag.

He was, but George Preston Marshall was a devoted Jim Crow segregationist. I doubt he cared one way or the other about American Indians.

It would also be germaine, here, to point out that Marshall's first head coach was an American Indian.

by **Deadskins** » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:56 am

riggofan wrote:Your whole argument is patently whack.

I'd love to see what polls you're citing as evidence btw. From what I can tell, polls limited to Native Americans have been kind of all over the place and rare, and the most recent one was from like 2004.

Not to mention the fact that polls aren't conclusive evidence of anything. Just ask Karl Rove and President Mitt Romney.

Exactly how is my argument "whack?" No, the polls haven't been all over the place. They have consistently shown that only a small minority of Indians feel the term "Redskins" to be offensive. Just because Rove tried to spin poll results in Romney's favor, doesn't make the polling numbers inaccurate. Go back and look at this thread from the election where DarthMonk was following Nate Silver's 538 polling predictions which, as it turned out, were dead on accurate.

BTW, do you know how the Redskins' current logo of the Indian head came into being? Would it surprise you to know that it was designed by, and put on the helmets at the request of, Indians? The logo was added in 1972 at the request of Walter Wetzel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, and chairman of the Blackfoot tribe. He said, "I'd like to see an Indian on your helmets. It made us all so proud to have an Indian on a big-time team... It's only a small group of radicals who oppose those names. Indians are proud of Indians."

by **HTTRRG3ALMO** » Sun Jun 16, 2013 3:34 pm

Cappster wrote:I believe it's only a matter of time before the name changes to something else. I think the sooner we get used to that fact the better we will be at adapting to the change. I love the Redskins as much as anyone else, but I can see how native tribesmen could be and how some are offended by the slang term for their kind of people.

Painful to read this comment, but the reality is, I have to agree; sooner or later the name is going to change. I've been preparing myself accordingly so that I can "recover" faster. I love this team; a name change would, in my mind, make it a different team. Really hope I can get past that quickly...can't see myself rooting for the Ravens.

Hang on...gotta throw up lol

That said, my last plea is that the fans have a strong say in the new name; last thing I want is some corny name that I'm embarrassed of. The Rocs, Metros, Leopards...I mean serious man...are you kidding??

I remember when the Bullets were changing their name and I saw the options...my heart sank. The Wizards being the best people could come up with? I was so frustrated, would love to not endure that again.

I do hope this name sticks around for a while. Perhaps just changing the logo and the organization defining what THEY mean by the name would help, but it would only buy us time.

Folks are quick to forget that the name has a positive as well as a negative meaning. Many Native Americans are proud of the name, some are offended. I say "some" because I'm assuming the polls are accurate in that a small portion of Native Americans feel the name is racist. I don't personally think its racist; I think its a name of warrior pride, but hey, that's just me, and I do have an emotional attachment to the name. Painfully, I have to admit I could be wrong here :/

by **HTTRRG3ALMO** » Sun Jun 16, 2013 3:37 pm

Countertrey wrote:
welch wrote:
ACW wrote:
GoSkins wrote:In my view this is a non negotiable issue. We are the Washington Redskins. That's who we are and that should always be who we are.
Not sure about that. The name was given by a racist douchebag. Yes, our founder was a racist douchebag.

He was, but George Preston Marshall was a devoted Jim Crow segregationist. I doubt he cared one way or the other about American Indians.
It would also be germaine, here, to point out that Marshall's first head coach was an American Indian.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

by **HTTRRG3ALMO** » Sun Jun 16, 2013 3:40 pm

Deadskins wrote:
riggofan wrote:Your whole argument is patently whack.

I'd love to see what polls you're citing as evidence btw. From what I can tell, polls limited to Native Americans have been kind of all over the place and rare, and the most recent one was from like 2004.

Not to mention the fact that polls aren't conclusive evidence of anything. Just ask Karl Rove and President Mitt Romney.

Exactly how is my argument "whack?" No, the polls haven't been all over the place. They have consistently shown that only a small minority of Indians feel the term "Redskins" to be offensive. Just because Rove tried to spin poll results in Romney's favor, doesn't make the polling numbers inaccurate. Go back and look at this thread from the election where DarthMonk was following Nate Silver's 538 polling predictions which, as it turned out, were dead on accurate.

BTW, do you know how the Redskins' current logo of the Indian head came into being? Would it surprise you to know that it was designed by, and put on the helmets at the request of, Indians? The logo was added in 1972 at the request of Walter Wetzel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, and chairman of the Blackfoot tribe. He said, "I'd like to see an Indian on your helmets. It made us all so proud to have an Indian on a big-time team... It's only a small group of radicals who oppose those names. Indians are proud of Indians."

Say what?? I never knew this. Why isn't this being brought up in the media????!! This whole one-sided reporting is sickening. Hopefully all of this will come to light as it appears the media is strictly on a smear campaign to have their 15 minutes.

by **Mississippiskinsfan2** » Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:45 am

They can change the name but I will still call my team the Redskins..... and if you ain't down with that I got two words for ya! :twisted:

by **die cowboys die** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:06 am

i think the name will probably change at some point, and i do want to be sensitive to those who take it as a racial slur, since to the best of my knowledge the term has been used in that capacity by some. it is hard for me to see how it's meant to be derogatory though; why would you name your team something you felt was pejorative? it makes no sense. obviously the intention was to draw on the strength/bravery/skill/intensity represented by native american warriors. but nonetheless, if it's a word that was used as a slur it's probably best to change it.

HOWEVER, what makes NO sense to me at all is that it seems most of the people i've seen discussing this on TV or whatever, they say that it is offensive not just because of the name but the very use of a native american figure as the mascot altogether. changing the name to "The Washington Warriors" and keeping the mascot would be just as offense to them. i don't understand that at all. i have never heard a word about people thinking that the Minnesota Vikings is somehow offensive because it appropriates a stereotype from a specific ethnic group's history.

by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:58 pm

I'm down to change it to "CowboyKillers".... Nothing else will suffice!

by **yupchagee** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:09 pm

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:I'm down to change it to "CowboyKillers".... Nothing else will suffice!

Giant Killers would also work.

by **gushogs** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 1:56 pm

The way things are going with the politically correct terms, the new name will be the Washington ______, so it won't affect a soul in the whole wide world. And then, ten years from now, the _______ people will want a name change!!!
GO REDSKINS
HaiL,

by **yupchagee** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:16 pm

gushogs wrote:The way things are going with the politically correct terms, the new name will be the Washington ______, so it won't affect a soul in the whole wide world. And then, ten years from now, the _______ people will want a name change!!!
GO REDSKINS
HaiL,

The only "safe" names are the Hoya's, Hokies & Hoosiers. Nobody knows what they are.

by **fredp45** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:25 pm

can't be "Eagle Killers" -- it's illegal to kill eagles.

jeez, just keep it Redskins and be done with it!!!

As I've said on this board before, Miami of Ohio's name was Redskins but under pressure a few years back, they changed it to the RedHawks...just doesn't have the ring to it.

by **mastdark81** » Thu Jun 27, 2013 10:23 pm

HTTRRG3ALMO wrote:
Deadskins wrote:
riggofan wrote:Your whole argument is patently whack.

I'd love to see what polls you're citing as evidence btw. From what I can tell, polls limited to Native Americans have been kind of all over the place and rare, and the most recent one was from like 2004.

Not to mention the fact that polls aren't conclusive evidence of anything. Just ask Karl Rove and President Mitt Romney.

Exactly how is my argument "whack?" No, the polls haven't been all over the place. They have consistently shown that only a small minority of Indians feel the term "Redskins" to be offensive. Just because Rove tried to spin poll results in Romney's favor, doesn't make the polling numbers inaccurate. Go back and look at this thread from the election where DarthMonk was following Nate Silver's 538 polling predictions which, as it turned out, were dead on accurate.

BTW, do you know how the Redskins' current logo of the Indian head came into being? Would it surprise you to know that it was designed by, and put on the helmets at the request of, Indians? The logo was added in 1972 at the request of Walter Wetzel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, and chairman of the Blackfoot tribe. He said, "I'd like to see an Indian on your helmets. It made us all so proud to have an Indian on a big-time team... It's only a small group of radicals who oppose those names. Indians are proud of Indians."

Say what?? I never knew this. Why isn't this being brought up in the media????!! This whole one-sided reporting is sickening. Hopefully all of this will come to light as it appears the media is strictly on a smear campaign to have their 15 minutes.

by **SkinsJock** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:56 am

^^

am I missing something here?

by oj » Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:19 pm

What i think will mandate a name change is the NFL worriing about thier TV ratings. It won't be an order from congress, no bunch of disgruntled protesters or do-gooders marching around fedex stadium.
The final decision will be made by the leage vice president in charge of marketing and some polls that she will trot out to support her stand.
They will never come out and admit it but i believe that is what will take place.