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!

     

Here come the Redskins (*nothing piece MSN article)

DaveThePanther2008
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

The Commanders name sucks but you can't go back to Redskins. It's just a blatantly racist name. Like the Cleveland Indians where the mascot was like a 1950s style racist caricature. I can see something like the Chiefs working. It feels more reverential and celebrating vs. a caricature or a racist slang word. And something like the FSU Seminoles definitely works with their longstanding relationship with the tribe.

  • Pie 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
frankw Grand Master

frankw

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

The original owner of the team and the man who was behind the branding at the time was a notorious racist who was forced to integrate black players to the point the lease on his stadium was almost revoked. Attempting to go back to that would be ridiculous.

  • Pie 11
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The NFL Shield At Midfield Grand Master

The NFL Shield At Midfield

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, frankw said:

The original owner of the team and the man who was behind the branding at the time was a notorious racist who was forced to integrate black players to the point the lease on his stadium was almost revoked. Attempting to go back to that would be ridiculous.

Yep they were threatened with having the lease pulled for what is now known as RFK Stadium because it was on federal land.  George Preston Marshall was a very vocal, proud racist and his team was the last to integrate.  They would have minstrel shows at halftime and everything.

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I liked the Washington Football Team gimmick.  It was unique.

Yep.  Once they went to Football Team they should have stayed with it.   basically  taking a soccer ish name actually worked being the lone duck in the NFL with it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted

Apparently no one read the article past the clickbait title… their team president literally said there are a million things that are more of a priority than team name. So no change is imminent lol.

 

they never should’ve changed it from Redskins but once they went to Washington Football Team they should’ve stuck with that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Seems like there is going to be a change in DC.  They might be reverting back to the Redskins.

I was never a fan of the move and sadly it was the few ruling the many.   I hope they go back.  Even though I can't stand the Redskins I hate the new name.  I see Red and Gold they are the Redskins and always will be for me.

Good Luck Washington I hope you do the right thing. 

NFL News: Commanders' president unveils team's plans for name change (msn.com)

 Any issue that addresses racism  is going to be the few ruling many.  The majority is not in position to decide how the minority group should feel about it simply because they can outvote them.   Referring to skin color is about as racist as it gets, even if it is a mascot--in my view. 

Edited by MHS831
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, pantherclaw said:

The natives didn't weren't offended when they were the redskins. More natives have come out in support of the original name, the Redskins. 

Seems like a no brained to me. 

So you have data to support this?  I would agree that your position is a "no brainer."

38% of self-identified Native Americans said they were not bothered by the Washington Redskins name. But 49% overall said it was offensive, along with 67% of respondents who were heavily engaged in their native or tribal cultures, 60% of young people, and 52% of those with tribal affiliations.

But it is not about numbers, so I was wrong for presenting the data to argue in support of a decision that is about individuals, not groups.  If it was always about the majority makes the decision, we could tear down access ramps for the disabled.  We could hoist our Confederate flags to celebrate 4 years of white heritage that most whites know nothing about, and we could force all religions not classified as evangelicals to comply with the majority or tough sh!t.   Right?

If some are offended, even if those offended were not in the majority, that is all that should matter. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • Tr3ach
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By Tr3ach · Posted

      I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...