DeathFromAbove1979 wrote:hutch wrote:DeathFromAbove1979 wrote:
The name MUST be a curse when they've won 3 Super Bowls and 2 World Championships under the name. Yes, the last was over 2 decades ago, but they have been named the same thing for the better part of a century.
At this point I don't give 2 squirts of piss WHAT the hell they do. Win another Super Bowl. Rename them the Washington Dudeguys and if they win a Super Bowl it'll all be fine with me.
nobody cared what they were named until more recently… you could make the argument the curse was activated when Cooke died…
personally I think the team needs a fresh start… changing the name would be a beginning….the clamor for them to change the name will get louder.. given the team's racist history I think they should have been out in front on the name issue…
How racist? Like, having the only black Super Bowl winning quarterback in NFL history? Pretty racist.
Honestly, I don't give a shit at this point. They can do whatever they want. If they bring me a Super Bowl, I don't care what they're named or who owns the team.
You are pathetic if you don't know the history of the Washington Redskins… educate yourself.. here is a snippet that can begin your education:
Most Americans, and most Redskins fans, agree with him (Hutch note ie Snyder and resdksins name). But all that shows is that those Americans and fans don?t know the history. Snyder, presumably, does. He should be ashamed.
Marshall had made a fortune in the commercial laundry business when he purchased the Boston Braves football team in 1932. His second coach was a man whose mother was thought to be part Sioux. Not known to be?thought to be. And on that flimsy basis, Marshall changed the name, in this coach?s ?honor? (even though Marshall fired him after two seasons), from Braves to Redskins. It seems telling that ?Braves? was somehow not authentic enough for Marshall.
?Redskins? lasts only because white people don?t know it?s offensive and don?t particularly care to stop and think about how and why it might be.
Telling, but not surprising. This is a man who proposed to his wife against the backdrop of a group of black performers he?d hired to croon ?Carry Me Back to Ol? Virginny? as he popped the question (?Massa and Missus have long since gone before me / Soon we will meet on that bright and golden shore?). Who ordered the Redskins marching band to play ?Dixie? right before ?The Star-Spangled Banner? prior to every game?up into the 1960s. And who probably instigated the banning of black athletes from the NFL from 1933 until 1946.
I say ?probably? because the league?s owners at the time always kept it a deep secret, but Thomas G. Smith, who wrote a 2011 book about all this, got as close as a person could get to putting Marshall at the center of the ban. The league had blacks before 1933 only because people didn?t care much about pro football then, not nearly as much as they did about baseball. But in 1933, at someone?s instigation, the owners got together and agreed on the ban. Certainly, Marshall was the biggest racist of the bunch. (I reviewed the book here, for The New York Review of Books.)
Most famously of all, Marshall was the last owner to accept a black player?fully 15 years after the ban was lifted. And his team drafted an African-American then (in 1961) only because it was forced to by the government?the then-new stadium that we call RFK Stadium today was built on Department of Interior land, which permitted the Kennedy administration to order the lessee (the team) to adhere to federal nondiscrimination policies. In other words, Marshall wasn?t merely a standard-issue racist of the time, like H.L. Mencken or countless others. He was diseased. He seethed with hatred of nonwhite people. And ?Redskins? is his handiwork. Because ?Braves? wasn?t quite descriptive enough.
from: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/01/the-racist-redskins.html