2021-2022 NFL Season

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

https://nypost.com/2021/07/12/washington-football-team-axes-fan-favorite-new-name/

So they axe Warriors because it is offensive to certain groups in particular Native Americans, but its OK for Golden State. Go figure.

It’s all about the imagery.

[MU82]

https://nypost.com/2021/07/12/washington-football-team-axes-fan-favorite-new-name/

So they axe Warriors because it is offensive to certain groups in particular Native Americans, but its OK for Golden State. Go figure.

Yes.

Get over it.

[DegenerateDish]

The Louis County vs NFL case isn’t getting any play nationally, but man is this case getting interesting fast.

I don’t know how the NFL can possibly win this case with the evidence that exists. A settlement would be hundreds of millions I would imagine.

[Herman Cain]

The Louis County vs NFL case isn’t getting any play nationally, but man is this case getting interesting fast.

I don’t know how the NFL can possibly win this case with the evidence that exists. A settlement would be hundreds of millions I would imagine.

There will be a settlement when the insurance companies want to turn off the legal meter.

[Pakuni]

The Louis County vs NFL case isn’t getting any play nationally, but man is this case getting interesting fast.

I don’t know how the NFL can possibly win this case with the evidence that exists. A settlement would be hundreds of millions I would imagine.

Stan Kronke is going to make so much money on the SoFi development and the added value of the Rams that any settlement is going to be chump change in comparison.

[DegenerateDish]

Stan Kronke is going to make so much money on the SoFi development and the added value of the Rams that any settlement is going to be chump change in comparison.

The punitive damage discovery is the big loss for all the defendants here. Ultra rich dudes don’t enjoy people poking around their financial records.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

https://nypost.com/2021/07/12/washington-football-team-axes-fan-favorite-new-name/

So they axe Warriors because it is offensive to certain groups in particular Native Americans, but its OK for Golden State. Go figure.

This has been explained on this site before, I actually think there were posts directly to you, but in case you missed them and are curious.

Having the moniker of "Warrior" isn't inherently racist. It depends on the imagery being used with it. Though a majority of teams named "Warriors" in US history opted to utilize Native American imagery, leading some to permanently associate the two regardless of imagery.

The Philadelphia Warriors used a racist caricature as their mascot back in the 40s and 50s. When the team relocated to San Francisco in the 60s, they dropped the caricature and replaced it with an image of headdress. Still native imagery but not quite as offensive. This stayed in place until 1968 when the team decided to drop all native imagery and replace it with an image of the Golden Gate bridge. Since then, there have been no logos that even hint at native imagery in Golden State.

The timing is important because Golden State made this change in the 60s, decades before there was any significant public pressure to drop Native American mascots. By the time that pressure arrived in the late 90s and reached a boiling point in the mid 2000s, 30 some years had passed. Fans weren't showing up to Oakland Arena in war paint and headdresses anymore, they had successfully transitioned from native imagery to a neutral imagery. On top of that, as long as the team had been in San Francisco, the imagery used didn't fall into the far end of the racism spectrum (i.e. Redskins, Chief Wahoo, and yes, Willie Wampum).

Timing is what makes Warriors a bad PR move for the Washington Football Team. Until last season, they had a racial slur for Native Americans as their moniker. Their fans were famously filled with shirtless White guys showing up with tomahawks, war paint, and other racial stereotypes. To take on a moniker that in this country traditionally has been associated with Native American imagery, would be viewed as a continuation of Redskins just in different clothing. Could it be done in a non-problematic way? Sure. Would that be a good PR move for the team? Don't see any way that it could be.

[muwarrior69]

This has been explained on this site before, I actually think there were posts directly to you, but in case you missed them and are curious.

Having the moniker of "Warrior" isn't inherently racist. It depends on the imagery being used with it. Though a majority of teams named "Warriors" in US history opted to utilize Native American imagery, leading some to permanently associate the two regardless of imagery.

The Philadelphia Warriors used a racist caricature as their mascot back in the 40s and 50s. When the team relocated to San Francisco in the 60s, they dropped the caricature and replaced it with an image of headdress. Still native imagery but not quite as offensive. This stayed in place until 1968 when the team decided to drop all native imagery and replace it with an image of the Golden Gate bridge. Since then, there have been no logos that even hint at native imagery in Golden State.

The timing is important because Golden State made this change in the 60s, decades before there was any significant public pressure to drop Native American mascots. By the time that pressure arrived in the late 90s and reached a boiling point in the mid 2000s, 30 some years had passed. Fans weren't showing up to Oakland Arena in war paint and headdresses anymore, they had successfully transitioned from native imagery to a neutral imagery. On top of that, as long as the team had been in San Francisco, the imagery used didn't fall into the far end of the racism spectrum (i.e. Redskins, Chief Wahoo, and yes, Willie Wampum).

Timing is what makes Warriors a bad PR move for the Washington Football Team. Until last season, they had a racial slur for Native Americans as their moniker. Their fans were famously filled with shirtless White guys showing up with tomahawks, war paint, and other racial stereotypes. To take on a moniker that in this country traditionally has been associated with Native American imagery, would be viewed as a continuation of Redskins just in different clothing. Could it be done in a non-problematic way? Sure. Would that be a good PR move for the team? Don't see any way that it could be.

Really?

https://sportsmascots.fandom.com/wiki/Chief_Zee_(Washington_Redskins)

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Really?

https://sportsmascots.fandom.com/wiki/Chief_Zee_(Washington_Redskins)

Where did he say they were exclusively white guys?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Really?

https://sportsmascots.fandom.com/wiki/Chief_Zee_(Washington_Redskins)

Yes really.













Did I ever say that it was exclusively White? A majority are white.

[muwarrior69]

Where did he say they were exclusively white guys?

Then why bring race into it?

[muwarrior69]

Yes really.













Did I ever say that it was exclusively White? A majority are white.

C'mon man, they're all wearing shirts!

[jficke13]

Is this some kind of solidarity for mascot name loss thing? Are you a diehard Washington Football Team fan suddenly deprived of his mascot? What engenders such passionate defense here?

I'm honestly curious, because I can think of very few things I care about less than what Dan Snyder's team calls itself. It seems weird as heck that anyone would do anything in response to this rebranding beyond simply saying "okay."

[cheebs09]

Then why bring race into it?

The nickname being replaced was a color followed by skin. You can’t really separate race from this.

If they got rid of it in the 70s and went with knight imagery of Warriors, they’d have probably been able to make it work, similar to MU. Especially with how hard WFT fought to keep the former name, in my opinion, you can’t go to a name that could even be close to the Native American imagery.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Then why bring race into it?

1. Because the Washington Football Team brought race into it by using a racial slur as their mascot for decades.

2. Because while it is bad when any non-Native American culturally appropriates Native imagery, it is worse when a White person does it than when a Black or Latinx or Asian person does. To pre-empt your why, it is because of the historical context. The genocide or conquering or subjugation or whatever word you are comfortable using of Native Americans was primarily perpetuated by White Europeans and later White Americans. So while other people of color doing it is an insult, when a White person does it, it is adding insult to past injury.

If it makes you feel better, I don't like Chief Zee either.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Then why bring race into it?

Why bring race into a discussion about native imagery?

[JWags85]

1. Because the Washington Football Team brought race into it by using a racial slur as their mascot for decades.

Not even the recent conversation, but their founder was an avowed segregationist/bigot who was the last to sign a black player.  He chose Redskins cause the team he bought was called the Braves and he liked the Native American imagery.  AND the first coach he hired, as a marketing gimmick, was a huckster who claimed to be Native American.

There was never anything with the Redskins like other Warriors or Braves mascots that aged poorly as people became more aware and sensitive, it was a racist nickname picked and crafted by a dyed in the wool racist owner from the jump

[Hards Alumni]

So are we not going to bring up Richard Sherman's antics from last night?

[Pakuni]

So are we not going to bring up Richard Sherman's antics from last night?

I think you just did.

[jesmu84]

So are we not going to bring up Richard Sherman's antics from last night?

The good news is the NFL has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to domestic violence...

... If there's video...

... Or the player isn't a superstar.

[naginiF]

The good news is the NFL has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to domestic violence...

... If there's video...

... Or the player isn't a superstar.

... Or the victim doesn't settle out of court

[JWags85]

The good news is the NFL has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to domestic violence...

... If there's video...

... Or the player isn't a superstar.

It will be interesting how this is viewed.  Obviously not excusing his behavior but it seems a different situation than someone who explicitly puts their hands on their spouse.

Now the DUI and reckless driving is another matter.

[Herman Cain]

Lots of detail on The Sherman Imbroglio

https://nypost.com/2021/07/14/richard-sherman-threatened-to-kill-himself-wifes-911-call/

[Hards Alumni]

Lots of detail on The Sherman Imbroglio

https://nypost.com/2021/07/14/richard-sherman-threatened-to-kill-himself-wifes-911-call/

Alcohol + CTE is a really really bad combo

[jficke13]

So are we not going to bring up Richard Sherman's antics from last night?

You call them antics, I see someone in need of help, likely not the kind that he's going to get with a week in jail.