Paintrain's all encompassing 'discuss all things offseason' thread (Version 2.0)

[ethat001]

Originally Posted by scowan

I'm about to open a can of worms I know, but what native americans of TODAY have endured hardships. If they have and are its because of their own choosing. This is like the Black community continuing to blame their struggles on whites when we are 40+ years from the civil rights movement. By the way, I see a black man in the oval office. At what point do you "join" America and take advantage of the freedom to choose you own future and outcome based on your abilty and quit blaming others for your struggles. Its not a perfect world I'll give you that, but there is more opportunity to rise above your condition in this country verses any other I know, but it seems like many want to continue to put the blame on others for their "condition" instead of rising above it through hard work and effort. Ok enough soapbox for me.

Our Congress just wants to continue to find "victims" they can champion. If its not the Redskins it would be another "victim" group. Instead of bringing people together, they just want to make us all hate each other for votes. Its all very sad.

I appreciate your candor, but it does show that you don't have much insight into the complex legacy of racial issues in the US. The sad part is that most people not affected don't. I'm not white, black, or Native American - but I appreciate the history, and I've actually been to inner city neighborhoods and also to native american reservations. I won't change your mind in a message board, but I disagree on your views.

Few points:

1) Obama is as much white as he is black.

2) The financial profits for casinos on reservations are overstated (see article here. Only a few near major cities make substantial profits, and a good portion of Native Americans are still very poor and on welfare. You're essentially completely wrong.

3) Would everyone here be fine renaming the team "Rednecks", "Black Panthers" or "Jihadi's"? I think it's fair to say that a word or name can have powerful connotations to a subset of people. Redskins is such an old term, it has lost much of it's initial meaning, but let's be honest - the initial meaning was not something to be proud of..



Again, I'm actually fine keeping the name Redskins.. but I think the talk on this thread demonstrates the racial insensitivities that prove the other side's points..

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by ethat001

I appreciate your candor, but it does show that you don't have much insight into the complex legacy of racial issues in the US. The sad part is that most people not affected don't. I'm not white, black, or Native American - but I appreciate the history, and I've actually been to inner city neighborhoods and also to native american reservations. I won't change your mind in a message board, but I disagree on your views.

Few points:

1) Obama is as much white as he is black.

2) The financial profits for casinos on reservations are overstated (see article here. Only a few near major cities make substantial profits, and a good portion of Native Americans are still very poor and on welfare. You're essentially completely wrong.

3) Would everyone here be fine renaming the team "Rednecks", "Black Panthers" or "Jihadi's"? I think it's fair to say that a word or name can have powerful connotations to a subset of people. Redskins is such an old term, it has lost much of it's initial meaning, but let's be honest - the initial meaning was not something to be proud of..



Again, I'm actually fine keeping the name Redskins.. but I think the talk on this thread demonstrates the racial insensitivities that prove the other side's points..

I take it you have not had an opportunity to review Bruce's letter?

http://files.redskins.com/pdf/letter...ruce-allen.pdf

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I take it you have not had an opportunity to review Bruce's letter?

http://files.redskins.com/pdf/letter...ruce-allen.pdf

Some people have honest intentions but as the saying goes the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I feel others like Reid are using it to distract from other more immediate issues facing the country like in the case of Reid net neutrality, the Comcast-Time Warner merger, and the veterans affairs scandal.

Though as BA kind of pointed out with a lot of these Senators so many of them crying foul and willing to go to the mattresses to get the name changed yet for years many of them have been ignoring the more critical issues surrounding basic quality of life on reservations. Doesn't make our view right just that when someones house is on fire you don't focus on someone leaving the lights on.

Honestly if it were up to me I would have it where every Native American that has ever lived on a reservation and is at least 15 years of age be allowed to vote. If the vote comes 70% or more in favor of the team keeping their name then the team should be given a 25 year pass before another vote is held.

Not to sound crass but non-natives can be as offended as they want for Native Americans really the only thing that matters is how Native Americans as a whole feel about this issue. For me personally if more then 30% found the name offensive I would find that as reason enough to change the name. After all you can't just flat out ignore a minority view just because they don't have enough support though by the same token you can't be taken hostage by it either.

The saddest part through of this whole tragedy might be that if the Redskins can hold out past the midterm election that the issue could end up loosing significant momentum until 2016 which in the end would mean that a bunch of politicians were trying to collect votes for the midterm elections.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I take it you have not had an opportunity to review Bruce's letter?

http://files.redskins.com/pdf/letter...ruce-allen.pdf

Bruce's letter doesn't mean squat. If many members of race of people are offended by a name, then they are offended.

The name must go. In time, it will go. Dan Snyder is on the wrong side of history on this issue.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

Bruce's letter doesn't mean squat. If many members of race of people are offended by a name, then they are offended.

The name must go. In time, it will go. Dan Snyder is on the wrong side of history on this issue.

I'm sure you're aware that there's a number of high schools here in America with a majority Native-American population that still use the nickname Redskins. Suzan Harjo should perhaps unite her fellow "offended" Native Americans if she wants to succeed.

In addition, there's considerable evidence that the name did not begin as a racist term. And obviously it's not used as a derogatory term today. So why must it go?

Hail To the Redskins: NFL Must Save Name, Image, Legacy

Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

I'm sure you're aware that there's a number of high schools here in America with a majority Native-American population that still use the nickname Redskins. Suzan Harjo should perhaps unite her fellow "offended" Native Americans if she wants to succeed.

In addition, there's considerable evidence that the name did not begin as a racist term. And obviously it's not used as a derogatory term today. So why must it go?

Hail To the Redskins: NFL Must Save Name, Image, Legacy

Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.

This is a time of racial sensitivity. People are eager to get on board to fight any form of racism, real or imagined, or at least, to avoid being associated with anything that is generally perceived to be racist.

Once the press gets ahold of a story that is, to them, representative of the vestiges of racism, they will work it like a dog works a bone. People who were on the fence will be overwhelmed by the press coverage and by their friends and acquaintances who have been told what to think by the press. Eventually, the fence sitters will change their minds and support the name change.

When it becomes apparent to politicians that there is advantage to be gained by showing support for forcing the name change they will bestow on us their brand of "moral leadership" by writing letters, threatening the NFL, and eventually holding congressional hearings on the issue. In time, the NFL will tire of this unwanted congressional attention and drop their support of Dan Snyder on this issue.

That leaves only Dan Snyder, his minions, and a small group of hardcore fans on his side of the issue. At that point, it's all over. Snyder is not going to win, so why should he go through all of aggravation?

I can think of one reason. I assume that Dan Snyder is working right now on a comprehensive marketing campaign to roll out a new team name complete with new uniforms, lots and lots of cool new gear for fans to purchase, etc. Once this is ready to roll out, he'll announce that he has had a change of heart and the name will be changed. He instantly becomes a good guy who is in the spotlight and in a perfect position to roll out all the good money-making stuff. He'll take the lemons and make lemonade, as he should.

Ultimately, the team name will be changed but the resolution of this issue will not make us a moral people or contribute much to the welfare of Native American tribes. In the end, the primary change in all of this will be that Dan Snyder will get richer. That's how our system works.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

This is a time of racial sensitivity. People are eager to get on board to fight any form of racism, real or imagined, or at least, to avoid being associated with anything that is generally perceived to be racist.

Once the press gets ahold of a story that is, to them, representative of the vestiges of racism, they will work it like a dog works a bone. People who were on the fence will be overwhelmed by the press coverage and by their friends and acquaintances who have been told what to think by the press. Eventually, the fence sitters will change their minds and support the name change.

When it becomes apparent to politicians that there is advantage to be gained by showing support for forcing the name change they will bestow on us their brand of "moral leadership" by writing letters, threatening the NFL, and eventually holding congressional hearings on the issue. In time, the NFL will tire of this unwanted congressional attention and drop their support of Dan Snyder on this issue.

That leaves only Dan Snyder, his minions, and a small group of hardcore fans on his side of the issue. At that point, it's all over. Snyder is not going to win, so why should he go through all of aggravation?

I can think of one reason. I assume that Dan Snyder is working right now on a comprehensive marketing campaign to roll out a new team name complete with new uniforms, lots and lots of cool new gear for fans to purchase, etc. Once this is ready to roll out, he'll announce that he has had a change of heart and the name will be changed. He instantly becomes a good guy who is in the spotlight and in a perfect position to roll out all the good money-making stuff. He'll take the lemons and make lemonade, as he should.

Ultimately, the team name will be changed but the resolution of this issue will not make us a moral people or contribute much to the welfare of Native American tribes. In the end, the primary change in all of this will be that Dan Snyder will get richer. That's how our system works.

I'm afraid you're right. Great post.

That being said, I'm glad Snyder's holding fast with the name. And if he hangs onto it until he's absolutely forced to change, he'll still have my respect. As it is now, the money/attention-seeking Native Americans, vote-seeking politicians, and the other people that are adding their voices to the mix(perhaps in an attempt to make themselves feel better about their own racism?) are having no effect on Snyder and I love it.

Also, I don't think it's a guarantee that a new name, color scheme, and logo would equal dollars for Snyder. A huge change like that would alienate/upset a lot of fans. Many would likely begin rooting for another team.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by ethat001

I appreciate your candor, but it does show that you don't have much insight into the complex legacy of racial issues in the US. The sad part is that most people not affected don't. I'm not white, black, or Native American - but I appreciate the history, and I've actually been to inner city neighborhoods and also to native american reservations. I won't change your mind in a message board, but I disagree on your views.

Few points:

1) Obama is as much white as he is black.

2) The financial profits for casinos on reservations are overstated (see article here. Only a few near major cities make substantial profits, and a good portion of Native Americans are still very poor and on welfare. You're essentially completely wrong.

3) Would everyone here be fine renaming the team "Rednecks", "Black Panthers" or "Jihadi's"? I think it's fair to say that a word or name can have powerful connotations to a subset of people. Redskins is such an old term, it has lost much of it's initial meaning, but let's be honest - the initial meaning was not something to be proud of..



Again, I'm actually fine keeping the name Redskins.. but I think the talk on this thread demonstrates the racial insensitivities that prove the other side's points..

I think that's up for considerable debate. Have not heard a compelling/definitive argument that the initial meaning was offensive.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think that's up for considerable debate. Have not heard a compelling/definitive argument that the initial meaning was offensive.

How many people actually use the word Redskins as a derogatory term? Feels like when the name comes up, people automatically think of the football team.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by mooby

How many people actually use the word Redskins as a derogatory term? Feels like when the name comes up, people automatically think of the football team.

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

Yes well said and not only with this issue, but many others as well.

But with this specific issue, I'd like to know why sudden change which caused them to be offended? When did term "Redskins" suddenly cross the line as derogatory?

Back to your point of "They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made"...that is a good way to put it, because these "little" and "meaningless" victories of today's culture are the easiest. When it comes to the "heavy lifting", this/our generation of people just doesnt get it.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

Well said and I agree.

But I also see the tidal wave of uninformed initiative which will only get louder and more annoying until the name is changed.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

Seems like this is a trending thing nowadays. Also great post, something tells me you're probably right.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

/drops mic

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Which was my point earlier. No one thinks Native Americans when they think of "Redskins" because truth be told most people simply don't think of Native Americans. Let's say the name changes, do we really believe all these clamoring for a name change are gonna say "Well'that's just the first step. Let's improve their living conditions, address issues such as illiteracy, alcoholism, poverty in the NA community" No....Hell to the No. They'll just pat themselves on the back and say "Look at the change we made!"

I'm not a gung ho keep the name at all costs guy, but the fake sincerity of those that demand the name change irks me

Well said. I'm guessing from a slimy politician standpoint it takes a lot less political capital to make a couple of public outcries about the 80 year old name of a football team instead of moving to acquire federal money to improve quality of life problems on reservations.

Plus at the end of the day they can throw onto their political resume that they're "staunch supporters of Native American rights."

Natives against the name: Excuse us Senator but if possible we would like to ask for your help in our efforts to change the name of the Washington Football teams name as we find it offensive.

Senator: WELL THIS IS AN OUTRAGE! You know what I'm going to send out a press release, publish an open letter, and hold a press conference to call out this despicable organization that's clearly promoting racism. 80 years is way to long. This needs to be addressed NAO!

Natives against the name: Also while we're here we'd also like to ask for your assistance with many issues that are critical to our people. For starters our literacy rates are falling so we require more teachers to help our young people. Also many of our schools are outdated, some of them have asbestos so if possible we would need to procure funds to help with our facilities. We also....

Senator: Ooh, um, yeahhhhhh thats going to be tricky. I tell you what lets table that for now and have another meeting on this later in the month. Talk to my secretary I'm pretty sure my calender for June 31 is WIDE OPEN. However I'm going to get started on that football name change RIGHT AWAY. Right after I go to the mall....in Canada.

Natives against the name: But Senator......

Secretary: So doe June 31st at 2:65 work for you? Or would you rather have July 32nd at zero dark ninety slash potato?