Skins are SB Bound... Havent u heard?

[Skinsmaniac]

That's such a ****ty way to block a man. I can't believe it's still legal.

I worry more about Shannahan's cut blocks injuring our players than I do his ability to coach that godforsaken team.

Yeah, it should probably be outlawed. At the same time, it's one of those things where I'm glad we're doing it and not our opposition. How do I justify it? I'm very complex :laugh1:.

 

[DallasEast]

For VACowboy and DallasEast: It's coming...

Commanders' Blockers Cut to Chase
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/082010/08172010/569013

Thanks. It's nice to see a media outlet which is willing to shed light on this regrettable nonsense. Here is a key item from the article which I have mentioned before:

*****

The difference between a legal cut block and an illegal block, however, can be slim.

Linemen are prohibited from blocking a defender below his waist from behind. They also cannot deliver a low block on a defender who is already engaged with another offensive player.

*****

It is shameful that the rules allow cut blocks from the front on defensive linemen, but it is what it is and I'm not going to argue a point which the NFL refuses to address at this time. I will simply be hopeful that re-positioning the umpire into the offensive backfield will reduce the number of non calls when an offensive lineman throws an illegal block BECAUSE they happened more often than Shanahan's supporters would care to admit.

The excuse has been that the umpire was out of position to see the illegal block. That is no longer going to be the case anymore.
​

 

[Hostile]

Sigh. You have the reasoning skills of a child.

Thank you for the insult. Care to address the topic or do you just want to act like a coward and hurl more insults?

How do you disown a racist past? By simply saying, "it happened, we don't like it, let's forget it?" Ask America how well that works.

 

[1fisher]

Yeah, it should probably be outlawed. At the same time, it's one of those things where I'm glad we're doing it and not our opposition. How do I justify it? I'm very complex :laugh1:.

Cowards! I hope this backfires in Shanahans face...... Thank God he won't be coaching in Dallas anytime soon. I can't stand him. Even moreso since he's a Reds*in.

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

My question stands. He said "disown." How do you disown it?

To me, the only way to do that would be to do the honorable thing and change the mascot name. It is racist. Denying that is silly. As long as you cling to the name, you own the past.

No I don't disown the name. I am fourtante enough to know many native American Washington Commanders fans who do not have an issue with the team name.

Do I disown the past and what GPM did to blacks? Sure. It was racist. Its a rather silly question in my opinion, sort of like trying to lump all Muslims together as terrorists by asking dumb questions like "do you believe in Sharia law."

Its about as relevant as me asking "do you disown Michael Irvin for stabbing a teammate in the neck at training camp 1998 and that entire 'Boys will be Boys' era."

Things are fairly complex in my world, not black and white. Asking black and white questions is a cheap cop out and intellectually lazy.

One last edit: I have no idea how we even veered into this topic of conversation. I have got enough on my plate, I come here to talk silly smack not get into racial history and American politics

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I'm not too worried about the cut blocks. Every team cut blocks to some degree. Teams around the league are prepared for it and know the deal. A few years ago IIRC, they cut block and injured Jammal Williams. That seemed more of a case of one bad O-Lineman who was getting killed by Wiliams all game long, so he had bad intentions. The thing is that if they want to purposedly hurt a defensive player, the defense can go after McNabb's knees. Most of them know the score, hurting a D-Lineman isn't as big of a deal as hurting their QB.







YR

 

[VACowboy]

For VACowboy and DallasEast: It's coming...

Commanders' Blockers Cut to Chase
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/082010/08172010/569013

You seem proud of that.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

No I don't disown the name. I am fourtante enough to know many native American Washington Commanders fans who do not have an issue with the team name.

Believe me...growing up in the Central NY area where there is a large Native American population, one of whom is my best friend that I've known since I was 10 years old, there are a lot more Native Americans that detest the Commanders name than those who have no issue.

There are black people who don't have an issue with somebody doing blackface, but the majority that I've known have a major issue with it.

The Commanders name is there so Snyder can contineu to line his pockets instead of making the ethical choice to change the name and 're-market' Washington under a different name. Whether you understand it or not, you're basically saying to the world 'I'm against being racist to black people, but being racist to Native Americans is okay.'

I don't think you're that type of person, but that's exactly how you come across and that's exactly how the overwhelming majority of Native Americans view it.






YR

 

[DallasEast]

Thank you for the insult. Care to address the topic or do you just want to act like a coward and hurl more insults?

How do you disown a racist past? By simply saying, "it happened, we don't like it, let's forget it?" Ask America how well that works.

In my opinion, it will take an "authoritative nudge" in the proper direction in order for the Washington franchise to move into the 21st century. I just do not see that ever happening.

Down here in my neck of the woods there is a nearby college called the University of Louisiana at Monroe (ULM). Their mascot is the Warhawks, which was adopted in honor of a local World War II hero's military unit.

However, before the Warhawks were born, they were the Indians of Northeast Louisiana University (NLU). If not for the NCAA, NLU would have never evolved beyond the old inequities associated with its mascot. The university would have undergone its name-changing facelift to ULM just before the turn of the century and still held onto a totally unnecessary stereotype.

The NCAA was ULM's motivation to do "the right thing". There is nothing out there to push Daniel Snyder's club in that same direction.

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

Believe me...growing up in the Central NY area where there is a large Native American population, one of whom is my best friend that I've known since I was 10 years old, there are a lot more Native Americans that detest the Commanders name than those who have no issue.

There are black people who don't have an issue with somebody doing blackface, but the majority that I've known have a major issue with it.

The Commanders name is there so Snyder can contineu to line his pockets instead of making the ethical choice to change the name and 're-market' Washington under a different name. Whether you understand it or not, you're basically saying to the world 'I'm against being racist to black people, but being racist to Native Americans is okay.'

I don't think you're that type of person, but that's exactly how you come across and that's exactly how the overwhelming majority of Native Americans view it.






YR

Anectodal evidence.

Per Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy

According to polling results published in Sports Illustrated in February 2002,
“Although most Native American activists and tribal leaders consider Indian team names and mascots offensive, neither Native Americans in general nor a cross section of U.S. sports fans agree.[6] According to the article, "There is a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this issue."[6]”
In 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the Sports Illustrated poll's findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.[7]


And then there is this

What do Native Americans themselves think?
This is where it gets kind of odd. In actuallity, less than 18% of Native Americans are offended by Indian Mascots in pro sports. In a March 4, 2002 Sports Illustrated 7 page editorial entitled "The Indian Wars", a poll was conducted amongst Native Americans. Surprisingly, the following information was gathered:
"Asked if high [COLOR=#009900! important][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][COLOR=#009900! important][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]school[/FONT][/FONT][/color][/color] and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81% of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83% of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters and symbols."
This begs the question: If it doesn't bother Native Americans, why are so many non Indians taking up a fight against Indian mascots in pro sports? The answer is rather odd, but could be attributed to the misunderstanding of the real meaning of Commander, or it could simply be moral guilt. This is our attempt to make amends for something we were never a part of and could not control. The compaign against the Native American by the United States was a dark part of our nation's history. Perhaps this is the reason for today's offense towards the use of Indian mascots.


Read more: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/1958...e-are-native-americans-offended#ixzz0***t9vT4

 

[Hostile]

No I don't disown the name. I am fourtante enough to know many native American Washington Commanders fans who do not have an issue with the team name.

So because rappers use the N word in lyrics we should all use it too?

I'm sorry, but that is absolutely dumb logic. You know some who have no issue with it, so the rest of them who do should shut up?

It is clinging to racism and your racist roots to keep that name alive. There is no way to spin it differently.

Do I disown the past and what GPM did to blacks? Sure. It was racist. Its a rather silly question in my opinion, sort of like trying to lump all Muslims together as terrorists by asking dumb questions like "do you believe in Sharia law."

My question still isn't answered. How do you disown it and keep the name? This is like saying, "yeah I have my grandfather's KKK sheets, but I don't put them on the bed and I only have them for sentimental reasons."

Its about as relevant as me asking "do you disown Michael Irvin for stabbing a teammate in the neck at training camp 1998 and that entire 'Boys will be Boys' era."

I didn't claim to disown any portion of the Cowboys History. Two of you now are saying you do. I am asking how while you still cling to a racist mascot.

Try and stay on topic.

Things are fairly complex in my world, not black and white. Asking black and white questions is a cheap cop out and intellectually lazy.

No, he made a blanket convenient statement of acceptance. That is the cop out. You don't recognize this because you are just as guilty as he is.

One last edit: I have no idea how we even veered into this topic of conversation. I have got enough on my plate, I come here to talk silly smack not get into racial history and American politics

It's quite simple really how this veered. He said Commanders fans disown that portion of their past.

How? Especially given the mascot name.

It is talking out of both sides of your faces. Period.

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

So because rappers use the N word in lyrics we should all use it too?

I'm sorry, but that is absolutely dumb logic. You know some who have no issue with it, so the rest of them who do should shut up?

It is clinging to racism and your racist roots to keep that name alive. There is no way to spin it differently.

My question still isn't answered. How do you disown it and keep the name? This is like saying, "yeah I have my grandfather's KKK sheets, but I don't put them on the bed and I only have them for sentimental reasons."

I think you are a confused man.

I don't have a problem with the name Commanders. And apparently, according to polls as recent as 2002, neither do the very vast majority of native Americans.

If I am being asked to disown something, its GPM's treatment of blacks and the overall man himself.

I didn't claim to disown any portion of the Cowboys History. Two of you now are saying you do. I am asking how while you still cling to a racist mascot.

Try and stay on topic.

Admire the honesty and the fact that you had no issues with the Boys will be Boys era.

No, he made a blanket convenient statement of acceptance. That is the cop out. You don't recognize this because you are just as guilty as he is.

It's quite simple really how this veered. He said Commanders fans disown that portion of their past.

How? Especially given the mascot name.

It is talking out of both sides of your faces. Period.

Thats just a bunch of nonsense. Again, complex issue Hostile. It ain't hard to see shades of gray. This isn't a black and white world here.

You can drone on and on about the name. Clearly, based on polls, not the anectodal evidence you and YR have provided, this isn't the issue amongst the general Native American population that you would like it to be

Its as intellectually lazy as asking me if I support or oppose the Islamic Center being built in NYC because Hamas now supports it being built.

 

[DallasEast]

Anectodal evidence.

Per Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy

According to polling results published in Sports Illustrated in February 2002,
“Although most Native American activists and tribal leaders consider Indian team names and mascots offensive, neither Native Americans in general nor a cross section of U.S. sports fans agree.[6] According to the article, "There is a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this issue."[6]”
In 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the Sports Illustrated poll's findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.[7]


And then there is this

What do Native Americans themselves think?
This is where it gets kind of odd. In actuallity, less than 18% of Native Americans are offended by Indian Mascots in pro sports. In a March 4, 2002 Sports Illustrated 7 page editorial entitled "The Indian Wars", a poll was conducted amongst Native Americans. Surprisingly, the following information was gathered:
"Asked if high [COLOR=#009900! important][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][COLOR=#009900! important][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]school[/FONT][/FONT][/color][/color] and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81% of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83% of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters and symbols."
This begs the question: If it doesn't bother Native Americans, why are so many non Indians taking up a fight against Indian mascots in pro sports? The answer is rather odd, but could be attributed to the misunderstanding of the real meaning of Commander, or it could simply be moral guilt. This is our attempt to make amends for something we were never a part of and could not control. The compaign against the Native American by the United States was a dark part of our nation's history. Perhaps this is the reason for today's offense towards the use of Indian mascots.


Read more: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/1958...e-are-native-americans-offended#ixzz0***t9vT4

Each time this isolated SI/Annenberg Public Policy Center finding keeps reappearing on this board, I always find myself wondering how different these less than a handful of polling surveys would have differed if there had not been a near eradication of native people in this country?

Sometimes, victims can take only so much. The question will always remain whether the term Commanders is, in fact, offensive or not? Native American activists cannot be labeled as indifferent. Even if they are found to share only the minority opinion of their people, does that negate their opinion? Does it have merit? If the opinion within a minority is shared to some greater extent within an external majority, is it disregarded simply because the minority within that external majority lacks what is essentially moral fortitude?

These are questions which I fear will never be answered within my lifetime, but hopefully, some day, they eventually shall.

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

Each time this isolated SI/Annenberg Public Policy Center finding keeps reappearing on this board, I always find myself wondering how different these less than a handful of polling surveys would have differed if there had not been a near eradication of native people in this country?

Sometimes, victims can take only so much. The question will always remain whether the term Commanders is, in fact, offensive or not? Native American activists cannot be labeled as indifferent. Even if they are found to share only the minority opinion of their people, does that negate their opinion? Does it have merit? If the opinion within a minority is shared to some greater extent within an external majority, is it disregarded simply because the minority within that majority lacks what is essentially moral fortitude?

These are questions which I fear will never be answered within my lifetime, but hopefully, some day, they eventually shall.

I don't think they are indifferent or irrelevant. However, the major disconnect cannot be denied. The leadership finds it one way, while the rank and file has a different conclusion. Its almost like unions in the 1980s, with leadership supporting Democrat candidates and rank and file (i.e Reagan Democrats) voting for Ronald Reagan.

I am not native American so I have no clue why there is such a disconnect between leaders and activitsts and the rest of the population on this issue.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

The problem with pointing to the poll is that it doesn't exactly address the nickname 'Commanders.'

For instance, I can tell you that the Native Americans I know (and I know probably close to 50 of them) don't have any issue with the nickname 'Warriors.' They also don't have a problem with the 'Seminoles.'

However, I know a lot of them had problems with St. John's University nickname 'Redmen' and the University finally changed it to the 'Red Storm.'

I could do my own poll of Native Americans asking 'do you find the nickname Commanders offensive?' and the poll answer would be 'yes' by a long shot.

 

[DallasEast]

I don't think they are indifferent or irrelevant. However, the major disconnect cannot be denied. The leadership finds it one way, while the rank and file has a different conclusion. Its almost like unions in the 1980s, with leadership supporting Democrat candidates and rank and file (i.e Reagan Democrats) voting for Ronald Reagan.

I am not native American so I have no clue why there is such a disconnect between leaders and activitsts and the rest of the population on this issue.

"Disconnect" is indifference.

Pollster: "Do you care if the Washington NFL franchise uses the term 'Commander'?"

Native American: "Huh? Who cares?"

But you are correct. The issue is not irrelevant. As far as the "disconnect" or "indifference", that is irrelevant. The only question is whether the term is offensive. That opinion is shared by a minority within the Native American community and among the majority of various peoples outside of the Native American populace. That's relevant.

 

[Hostile]

I think you are a confused man.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time you are wrong.

I don't have a problem with the name Commanders. And apparently, according to polls as recent as 2002, neither do the very vast majority of native Americans.

I've seen polls that say they do oppose it. What difference does a poll make for you anyway? You need a poll to tell you what your opinion is? Okay, what % do you need so that you see that the word is offensive.

I will throw out the same challenge to you that I have thrown out to dozens of Commanders fans. Come with me to the Cibeque Apache reservation here in AZ and walk up to a group of them and call them Commanders. If you can't or won't, then you are a hypocrite.

If I am being asked to disown something, its GPM's treatment of blacks and the overall man himself.

This is exactly my point. How convenient to turn a blind eye to one aspect while embracing the other with all your heart.

Admire the honesty and the fact that you had no issues with the Boys will be Boys era.

I said I have no issues? No, I said I haven't made any comments about disowning any era. There's a huge difference there.

Thats just a bunch of nonsense. Again, complex issue Hostile. It ain't hard to see shades of gray. This isn't a black and white world here.

There is no gray area from where I sit. Just like the rebel flag in the south. You see a gray area because you want to.

My Dad went to NMSU. At one time their college yearbook was called the swastika and it featured a native American (Navajo & Hopi) renditions that looked like cave drawings. The swastika itself is 3000 years old in origin, clearly predating the **** use. NMSU dropped the use of that symbol from its yearbook. The tribes have also dropped the use of it. They recognize the need to move past these old traditions that have ties to horror.

Doing the right thing is never bad.

You can drone on and on about the name. Clearly, based on polls, not the anectodal evidence you and YR have provided, this isn't the issue amongst the general Native American population that you would like it to be

Again with the polls nonsense.

I am deleting the last line because I don't want to stray from the topic as you clearly do.

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

The problem with pointing to the poll is that it doesn't exactly address the nickname 'Commanders.'

For instance, I can tell you that the Native Americans I know (and I know probably close to 50 of them) don't have any issue with the nickname 'Warriors.' They also don't have a problem with the 'Seminoles.'

However, I know a lot of them had problems with St. John's University nickname 'Redmen' and the University finally changed it to the 'Red Storm.'

I could do my own poll of Native Americans asking 'do you find the nickname Commanders offensive?' and the poll answer would be 'yes' by a long shot.

Please conduct that study. The only reason I even brought up the Annenburg/SI study was to bring actual facts into this discussion. Everything else is anectodal evidence and heresay

"Disconnect" is indifference.

Pollster: "Do you care if the Washington NFL franchise uses the term 'Commander'?"

Native American: "Huh? Who cares?"

But you are correct. The issue is not irrelevant. As far as the "disconnect" or "indifference", that is irrelevant. The only question is whether the term is offensive. That opinion is shared by a minority within the Native American community and among the majority of various peoples outside of the Native American populace. That's relevant.

Evidence of that? Where are we going off on this indifferent/disconnect discussion.

Here is the fact. Native American leaders find it offensive. Based on this study, the vast majority of Native Americans do not. I am not the one who commisioned or paid for the study, and hell I didn't even know it existed until an hour ago.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time you are wrong..

That contributes

I've seen polls that say they do oppose it. What difference does a poll make for you anyway? You need a poll to tell you what your opinion is? Okay, what % do you need so that you see that the word is offensive.

Please show me the polls, I'd love to take a look at them. If there is any contrary evidence I have no problem seeing it.

I will throw out the same challenge to you that I have thrown out to dozens of Commanders fans. Come with me to the Cibeque Apache reservation here in AZ and walk up to a group of them and call them Commanders. If you can't or won't, then you are a hypocrite.

Next time I am in Arizona (which will be my first time) I'd love to meet up. It will hopefully be an educational experience on this issue. I'll be happy to wear a Washington Commanders t-shirt as well.

This is exactly my point. How convenient to turn a blind eye to one aspect while embracing the other with all your heart.

Huh? Again, you seem to be a black and white type guy with things. Here is something you have probably learned in life..things are far more complex then they appear.

Doing the right thing is never bad.

Agree.

Again with the polls nonsense.

Facts my friends. They make an argument much more persuasive then heresay.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Please conduct that study. The only reason I even brought up the Annenburg/SI study was to bring actual facts into this discussion. Everything else is anectodal evidence and heresay

The Annenburg/SI study has a major hole in it that is pretty obvious to see. The term 'Warrior' and even the term 'Indian' are completely different from 'Commander.' A flawed poll doesn't mean it's a fact when it comes to the conversation at hand.

Technically, referring to an African American as 'black' is deragatory to some African Americans. I could skew a poll question like 'do you find racial slurs like 'black' offensive?'

I'm sure I would get a resounding no by African Americans. Then I could say 'well, 99% of African Americans don't find racial slurs offensive according to the poll I conducted.'

Of course, that would be deliberately misleading and I don't think the Annenburg/SI poll did that. But, there was a flaw in the poll nonetheless (polls tend to have flaws in them) and thus it doesn't really make it a fact. If they asked 'do you find the term 'Commanders' offensive?' to Native Americans and the answer was a resounding no, then I would say that is a fact (provided that the sample size is over 100 people from across the nation).







YR

 

[Hostile]

That contributes

So did accusing me of being confused. You don't like the paint, don't sling the paintbrush.

Please show me the polls, I'd love to take a look at them. If there is any contrary evidence I have no problem seeing it.

What % are you looking for in order to change your mind? I mean give me a range here. Since a poll will clearly define right or wrong to you, what % do you need?

Next time I am in Arizona (which will be my first time) I'd love to meet up. It will hopefully be an educational experience on this issue. I'll be happy to wear a Washington Commanders t-shirt as well.

I don't believe for one minute that you'd do it. The invitation is wide open.

Huh? Again, you seem to be a black and white type guy with things. Here is something you have probably learned in life..things are far more complex then they appear.

This one isn't that complex. It is for you because it is the team you love. A team that I suspect you would still love if they did the right thing and changed the name. For me it could not be more obvious what is right and what is wrong.

To me if you are going to disown racism, you do not cling to a racist symbol while doing so.

I will never need a poll to think for me. I can do it on my own. Do you think I was shocked when I learned that GSP was a racist? I assure you I was not.

Facts my friends. They make an argument much more persuasive then heresay.

I find it almost humorous that you misspell "hearsay" to make it look more like "heresy" and use "then" instead of "than." It totally changes what the 2nd sentence says. In other words heresy follows persuasion per you. How true. It is a shame that it totally applies in this case, albeit not in a religious sense.

I know a lot of Native Americans. None of them that I know are nonplussed by that word. Every single one of them has told me that it offends them. These are good people. They do not deserve the insults. It's too bad they are never asked to vote in polls.

In case you are wondering how many Native Americans I might know. My Mom's 2nd husband was a full blooded Apache. I know a lot of his people. My father-in-law was actually adopted by the Navajo and Hopi tribes of northern Arizona. All of my in-laws have extensive Histories of friendships with their Native American neighbors. In fact, one of them is basically my adopted brother-in-law. When his family died he had nowhere else to go. My wife considers him as much a brother as her own flesh and blood. He considers my in-laws as his Mom & Dad. They made sure he was still raised with his tribal culture intact.

I live near the Tohono O'Odam Nation. I wear my Cowboys colors proudly and often get to ask them about the word. You pay attention to polls. I listen to people. In my time doing this I think one person has said he doesn't care. I've asked hundreds. I don't know who your polls ask, but it isn't the people I know. I call these things...facts.