Do you think Snyder should change the name of the Redskins? (4 Viewers)

[Swing 51]

I hope Dan Snyder owns the Redskins for the next 100 years. Makes it enjoyable during the football season.

H8ers gonna h8

posty h8s everything...

 

[BowieMercs]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty. He's the one who got me into FF in the first place.

 

[Swing 51]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty.

Sorry to hear that.

 

[Mr. Ected]

Should hillbillies from West Virginia, Ky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama demand to be called Appalachian Americans? Everyone is worried about offending Native Americans and African Americans, what about Appalachian Americans? Hillbillies is just as a derogatory term as Redskins and possibly even more so.

What?

I think he means this...

"Hillbilly is a term (often derogatory) for people who dwell in rural, mountainous areas in the United States, primarily in Appalachia, but also parts of the Ozarks. Due to its strongly stereotypical connotations, the term can be offensive to those Americans of Appalachian or Ozark heritage."

I don't know of any teams with that name, though.

Verona HS, Verona, NJ.

 

[BowieMercs]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty.

Sorry to hear that.

LOL. In person he isn't at all like his online persona. Well he does truly hate the home team, wherever he is.

 

[TobiasFunke]

They should worry about changing other things like the owner, president, head coach, QB, etc...

Thank God someone finally had the courage to take shots at Dan Snyder, Bruce Allen, Jay Gruden and RGIII

 

[Summer Wheat]

Glad the Redskin name change has finally lost steam. Move on to improving the football product on the field.

 

[larch]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty.

Sorry to hear that.

LOL. In person he isn't at all like his online persona. Well he does truly hate the home team, wherever he is.

Thanks Mercs. I tell people that and they just don't believe me.

Though you are right, I do hate the home team.

 

[Saheeb's Warrior]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty.

Sorry to hear that.

LOL. In person he isn't at all like his online persona. Well he does truly hate the home team, wherever he is.

Thanks Mercs. I tell people that and they just don't believe me.

Though you are right, I do hate the home team.

Hi posty!

 

[larch]

Funny thing is, I used to work with posty.

Sorry to hear that.

LOL. In person he isn't at all like his online persona. Well he does truly hate the home team, wherever he is.

Thanks Mercs. I tell people that and they just don't believe me.

Though you are right, I do hate the home team.

Hi posty!

Hola Team!

 

[dgreen]

In seasons past, the PA announcer at FedEx Field would say, "FIRST DOWN WAAAAAASSSSHHHHINGTON" whenever they got a first down. This season, he says, "FIRST DOWN REDSKIIIIIINSSSS".

Just a little something I noticed and is actually the type of thing that makes me want them to lose this battle. I have no problem them making a statement or two about the name and keeping the name. What's annoying is the nonstop little crap that only serves as them saying, "We'll do whatever we want and you can't stop us lolz!" Can this organization take the high road at least once?

 

[larch]

In seasons past, the PA announcer at FedEx Field would say, "FIRST DOWN WAAAAAASSSSHHHHINGTON" whenever they got a first down. This season, he says, "FIRST DOWN REDSKIIIIIINSSSS".

Mega kudos to the PA announcer!!!!!!!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Just curious, what do they do with the name on DC sports radio stations? No restrictions I guess?

I heard some guy on the Dan Lebatard show who clearly wouldn't utter it.

 

[tonydead]

In seasons past, the PA announcer at FedEx Field would say, "FIRST DOWN WAAAAAASSSSHHHHINGTON" whenever they got a first down. This season, he says, "FIRST DOWN REDSKIIIIIINSSSS".

Just a little something I noticed and is actually the type of thing that makes me want them to lose this battle. I have no problem them making a statement or two about the name and keeping the name. What's annoying is the nonstop little crap that only serves as them saying, "We'll do whatever we want and you can't stop us lolz!" Can this organization take the high road at least once?

Isn't much of a battle lately.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Just curious, what do they do with the name on DC sports radio stations? No restrictions I guess?

I heard some guy on the Dan Lebatard show who clearly wouldn't utter it.

DC sports radio stations are basically Redskins radio stations with the Nats, Wizards and Caps serving as filler. One of the two big stations is Snyder-owned, so that answers that question, and the other would lose a huge chunk of their audience if they took an anti-name position.

 

[Faust]

Daniel Snyder can't see that the future is here:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13724289/washington-redskins-name-change-inevitable

 

[larch]

Daniel Snyder can't see that the future is here:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13724289/washington-redskins-name-change-inevitable

Screw them!!!

GO REDSKINS!!!!!!!!!!

 

[matttyl]

Just curious, what do they do with the name on DC sports radio stations? No restrictions I guess?

I heard some guy on the Dan Lebatard show who clearly wouldn't utter it.

DC sports radio stations are basically Redskins radio stations with the Nats, Wizards and Caps serving as filler. One of the two big stations is Snyder-owned, so that answers that question, and the other would lose a huge chunk of their audience if they took an anti-name position.

We have a 2nd sports station? Maybe I live too far west to get it, but what is it?

 

[Johnny Rock]

During the pilot episode of the new tv show "Minority Report," they called them "Red Clouds" in the year 2040.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Still don't care but they are missing out. Washington Monuments is an awesome name that has built in advertising in abundance.

 

[the moops]

Daniel Snyder can't see that the future is here:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13724289/washington-redskins-name-change-inevitable

Screw them!!!GO REDSKINS!!!!!!!!!!

really is sad that some people are so damn attached to the name of a ####### sports team. channel your anger and energy into something worthwhile. please

 

[JZilla]

They seem to have weathered the storm

I thought for sure the copyright revoke was gonna do it. I guess that doesn't really make much difference.

Still don't really care much myself, I can't stand that rotten team and their dog#### owner. The persistent bigotry fits.

 

[njherdfan]

Just curious, what do they do with the name on DC sports radio stations? No restrictions I guess?

I heard some guy on the Dan Lebatard show who clearly wouldn't utter it.

DC sports radio stations are basically Redskins radio stations with the Nats, Wizards and Caps serving as filler. One of the two big stations is Snyder-owned, so that answers that question, and the other would lose a huge chunk of their audience if they took an anti-name position.

We have a 2nd sports station? Maybe I live too far west to get it, but what is it?

106.7 and 980 are the two sports stations I think.

 

[Cold Dead Hands]

The Fighting Sioux appears to be available.

 

[larch]

Daniel Snyder can't see that the future is here:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13724289/washington-redskins-name-change-inevitable

Screw them!!!GO REDSKINS!!!!!!!!!!

really is sad that some people are so damn attached to the name of a ####### sports team. channel your anger and energy into something worthwhile. please

Actually I hate the Redskins, I just think that the outrage of their name is just stupid and they should keep their name.

I am glad that Dan Snyder is fighting this.

 

[Don Quixote]

Not offensive: https://twitter.com/huffpostsports/status/647218677604052992

 

[Leviathan]

1/8th Blackfoot over here. I am 1/8th offended! Do I qualify for reparations or not?

 

[Leviathan]

I will accept EBT only if you agree with my terms, paleface.

 

[chauncey]

If the Redskins were winning championships would this be an issue?

 

[Leviathan]

If the Redskins were winning championships would this be an issue?

Not sure. I bet my dad $5 that the Redskins would beat the Raiders in the Super Bowl. He won the bet, obviously. I still hold it against him even though it was lesson learned.

 

[dparker713]

Daniel Snyder can't see that the future is here:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13724289/washington-redskins-name-change-inevitable

If I had a kid in Madison, I'd send them to school every day in Celtic, Irish or Texans gear.

 

[Henry Ford]

They seem to have weathered the storm

I thought for sure the copyright revoke was gonna do it. I guess that doesn't really make much difference.

Still don't really care much myself, I can't stand that rotten team and their dog#### owner. The persistent bigotry fits.

Trademark appeals aren't over yet. They for sure won't ditch the name until those are finished.

 

[Willie Neslon]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Eh, everything that's been said has been said. There was a flurry there for a bit while RGIII made them something more than an afterthought but now it's back to the status quo for the last 20 years. The name is very racist, the team ain't changing it until the courts of the league force them to do so, and the franchise is basically irrelevant and almost never appears on national TV so it doesn't come up. When they do happen to get a bit of the spotlight, like last night, there's always new articles and ridiculous new images making the rounds.

You should definitely tell this native American writer that his outrage is "faux," though. I'm sure he'll be totally relieved to learn from you that he actually isn't outraged at all!

 

[tom22406]

The only way the name changes is if the NFL forces the team to do it.No chance in hell Snyder ever does this out of good will.

Saw a stat last night that said the Skins are 4-18 in prime time games since 2008 so it's pretty clear putting a good product on the field isn't a real concern given how much money Snyder is hauling in with this #### storm of a team.

Worst franchise in sports,hands down.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The only way the name changes is if the NFL forces the team to do it.No chance in hell Snyder ever does this out of good will.

Saw a stat last night that said the Skins are 4-18 in prime time games since 2008 so it's pretty clear putting a good product on the field isn't a real concern given how much money Snyder is hauling in with this #### storm of a team.

Worst franchise in sports,hands down.

The trademark law stuff is complicated, not sure I really grasp the state protections, but if they lose the federal protection and whatever state protections they retain aren't sufficient to rein in outside merchandise sales I suspect he'd change it. Nobody's buying overpriced merchandise from the team if anyone can sell identical stuff for half price, which means the team would lose millions. Plus that gives him an out; he can blame the nosy courts and government interference. And people too stupid to understand how ridiculous it is to blame the government for failing to extend a government benefit will lap it up.

 

[tonydead]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Where girls with penises should take a dump.

 

[The Commish]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Kinda why it's hard to take the whole thing seriously. People have compared it to gay rights, the "N" word and all sorts of other things that I don't find all that compelling for this very reason. All those other things are shouted down and fought until they are changed. It's unfortunate for American Indians that the "outrage" associated with this is primarily by those who have the attention span of a gnat. I think they do a disservice to the American Indian cause personally. It's hard to keep that sort of fight alive knowing that they'll still pull for the team even if the name doesn't change.

 

[tom22406]

The only way the name changes is if the NFL forces the team to do it.No chance in hell Snyder ever does this out of good will.

Saw a stat last night that said the Skins are 4-18 in prime time games since 2008 so it's pretty clear putting a good product on the field isn't a real concern given how much money Snyder is hauling in with this #### storm of a team.

Worst franchise in sports,hands down.

The trademark law stuff is complicated, not sure I really grasp the state protections, but if they lose the federal protection and whatever state protections they retain aren't sufficient to rein in outside merchandise sales I suspect he'd change it. Nobody's buying overpriced merchandise from the team if anyone can sell identical stuff for half price, which means the team would lose millions. Plus that gives him an out; he can blame the nosy courts and government interference. And people too stupid to understand how ridiculous it is to blame the government for failing to extend a government benefit will lap it up.

Found this from a 2013 WP article

National NFL merchandising is worth $3 billion per year, split evenly between the league’s 32 teams, save the Dallas Cowboys, who have their own deal. The Redskins’ annual share of this pot is about $100 million.

With the team making around $400 million for that year(2012) that is a pretty nice chunk of change to be losing.I wonder if the league has a clause to where if a brand is harming the seal they can force a change?

ETA:Here is the article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-change-the-redskins-name-pay-dan-snyder-off/2013/11/26/e400d6a2-417b-11e3-a624-41d661b0bb78_story.html

 

[thayman]

In seasons past, the PA announcer at FedEx Field would say, "FIRST DOWN WAAAAAASSSSHHHHINGTON" whenever they got a first down. This season, he says, "FIRST DOWN REDSKIIIIIINSSSS".

Just a little something I noticed and is actually the type of thing that makes me want them to lose this battle. I have no problem them making a statement or two about the name and keeping the name. What's annoying is the nonstop little crap that only serves as them saying, "We'll do whatever we want and you can't stop us lolz!" Can this organization take the high road at least once?

Not that it matters, but they were saying FIRST DOWN REDSKIIIINSSS last year at the Titans game.

 

[thayman]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Eh, everything that's been said has been said. There was a flurry there for a bit while RGIII made them something more than an afterthought but now it's back to the status quo for the last 20 years. The name is very racist, the team ain't changing it until the courts of the league force them to do so, and the franchise is basically irrelevant and almost never appears on national TV so it doesn't come up. When they do happen to get a bit of the spotlight, like last night, there's always new articles and ridiculous new images making the rounds.

You should definitely tell this native American writer that his outrage is "faux," though. I'm sure he'll be totally relieved to learn from you that he actually isn't outraged at all!

Because any Native American's outrage is irrelevant to the situation. This is only about money, Forbes ranks The Washington Redskins as the 3rd most valuable franchise in the NFL and 10th most valuable sports franchise in the world at $2.4 Billion. The only way the name changes is if people who are actually offended would let sponsors of the team know they won't do business with them anymore.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Kinda why it's hard to take the whole thing seriously. People have compared it to gay rights, the "N" word and all sorts of other things that I don't find all that compelling for this very reason. All those other things are shouted down and fought until they are changed. It's unfortunate for American Indians that the "outrage" associated with this is primarily by those who have the attention span of a gnat. I think they do a disservice to the American Indian cause personally. It's hard to keep that sort of fight alive knowing that they'll still pull for the team even if the name doesn't change.

I think you're confusing media attention (specifically, attention from media on your radar) with actual concern.

There's no national media attention because there are no new developments or arguments to make and the team has been largely irrelevant for two years, and the media likes shiny new things. But there's still regular protests when the team goes on the road- last night was their first road game so we haven't seen much of that this year but there were protests at virtually every stop last year. There's still a constant debate about the name in DC. There's still schools getting rid of the name- a bill just two weeks ago in fact.

I assume your "they'll still pull for the team if the name isn't changed" line was aimed at me. I don't really understand it. First, it's likely untrue, they're definitely losing fans, even if they haven't lost me. Second, fanhood is not a light switch. There's degrees of enthusiasm, and the less enthusiastic a fan is the harder it's going to be for the team to get their money. Is it hypocritical to keep rooting for a team that does something you think is really bad? Maybe, but I don't see how it's different from rooting for a player who has beaten up a woman or driven drunk or pooped in a shoe or whatever, or rooting for the team that employs them and forgives (even condones) that behavior. And every team has guys like that. That's just sports.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Eh, everything that's been said has been said. There was a flurry there for a bit while RGIII made them something more than an afterthought but now it's back to the status quo for the last 20 years. The name is very racist, the team ain't changing it until the courts of the league force them to do so, and the franchise is basically irrelevant and almost never appears on national TV so it doesn't come up. When they do happen to get a bit of the spotlight, like last night, there's always new articles and ridiculous new images making the rounds.

You should definitely tell this native American writer that his outrage is "faux," though. I'm sure he'll be totally relieved to learn from you that he actually isn't outraged at all!

Because any Native American's outrage is irrelevant to the situation. This is only about money, Forbes ranks The Washington Redskins as the 3rd most valuable franchise in the NFL and 10th most valuable sports franchise in the world at $2.4 Billion. The only way the name changes is if people who are actually offended would let sponsors of the team know they won't do business with them anymore.

I know that's Dan Snyder's perspective, but I'm not sure I understand your post. Because what? I didn't ask a question. I just pointed out that just because the story has faded from the consciousness of a media and a national audience with short attention spans doesn't mean that the people who cared about it then have somehow stopped caring about it now.

If you really think the story is dead and that people no longer care about it, consider what would happen if (try not to laugh) the Skins made the Super Bowl. It would be one of the dominant stories of the two week leadup, possibly the dominant story.

 

[Sinn Fein]

If i were Daniel Snyder, I would change my own name, and leave the Redskins

 

[The Commish]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Kinda why it's hard to take the whole thing seriously. People have compared it to gay rights, the "N" word and all sorts of other things that I don't find all that compelling for this very reason. All those other things are shouted down and fought until they are changed. It's unfortunate for American Indians that the "outrage" associated with this is primarily by those who have the attention span of a gnat. I think they do a disservice to the American Indian cause personally. It's hard to keep that sort of fight alive knowing that they'll still pull for the team even if the name doesn't change.

I think you're confusing media attention (specifically, attention from media on your radar) with actual concern.

There's no national media attention because there are no new developments or arguments to make and the team has been largely irrelevant for two years, and the media likes shiny new things. But there's still regular protests when the team goes on the road- last night was their first road game so we haven't seen much of that this year but there were protests at virtually every stop last year. There's still a constant debate about the name in DC. There's still schools getting rid of the name- a bill just two weeks ago in fact.

I assume your "they'll still pull for the team if the name isn't changed" line was aimed at me. I don't really understand it. First, it's likely untrue, they're definitely losing fans, even if they haven't lost me. Second, fanhood is not a light switch. There's degrees of enthusiasm, and the less enthusiastic a fan is the harder it's going to be for the team to get their money. Is it hypocritical to keep rooting for a team that does something you think is really bad? Maybe, but I don't see how it's different from rooting for a player who has beaten up a woman or driven drunk or pooped in a shoe or whatever, or rooting for the team that employs them and forgives (even condones) that behavior. And every team has guys like that. That's just sports.

It wasn't aimed at anyone other than those who say it's disgusting but yet still pull for the team. If that's you, then it applies. I've heard it all over the place. When push comes to shove, they aren't willing to give the team up. Personally, I find that relatively interesting to And I agree, it isn't all that much different than someone rooting for a wife beater or someone who decides to drive drunk etc. Both induce the in me.

Where I disagree is saying that it's like rooting for a team who employs players like that. If it's an employee that continues to show a solid pattern of behavior and the team continues to look the other way, then we can talk. I'd emphasis condones in your thought, rather than as a sub-thought and then I'd be on board.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Kinda why it's hard to take the whole thing seriously. People have compared it to gay rights, the "N" word and all sorts of other things that I don't find all that compelling for this very reason. All those other things are shouted down and fought until they are changed. It's unfortunate for American Indians that the "outrage" associated with this is primarily by those who have the attention span of a gnat. I think they do a disservice to the American Indian cause personally. It's hard to keep that sort of fight alive knowing that they'll still pull for the team even if the name doesn't change.

I think you're confusing media attention (specifically, attention from media on your radar) with actual concern.

There's no national media attention because there are no new developments or arguments to make and the team has been largely irrelevant for two years, and the media likes shiny new things. But there's still regular protests when the team goes on the road- last night was their first road game so we haven't seen much of that this year but there were protests at virtually every stop last year. There's still a constant debate about the name in DC. There's still schools getting rid of the name- a bill just two weeks ago in fact.

I assume your "they'll still pull for the team if the name isn't changed" line was aimed at me. I don't really understand it. First, it's likely untrue, they're definitely losing fans, even if they haven't lost me. Second, fanhood is not a light switch. There's degrees of enthusiasm, and the less enthusiastic a fan is the harder it's going to be for the team to get their money. Is it hypocritical to keep rooting for a team that does something you think is really bad? Maybe, but I don't see how it's different from rooting for a player who has beaten up a woman or driven drunk or pooped in a shoe or whatever, or rooting for the team that employs them and forgives (even condones) that behavior. And every team has guys like that. That's just sports.

It wasn't aimed at anyone other than those who say it's disgusting but yet still pull for the team. If that's you, then it applies. I've heard it all over the place. When push comes to shove, they aren't willing to give the team up. Personally, I find that relatively interesting to And I agree, it isn't all that much different than someone rooting for a wife beater or someone who decides to drive drunk etc. Both induce the in me.

Where I disagree is saying that it's like rooting for a team who employs players like that. If it's an employee that continues to show a solid pattern of behavior and the team continues to look the other way, then we can talk. I'd emphasis condones in your thought, rather than as a sub-thought and then I'd be on board.

Rooting for a team = rooting for its players, because the team chooses to acquire and retain those players. If you're a Cowboys fan and Greg Hardy records a sack, what are you supposed to do? Fight back your happiness with the result of the play somehow? Disregard the game result completely because it was earned with the help of a guy who threw his girlfriend on a pile of guns and beat her until she feared for her life? Come on. It's impossible to separate the two. If you're a sports fan you live with your team doing things you don't like. If they do particularly bad things it might make you less a fan, less willing to buy tickets and merchandise and whatnot. That's where I am personally with the Skins. But you can't just turn off fandom. The entire concept is irrational, you can't apply rational thinking to it.

 

[tom22406]

In my circle of friends who are Skins supporters they all are against a name change and I have to say if they were for the change but still supported the team it would get a chuckle from me to say the least.I get the loyalty and that you have been a life long follower but if you truly are offended by this nickname that is deemed as racist why continue to support it?

Don't watch the games,don't buy merch and don't support anything Snyder is associated with(those that line his pockets).It just screams hypocrisy to me.

 

[thayman]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Eh, everything that's been said has been said. There was a flurry there for a bit while RGIII made them something more than an afterthought but now it's back to the status quo for the last 20 years. The name is very racist, the team ain't changing it until the courts of the league force them to do so, and the franchise is basically irrelevant and almost never appears on national TV so it doesn't come up. When they do happen to get a bit of the spotlight, like last night, there's always new articles and ridiculous new images making the rounds.

You should definitely tell this native American writer that his outrage is "faux," though. I'm sure he'll be totally relieved to learn from you that he actually isn't outraged at all!

Because any Native American's outrage is irrelevant to the situation. This is only about money, Forbes ranks The Washington Redskins as the 3rd most valuable franchise in the NFL and 10th most valuable sports franchise in the world at $2.4 Billion. The only way the name changes is if people who are actually offended would let sponsors of the team know they won't do business with them anymore.

I know that's Dan Snyder's perspective, but I'm not sure I understand your post. Because what? I didn't ask a question. I just pointed out that just because the story has faded from the consciousness of a media and a national audience with short attention spans doesn't mean that the people who cared about it then have somehow stopped caring about it now.

If you really think the story is dead and that people no longer care about it, consider what would happen if (try not to laugh) the Skins made the Super Bowl. It would be one of the dominant stories of the two week leadup, possibly the dominant story.

My point is the name change has nothing and never will have anything to do with Native Americans.

 

[The Commish]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Kinda why it's hard to take the whole thing seriously. People have compared it to gay rights, the "N" word and all sorts of other things that I don't find all that compelling for this very reason. All those other things are shouted down and fought until they are changed. It's unfortunate for American Indians that the "outrage" associated with this is primarily by those who have the attention span of a gnat. I think they do a disservice to the American Indian cause personally. It's hard to keep that sort of fight alive knowing that they'll still pull for the team even if the name doesn't change.

I think you're confusing media attention (specifically, attention from media on your radar) with actual concern.

There's no national media attention because there are no new developments or arguments to make and the team has been largely irrelevant for two years, and the media likes shiny new things. But there's still regular protests when the team goes on the road- last night was their first road game so we haven't seen much of that this year but there were protests at virtually every stop last year. There's still a constant debate about the name in DC. There's still schools getting rid of the name- a bill just two weeks ago in fact.

I assume your "they'll still pull for the team if the name isn't changed" line was aimed at me. I don't really understand it. First, it's likely untrue, they're definitely losing fans, even if they haven't lost me. Second, fanhood is not a light switch. There's degrees of enthusiasm, and the less enthusiastic a fan is the harder it's going to be for the team to get their money. Is it hypocritical to keep rooting for a team that does something you think is really bad? Maybe, but I don't see how it's different from rooting for a player who has beaten up a woman or driven drunk or pooped in a shoe or whatever, or rooting for the team that employs them and forgives (even condones) that behavior. And every team has guys like that. That's just sports.

It wasn't aimed at anyone other than those who say it's disgusting but yet still pull for the team. If that's you, then it applies. I've heard it all over the place. When push comes to shove, they aren't willing to give the team up. Personally, I find that relatively interesting to And I agree, it isn't all that much different than someone rooting for a wife beater or someone who decides to drive drunk etc. Both induce the in me.

Where I disagree is saying that it's like rooting for a team who employs players like that. If it's an employee that continues to show a solid pattern of behavior and the team continues to look the other way, then we can talk. I'd emphasis condones in your thought, rather than as a sub-thought and then I'd be on board.

Rooting for a team = rooting for its players, because the team chooses to acquire and retain those players. If you're a Cowboys fan and Greg Hardy records a sack, what are you supposed to do? Fight back your happiness with the result of the play somehow? Disregard the game result completely because it was earned with the help of a guy who threw his girlfriend on a pile of guns and beat her until she feared for her life? Come on. It's impossible to separate the two. If you're a sports fan you live with your team doing things you don't like. If they do particularly bad things it might make you less a fan, less willing to buy tickets and merchandise and whatnot. That's where I am personally with the Skins. But you can't just turn off fandom. The entire concept is irrational, you can't apply rational thinking to it.

I made a qualification for your scenario here and oddly enough was thinking of the Cowboys when I made it . I don't know how anyone is a Cowboys fan

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't hear any faux outrage about this anymore. The internet found something new to be offended by.

Eh, everything that's been said has been said. There was a flurry there for a bit while RGIII made them something more than an afterthought but now it's back to the status quo for the last 20 years. The name is very racist, the team ain't changing it until the courts of the league force them to do so, and the franchise is basically irrelevant and almost never appears on national TV so it doesn't come up. When they do happen to get a bit of the spotlight, like last night, there's always new articles and ridiculous new images making the rounds.

You should definitely tell this native American writer that his outrage is "faux," though. I'm sure he'll be totally relieved to learn from you that he actually isn't outraged at all!

Because any Native American's outrage is irrelevant to the situation. This is only about money, Forbes ranks The Washington Redskins as the 3rd most valuable franchise in the NFL and 10th most valuable sports franchise in the world at $2.4 Billion. The only way the name changes is if people who are actually offended would let sponsors of the team know they won't do business with them anymore.

I know that's Dan Snyder's perspective, but I'm not sure I understand your post. Because what? I didn't ask a question. I just pointed out that just because the story has faded from the consciousness of a media and a national audience with short attention spans doesn't mean that the people who cared about it then have somehow stopped caring about it now.

If you really think the story is dead and that people no longer care about it, consider what would happen if (try not to laugh) the Skins made the Super Bowl. It would be one of the dominant stories of the two week leadup, possibly the dominant story.

My point is the name change has nothing and never will have anything to do with Native Americans.

The reasons for the name change have everything to do with Native Americans. Whether it actually happens should have something to do with it as well, but Snyder being Snyder it probably doesn't, so I agree with you there. He's not exactly a person known for doing the right thing simply because it's the right thing. Hell sometimes it seems like he deliberately seeks out the wrong thing.