Jump to content

So it's the Washington Commanders now?


stuvian

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, BuffaloBillyG said:

I thought the name Red Hogs was a no brainer. Pays tribute to the players of the past. Keeps the same traditions (the song Hail to the Redskins is easily now sung "Hail to the Red Hogs). Even the #HTTR stays the same. Merchandise would be pretty cool. Stuffed hogs, the old piggie noses ect. 

 

I said months ago that if they picked another name they were idiots. I forgot to factor in that Dan Snyder is in fact, an idiot. My bad.


So, you don’t think ‘Hail to the Commanders’ works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Two years and lots of money spent for Washington's going Commando?  I just...ugh...

 

In just five minutes I thought of the Washington Warlords.  For a logo use one of those old medieval helmets with a spike on top and curved horns, then use the horns and spike to fashion a "W".  Five minutes and I already thought of something better then this.  I feel bad for the fans.  I mean this isn't Buffaslug levels of disappointing, but...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

I really can't believe they didn't come up with an actual graphic logo. Where is the commander? This is just pathetic, and I really feel for Washington fans.

I did for a second but then I thought about Super Bowl 26 and suddenly I don't feel so bad anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, djp14150 said:

History lesson here…

 

this name has been asked to be changed for a long time

 

speculators have copyrighted and trademarked many of these potential team names that would have cost washington to pay millions to get rights to from speculators.

 

they could not legally force these owners to give them up.

 

 

 

I remember complaints about the "Redskins" name going back to at least the late 1990s because the name is so disrespectful.  Chiefs, Braves, Indians, Warriors etc aren't disrespectful because they were never generally used to insult people, and calls to change those team names are much more recent.  BTW, when the Atlanta Braves first made the World Series in 1991, there were complaints about their "Tomahawk Chop" cheer.   Maybe that was what led people to start questioning the Redskins name.

 

If you cannot understand why Redskins is wrong for a team name, understand that it's like the difference between using "Italian", "Jewish", "Polish", "Puerto Rican", "Mexican", "German", "Cuban", "Irish", etc and the numerous derogatory terms bigots have used for people of these heritages over the years.  

Edited by SoTier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

I remember complaints about the "Redskins" name going back to at least the late 1990s because the name is so disrespectful.  Chiefs, Braves, Indians, Warriors etc aren't disrespectful because they were never generally used to insult people, and calls to change those team names are much more recent.  BTW, when the Atlanta Braves first made the World Series in 1991, there were complaints about their "Tomahawk Chop" cheer.   Maybe that was what led people to start questioning the Redskins name.

 

If you cannot understand why Redskins is wrong for a team name, understand that it's like the difference between using "Italian", "Jewish", "Polish", "Puerto Rican", "Mexican", "German", "Cuban", "Irish", etc and the numerous derogatory terms bigots have used for people of these heritages over the years.  


 

ithink part of the issue was stereotypes in hoe team logos and other things were displayed

 

Chiefs braves and the tomahawk chop is offensive.

braves and chiefs alone aren’t offensive.  Chief is the head of a tribe. Braves is in reference to the national anthem and how some refer to native Americans 

Indians on the surface isn’t offensive

Warriors has other meaning from military references. My high school nick name was that and logo was a chief head,  they coukd have kept name but change the logo.

 

college teams used tribal names. Most are gone except for the seminoles.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Wiz said:

You can't make this ***** up.

 

 

Commanders logo includes the wrong years for Super Bowl Victories 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/washington-commanders-logo-wrong-super-bowl-years/ymro8jkbas218xgt4cgqxo6a

 

 

Even the article gets it wrong.

 

It says "Washington won the Super Bowl in its 1981, 1987 and 1991 seasons. Yet the logo has 1982, 1988 and 1992, which were the years in which the title game took place," but Washington won in 1982, not 1981, and the logo shows 1983 😅

 

Seems like everyone is confused. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/1/2022 at 7:54 AM, TheyCallMeAndy said:

Doubt they’ll need to, the term ‘redskin’ is derogatory. Chief is not. 

Redskin is not derogatory.  Or at least it wasn't.  It's well know that the name was loved by Native Americans and endorsed by them when first announced 90 years ago.  The logo was drawn by Natives and intended to be factually accurate, which it was.  

 

I have family that are part Cherokee.  They are big Blackhawks fans.  They love that their heritage honored by sports teams.   They prefer being called Indians  to Native Americans too.  It's mainly white people making these pushes, and a vocal minority of Natives.

 

Also check out the Google street view of 501 N Franklin St, Watkins Glenn NY 14891.  I'd post a pic if the site let me, but  It's downtown Watkins Glen.  If being called "red" was so offensive, why did so many Native people's call themselves red men??? (Fact is it wasn't historically derogatory)

 

And also, yes, these people do find Chiefs offensive.  Also with drawings of Indian heads or arrow heads or tomahawks.  They are offended by their own history it seems. 

  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Yea 90% of the people don't even know that the bills are named after Bill Cody..  or the browns for Paul Brown 

 

And really you're going to say Vikings are named after white people? Maybe they're called the Vikings because it's a cool name not because they said hey,  let's name this team after a bunch of white seafarers

 

I've never thought of the Minnesota Vikings and said damn , clearly the name was just chosen because they're a bunch of white people

 

If They wanted to name them Red tails because they thought it was the best name go for it.. if they were doing it just because they thought it was trendy,  I wouldn't

 

Where's the NFL team for the Asians or Hispanics

 

Why would it bother you so much to have a team name that honored black pilots, in a sport that’s played by a majority of blacks? The Vikings were white, that’s a fact. Chosen because a large number of Scandinavian immigrants settled in Minnesota. And ignorance on the origin of Bills and Browns doesn’t change the fact that majority black players are playing for teams named after whites. That’s fine, but you being upset about a team potentially being named after blacks is disturbing. And a positive team name associated with other ethnicities would be fine too if the situation arose.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...