Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Beginning of the End For the Redskins?


Recommended Posts

Can you kick that high? If so can you teach my grandmother's Pilates class?

If one was telling d!&k jokes, one might say that a high kick wasn't required because said joke -eller has only has 6 inches......of ground clearance. But I didnt say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing is being prohibited. What's happening is that the Redskins are asking the government to endorse and protect their use of a racial slur, which is against policy. The government is deciding they no longer want to do that. The Redskins are still perfectly allowed to use that name, nobody is forcing them otherwise, nobody is censoring them. They simply will no longer have assistance from the government, in the form of trademark enforcement and taxpayer resources diverted to the protection of their use of a racial slur.

In short, your offended whining about freedoms makes you look like an idiot who understands nothing going on around them.

thank  you for telling.me what i already know. What is happening, and I'm  still offended by the overly sentive people that make up the vocal part of society.  Your can paint it however you want to. Thanks for playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if george marshall hated native americans, why did he name his team after them? makes you think

Well he definitely didn't care much for black people.

Below is the type of bigotry that the Redskins name originates from. Would you like to keep defending it?

"We'll start signing Negroes," Washington Redskins owner George Preston Marshall once quipped, "when the Harlem Globetrotters start signing whites."

In 1961, the Redskins were the only team in professional football without a black player. In fact, in the 25-year history of the franchise, no black had ever played for George Marshall. Sam Lacy, the gifted black sportswriter for the Baltimore Afro-American, called the Redskins football's "lone wolf in lily-whiteism." Their owner was "the one operator in the whole structure of major-league sports who has openly flouted his distaste for tan athletes."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow an old 20th century white dude didn't like black people. Keep hitting me with those hard hitting revelations

He wasn't just some old white dude. He was one of many white men in positions of power and wealth in that era who were vehemently opposed to civil rights.

Maybe instead of making quips and diminishing that, you could do a little research of your own on the matter before wondering aloud how a man like that who would use a racial slur to name his professional football team could possibly be racist. The fact that "Redskins" was even acceptable back then, and could still possibly exist today in the year 2015, speaks to the flawed archaic mindset that still resonates with some of our population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...