Redskins

[irishpat183]

California high school under fire for ‘angry Arab’ mascot | Fox News

This the same as "fighting Irish", no?

And I love that civil rights groups get to dictate what is "acceptable" now...Sheesh.

 

[irishff1014]

This coaching staff and RGIII are crap.

 

[NDPhilly]

Was at the game. Kelly's decision t go for it on 4th and 1 was asinine; completely turned the momentum. Shanahan didn't trust RGIII at all in the first half and into the 3rd quarter. IMO you guys should have picked on Roc Carmichael and Patrick Chung more. They are awful. Stadium was loudest I've heard it in a couple years.

 

[irishff1014]

This is by far the worse team i have seen in a long time. They can't catch, can't block, defensive backs are straight garbage. I hope the rams will be happy with there top 5 pick. SMH

 

[johnnycando]

This is by far the worse team i have seen in a long time. They can't catch, can't block, defensive backs are straight garbage. I hope the rams will be happy with there top 5 pick. SMH

Was Morris injured?

He didn't score me a point since the 1st.

 

[STLDomer]

This is by far the worse team i have seen in a long time. They can't catch, can't block, defensive backs are straight garbage. I hope the rams will be happy with there top 5 pick. SMH

Hehehehehehehe

 

[irishff1014]

Was Morris injured?

He didn't score me a point since the 1st.

No they quit giving him the ball early and when they did the o line sucked.

He did score a TD.

 

[Irish Man3]

Fml!!

Weird ending to the game though. Refs have some questions to answer.

 

[irishff1014]

Fml!!

Weird ending to the game though. Refs have some questions to answer.

Hell yea they do.

But if Garcon holds on to the ball it is a non-issue. Garcon is very over rated. He dropped at least 5 passes tonight him self.

 

[Cackalacky]

Senator threatens NFL's tax-exempt status over Washington Redskins name - ESPN
Tax-exempt status under fire. Uh oh NFL....

 

[dre1919]

The idea the name "Redskins" isn't racist is completely invalid and stupid. If the NFL called a press conference tomorrow and announced they were expanding with two new teams, the Birmingham Alabama Blackskins and the Vermont Whiteskins how far would that go?! It's just the fact that when it comes to Native American issues nobody really advocates for them or cares. It's like they are a quaint novelty of the past, not a real, living breathing indigenous people that were misplaced.

 

[Cackalacky]

The idea the name "Redskins" isn't racist is completely invalid and stupid. If the NFL called a press conference tomorrow and announced they were expanding with two new teams, the Birmingham Alabama Blackskins and the Vermont Whiteskins how far would that go?! It's just the fact that when it comes to Native American issues nobody really advocates for them or cares. It's like they are a quaint novelty of the past, not a real, living breathing indigenous people that were misplaced.

Yeah. This was discussed on pages 4-6 in depth. It ended up being really good (if you missed it).

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Wait, the NFL has tax exempt status?

 

[Cackalacky]

Wait, the NFL has tax exempt status?

Yes, but I doubt this is anything more than saber-rattling.

 

[ACamp1900]

I have agreed with “there are so many other more important things to worry about” crowd here the whole time. I also thought ‘Warriors’ while keeping the same logo was the best out for everyone. They could even build up the run out of the tunnel with “Warriors, come out to play-a!” (So awesome)… anyway,…

Honestly though, the more this plays out, the more I begin to admire the ‘skins stubborn stance on this, and while I don’t really ‘side’ with them, I find myself, well, siding with them, more and more... At least from the following perspective: I know this, if I owned a private business and a number of outside groups, and now the federal government, were telling me how to run it/what to do with it… I would tell them all where to go, and dig in deeper also, ‘this is my private business brah… don’t like it?… don’t buy a ticket.’ So while I tend to think a name change is the best option, I get why Snyder wouldn’t take this very well.

 

[ACamp1900]

Wait, the NFL has tax exempt status?

This was my first thought.

 

[wizards8507]

The idea the name "Redskins" isn't racist is completely invalid and stupid. If the NFL called a press conference tomorrow and announced they were expanding with two new teams, the Birmingham Alabama Blackskins and the Vermont Whiteskins how far would that go?! It's just the fact that when it comes to Native American issues nobody really advocates for them or cares. It's like they are a quaint novelty of the past, not a real, living breathing indigenous people that were misplaced.

Are you really that ignorant of history? "Redskin" doesn't mean "those people were born with red skin" like your hypothetical terms of "Blackskins" and "Whiteskins." Native American tribes literally painted themselves red.

An important aspect of Beothuk life was their use of red ochre – extracted from iron deposits – to coat their implements, bodies and the remains of the dead. The colour red played a role in Beothuk tribal identity; disgraced band members might be ordered to remove the colouring as a form of punishment. It is very likely that the red hues also had spiritual overtones for the people. This extensive use of ochre led Europeans to name the Beothuk the “Red Indians.”

 

[wizards8507]

Wait, the NFL has tax exempt status?

Kind of. The teams themselves pay taxes on ALL revenues, including tickets, including tickets, merchandise, concessions, etc. The only tax-exempt entity is the NFL "umbrella" organization that includes the administrative offices.

 

[irishfanjho15]

Are you really that ignorant of history? "Redskin" doesn't mean "those people were born with red skin" like your hypothetical terms of "Blackskins" and "Whiteskins." Native American tribes literally painted themselves red.

An important aspect of Beothuk life was their use of red ochre – extracted from iron deposits – to coat their implements, bodies and the remains of the dead. The colour red played a role in Beothuk tribal identity; disgraced band members might be ordered to remove the colouring as a form of punishment. It is very likely that the red hues also had spiritual overtones for the people. This extensive use of ochre led Europeans to name the Beothuk the “Red Indians.”

This is exactly the problem with this argument. People have no clue where the term "Redskins" comes from or what it truly means. I can understand if Native American groups have problem with using a historical cultural reference to name a pro football team but when people scream at the top of their lungs about "Redskins is so racist!!!" it drives me nuts. Especially because people incorrectly assume it's references.

 

[dshans]

What I find most interesting is the threat to remove tax exempt status for the NFL. I find the NFL tax exempt status to be exceedingly curious and troubling.

As a resident of Minneapolis and Minnesota I will be paying a share of a new stadium for the Vikings (against my wishes) that has the team owner paying less than half the cost. The owner (Ziggy Wilf of New Jersey) will be 90% reimbursed for his expenditures through an NFL fund.

Additional taxes are being levied on Minneapolis proper for this folly. The state is "kicking in" with existing state-wide tax revenues that come primarily from Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Minneapolis is on the hook for 30 years of maintenance costs (estimated to be 7.5 million per annum) for 30 years. Ziggy Wilf gets to pocket the annual naming rights fees, luxury box fees and fees season ticket holders will now have to pay (on top of the exorbitant per game ticket prices) for the "privilege" of being fleeced to watch a football game.

Three things:
1) Washington should do the right thing and come up with a new name. Names for sports teams are fluid. The New Orleans Jazz made sense, the Utah Jazz not so much. California has the likes of the Lakers (originally from Minneapolis ... how many lakes are there in L.A.?) How many remember the origin of the name "Dodgers?" I'm still not sure where the NFL teams the Cardinals, Rams, Raiders and Colts call home.

2) How in the world can the NFL be considered "non-profit?"

3) Why do states and cities continually and willingly toss money at the feet of the team owners and the league to build new stadiums?

OK, OK. End of cheapskate curmudgeon rant.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Um the Beothuk are from Canada.

Can someone show me how we go from there to a football team named in the 1930's?

 

[dre1919]

Are you really that ignorant of history? "Redskin" doesn't mean "those people were born with red skin" like your hypothetical terms of "Blackskins" and "Whiteskins." Native American tribes literally painted themselves red.

An important aspect of Beothuk life was their use of red ochre – extracted from iron deposits – to coat their implements, bodies and the remains of the dead. The colour red played a role in Beothuk tribal identity; disgraced band members might be ordered to remove the colouring as a form of punishment. It is very likely that the red hues also had spiritual overtones for the people. This extensive use of ochre led Europeans to name the Beothuk the “Red Indians.”

Hmmm...let me check.

Self?

Yes.

Are you really THAT ignorant of history?

Well, I don't think so...

Oh, good. Never mind. Wizards 8507 must be talking out his ass then.

Here's the thing:

1. Not many people in general society know anything about face or body painting. They assume it's because of their skin color and the fact that the word "skins" is in the title points to their assumption being correct. It's called "perception becomes reality".

2. If you think the term "redskins" was an homage to their body painting and war techniques, and had nothing to do with their skin color or a racist epithet, then you sir are ignorant of history.

3. My point was that throughout history white people and black people have painted themselves up too. But when you reference "white skins" or "black skins", in the context I did especially, it drums up only one thing and it ain't war practices or respect for their fighting prowess.

4. So back the f*** up.

 

[irishog77]

Hmmm...let me check.

Self?

Yes.

Are you really THAT ignorant of history?

Well, I don't think so...

Oh, good. Never mind. Wizards 8507 must be talking out his ass then.

Here's the thing:

1. Not many people in general society know anything about face or body painting. They assume it's because of their skin color and the fact that the word "skins" is in the title points to their assumption being correct. It's called "perception becomes reality".

2. If you think the term "redskins" was an homage to their body painting and war techniques, and had nothing to do with their skin color or a racist epithet, then you sir are ignorant of history.

3. My point was that throughout history white people and black people have painted themselves up too. But when you reference "white skins" or "black skins", in the context I did especially, it drums up only one thing and it ain't war practices or respect for their fighting prowess.

4. So back the f*** up.

First, I'll say that wizards' story is only part of the story-- it's an incomplete history of the term "redskin," but it holds merit nonetheless.

But my main point here is the bolded above. Ignorance can be cured. Ignorance, also, is never an excuse for anything. Ignorance is fed by perception. If people are incorrect in their assumption, then it is incumbent upon another to change, to meet the ignorant's perception?? That's total horseshit.

I think I'm in ACamp's camp here-- I don't really care all that much...but a big part of me says more power to Snyder (who I loathe) and his organization in standing up to the government/media pressure to change to better suit what they would like.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Perhaps the finest example of a warrior going into battle with his skin painted was Roddy Piper in his seminal match against Bad News Brown at Wrestlemania:

 

[tadman95]

Hell yea they should change the name! I hate the Washington Redskins and anything that can be done to cause them pain and misery is all right by me!

 

[GowerND11]

What I find most interesting is the threat to remove tax exempt status for the NFL. I find the NFL tax exempt status to be exceedingly curious and troubling.

As a resident of Minneapolis and Minnesota I will be paying a share of a new stadium for the Vikings (against my wishes) that has the team owner paying less than half the cost. The owner (Ziggy Wilf of New Jersey) will be 90% reimbursed for his expenditures through an NFL fund.

Additional taxes are being levied on Minneapolis proper for this folly. The state is "kicking in" with existing state-wide tax revenues that come primarily from Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Minneapolis is on the hook for 30 years of maintenance costs (estimated to be 7.5 million per annum) for 30 years. Ziggy Wilf gets to pocket the annual naming rights fees, luxury box fees and fees season ticket holders will now have to pay (on top of the exorbitant per game ticket prices) for the "privilege" of being fleeced to watch a football game.

Three things:
1) Washington should do the right thing and come up with a new name. Names for sports teams are fluid. The New Orleans Jazz made sense, the Utah Jazz not so much. California has the likes of the Lakers (originally from Minneapolis ... how many lakes are there in L.A.?) How many remember the origin of the name "Dodgers?" I'm still not sure where the NFL teams the Cardinals, Rams, Raiders and Colts call home.

2) How in the world can the NFL be considered "non-profit?"

3) Why do states and cities continually and willingly toss money at the feet of the team owners and the league to build new stadiums?

OK, OK. End of cheapskate curmudgeon rant.

We talked about the bolded part in a class I had in college. The class was on the Geography of Sport, which was an awesome class. Basically the discussion was why taxpayers should pay, especially when not all the taxpayers are fan of the team, or even not fans of the sport in general. The belief is that through public funding there is a greater service being brought to the local market than would be without it. Basically, if the public won't fund the stadium in city A, the public in city B will and the team will move. This will cause an economic downturn as revenue in businesses located in city A will decrease due to loss of fans attending games (bars, hotels, restaurants, etc.) as well as a loss of the athletes who call the city home.

Interesting note, we are seeing a revival of downtown stadiums within the last decade. During the 60s, 70s, and 80s many stadiums were being built outside the cities in suburbs and away from the urban decay that was occurring in U.S. cities. Today many more stadiums are being moved back into the cities as an effort to help rejuvenate downtown infrastructure and attract more business downtown with an effort to move populations back inside the city limits. I'm sure this is something Buster would have greater knowledge than I do, so if he is lurking I'd love to have him post his thoughts on that as well, though this would be a little off topic.

 

[Cackalacky]

We talked about the bolded part in a class I had in college. The class was on the Geography of Sport, which was an awesome class. Basically the discussion was why taxpayers should pay, especially when not all the taxpayers are fan of the team, or even not fans of the sport in general. The belief is that through public funding there is a greater service being brought to the local market than would be without it. Basically, if the public won't fund the stadium in city A, the public in city B will and the team will move. This will cause an economic downturn as revenue in businesses located in city A will decrease due to loss of fans attending games (bars, hotels, restaurants, etc.) as well as a loss of the athletes who call the city home.

Interesting note, we are seeing a revival of downtown stadiums within the last decade. During the 60s, 70s, and 80s many stadiums were being built outside the cities in suburbs and away from the urban decay that was occurring in U.S. cities. Today many more stadiums are being moved back into the cities as an effort to help rejuvenate downtown infrastructure and attract more business downtown with an effort to move populations back inside the city limits. I'm sure this is something Buster would have greater knowledge than I do, so if he is lurking I'd love to have him post his thoughts on that as well, though this would be a little off topic.

One aspect of redeveloping inner city areas is the Brownfields program. Many portions of previously developed inner city areas are contaminated sites from past uses. This is particularly the case in industrialized urban areas along rivers. The city's get stuck with the unusable property which typically cannot be developed but for specific uses limited by the amount of environmental pollution present. Rather than have sites like this listed as Superfund sites or remain vacant because developers will have to dump tons of money to cleanup the site prior to development for unrestricted use, The Brownfields program allows the municipalities to claim these properties and develop them as parks, public places, or more typically sporting stadiums and venues. Its actually a good program and works well for redeveloping vacant urban areas. Many stadiums that have relocated to urban areas have used this program. The catch is that the taxpayers tend to pay for some of this as mentioned above by dshans.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Kind of. The teams themselves pay taxes on ALL revenues, including tickets, including tickets, merchandise, concessions, etc. The only tax-exempt entity is the NFL "umbrella" organization that includes the administrative offices.

Don't they also pay out all revenue that exceeds their expenses to the teams as well? I know there is some timing in there that could have tax consequences. I guess I always operated under the idea that the league office was essentially a pass-thru entity.

 

[Cackalacky]

Redskins’ Twitter Campaign To Defend Their Name Goes About As Well As You’d Expect | ThinkProgress
So this went horribly wrong. Lol.

 

[ACamp1900]

think progres... hmmm... do i dare give that site a hit???


nah.