Author Topic: 2012 NFL Thread  (Read 14162 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26076
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #150 on: June 12, 2013, 06:16:46 PM »
The Washington team's name controversy has been getting heated lately, with 10 congressmen signing a letter urging Dan Snyder to change the team's name, Snyder hiring noted GOP(and NHL) spinmeister Frank Luntz to try and quell the rising bad sentiment and more than a few newspapers refusing to use the team's name in print.

Goodell defends Washington's Name
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

TMLfans.ca

Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #150 on: June 12, 2013, 06:16:46 PM »

Offline KoHo

  • Marlie
  • **
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #151 on: June 12, 2013, 08:02:50 PM »
Not exactly politically correct but my message to people offended by the name:

Get over it.

The "Redskins" name just like the "Indians" and "Blackhawks" is meant with 0 malice or prejudice. None whatsoever. This isn't even a campaign launched by Native Americans, it's an initiative led by white Senators who want to PC society to death. These silly politicians have more important things to be working on than pretending be outraged about a football team because of "white guilt."

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26076
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #152 on: June 12, 2013, 09:22:51 PM »
Couple things just in the interest of background information:

The "Redskins" name just like the "Indians" and "Blackhawks" is meant with 0 malice or prejudice. None whatsoever.

George Marshall, the man who named the team, was one of the most virulently racist people to ever own a professional sports franchise, a man that most people think was behind the decision to ban black players from the NFL and refused to put one on his team even after the league integrated for 17 years and only relented when the federal government basically mandated that the team do the same. What the intent behind the name is, I suppose, unknowable but given those origins I don't know if I'd be that quick to ascribe a benevolent or prejudice-free intent, keeping in mind that if we agree that the name is a racial slur that the intent behind it is largely irrelevant.

This isn't even a campaign launched by Native Americans, it's an initiative led by white Senators who want to PC society to death.

Well, A) it's not Senators, it's Congresspeople and B) describing the 10 who signed the letter as "white" is terrifically inaccurate. For starters, the chief architect of the letter was Tom Cole, a republican from Oklahoma, who is one of only two Native Americans in Congress, being a member of the Chickasaw nation. After Cole, though, only two of the signees are white. The signers include African-American, Hispanic,  Japanese-American and Samoan members of Congress. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, one of the very few Native Americans to serve in the Senate, has also been outspokenly vocal about wanting the team to change their name.

These silly politicians have more important things to be working on than pretending be outraged about a football team because of "white guilt."

Well, A) as I've pointed out very few of the people involved congressionally are white so it's not born out of white guilt and B) really, all they did was sign a letter. It's not like that takes up too much of their time.

Anyways, the issue here really seems to be boiling down to a case that's more about whether or not the Football team should be allowed to hold a copyright on the name. On that question I'm fairly inclined to side against the team. Even if you want to argue that a privately owned football team should be allowed to be named whatever the owner wants, it's a much harder case to make that anyone should have a copyright on a racial slur.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 09:26:32 PM by Nik the Trik »
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline KoHo

  • Marlie
  • **
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #153 on: June 12, 2013, 10:14:35 PM »
Wow, that's some good fact-checking. I have a much more clear understand of this now but my position hasn't changed. No matter how racist the old owner may have been the name isn't interpreted in a negative light. The group of people who find it offensive is very small...according to a University of Pennsylvania poll of 768 Native Americans only 9% found the name offensive. I think our society has to tone down the overzealous political correctness a little. It's getting a bit much. The Redskins are a historic franchise and should be left be.

People of Norwegian descent don't object to the name "Vikings" and people of Irish/Gaelic descent have no problem with "Celtics." I've also never heard of anyone taking offense to the "Edmonton Eskimos" name...

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26076
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #154 on: June 12, 2013, 10:48:18 PM »
Wow, that's some good fact-checking. I have a much more clear understand of this now but my position hasn't changed. No matter how racist the old owner may have been the name isn't interpreted in a negative light.

Well, clearly how the name is interpreted is a matter of some dispute. Regardless, as I said, I don't know if how a name is "interpreted" is really the key issue when it comes to a word that is listed in most dictionaries as an offensive slur.

The group of people who find it offensive is very small...according to a University of Pennsylvania poll of 768 Native Americans only 9% found the name offensive.

One, that's a nearly 10 year old poll at this point and two, it's a problematic poll for any number of reasons. Those 768 people were only self-identified as Native Americans as opposed to, say, being taken from official legal members of a tribe or nation. Likewise, there's a pretty significant wealth of academic literature that says that using Native American mascots/nicknames are legitimately harmful, to the point where the American Psychological Association has passed a resolution calling for them not to be used.

I think our society has to tone down the overzealous political correctness a little. It's getting a bit much. The Redskins are a historic franchise and should be left be.

As I mentioned, I think the issue right now is the issue of the copyright. US law actually says that you can't copyright a disparaging term to others. Again, being as it's a pretty common consensus that it's an offensive term, it seems like it's a pretty open and shut case here. In fact, the people who have sued to overturn the trademark actually won in court and only lost on appeal on the grounds that they should have brought their case earlier. The current case, brought by people of an appropriate age, looks like it should probably win as well.

People of Norwegian descent don't object to the name "Vikings" and people of Irish/Gaelic descent have no problem with "Celtics." I've also never heard of anyone taking offense to the "Edmonton Eskimos" name...

Those strike me as pretty patently false equivalencies because neither Vikings or Celtics are or have ever been used as derogatory slurs against the people you're referring to. Likewise, it's notable that it's not the Atlanta Braves or Kansas City Chiefs that are the target of these lawsuits but the one specific team that uses what is again, a term that is almost beyond dispute a racial slur.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline KoHo

  • Marlie
  • **
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #155 on: June 13, 2013, 05:17:39 PM »
Ok. But I still think the people up in arms about this need to get a grip. It's not that big of a deal. I understand you wouldn't go up to a Native American and call them a "Redskin" but the football team's name has been there for so long that it's been accepted by society as non-offensive in that context. There's a movement within the Native community to change the name, but there's also a movement to keep the name because they take pride in it. Since the football team's been around for so long and his major historical semblance they should just keep it. No one is starting an expansion team in 2013 with a name like the "Redskins."

Offline Nik Bethune

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26076
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #156 on: June 13, 2013, 05:28:59 PM »
Ok. But I still think the people up in arms about this need to get a grip. It's not that big of a deal.

Well, clearly that's a matter of some dispute. Like I said, there's quite a bit of academic literature on the harmful effects that using Native American symbols/terms as mascots/nicknames can have on what I think we'd agree is an already marginalized community.

I understand you wouldn't go up to a Native American and call them a "Redskin" but the football team's name has been there for so long that it's been accepted by society as non-offensive in that context.

Again, I don't think that it has been universally accepted by society. Regardless, that something like this has existed for a long time to the extent that it's been normalized would be part of the problem. There is no grandfather clause for outdated behaviour/offensive terminology in our society.

There's a movement within the Native community to change the name, but there's also a movement to keep the name because they take pride in it.

Where is that particular movement? Who is leading it? I only ask because in the reading I've done on the subject I've never heard of a Native group vociferously defending the name or even taking pride in it.

Since the football team's been around for so long and his major historical semblance they should just keep it. No one is starting an expansion team in 2013 with a name like the "Redskins."

Well, yet again, the issue isn't really keep it or change it at this point. Right now it's more about the copyright and should they be allowed to "own" such a term.

Anyways, coincidentally enough, a story about the team in question and the controversy over their name was one of the headlines on Grantland today. I think it's worth a read: An Open Letter to Dan Snyder.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline KoHo

  • Marlie
  • **
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #157 on: June 26, 2013, 12:58:46 PM »
Aaron Hernandez was released by the Patriots today after being arrested in connection with the murder of Odin Lloyd. Meanwhile, Browns rookie Ausar Walcott was also released today after being charged with attempted murder, aggravated assault, and endangering an injured victim.

Not the NFL's finest hour.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2013, 04:46:53 PM by KoHo »

Offline mc

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1212
  • get the shovels
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #158 on: June 26, 2013, 04:44:26 PM »
Aaron Hernandez was released by the Patriots today after being arrested in connection with the murder of Odin Lloyd. Meanwhile, Browns rookie Ausar Walcott was also released today after charged with attempted murder, aggravated assault, and endangering an injured victim.

Not the NFL's finest hour.

I love the NFL so much but this off the field stuff is mind blowing. Happens in no other league but the NFL.

Offline Sarge

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7783
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #159 on: August 28, 2013, 09:46:37 AM »
Anyone care to enter a friendly (private) 12 team http://cbssports.com  fantasy football league this year? Please PM me. - Draft Sep 3 1430... Just 3 of 12 spots remaining.

Offline Sarge

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7783
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #160 on: August 29, 2013, 04:35:35 PM »
Anyone care to enter a friendly (private) 12 team http://cbssports.com  fantasy football league this year? Please PM me. - Draft Sep 3 1430... Just 3 of 12 spots remaining.

* bump *

Offline Sarge

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7783
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #161 on: August 30, 2013, 02:49:06 PM »
League is now full... Thanks anyway, gang.

Offline seahawk

  • Site Contributor
  • Rookie
  • *
  • Posts: 880
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #162 on: September 05, 2013, 10:41:33 PM »
Question for the fantasy football junkies here. I have a trade offer in one of my leagues. I give up Michael Vick and get back Phillip Rivers and Tony Gonzales. I would also have to drop someone, probably my current TE Jermaine Gresham.

Would you make this trade?

TMLfans.ca

Re: 2012 NFL Thread
« Reply #162 on: September 05, 2013, 10:41:33 PM »