CSNbbs

Not trying to open anything resembling a can of worms, but just wondering what thoughts this board might have on this, especially considering that some SBC teams have been affected by name changes in the not-too-recent past:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new...story.html

Personally, I've long felt that the name "Redskins" was the most obvious Native American sports nickname in need of a change. Results like this definitely make me think a little harder about that, though (even though I think the Post is known for trying to please Dan Snyder).

Don't care about the NFL.

And now that we were forced out of the Indian business, I really don't care if they force removal of all Indian references from popular culture completely like they used to do chiseling off references to bad pharoahs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

I think the Redskins should take a page or two out of the Braves and the Seminoles books. The Braves used to have a mascot named "Chief Knocka-Homa" which was obviously racist and they got rid of everything really to do with Native Americans besides the name Braves and the tomahawk chop. The Seminoles on the other hand celebrate being linked with native Americans and named their mascot after the indigenous people that lived around that area. If the Redskins did this instead of using the name "Redskins", I think people would be a little less upset.

From a team support stand point, I think that the vast majority of Colleges, Universities and Professional teams see a net loss when they make any sort of name change from what their Alumni and/or built fan base identify with. Be that the name of the institution or mascot. The resist to change it is not only on principal but Financial.

We've got to get away from everybody feeling like "feelings" are what rules the world. I'm not real sensitive to most people's political correctness, but I would listen more to a Native American issue.
I think that what you have is a few people stirring up the hen house.
Usually less people are offended, until they are informed that they should be offended.

A "slur"? Webster didn't know everything. It can be a slur, sure. You think their fans are doing that when they say GOOO SKINS?
These activist would also seek to remove "BRAVES". It what universe is THAT disparaging?

I think that most of their fans would not disparage Native Americans. I do think that it is a form of honor. It doesn't make them look goofy, but it makes them look strong, and it isn't made up imagery. It's part of their History. I think that is why so few have an issue with it.

I like the FSU approach in which they support and have the support of most Seminoles although I'm sure you could find a few that are "offended".

But if using a Mascot in this way is offensive... then shouldn't most of us be offended by "Cowboys"? Do the Irish complain about the "fighting Irish"? Should Christians be in an up roar about the "Demon Deacons"?
Trojans? Who knows, we could have some people from the real old Troy - I'm sure they don't still dress like that!

Nobody is singling out or disparaging Native Americans here. Nobody said everybody has to like everything. They say if only 1 Native American objects or is offended, then they shouldn't use it. Well really? Does that undermine the perhaps majority opinion of Native Americans? Seems so. And by that math, I guess they really only need 1 Native American for approval!

I don't buy the hurtful image impact mumbo-jumbo on Native American youth. Not when it's done right. I don't know if they do, but It would be cool for Washington to support or sponsor some things at Reservations and maybe even have a Native American Appreciation Day in which they make free tickets available to Native Americans, like we do with Military appreciation day.

I don't consider myself to be Native American, but I do have distant Cherokee decent on my mother's side. Additionally, I don't know the exact % of blood line, but my Wife's grandfather was Obviously Native American. I understand that pure Native Americans would have a much different experience than myself, but I can tell you that I would NEVER do anything that I felt like was being offensive or disrespectful to Native Americans. You can see the blood line influence in my child - If I thought it was out of line, I wouldn't support it.

You can't please everybody.

(05-19-2016 11:31 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote: [ -> ]I think the Redskins should take a page or two out of the Braves and the Seminoles books. The Braves used to have a mascot named "Chief Knocka-Homa" which was obviously racist and they got rid of everything really to do with Native Americans besides the name Braves and the tomahawk chop. The Seminoles on the other hand celebrate being linked with native Americans and named their mascot after the indigenous people that lived around that area. If the Redskins did this instead of using the name "Redskins", I think people would be a little less upset.

Or just change their branding to this:

(05-19-2016 11:55 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 11:31 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote: [ -> ]I think the Redskins should take a page or two out of the Braves and the Seminoles books. The Braves used to have a mascot named "Chief Knocka-Homa" which was obviously racist and they got rid of everything really to do with Native Americans besides the name Braves and the tomahawk chop. The Seminoles on the other hand celebrate being linked with native Americans and named their mascot after the indigenous people that lived around that area. If the Redskins did this instead of using the name "Redskins", I think people would be a little less upset.

Or just change their branding to this:

(05-19-2016 11:55 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 11:31 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote: [ -> ]I think the Redskins should take a page or two out of the Braves and the Seminoles books. The Braves used to have a mascot named "Chief Knocka-Homa" which was obviously racist and they got rid of everything really to do with Native Americans besides the name Braves and the tomahawk chop. The Seminoles on the other hand celebrate being linked with native Americans and named their mascot after the indigenous people that lived around that area. If the Redskins did this instead of using the name "Redskins", I think people would be a little less upset.

Or just change their branding to this:

Sports writers/talk would love it.

If the team was stacked with talent: LOADED Potatoes

If they get crushed: MASHED potatoes

Them song/dance: The Mashed Potato

Playing in the pouring rain: game dubbed "Potato Soup Bowl"




WAIT..... NOW somebody is offended again, they are going to have to change the name of that potato! calling something that is grown beneath the ground even.. an obvious known reference to Native Americans.... is just.. well disparaging. Let's start a petition.

9 of 10......7 of 10......until they get to 10 of 10, they'll always have a dispute.

I agree with Ark30Inf....just erase the history. Also erase the exempt status, tax breaks, free military protection and casinos.

So, can we poll Eagles fans and see how many of them are offended by the Cowboys? If it's 90-100% can we do away with them too?

The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

Agree 100%

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

Well, I agree with that, but I don't really see this as being about government action. (I could be missing something, though.) Similar decisions have been made at both public and private institutions, and in the public cases, it's largely been nearly-no-brainer decisions based on the level of the controversy (and has amounted to actions requiring a lot less than rectifying the marginalization of the native peoples of the United States).

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

I've only been alive for the past 52 years, but I'd say they've been treated pretty danged well.

(05-19-2016 12:46 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

Well, I agree with that, but I don't really see this as being about government action. (I could be missing something, though.) Similar decisions have been made at both public and private institutions, and in the public cases, it's largely been nearly-no-brainer decisions based on the level of the controversy (and has amounted to actions requiring a lot less than rectifying the marginalization of the native peoples of the United States).

You're right, it's nothing to do with government and it can't be. The NFL could force something to happen, but that still wouldn't be the government.

Everyone has a right to feel whatever way they want about the whole thing. If they don't like it, thats their choice. If they don't care, it's their choice. If they are offended, thats their choice. But the decision of what to do about it, ultimately, is going to come down to money. How many people conscientiously boycott Redskins games, whether on TV or at the stadium because of it. How many people WOULD boycott if there was a change in name? And how many people don't care? I guarantee, if more people would stop boycotting and start watching the games after a name change, they'd do it tomorrow. But it has nothing to do with the "morality" of the owners or anything like that (I guess unless you consider that it would be immoral to not change the name, but in business people don't give a crap if something is moral or not so long as they make more money. Generally).

(05-19-2016 01:16 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

I've only been alive for the past 52 years, but I'd say they've been treated pretty danged well.

Take a ride through a reservation in the Dakota's or Montana and get back with me.

(05-19-2016 12:46 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

Well, I agree with that, but I don't really see this as being about government action. (I could be missing something, though.) Similar decisions have been made at both public and private institutions, and in the public cases, it's largely been nearly-no-brainer decisions based on the level of the controversy (and has amounted to actions requiring a lot less than rectifying the marginalization of the native peoples of the United States).

All levels of government are meddling in the mascot name change game.

Yes, I participated and yes, this should have been in general discussion to begin with; as it has nothing to do, really, with the SBC or college football. So, here goes............

(05-19-2016 02:40 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 01:16 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 12:27 PM)AppManDG Wrote: [ -> ]The govt should be much more concerned with how THEY'VE treated native Americans than a few teams using them as mascots.

I've only been alive for the past 52 years, but I'd say they've been treated pretty danged well.

Take a ride through a reservation in the Dakota's or Montana and get back with me.

Did we cause that?
I sure as heck didn't....nor did my father. I'm not feeling any guilt for something that happened 100+ years ago, something that I had nothing to do with.
You gotta pick yourself up and carry on. Stop blaming others for your condition. If you want your condition to improve, you have to improve it.

(05-19-2016 03:08 PM)CatMom Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I participated and yes, this should have been in general discussion to begin with; as it has nothing to do, really, with the SBC or college football. So, here goes............

My bad.

(05-19-2016 04:58 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-19-2016 03:08 PM)CatMom Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, I participated and yes, this should have been in general discussion to begin with; as it has nothing to do, really, with the SBC or college football. So, here goes............

My bad.

It's ok. Let it get some steam before I did. It's an interesting topic, really but....it was and did get political. Kind of a hot topic, so to speak.