Correct me if I am wrong but Fed ex field is in MD, the training camp is in VA and the NFL controls the teams. The board of apes is voting to force the redskins to change their name to the redtails or something other less "racist." How would this be possible? Although I dont watch any coontact sports I think DC has bigger issues and dont have any say in this matter. They are threatining to never let the redskins come back into the district with the name but cronically beg them to come back to the city WTF?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0430/Redskins-name-change-DC-council-member-proposes-team-change-their-name

If he wants the city represented, they should be passing resolutions to reverse the Wizards name change.

Redtails works. They are always getting spanked

Sonny Sam and Frank Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Redtails works. They are always getting spanked


You don't watch football too much do you, Cletus?

The Redtails record speaks for itself. Next time you hit the drive thru at McDonalds tell Haynesworth I said hi

Redtails refer to the tuskegee airmen. Another lie my teacher told me.

http://sbpdl.net/2012/01/12/the-truth-about-the-tuskegee-airmen-lies-in-red-tails/

They just opened the door for the era of the The Richmond Redskins.

Ship the team to Richmond and call them the Richmond Rednecks.

p4yyP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Redtails refer to the tuskegee airmen. Another lie
> my teacher told me.
>
> http://sbpdl.net/2012/01/12/the-truth-about-the-tu
> skegee-airmen-lies-in-red-tails/

Yup...cause the only US pilots that did "anything" in WWII were the Tuskegee Airmen. I get that until the HBO film in the 90's few people knew of these savages and their exploits. It's 2013, they've had a feature film now and their history is on the Internet, enough already.

And only in DC would they consider changing a team name some find offensive in order to "celebrate the diversity" of flying moon crickets from 70 years ago...

>>> "Redskins" ==> "Redtails (!?) ==>...

Call them the "Early Americans".

Redskins, Wizards, Caps and now the Nats the curse continues.
Attachments:

aolT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Correct me if I am wrong but Fed ex field is in
> MD, the training camp is in VA and the NFL
> controls the teams. The board of apes is voting to
> force the redskins to change their name to the
> redtails or something other less "racist." How
> would this be possible? Although I dont watch any
> coontact sports I think DC has bigger issues and
> dont have any say in this matter. They are
> threatining to never let the redskins come back
> into the district with the name but cronically beg
> them to come back to the city WTF?
>
> http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/201
> 3/0430/Redskins-name-change-DC-council-member-prop
> oses-team-change-their-name


Lets go redtails!!! FIGHT WITH WORDS, LIKE A WISE FOX WOULD!!!
In other news, Dan Snyder, sensing a unique oportunity, has signed Jason Collins to a 1 year deal to sell hotdogs outside of Fedex

And danny boy say's no way, not a chance, nada, not in my lifetime. Good for him to not crack under pressure from the districts BOFU's.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/redskins/2013/05/09/washington-redskins-daniel-snyder/2148127/

Fuck Dan Snyder. On top of all his other issues it sounds like he is a racist too. Snyder may well be the worst and most selfish person to walk the earth.

They need to change the fucking name, its an offensive ignorant name. Change it and get the fuck over it.

The people who want to change the name of Redskins have it all wrong. Considering many people in this country are ill educated or come from somewhere else thus have little understanding of American history, the name Redskins actually benefits Native Americans because it brings awareness of their place in U.S. history.

Russ Grimm fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fuck Dan Snyder. On top of all his other issues it
> sounds like he is a racist too. Snyder may well
> be the worst and most selfish person to walk the
> earth.
>
> They need to change the fucking name, its an
> offensive ignorant name. Change it and get the
> fuck over it.


According to Dan you need to get the "fuck" over it. As for the selfish part he owns the team dip shit and can do what ever he wants.

REDTAILS SUCK!

Russ Grimm fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fuck Dan Snyder. On top of all his other issues it
> sounds like he is a racist too. Snyder may well
> be the worst and most selfish person to walk the
> earth.
>
> They need to change the fucking name, its an
> offensive ignorant name. Change it and get the
> fuck over it.


+1000

.........and they have sucked since the early 1990's.

Anoyone whom thinks otherwise is a fool that does watch football.

Doesnt matters what you call them.....losers would be work well too!

.........and they have sucked since the early 1990's.

Anoyone whom thinks otherwise is a fool that does watch football.

Doesnt matters what you call them.....losers would work well too!

Snyder has learned a lesson (maybe) and pulled back from managing his team. This is the type of stuff he needs to get involved with. And I like his position.

Russ Grimm fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> its an offensive ignorant name.

Who told you this? Mike Wise? Your mom?

I’m sure your intent is to be sensitive, but you've been misled to think it's a bad word, it’s not. Never was. Sorry. Dan Snyder is right.

Here is some history for you…

http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf

The Native American Sources of Redskin:

It is clear from the earliest citations that redskin was regarded as an Indian expression. It was at first used only to translate what Indians said or as a consciously adopted Indian turn of phrase employed in formally addressing Indians. The tribal identities of the speakers who were quoted using this word in the period from 1769 to 1822 point to its specific languages of origin.

Here is another interesting link from a 2002 issue of Sports Illustrated on the subject

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1025046/1/index.htm

Further, I recommend reading “BEFORE THE REDSKINS WERE THE REDSKINS: THE USE OF NATIVE AMERICAN TEAM NAMES IN THE FORMATIVE ERA OF AMERICAN SPORTS, 1857-1933” in its entirety.

http://valhalla.law.und.nodak.edu/LawReview/issues/web_assets/pdf/86/86-4/86NDLR879.pdf

Since it’s very long, I’ll just post a snippet.

Although the general treatment of Native Americans by the mainstream American culture throughout history was patronizing, insensitive, and immoral at times, the early use of Native American team names does not, in the context of sports team names, appear to have been particularly disparaging. Teams were named after Native Americans as patriotic gestures, as geographic identifiers, and occasionally as humorous refer-ences, but almost never with the intention of insulting or making fun of Native Americans specifically.

The practice of adopting Native American names predates the practice of adopting the names of fierce animals as team nicknames; consequently, it seems unfair to suggest that Native American and animal nicknames sent similar messages, at least in the pre-1933 period. Moreover, the most famous teams bearing Native American names adopted before 1933—the Boston (now Atlanta) Braves and the Cleveland Indians of the MLB, the Boston (now Washington) Redskins of the NFL, and the Chicago Black Hawks of the National Hockey League (NHL)—70 chose their names, at least in part, as a reference to the supposed athleticism of Native Americans and their special successes in team sports.

More Complete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Russ Grimm fan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > its an offensive ignorant name.
>
> Who told you this? Mike Wise? Your mom?
>
> I’m sure your intent is to be sensitive, but
> you've been misled to think it's a bad word,
> it’s not. Never was. Sorry. Dan Snyder is right.
>
>
> Here is some history for you…
>
> http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf
>
> The Native American Sources of Redskin:
>
> It is clear from the earliest citations that
> redskin was regarded as an Indian expression. It
> was at first used only to translate what Indians
> said or as a consciously adopted Indian turn of
> phrase employed in formally addressing Indians.
> The tribal identities of the speakers who were
> quoted using this word in the period from 1769 to
> 1822 point to its specific languages of origin.
>
> Here is another interesting link from a 2002 issue
> of Sports Illustrated on the subject
>
> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/mag
> azine/MAG1025046/1/index.htm
>
> Further, I recommend reading “BEFORE THE
> REDSKINS WERE THE REDSKINS: THE USE OF NATIVE
> AMERICAN TEAM NAMES IN THE FORMATIVE ERA OF
> AMERICAN SPORTS, 1857-1933” in its entirety.
>
> http://valhalla.law.und.nodak.edu/LawReview/issues
> /web_assets/pdf/86/86-4/86NDLR879.pdf
>
> Since it’s very long, I’ll just post a
> snippet.
>
> Although the general treatment of Native Americans
> by the mainstream American culture throughout
> history was patronizing, insensitive, and immoral
> at times, the early use of Native American team
> names does not, in the context of sports team
> names, appear to have been particularly
> disparaging. Teams were named after Native
> Americans as patriotic gestures, as geographic
> identifiers, and occasionally as humorous
> refer-ences, but almost never with the intention
> of insulting or making fun of Native Americans
> specifically.
>
> The practice of adopting Native American names
> predates the practice of adopting the names of
> fierce animals as team nicknames; consequently, it
> seems unfair to suggest that Native American and
> animal nicknames sent similar messages, at least
> in the pre-1933 period. Moreover, the most famous
> teams bearing Native American names adopted before
> 1933—the Boston (now Atlanta) Braves and the
> Cleveland Indians of the MLB, the Boston (now
> Washington) Redskins of the NFL, and the Chicago
> Black Hawks of the National Hockey League
> (NHL)—70 chose their names, at least in part, as
> a reference to the supposed athleticism of Native
> Americans and their special successes in team
> sports.


Wow. Way to spin the article. Read about how Native American names were used in the 1930s.

Even if there was no perjorative intent with the name originally, there sure is now. The team needs to change the name and move on.

Jay Silverheels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow. Way to spin the article.

Which one? I posted three. Apparently, you didn't bother to read all of them and have chosen to explain this by implying that I’ve done some sort of spinning. Wow indeed.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that rather than read 50 pages worth of facts and research you’d stick with your own uninformed opinion. Much easier that way.

This is the problem, if enough idiots repeat the same thing over and over people begin to believe it’s true.

> Even if there was no perjorative intent with the
> name originally,

There wasn't.

> there sure is now.

No, there isn't. This is where you are wrong. I’m sorry, but you obviously have done little to no research on this and are basing your opinion on a “feeling” spread by other individuals who are also uneducated on the subject.

There is an extremely small minority of people who want to be offended FOR others in order to make themselves feel better. That’s what this is about. The term “Redskin” in its modern day form is used exclusively to describe the Washington DC NFL franchise, and that is it.

Let’s review…. It was never offensive, and isn’t offensive today. In addition, the law agrees with this statement. Therefore, Dan Snyder is correct in saying he isn’t going to change it (because there is no reason to) and you are incorrect in thinking there is any basis behind the idea that it should be changed.

I know it feels good to be on the side of the “victim” but let’s be clear, there are no victims in this, just those who want victims to exist (knowingly or not) for their own selfish reasons.