Darrell Green does not support Redskin name change

[HailGreen28]

Thought this post didn't really belong in any ongoing thread, since the "Notes Ch.6" thread was just closed. Just wanted to throw this out there since this misinformation by ESPN below was posted in that thread:

Originally Posted by donofriose

The nice folks at ESPN still won't let it go.
Art Monk, Darrell Green -- Washington Redskins should mull change - ESPN

From the ESPN article: "Washington Redskins Hall of Famers Art Monk and Darrell Green say the team should consider changing the team's nickname because it is offensive to many Native Americans."


The correction by Darrell Green:
‘In No Way’ Does Darrell Green Want Redskins to Change Name

From the CBS article: ""In no way I want to see the Redskins change their name,” Green told 106.7 The Fan’s Lavar and Dukes. “So that just makes that clear. And I’ll speak for Art, there’s no way he wants it, and I guarantee he didn’t say it, and I know I didn’t say it.”

Green insists he was simply trying to emphasize if someone is offended by the name, then a conversation, if nothing else, is warranted."


With the way other "journalists" picked this up and ran with it, yes this is example # 4.6 X 10(9) that "The Media" is only interested in attention, not truth.

And the name "Redskins" shouldn't be changed.

That is all.

[MTK]

Sounds like DG is backtracking to me... doesn't want to piss anyone off. He should have just said no comment in the first place.

[SkinsGuru]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Sounds like DG is backtracking to me... doesn't want to piss anyone off. He should have just said no comment in the first place.

all DG said was that if someone is offended it merits discussion . . . he never said it should be changed . . . he then clarified saying that he does not want it changed and neither does Monk . . . and i agree . . . if someone is offended it does merit a discussion, then no name change . . . lol

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by SkinsGuru

all DG said was that if someone is offended it merits discussion . . . he never said it should be changed . . . he then clarified saying that he does not want it changed and neither does Monk . . . and i agree . . . if someone is offended it does merit a discussion, then no name change . . . lol

My guess is DG caught some flack for what he said and is now changing his tune.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Sounds like DG is backtracking to me... doesn't want to piss anyone off. He should have just said no comment in the first place.

Shows you what a few thousand death threats will do.......
-Silly Bastard

[SirLK26]

I really doubt Darrell Green or Art Monk, two Redskins greats, would support a name change. I think Green was misunderstood, and now he's just clarifying.

[over the mountain]

I dont think ESPN misrepresented what Monk and Green said in the first interview. They both said it deserves to be discussed and considered. Monk saying "strongly considered".

The ESPN article title (at least quoted here) is an accurate summation of what they said in the first interview.

For whatever reason, certain people took "it merits a discussion" to mean they wanted the name changed.

D Green imo didnt back track at all in his second clarifying interview, he repeated what he said and then added that he doesnt want the name changed and doesnt think monk wants it changed either .... but (like he said previously) it deserves to be at least discussed.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

I dont think ESPN misrepresented what Monk and Green said in the first interview. They both said it deserves to be discussed and considered. Monk saying "strongly considered".

The ESPN article title (at least quoted here) is an accurate summation of what they said in the first interview.

For whatever reason, certain people took "it merits a discussion" to mean they wanted the name changed.

D Green imo didnt back track at all in his second clarifying interview, he repeated what he said and then added that he doesnt want the name changed and doesnt think monk wants it changed either .... but (like he said previously) it deserves to be at least discussed.

You nailed it. It's hilariously shortsighted to blame the media for this. It's an easy/lazy thing to do. But it's dead wrong.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You nailed it. It's hilariously shortsighted to blame the media for this. It's an easy/lazy thing to do. But it's dead wrong.

See how 'The Media' circles the wagons?

/sarc

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You nailed it. It's hilariously shortsighted to blame the media for this. It's an easy/lazy thing to do. But it's dead wrong.

I disagree. I think it's possible DG is backtracking now. Or that the article was written lazily so therefore ambiguous on Green's personal opinion on the name. But I think it's more likely the ESPN writer/editor(s) wrote the story the way they did to generate more viewers and interest. ESPN in particular and "The Media" in general lost the benefit of the doubt to me, a long time ago.

Apologies to you or anybody you know at ESPN or elsewhere that's actually a conscientious journalist. Not every individual in "The Media" is bad. It's just from MSNBC (Zimmerman 911 call), Fox ("scandal" reporting), and ESPN (Tebow mania!), reporting in general these days is more sensational and less factual than the past 20 years IMO.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

I disagree. I think it's possible DG is backtracking now. Or that the article was written lazily so therefore ambiguous on Green's personal opinion on the name. But I think it's more likely the ESPN writer/editor(s) wrote the story the way they did to generate more viewers and interest. ESPN in particular and "The Media" in general lost the benefit of the doubt to me, a long time ago.

Apologies to you or anybody you know at ESPN or elsewhere that's actually a conscientious journalist. Not every individual in "The Media" is bad. It's just from MSNBC (Zimmerman 911 call), Fox ("scandal" reporting), and ESPN (Tebow mania!), reporting in general these days is more sensational and less factual than the past 20 years IMO.

I think you went into reading the article with a preconceived notion of what you were going to read that you didn't actually pay attention to what Green and Monk said, or what was written.

The ESPN article, as well as others, wrote exactly what Green and Monk said. If you have a problem with what they said that's fine. But don't come at "the media" for it.

[NC_Skins]

I really wish people would stop posting shit about the name change. I don't give a shit if it is Darrell Green. Until the NFL makes a statement, Congress makes them change it (if they can) or Dan Snyder decides to make a change, it really doesn't matter one bit. Stop beating this dead horse. It's already glue.

[mredskins]

All name change threads should be started in the Debating with the Enemy forum. That is a excellent black hole for them.

[JoeRedskin]

Oh SmootSmack, the media is to blame for everything. Did you know that:

K. Robinson's pectoral was torn due b/c he was trying to tackle a reporter for an interview?

Carriker's injury was the direct result of the excess coverage on Hernandez?

Percy Harvin's hip injury occured while waiting to be interviewed for NFL Network?

Massive coverage of the Prince George's birth caused an electrical outage at Redskins' Park?

It's all your damn fault SmootSmack. All of it.

[hooskins]

Who cares what former players think?

I am so over this whole name change "debate". I could care less what they are called. If they stay the redskins great, if not whatever. I just want to see rg3 make some sick plays. Soon.