eme123

Oh wow! Imagine being a player. You show up to OTA's and there are Giants signs everywhere.

Pick 31. TE

EJ probably doesn't have much of a car yet since he doesn't have a contract.

This was an awesome post. Thank You!

I love watching the Jets implode in May.

This is a great read. I'm #2 for sure. Even worse I know a #1. I haven't watched a Bills/Sabres game w/ him in years and I plan to keep it that way.

YESSSS! That would be sweet to ruin the NFL's Super Bowl 50 parade. The Bills in that Super Bowl would do just that.

I would love to see Miami call the NFL's bluff and not give a cent to the dolphins for a new stadium. The NFL has had 10 Super Bowls there. When Miami gets a new privately funded stadium the NFL isn't going to award them with the big game? Stadiums are a huge waste of taxpayers money.

So....we can't drink on the walk into the stadium? I can live with that. I just don't see what problem is being solved with this policy. Garbage? Drunken Behavior? Slow in stadium beer sales?

He looks like he needs to build some bulk. Even on the field he looks small. Smaller than Bryan Scott.

thank you

1270 The Fan? I didn't realize there was another option. Rich Gaenzler has his own show? Thats sounds like a better option than Chap and Poodle.

First hand accounts and your opinion 200 years later are quite different. It was ugly. There is no debating that. The goal was cotton & money. The american government had no interest in "wiping indians from the planet". Lets not insult groups that have actually lived through "systematic genocide" & ethnic cleansing. All that said it was awfully generous of the U.S. government to let Indians take their African Slaves with them to Oklahoma. (Sarcasm)

Wikipedia???? Don't hurt yourself. Actually I love history. There is no question The Trail of Tears was an end result of bad government policy. However, Indian removals in the early 1800's do not constitute "systematic genocide" on the part of the U.S gov't. The legislation and policies held don't constitute "murder" on the part of the U.S gov't. (Even though decisions by generals & soldiers on the ground may have) The U.S government did not ethnically cleanse American Indians from the planet. There is no question the Trail of Tears was a violent byproduct of white supremacy & fast continental expansion. To say it was a direct policy of Andrew Jackson & U.S Government is just plain ignorant. Even more ignorant is the fact that the Washington Redskins should be punished for it 200 years later because they are located in the U.S. capital.

Systematic genocide? murder? ethnically cleansed from the planet? Is that what happened????? Oh thanks for educating me. Now I know why you are in the extreme minority of people who think the Redskins should change their name. You don't know the facts!

I think Cordy Glenn moves to LG. Bring Hairston back to LT and Pears at RT. Glenn would be a bruiser in the run game.

"I dont WANNA!" is the best reason. Its HIS team and business. If you or anyone else doesn't like it than support another product. Im actually incredibly familiar with history. When were American Indians being referred to as "Redskins" by a significant group of people? 75%-91% of people of American Indian heritage probably don't know and obviously don't care.

Snyder has a great reason not to change the team name. Its been their name since 1932. Its the brand he purchased for a large sum of money. Snyder didn't purchase the team to rebrand them as the Washington Pelicans. Most people wouldn't call a Native American a Redskin to their face because it doesn't make any sense. Their skin isn't red! If a person did want to try this stunt I imagine the person of Native American descent as being pretty perplexed. The point in my above post was the original definition of Redskin has been slandered. People crying racism are helping turn it into something else. The original definiton is still the original definition even though a FEW take it as something else.

The absurdity of a few is insane! Do people of Native American heritage even have red skin??? Redskin is a term that does NOT refer to the skin of Native Americans. It is a word used to describe their vermilion face and body paint. -Oxford Dictionary Wikipedia describes Redskin as a racial slur referring to the Native American race. This is a terrible source for one thing. However, since this is the only medium people seem to get their information from lately, check out two polls listed regarding the term. 1) A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name. 2) A 2004 Univ. of Penn poll found that 91% of American Indians found the name acceptable.

According to Oxford Dictionary: Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. In time, however, through a process that in linguistics is called pejoration , by which a neutral term acquires an unfavorable connotation or denotation, redskin lost its neutral, accurate descriptive sense and became a term of disparagement. The original definition of the term had nothing to do with skin color. Its a term that was slandered by people who associated it with skin color(Racist & Non). Today, the only people using the term are people who associate it with skin color or are talking about an NFL football team. So, the only people who have a problem with it are the very people who are creating it! Protesting the use of "Redskin" is championing racism.

Levi's ??? kinda weird

Crazy B

Done w/ jerseys. I hate the white collar.

Super Bowl or Bust

Now we are going to start measuring the level of offense? Redskins is offensive to you. Vikings/Cowboys is offensive to someone else. So, where does it end. It never ends. Very few people have had a problem with Redskins for 81 years. Thats their name so get over it. Lets lighten up here and save a tree.