Redskins Offseason Thread

I'm really interested in reading you guys' takes on this matter.

Not being American makes it difficult to have an opinion. I tried to read a lot about it.

It's quite clear it wasn't controversial at all when the name first changed from Braves to Redskins.
I even read article saying there's a controversy on wether the word Redskins comes from a slur used by Europeans to design the Natives or a translation of a word the Natives used to talk about themselves, through the french "Peaux Rouges".

On the other hand, the Washington Post poll claiming 90% of the Natives don't find the Redskins name offensive apparently wasn't really reliable (only 500 respondent, self identified as Native Americans via telephone with no checking of that self identification).

All the articles I found were quite evidently written by somebody supporting one or the other side of this controversy. Hard to make an opinion from these.

At this point, wouldn't one solution for the Redskins be to fund a study, conducted by an independent institution, asking, for say, 2000 truly identified and randomly selected Natives (not voluntaries to respond to the study) if they find the name offensive ?

That way if it turns out the majority of them doesn't find it offensive, it shuts critics up, if it turns out the majority of them does find it offensive, the team can go back to being the Braves without looking like they gave up to a loud minority.
How dumb is this idea?

CNBC and others followed up the WaPo poll with additional polls, some with more responses, and still found a mix of 85/15 and 80/20 in favor of those saying they're not offended. The opinions of the Native American population continue to reflect those of the broader population.

To me it's simple: the party that stands to be potentially injured by the name is the Native Americans. If you poll them, and you get close to 50/50, then I'd say that calls for a change.

But as long as every poll comes out saying that it doesn't bother the majority of them, then it's fine. I'm not interested in satisfying a whiny minority. I'm interested in what the majority of their ethnic group thinks.

The name should stay unless they say otherwise.

CNBC and others followed up the WaPo poll with additional polls, some with more responses, and still found a mix of 85/15 and 80/20 in favor of those saying they're not offended. The opinions of the Native American population continue to reflect those of the broader population.

To me it's simple: the party that stands to be potentially injured by the name is the Native Americans. If you poll them, and you get close to 50/50, then I'd say that calls for a change.

But as long as every poll comes out saying that it doesn't bother the majority of them, then it's fine. I'm not interested in satisfying a whiny minority. I'm interested in what the majority of their ethnic group thinks.

The name should stay unless they say otherwise.

Seems pretty reasonable to me. I wasn't aware other polls had been conducted.

CNBC and others followed up the WaPo poll with additional polls, some with more responses, and still found a mix of 85/15 and 80/20 in favor of those saying they're not offended. The opinions of the Native American population continue to reflect those of the broader population.

To me it's simple: the party that stands to be potentially injured by the name is the Native Americans. If you poll them, and you get close to 50/50, then I'd say that calls for a change.

But as long as every poll comes out saying that it doesn't bother the majority of them, then it's fine. I'm not interested in satisfying a whiny minority. I'm interested in what the majority of their ethnic group thinks.

The name should stay unless they say otherwise.

Agreed. And I thought this controversy was dead and buried with the outcome from the last lawsuit? If the Cleveland Indians decided it was best to remove their logo, then that's fine. However, completely different situation with the Redskins logo. It was created by a Native American Chief. At least, until someone gives me proof that such a story was fabricated, then that's what I'm rolling with. It's not like the Redskins logo is a cartoon depiction. I think it's an honorable logo. Of course, I'm a white guy, so what do I know?

Perks of liking random teams is name changes don't bother me. I was a Sonics fan before they moved to OKC.

The only reason I'm against this change is the reasons for it. If Native Americans largely prefer the name or are indifferent who is everyone else to say they should be offended? Pretty condescending if you ask me. And I don't like kowtowing to the PC crowd because after the name changes they'll just move onto something else to be offended by.

That being said, if we could tie the name change into playing in new stadium back in DC again I'd seriously be torn about changing it. The Piscataway's were native to the DC area. We could still honor native americans and do it with a specific historical flavor to the DC area.

Perks of liking random teams is name changes don't bother me. I was a Sonics fan before they moved to OKC.

The only reason I'm against this change is the reasons for it. If Native Americans largely prefer the name or are indifferent who is everyone else to say they should be offended? Pretty condescending if you ask me. And I don't like kowtowing to the PC crowd because after the name changes they'll just move onto something else to be offended by.

That being said, if we could tie the name change into playing in new stadium back in DC again I'd seriously be torn about changing it. The Piscataway's were native to the DC area. We could still honor native americans and do it with a specific historical flavor to the DC area.

This is kind of how I feel about PC issues. How many people does it take to take action against something? 1? 1,000,000? I'm fairly liberal, but that shit does annoy me especially when the people who care seem to be largely Caucasian.

The majority is often silent.

Watching the KC vs Tenn replay, based on what happened to Smith and that offense once Kelce went out, I think we need to bring in another guy. Adjusting to a key loss like that in game is much different than between games, so it's not to say that team with that talent couldn't be productive without a monster TE, and I put that kind of adjustment more on the coach than the QB, but looking at all his tape, I think TE is important for him, and really it's just important in the league now.

That said, if we can stay healthy at TE, especially if we bring in or next starter to develop, our TE corps is one of the best in the league. Smith will ball out with Reed and I'm sure he's looking forward to reuniting with VD. A solid guy that can block well and be a threat in the passing game would give us a succession plan in place at a really key position for Grudens offense and Smith's strengths.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Well, Reed is not expected to participate OTAs.. This is disappointing, I'm certain Reed knows plays and all that but it would be nice if he has opportunity to build chemistry with Smith..

https://twitter.com/JPFinlayNBCS/status/978597090619285504

Well, Reed is not expected to participate OTAs.. This is disappointing, I'm certain Reed knows plays and all that but it would be nice if he has opportunity to build chemistry with Smith..

https://twitter.com/JPFinlayNBCS/status/978597090619285504Moves TE priority up a notch in my mind.

I think changing the name to Warriors would be cool but keeping the same colors and logo, if they change it all up it would just kill the tradition.