Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
on another note, they did appear to have some new UNIs yesterday. I don't recall seeing those digs before, especially the no stripe helmet with the chief on the side? I have seen that no stripe helmet with a spear but not the chief..
I have an idea about how to solve the Redskins' politically incorrect name issue. problem is, I think it is a fairly simple solution that someone (maybe many someones) have come up with. and that it may have even been introduced on this forum. so if I'm rehashing something already discussed: forgive me.
here's the thing: the reason Redskin fans, any fans for that matter, want to hold on to their team name is because it's just that: the team name. what it stands for makes little difference. We're comfortable with what we have and there is the tradition of it all.
So I think DC is wedded to the name "Redskin", no matter what it stands for. If that were the case, couldn't the Redskins merely keep their name, but change their logo? There are animals that have red skins (or coats) like certain frogs or a red fox and snakes (not that they would want to compete with the D'Back logo). Why couldn't the Redskins merely change their logo to reflect a red skinned animal.
Admittedly the Tampa Bay Devil Rays tweaked their name by dropping "rays" but in the process the Rays went from a sea creature to a ray of sunshine. Couldn't the Skins do something similar and put the matter to rest?
I have a better idea: acknowlege that the right to not be offended simply doesn't exist. People seem to think if they don't like something someone else should have to modify their behavior. It is simply not true. The best way to solve this "controversy" is to acknowledge that we won't always agree on issues large or small and in such cases should respect the rights of others rather than to force them to change.
Maybe not a popular or PC answer, but I really don't care. PC is becoming borderline tyranny and I have no use for it. I do value liberty, though.
The team originated as the Boston Braves, based in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1932. At the time the team played in Braves Field, home of the Boston Braves baseball team. The following year the club moved to Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox, whereupon owners changed the team's name to the Boston Redskins. The Redskins relocated to Washington, D.C. in 1937.
The team originated as the Boston Braves, based in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1932. At the time the team played in Braves Field, home of the Boston Braves baseball team. The following year the club moved to Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox, whereupon owners changed the team's name to the Boston Redskins. The Redskins relocated to Washington, D.C. in 1937.
80 years of tradition isn't going anywhere.
dam straight and we been slaughtering, persecuting and disrespecting Redskins for a long time before 1932....hoo-yah!
This is what I'm trying to figure out. I know "Redskins" is deemed offensive, but how and why is "Washington" deemed offensive. I'm just trying to make sense of it all. Like, if it's offensive then why keep just "Redskins". What's offensive about "Washington"???? I'm a little confused at the moment...
It is a joke.
First, when they were named the Redskins it was a name of honor, not a name to offend. It was in HONOR of the Indians that they chose the name. Second, if times have changed that redskins is no longer acceptable so be it............change it.
As for Washington, the city was named in honor of our nations first president. If George Washington were alive today do you think he would still be honored or do you think he would be disappointed at the mess our elected leaders have placed us in? Hence the joke.
It is a joke.
First, when they were named the Redskins it was a name of honor, not a name to offend. It was in HONOR of the Indians that they chose the name. Second, if times have changed that redskins is no longer acceptable so be it............change it.
As for Washington, the city was named in honor of our nations first president. If George Washington were alive today do you think he would still be honored or do you think he would be disappointed at the mess our elected leaders have placed us in? Hence the joke.
Ooooohhh! Okay, now I get it. I was looking confused like crazy LOL
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
could this solve the Redskins' name issue?
