It's Official! Washington Redskins Retired

[SirVantes]

2 hours ago, 99call said:

I bigger point I'd raise is, how bloody boring and characterless do some places have to be, that they have to adopt some sort of synthetic imagined culture.

I'm still waiting for Saracens v Crusaders. 

Were the old boys of the Philological School in Marylebone honouring or denigrating the "endurance, enthusiasm and perceived invincibility of Saladin's warriors of the 12th century"?  Can a city named Christchurch name their team the Crusaders? Can anybody?

[99call]

22 minutes ago, SirVantes said:

I'm still waiting for Saracens v Crusaders. 

Were the old boys of the Philological School in Marylebone honouring or denigrating the "endurance, enthusiasm and perceived invincibility of Saladin's warriors of the 12th century"?  Can a city named Christchurch name their team the Crusaders? Can anybody?

I get where you're coming from,  all i'm suggesting is that for any city in the world, you could probably come up with 3-4 relevant names.  One of those names will likely be successful in:

- Conducive to being marketed

- Non topical

- Not sounding stupid.

I just think whomever is charged with coming up with these names, is doing a cack handed job. 

 

[99call]

14 minutes ago, SirVantes said:

Saracens v Crusaders

By the way, it would be a great game

[SirVantes]

Just now, 99call said:

By the way, it would be a great game

Absolutely

[99call]

Just now, SirVantes said:

Absolutely

So annoying that world rugby don't seem able to get their act together, and sync the seasons.   Hopefully one day it will happen, and we can see some international champions leagues

[anacostiakat]

As having been born, raised and currently reside in Washington DC/ it is a bit bittersweet to lose something you grew up with and remember walking to RFK Stadium or taking a short bus ride to the games.  But the name/logo change doesnt really bother me.  Keeping the color scheme is important to me.  It is important to me that they don't rename them something stupid.  ?  War Hogs would be cool but I am hoping for Red Wolves!  

More importantly I am hoping that with the hiring of a new coach and his staff along with the restructuring the team will become competitive again.  I believe they have had good drafts of late and have a young team that can build a winning tradition.  Hope springs eternal.....

[ElLoboLoco]

Let’s be honest.

They should be called The Sucks

[BrightonCorgi]

On 7/13/2020 at 9:46 AM, MooseAMuffin said:

I don't think they will make us change our name but I do think the Tomahawk Chop will go away and maybe even Warpaint ?

I'd be more upset about losing Warpaint than the chop. 

Their name will have to change.  Any team's name that is an association to any group of people cannot be.  It's offensive.

[MooseAMuffin]

1 hour ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Their name will have to change.  Any team's name that is an association to any group of people cannot be.  It's offensive.

I don't think I have ever heard of anyone finding the word Chief as derogatory or offensive. If so, say goodbye to CEO, COO, police chief, fire chief, etc. 

You could say that our Tomahawk Chop (which includes beating a war drum and chanting), could be taken in an offensive manner. But I don't think most people would find Chief offensive.

Fun fact, we are actually named after the nickname of our former mayor, H. Roe Bartle. Long story short, he spent time incorporating Native American values into the US Boy Scouts and created a Native American based honor society within the Scouts. People started calling him "The Chief" because of this and then a fan recommended naming the team after him and that's how we got our name. 

@BoliDan, I'd be interested to know what your wife thinks if Chiefs as a team name.

[inter4alia]

1 hour ago, MooseAMuffin said:

I don't think I have ever heard of anyone finding the word Chief as derogatory or offensive. If so, say goodbye to CEO, COO, police chief, fire chief, etc. 

 

Well, here ya go: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/17/city-of-duluth-moves-to-remove-the-word-chief-from-key-job-titles

[rp99pts]

And this is only the beginning.  The woke mob now smells blood in the water because the Redskins caved.   Get ready Chiefs, Braves, Blackhawks ETC..  You're next!!!!!

[MooseAMuffin]

1 hour ago, inter4alia said:

Well, here ya go: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/17/city-of-duluth-moves-to-remove-the-word-chief-from-key-job-titles

First time for everything. Good find!

Can't say I agree with the decision. I am going to need a book on all the words I can't say anymore, too many to keep track of.

[Guest Nekhyludov]

As far as I can see, this decision has nothing whatsoever to do with anything other than naked capitalism - not principle or culture or anything else. He who pays the piper calls the tune. And the tune changed.

Those of us who root for professional sports franchises are just rooting for billion dollar corporations. It's not different from cheering for Walmart or Toyota or Unilever. Their job is to make money - nothing more and nothing less. This is where the money is, so that's where the corporation goes.

The thing I find hilarious is that because Dan Snyder was literally the last person to see the writing on the wall, some random guy was able to copyright all of the likely alternative names (Redtails, Warriors, Monuments, even Washington Football Club!). And now Snyder is gonna have to pay through the nose to do what he could easily have done long ago. 

[Ken Gargett]

10 hours ago, anacostiakat said:

As having been born, raised and currently reside in Washington DC/ it is a bit bittersweet to lose something you grew up with and remember walking to RFK Stadium or taking a short bus ride to the games.  But the name/logo change doesnt really bother me.  Keeping the color scheme is important to me.  It is important to me that they don't rename them something stupid.  ?  War Hogs would be cool but I am hoping for Red Wolves!  

More importantly I am hoping that with the hiring of a new coach and his staff along with the restructuring the team will become competitive again.  I believe they have had good drafts of late and have a young team that can build a winning tradition.  Hope springs eternal.....

agreed. 

[alloy]

And what did Dan Snyder do to you sir?

Apparently, according to yahoo sports, the realtor in Virginia is just going to let the team name it's new name without compensation. And you just know yahoo news and sports are "always" correct! ?

[Ken Gargett]

58 minutes ago, alloy said:

And what did Dan Snyder do to you sir?

Apparently, according to yahoo sports, the realtor in Virginia is just going to let the team name it's new name without compensation. And you just know yahoo news and sports are "always" correct! ?

apparently he has a house full of merchandise for everything he registered (it really is dimwitted to think that they didn't register a heap of possibles, although i gather dan has a few so the name may come from there). this guy would have to prove some form of use (a broad generalisation and i am sure that someone would be able to explain what he needs to do in greater depth) and that might not be easy.

i gather he even registered washington red pandas. bring it on! 

[NSXCIGAR]

Texas Rangers next:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/13/texas-rangers-team-name-must-go/%3foutputType=amp

[Ken Gargett]

16 minutes ago, BoliDan said:

OK. This is the first of the many ridiculous one's the @ElJavi76 brought up last night, which I mentioned in my post. Wow... I didn't think it was real... Yeah we're getting way too sensitive now'n'days... I stick by my "Redskins" reaction nonetheless.

BD, this is part of the issue. what offends one person is okay by another. 

does everything go?

who decides?

where do you draw the line?

i have no idea on all that. 

[Deeg]

6 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

BD, this is part of the issue. what offends one person is okay by another. 

does everything go?

who decides?

where do you draw the line?

i have no idea on all that. 

Ken, let’s say for example there was a pro sports franchise in Boston called the “Micks”.  Let’s say you took a poll of Irish-Americans, and by a 60-40% margin, they said it wasn’t offensive.  Would that be grounds for not changing the name, since only 40% of the ethnic group in question were offended by it?

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, Deeg said:

Ken, let’s say for example there was a pro sports franchise in Boston called the “Micks”.  Let’s say you took a poll of Irish-Americans, and by a 60-40% margin, they said it wasn’t offensive.  Would that be grounds for not changing the name, since only 40% of the ethnic group in question were offended by it?

I don't think the families of the people murdered in DC gave a rat's behind about the Bullets. The uproar never seems to come from those who it's claimed the names insult.

[Ken Gargett]

1 hour ago, Deeg said:

Ken, let’s say for example there was a pro sports franchise in Boston called the “Micks”.  Let’s say you took a poll of Irish-Americans, and by a 60-40% margin, they said it wasn’t offensive.  Would that be grounds for not changing the name, since only 40% of the ethnic group in question were offended by it?

as i said, i have no idea. 

but if 40% are offended and 60% not (for me, not being offended does not carry the same weight as being offended, if that makes any sense - in the sense that i am not offended if someone does another show on the kardashians because i simply don't care and won't watch, but others may be desperate to see more of her/them - i gather there are more than one? others may be deeply offended that they get air time. does that make any sense?), then i would think 40% is a hell of a lot and i'd suspect time to find something more acceptable to all. 

 

[Meklown]

51 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

as i said, i have no idea. 

but if 40% are offended and 60% not (for me, not being offended does not carry the same weight as being offended, if that makes any sense - in the sense that i am not offended if someone does another show on the kardashians because i simply don't care and won't watch, but others may be desperate to see more of her/them - i gather there are more than one? others may be deeply offended that they get air time. does that make any sense?), then i would think 40% is a hell of a lot and i'd suspect time to find something more acceptable to all. 

 

Ken, the Kardashian analogy is amusing.

I would like to point out, however, that I think that there are 3 categories of people that you mentioned. "For", "Against", and "Indifferent". It's like a voting democracy - people who vote for a particular party is For or Against a party. People who abstain from voting are indifferent. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not think there is a democracy in this world that makes it a crime to not vote. In fact, for a lot of elections, turnout rate is usually 40-60%.

However, in today's polarising world, it seems that there can only be two camps - For and Against.

[Ken Gargett]

18 minutes ago, Meklown said:

Ken, the Kardashian analogy is amusing.

I would like to point out, however, that I think that there are 3 categories of people that you mentioned. "For", "Against", and "Indifferent". It's like a voting democracy - people who vote for a particular party is For or Against a party. People who abstain from voting are indifferent. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not think there is a democracy in this world that makes it a crime to not vote. In fact, for a lot of elections, turnout rate is usually 40-60%.

However, in today's polarising world, it seems that there can only be two camps - For and Against.

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not think there is a democracy in this world that makes it a crime to not vote."

yes. us! voting here is compulsory. 

[Deeg]

2 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

as i said, i have no idea. 

but if 40% are offended and 60% not (for me, not being offended does not carry the same weight as being offended, if that makes any sense - in the sense that i am not offended if someone does another show on the kardashians because i simply don't care and won't watch, but others may be desperate to see more of her/them - i gather there are more than one? others may be deeply offended that they get air time. does that make any sense?), then i would think 40% is a hell of a lot and i'd suspect time to find something more acceptable to all. 

 

I would agree wholeheartedly with that.  And that's the problem - shouldn't the offense taken by those who're being referenced by the name outweigh the in-offense (not a word, I know) of those that aren't?

It's preposterous to draw a parallel between the team name being an ethnic group (and let's be clear, the one used by the Washington football club is a flat-out racial slur) and that of an inanimate object.  Plenty of Native Americans are offended by it, and that alone should have been enough to get the name changed years ago.  Can you imagine if there were a pro baseball team called "Italians" (though the analog for Redskins would be a much less neutral term) or a basketball team called "Chinese"?  The fact is, when you use the name of an ethnic group for a team name you're effectively equating that group with what most teams are named after - animals.  As in, less than human.  Colts, Broncos, Bears, Redskins.  It really shouldn't be that complicated to understand why this is a problem.

[BrightonCorgi]

16 hours ago, rp99pts said:

And this is only the beginning.  The woke mob now smells blood in the water because the Redskins caved.   Get ready Chiefs, Braves, Blackhawks ETC..  You're next!!!!!

The goal is to have no depiction of the human form similar Orthodox Judaism and Islam. 

 

10 minutes ago, Deeg said:

I would agree wholeheartedly with that.  And that's the problem - shouldn't the offense taken by those who're being referenced by the name outweigh the in-offense (not a word, I know) of those that aren't?

No.  It doesn't matter what the group of the offensive depiction is aimed thinks; that's irrelevant.  It's not about them; it's about moral purity of the ones who deem it offensive.

Just because someone is not smart enough to know they are being hurt makes it allowable for them to be hurt.  There is little to know grey area.  All depictions are considered offensive.