first ?

I guess I don't quite understand this type of thinking. I mean, looking at this realistically:

1. The Redskins have won a total of 3 Super Bowls, and this guy thinks we're cursed? How about the Browns? Are they cursed? The Bengals? The Bills? Philly? I could be wrong, but the total super bowls won by those teams is ZERO correct?
Jumping over to baseball, how about Cleveland? Or the Sox before 04. Sorry, but I'm as big a Sox fan as their is, and never ONCE did I resort to this type of whining. They went 86 years, between Titles, so that kind of puts 15 years in perspective doesn't it?

I guess I'll end with this, and not to sound like a broken record, but if following the Redskins as a fan, causes you this much grief, and angst, then stop following them. Get a hobby to take up your time.

doo-doo

Thanks for piling it on Jasno. "No gnus is good gnus" would have been a better option for today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAwVIZDAUF0

This dude needs to be locked up. This is NOT the ordinary perspective of a Redskins fan. I actually think we could have this guy committed to an institution if we showed a judge this rambling nonsense.

Is there a pulitzer prize for a blog entry? I couldnt really agree more...

I've been a die hard fan since birth and have been through all 3 SB wins. Even though I was only 6 for the first I still remember it.

Anywho, there is a fine line between being a die hard fan and someone who comes across as having mental issues. Sorry but this guy fits the latter.

A too long for me but the parts I did read had me thinking. For the Skins are like a paper cut. You know when you touch it you will experience pain but you do it anyways. Every year I know they are going to cause me pain but I cheer for them and talk trash anyways.

The Skins were my first and will always have my heart but I decided years ago that I couldn't take it any longer. I am a real Skins fan and that will never change but the pain has also been too much for me. The sense of foreboding that something bad will happen always overtakes me, as well. Well, Vincent, I found the solution. I found a mistress. Her name is Wizards. Vincent, I suggest you find a mistress as well. I hear the Caps are available.

e. The sense of foreboding that something bad will happen always overtakes me, as well. Well, Vincent, I found the solution. I found a mistress. Her name is Wizards

LMGO!

I thought this was a thoughtful and insightful description of the plight of the average fan, and very well written.

That said it's more like a dissertation written 'tongue in cheek' than a real blog posting. I say good job Vincent, I wish I could write this well!

I'm sorry but this just comes across to me as whining, and not much more. I don't get what the point of it was? How many years have the Cubs gone without a title, and he's trying to compare the Redskins to that? Nice try, but you're WAY off base.

freedom, The way the Wizards are playing right now it won't be long until you have to dump them too.

For the record I am a Wizards fan but I find it easier to turn the channel or not watch when they are playing like crap.

Right on. Sadly you summed up my thoughts on Sunday after the game.

Um, "Best Glog Ever"

Beantown Greg: The kid is young so he doesnt have perspective, no winner context. My 20 year old kid brother is the same way. Also dont be so harsh.....

Libby mike, I dont know who you hang with, this sums up most skins fans I know!

Also people I am pretty sure this whipper-snapper had TONGUE FIRMLY IN CHEEK! If you take everything he says at face value, your the chump!

Excellent, well written, intelligent, funny.....

Vincent, hats off my man!

Take note, kids. THAT is a Guest Blog Entry. Well done. Pulitzer Prize for blogging, indeed.

Any good news on the dog Diddy?

And, yeah, it was CLEARLY tongue in cheek. Come on folks, have a sense of humor. Makes me wish Chuck Klostermann was a 'Skins fan.

"What but the mocking hands of fate could have prevented Carlos Rogers from intercepting what would have been a certain return for a touchdown in our last playoff appearance against the Seahawks?"

It's called the brick hands of Carlos not "the mocking hands of fate".

The blog was reading along nicely until the guy writes that he threw away his redskins shirt. Get a freakin life dude.

CL, sorry, I didn't see it that way, I'm not that bright, or that deep.

Those are my excuses, and I'm sticking to them.

No news, I'm afraid. And no news in this circumstance is bad news. Turning my attention to the lurid task of dealing with lawyers now.

Greg, man chill.....you boston dudes are real hardons!

seriously greg, your my boy hahahahaha bu man are you intense!

"I rejoiced at Deion, I extolled the tenacity of Adam Archuleta. Hell, I even thought Trung Canidate was going to be a perennial 1200 yard rusher."

Right then and there is when this thing went south.

Smarty pants....I through my shirt in the trash about 4:22 on sunday, after screaming at my wife "I dont care about the new jacket you got me at Old Navy!"

I think this post is great. I've often thought that the Redskins have been cursed "to the seventh son of the seventh son" too for Snyder's attempt to circumvent the Gods required humble offerings and patience in returning to football Glory.

I've also analyzed this from every angle. I waffle between two points of view:

1. We are cursed. Tipped passes are never caught by us; they are returned for TDs or are natural "hook and laterals" that go for TDs for the other team. We dominate an opponent for 65 of 75 plays, in the other 10, they win the game. Suisham has a cannon of a leg when playing for Dallas, but once he comes to Washington, his kicks can't reach the 10. Trotter is an All-Pro MLB, we sign him, he promptly gets injured. Three years later, we release him. He returns to philly, and suddenly becomes healthy and an all pro again. Walt Harris can't cover anyone when he's with us, he becomes a Pro Bowler and leads the league in INTs the very next year. Champ Bailey NEVER returned an INT for a TD with Washington, he suddenly returns several when he's with Denver. John Hall has a cannon of a leg with the Jets, and is never injured, we sign him and injuries appear from nowhere, and he loses leg strength. It goes on and on and on.

2. The alternative is worse. We have coaches who have succeeded everywhere they've coached-- until they reach Washington. We sign any player we want-- we get first choice in the FA pool. So how to explain our pitiful performance? Across the board, from players through coaches to ownership-- we stink.

How else to explain it? Prior to the Eagles game, what I saw was **NOT** an NFL offense. You would watch another NFL game, and you'd say, "how come we can't do any of this?". Even teams with QBs pulled from the scrap heap and injuries decimating their entire offense, and backups-to-backups across key positions-- teams would move the ball and score. But the Redskins, with multi-millionaires across the entire offense-- and we can't score! The Ravens are as good- the Dolphins are as good-- the Jets are as good-- pick almost any team-- they're just as good, with players that are neophytes and backups to backups to backups. There's only one answer--we suck.

The answer is not more patience-- we have to blow up the system, and start all over. It's the only answer ...

wow.....ok...there called jokes people........

Great post. It's not just the skins, it's all of DC area sports. (Forgetting the Nationals, whom I've never adopted), The Wizards keep pretending to be good only to regress each year. And don't get me started on the O's, a team that's broken my heart more times than I can even count. The one thing the O's having going for them over the skins is that I've been able to make a clean break with the O's. Once they let Mussina go, I withdrew my fandom, wished them luck and sent them on their way. I still am happy to see them win (all 70 games a year) but I won't root for them. The O's have no hope, but as Vincent so aptly points out, the skins continually give us reason for hope, only to dash that hope by seasons end.

And yet, despite all that, here I am, looking at the NFC and thinking, how much competition do we really have for that 6th playoff spot? The Lions? C'mon. The Saints? Beat the Rams and then we'll talk. Really, it's just us and Philly right now competing for that last spot. And if we do manage to sneak in at 9-7, we'll end up playing the Seahawks or Bucs and could sneak out a...

Oh jesus, look at me, they got me again...

michaelbarnes I was with you, but HOW DARE you suggest that Miami's offense is only as good as the Ravens. Have you seen the Ravens!?! Even you guys are a lot better than that...

Sorry to hear that Diddy. Why do you have to deal with lawyers?

By the way, someone else may have pointed this out, but if you want a REAL SHOCKER, check the NFL leading rushers list and take a look at who's #3 in yardage behind Peterson and Willie Parker.

Wow. That snuck up on us, didnt it? Pretty good for a guy who the fans gave up for dead by week 6.

Smarty pants....I through my shirt in the trash about 4:22 on sunday, after screaming at my wife "I dont care about the new jacket you got me at Old Navy!"

Posted by: chrislarry | November 13, 2007 02:38 PM

At 4:24 she should have threw your ass out the house. LMGO!

Champ returned his first pick for a TD against the Cardinals in his first year with the 'Skins. But I do get your drift, Michael :-)

Nice Alex!

Well played sir! Especially the Borges. Hard to weave Argentine fantastic realism into a football blog, but you did it my man. Also strongly recommend Julio Cortazar.

Here's some interesting perspective on how much we Redskins fans are really suffering.

The Skins made it to the divisional playoffs the year before last and were one dropped pick-6 away from the NFC Championship Game. Since that year, out of the other 31 teams in the league, only 11 (less than half) can claim the same level of "success." The list of teams that have failed to match the recent success of the Redskins includes such storied franchises as the Cowboys, Giants, 49ers, and Packers.

Just food for thought.

AS WE SAY IN YORKSHIRE! WHAT? A LOAD OF CRAP!
I KNOW ABOUT BEING A FAN[ IVE BEEN SEASON TICKET HOLDER AT LEEDS UTD FOR 25 YEARS ]
AND REDSKINS FAN FROM 1981 [THE YEAR CH4 FIRST PUT THE NFL ON T-V OVER HERE ] IF I FELT LIKE THAT ABOUT LEEDS OR THE REDSKINS I WOULD GIVE IT ALL UP NOW ! WE LIVE IN HOPE SOME TIMES THATS ALL WE HAVE GOT?

CL, sorry, sometimes I get intense. Its from being a Sox fan I think, they were so bad for so long, you get a chip on your shoulder.

I'll tone it down....

At the risk of 'getting deep' again for just a moment I think that success in the NFL is a lot simpler than we think but much harder to achieve.

Step 1. A coach with a CLEAR vision that everyone buys into.
Whether you hate him, just loathe him, or simply want to punch him in the face forever, Bill Belichick has a clear vision of how he wants him team to play and embeds that vision into ALL of his players - either they buy-in or they're gone. He coaches his teams to expect high-levels of personal responsibility/accountability (execute your assignment within the plan NO MATTER WHAT) of each other.
Step 2. Find someone to BE the coach on the field.
For New England it's Brady on offense, Bruschi on defense. These guys are the proxies for the coach on the field. They "channel" what the coach would expect and constantly remind everyone around them of their roles and assignments in the plan.
For Baltimore it was Ray Lewis in 2000, but it's gotten old as the team couldn't adapt.

I saw it happen at Manchester United in the UK. Alex Ferguson set the tone for the team, but it wasn't until Roy Keane became the embodiment of him on the field that they really took off as a force. And it wasn't until Keane's effectiveness began to wane that the veneer of invincibility wore off.

I think Gibbs 1.0 had that drive, who was his "guy on the field"? I think the challenge you have now is Gibbs 2.0 is NOT that "driven guy" any more.

Sorry for that, back to regular blogging.

Sorry, I'm also trying to say it's more than just being "team captain" for those guys on the field too. They have to be Leaders with a capital 'L'.

Manning (P) has it, Manning (E) doesn't. Favre has it, Brees and McNabb don't. That's why it doesn't happen often to me, you may have a 'driven' coach with a clear vision (Gruden?) but you need the player on the field too - and not just for one season.

Let's see a show of hands on who thinks we'll win this weekend? That's what a I thought. Can't wait to hear the typical bs excuses after this lopsided defeat.

That post is insane... I have one word that describes this blog post and the redskins organization these past 15 years... SATIRE

Alex... that's interesting. The very sad thing is that our defense carried this team the first few weeks and now that the offense is beginning to turn the corner, it looks they will need to carry the defense since guys are dropping like flies back there!

I had to get out the dictionary- never happened before reading the Insider (or any of LaCanfora's stuff). Aren't we fans all tortured souls- our lives angst ridden since the early 80's and the days of glory?
Old Vince has a point- even if it has too many big words in it. I'll still take all the ups and downs- it's part of what makes life and being a Skins fan interesting.

Trung Canidate. Hilarious!

Vincent - loverly job! Littery references were outstanding! (where is dealer BTW?)

Except the curse - I think the curse is me.

Of their 4 SBs - I didn't live in DC for 3/4. I think the gods gave me some reprieve in mid 80s (1987) because I was living an afterschool special adolescence.

I'm in NE for college and Pats are the joke of the league.

I move to Philly and they have 2 mediocre years, I leave and they begin their ascendance.

I move to LA and Rams and Raiders leave. No NFL in LA.

I move to SF and Raiders and Niners take nose dives. One year after the Raiders go to SB.

Meanwhile Skins are on a slow train to crapville.

I think it's me. Clearly the fubol gods don't like and don't want me to be a fan.

I need to be purified. Any suggestions?

You never forget your first love, whether it's a high school sweetheart, a faithful old hunting dog, or a fickle football team that seems to rip your heart out year after year.

Vincent you're dead on about one thing, they sure do make me miserable year in and year out. After this last loss I pondered for a day or so about why I actually let myself believe they will do something great and pull off a needed win. Haven't I learned by now?! Nonetheless, its Tuesday and I'm back to reading a few articles and by tomorrow I'll be full go screaming for a W over that team in Texas.

Good writing, Vincent! I can see that you are still young enough to feel real pain by being a Redskin fan. After a few more years you will just get blissfully numb from their ever losing ways. You will still feel unreasonably high the day of a win and you will greedily read every post written in the press that describes the game, perhaps already knowing that this glory is all too fleeting. Later in life you will sit through a Redskin loss and feel less depression because you are already too well rehearsed in this business. The mood that will come over you is one of the loss of a sunny, fall afternoon that has been sacraficed to the idiots on the football field once again. You know too well that others not afflicted with being a Redskins fan have spent that afternnoon you just wasted with their spouses, or played golf or read a good book or done something that made life better for them. Just consider yourself blessed if you merely watched them lose on television and did not have to sit in traffic for hours afterwards.

sfskin, Come to Dallas. I'll put you up at my place if it means the Cowboys are going to tank.

Yeah, Trung caused me to chuckle. That guy was awful, LOL. Thank you Steve Spurrier.

Loved the Guest Blog; certainly a change from the regular musings. Vincent said he checks out RI faithfully--anyone have any idea what is ID is? Just curious to see if his posts match this guest blog.

Vincent is Skippy.

I'd think twice before I blamed the offense this past week. If the game plan could get Thrash open deep and Portis lots of yards behind this makeshift line, it's working. This one can be blamed on #21's injury. Sure we could have salted it away with a touch instead of field goal but 25 points should win every week.
One last question. Am i oversimplifying football or does it not make sense to have your biggest back and biggest blockers just create a hole on the goal line? How about Lorenzo Alexander as FB and Sellers as HB running right behind [put heaviest lineman's name here]? 280 (Sellers) + 290 (Alexander) + 300 (Samuels) should equal 7. There's no linebacker or tackle in the league who should be able to stop that. The Fridge was a gimmick in the 80's but people need to take that strategy seriously. BTW, someone needs to tell Sellers that he's not supposed to be dancing in the backfield or jumping over piles. If there is no hole, make a hole. If we wanted a jitterbug, we'd give it to Portis.

Grande Pescado - I don't think my bad mojo works for just one game. It's seasonal. It's like an STD - only notice it after it's too late.

BTW - I know it's only Tuesday and the hangover from Sunday is only beginning to wear off but is anyone else diving into the Kool Aid early? I think my Kool Aid intake may be modulated the rest of the season but Dallas week - I can't help it. I slip on the burgundy and gold glasses and dive head first into the Pacific ocean of Kool Aid. Utterly totally completely irrational.

GO SKINS!
BEAT DALLAS!
SJK the Cowboys!

I'm an amputee this week for trash talking but who cares!

Someone please please please please explain to me how the Packers are near the top of the NFL power rankings. I know it may seem insane but I pray Dallas crushes them. The most upsetting part is it could easily be the Redskins in their shoes. They are no better than the Redskins are and are somehow 8-1. It's Mind blowing that they can be considered andthign but a joke. As much as i hate the cowboys atleast they are actually good.

Vincent,

I have to say that I was looking for any reason at all to hate your guest blog. You weren't going to get the benefit of any doubt I had. But, dude, you pulled it off. Well done, and perfect reading for a gloomy Tuesday.

On the goal line, Portis = Joe Washington and Sellers = Riggins.

Whay do we keep giving the ball to Joe Washington on goal line running plays?

Anyone who's seen Portis in person knows that the dude is 195-200 soaking wet with 3 layers of clothes on. It makes no sense to give him the ball and expect him to run people over. Even Betts is a good straight line runner and better option. What are we thinking ?

Someone please please please please explain to me how the Packers are near the top of the NFL power rankings.

The media have a lot invested in Favre love. As long as he's with the team, they will always be rated higher than they should be.

freedom0125 part of the reason that betts doesn't get the ball is because he is ass checks. all he does is fumble to blow games. he tried it again this week but andre carter wouldnt let him.

bret farve is the worst QB. why does he get so much credit all he ever does is throw it at db's at 100 mph and hope they will tip it to a wr.

Best... guest blog post... ever.

What persay is the PDX?

freedom0125 part of the reason that betts doesn't get the ball is because he is ass checks. all he does is fumble to blow games. he tried it again this week but andre carter wouldnt let him.

Posted by: sams3 | November 13, 2007 03:43 PM

sams3--How many times has a Betts fumble blown a game? He's carried the ball 623 times, and he's fumbled 8 times. Of those 8, 6 were lost. Did every one of those blow a game? Is one lost fumble in every hundred carries a lot or a little in the NFL?

Not counting this year, I have been following the skins for 54 years. Lombardi, Allen, and Gibbs were the coaches for 23 of those seasons with a combined winning percentage of 66%. All the other coaches combined had a winning percentage of 41%. That's 31 years of rooting for a bad team.

I have not done research for other teams, but I bet you will find similar records. I guess the point of this is that most teams are going to be bad, or not real good, more often than not.

I still watch the skins every chance I get and still am happy with every win.

I may be in the minority here, but I am glad we have Joe Gibbs. I believe he has bought stabilitiy to an organization that had its head up its butt.

I can't believe any of you won't attribute their perennial losing to the name of the franchise. It's obvious that a curse has been leveled against the team by some native american voodoo. Wake up and demand that, in the 21st century, we're not gonna have a team called the Redskins. Did you see that guy at the Philly game right before a commercial break wearing a headdress and waving a tomahawk? it was insane. are we living in the stone age? until the redskins (really think about the name for a minute, don't just dismiss what I'm saying) figure out it's not cool to demean a people that were systematically exterminated, we will forever suck.

Good read on an otherwise uneventful tuesday. I wouldnt say we are cursed, but the gods arent with us either.

talent_evaluator have you ever watched him run. its about the worst garbage i think ive ever seen. he makes it maybe a yard unless the blocking is perfect. CP is sick on the goal line the problem was not him. they should have ran that sweep to the left that works every single time CP runs it. when they have betts run it he never makes it past the line. there is a reason CP holds records and betts holds jocks.

Someone please please please please explain to me how the Packers are near the top of the NFL power rankings. ... The most upsetting part is it could easily be the Redskins in their shoes. They are no better than the Redskins are and are somehow 8-1.

Posted by: sams3 | November 13, 2007 03:40 PM

Is this post 'tongue in cheek' too? When the Redskins nlow out the Vikings 34-0 later in the season you would at least have some substance to base the above claim upon. Even I wouldn't say that Miami were as good as the Redskins, even though we score more points per game than you and we only lost on O/T on a coin-toss....

The records don't lie. Green Bay have found a way to win 8 out of 9 games (and blew a very late lead to lose the other), Washington have only found a way to win 5 out of 9, and dear old Miami, 0 out of 9.

It's not Favre-love, media-bias or anything else, it's just that right now they're better, that's all.

greerdoggy,

If the name were a curse then they never would have won a super bowl right? In facth, they never would have won a game, right? Indeeed, their airplane would crash everytime they took off to play a game.

And, actually, they chose the name "Redskins" out of admiration for the courage and bravery of native Americans. Why would they have chosen the name of a group that they wanted to demean?

"Someone please please please please explain to me how the Packers are near the top of the NFL power rankings. I know it may seem insane but I pray Dallas crushes them."

Um, rankings are just some dudes' opinion. Who gives a sjk? You want Dallas to crush GB because they're near the top of some power rankings?! WTF?!

We are cursed by a Native American Indian Shaman. Plain and simpley put our curse will not change until we change our name. The curse was put on us after the '91 SB and here we find ourselves 15 years later in a pile of Snyder excrement.

Until we change the name of the franchise we will not win anything meaningful.

if dallas has homefield locked up the game at the end of the year will be a cake walk

I love this post. It is refreshing to read something about football that goes beyond stats and gets to the emotional aspect of being a fan.

Mark (from the future) my admiration for you going up on top of your barn grew even more after that post.

Unless you started supporting the 'Skins several years before you were born (as you're from the future I concede this may be possible) kudos to you!

I'm in my late 40s and way too chickenshti to get up on a barn roof any more!!

I'm glad I took the time to log on here today... you guys make me laugh and that is something that is what we all need after sunday...

"Um, rankings are just some dudes' opinion. Who gives a sjk? You want Dallas to crush GB because they're near the top of some power rankings?! WTF?!"

HA LOL... I couldn't agree more.

mr. talent evaluator,

good engagement.

1) I maintain that the curse is only now being leveled as numerous native american organizations have sued the redskins trying to get them to change their name. as the lawsuits went nowhere (danny killed them with high-priced corporate lawyers, I believe the judgments have been made over the last fifteen years), they have turned to witch-craft as a judicial alternative.

2) aren't native americans the ones in a position to decide if they find a name demeaning or not? i think it's their call, not some white dude like myself or, presumably, you. we can SAY we think we're honoring them by mentioning their skin color, but if the people we're supposedly honoring say, 'uh, actually we find that name incredibly racist and ridiculous', i think we have to go with their opinion no? for instance, most people don't use the n-word anymore. why? because black people said 'we kind of find that word racist'. what's the difference?

Nice post. I'm glad to see that someone else suffers from Stockholm Syndrome.

The curse was put on us after the '91 SB.

Posted by: P00P | November 13, 2007 03:56 PM

Not much of a shaman if he waited until we'd won three super bowls, is he? Did it take him that long to graduate from Shaman U.?

Apologies if the author of this post was joking, or was tongue in cheek, but I'm surprised that he has found so many Redskins fans are just like him. Rather than thriving on the disappointments and losses, I exult in victory. Someone once compared cheering for the Redskins with being forcibly drowned, and I totally agree. Every time we lose I feel like someone is holding me under water and I'm gasping for air. When we win, it's like they're letting me come up for a breath... but I know they're about to push me back under again. Like the author, I was only 8 when the Redskins won a Super Bowl, so I don't really remember what it's like to not be drowning. Think I'm a little too obsessed?

But don't you dare take gregmarino88's tack and suggest that if following the Redskins as a fan causes me "grief, and angst, then stop following them." Like any real fan, I know that I'll never be able to stop caring about or following them. And the pleasure in their successes far outweighs the tragedy in their defeats.

Maybe he was busy building up his cursing business in Shaman Oaks?

greerdoggy,

Are you saying they have all these supernatural powers but are to stupid to know how to use them effectively? Everyone knows that if they could level a curse, it would have been to take ownership of the Redskins and change the name, not to make them lose.

Uh, no, just because a group claims that it's been offended is not cause to change a team's name -- free speech and all that. The guy who owns the team gets to name it whatever he wants.

RC,

We got our first TV when I was six, so that is when I started watching football and rooting for the skins. The barn roof is not that high, and I had ladders and ropes set up to keep me safe. I learned safety first many years ago.

Also, bad pun, but it brought a chuckle.

Another b@stard child of the ever abusive Norv/Danny/Gibbs pater familias. Vincent, I know your pain. If I knew you personally I would be sitting on that couch next to you on Sunday quietly brooding in expectation for a let down. Wins don't even feel like wins anymore. Thanks for sharing.

MDWiz, you equate the Redskins losing a game, to being held against your will underwater, but have a problem with me suggesting that perhaps some people need to find a hobby to occupy their time?

Are you kidding or not?

Mr. TE,

So I assume free speech would cover an owner wanting to name his team the DC n-g--rs? or the new york ahem, jews? etc.. etc...? or is there some point where reasonable people step in and put a stop to derogatory speech?

it's so caveman to say, 'i don't care if you find what i call you racist, i'm HONORING you!' good stuff.

I really wanted to write 'the new york k-kes' but the filters stopped me. you get the point. why are there filters on this blog! what about free speech!

All typically self-effacing Mark (from the future), but you're still one of my heroes now. You're just going to have to deal with that and move on. ;-)

And as for puns - are there any good ones? I thought that 'bad' was the point!

I hear you about knowing the second when were about to give away the game. The second Pierson went down last season it was over. Its smaller that that sometimes too.

But your not a real Redskins fan because Deion came from the Cowboys. @#$% the Cowboys

Sfskin, it's not you. The truth of the matter is....I jinxed the team. I moved to DC right after our last Super Bowl win and the team went downhill after that. Yep, blame it on me :(

So I've decided I will relocate and give hope back to our team and city. Guarantee you if I move we will once again become a winning franchise.

Think I will move to Dallas and put the curse on them.

greerdog--

Is there an owner who wants to use the names you suggest or are those just hypotheticals? I'm not sure it would be a good business decision.

As to the Post's filter, this is their blog. They own it. They can control what words are used, just like an owner can control the name of his team.

And, gee, what if I'm offended by the term "caveman"?

Ah, now I understand why the Yankees won the Civil War! Didn't they have a Shaman called Tecumseh on their side?

greerdoggy, look up "dead horse, flogging a". I don't believe t_e is advocating names that qualify as discriminatory on any legal basis.

I understand your point too, but the fact that some modern mores (can't find an accent for my 'e') now determine the word 'Redskins' to be unacceptable doesn't actually seem to be widely accepted.

I think it comes down to this: short of the team name being something specifically proscribed under statute the owner can call their team whatever they want however distasteful.

That said, ANY group can always exert 'commercial pressure', that is, hit Danny Boy in the wallet to make him consider changing that. So if you and others find the name to be unacceptable, find ways to exert commercial pressure and you may get what you seek.

Vinny,

If it was satire, well done. If it was from the heart I know how you feel. I swore off this team on this blog Sunday night. Now I'm gearing up for Dallas. What the hell, in for a dime, in for a dollar. Go Skins.

Vincent, I believe Robert Palmer has a verse about this ... might as well face it you're addicted to mud.

I still have a little vomit taste in my mouth after Sunday's game (and not just from the shots with Jasno the night before). Some TOUGH breaks repeated ad nauseous so far ... and I don't know if anyone has pulled out the power of THIS poop ... but I'm officially ready to send Ladell Betts packing. His 4th quarter fumble KILLED the momentum and mojo to win (I concede we got it right back ... but it served as the gentle reminder to the team about how to choke when it really counts).

I'm thinking some team who has their #1 back already ... Betts is under a manageable contract for ANY team ... maybe we can get back the 4th round pick (the one left in the toilet bowl re: Duckett or Lloyd) or whatever pick it is -- 4th or 5th -- for Kendall.

Some outstanding performances by some individuals, but losing Sean Taylor was like opening up the cinch rope at the top of a bag. EVERYTHING is now open for EVERYONE. Prioleau, Landry, and Fox are all strong safeties (hence big on special teams) ... can Doughty run fast and catch?

Also, shouldn't Mrs. in the PDX be ready to pop at any moment now?

I believe Mrs Nate is classified as 'impending' or somesuch currently 'sween.

Redcoat and TE,

Good comments.

The names I offered were hypotheticals. The reason they aren't viable is that most of society has decided they aren't acceptable.
You're absolutely right to point that out. The problem is historical, not moral. I think most people would have a problem with the name Redskins if you were to ask them about it, but most people WOULDN'T agitate against it because native americans, traditionally, are the most ignored and forgotten of minorities. this is primarily due to the fact that there frankly just aren't many of them left, they've been marginalized outside of mainstream society by the reservation system, and there was no widespread civil rights movement that ever advocated for them in the same way we saw with african americans.

i'm not arguing about the law in this matter. of course it's LEGAL now to call the team the 'redskins'. the question is whether it's RIGHT to. i don't think native americans, whose opinion has been ignored and belittled, would find this a matter of flogging dead horses.

by your calculus, we should have allowed 'commercial' pressures to push for african-american civil rights. that can work in sometimes symbolic ways (see boycotts, etc..), but ultimately it's national outrage that generally galvanizes change. why not make mention of it now and again on the team's blog? maybe a few people will start to say something. if we remain quiet and ignore the issue, nothing will change. lastly, if the group in question lacks the financial and political means to exert commercial pressure, then how can they be expected to change the system?

if more people stand up and say, 'you know what, if a million native americans find my team name offensive, i'll change it'. it's classy, it's morally justified, and it shows that you can do the right thing even when you're wallet isn't on the line.

it's not a matter of free speech so much of respect. there's no tired culture war here...

the club's woes are due to the incompetent management of the team obviously, but anytime i see an opening to discuss an example of institutionalized racism i will continue to flog that horse until it wakes up from the dead.

self-righteously yours,

"When the fans speak to the coach of Ebbsfleet United, he just might have to listen to them.

An Internet-based collective of soccer fans from more than 70 countries agreed in principle Tuesday to buy a controlling interest in the lower-league English soccer club."

MyFootballClub: http://www.my-footballclub.co.uk

Ebbsfleet United: http://www.ebbsfleetunited.net

Maybe we can buy the skins - I know, a pipe dream.

I think what they need to do with Betts is make him carry a football everywhere and have everyone try and knock it out. He's always had fumbleitis and this should have been done long ago. Besides, it'll be good practice for everyone.

Thoughtfully and elegantly put greerdoggy. Keep advocating away!

I'm not saying having to use 'commercial pressure' is right by the way, but I AM saying it often seems to be how change is best and most speedily effected here.

4th floor advocated strongly for the Jena 6 here earlier this year. I know that many people here joined in the lobbying once they became aware, so the machine does still work when you mobilize people effectively.

et tu, sween? I didn't think you'd be that fickle over Betts. One fumble and you're done with him? After the way he played for us last year?

In six years with the 'Skins he's run the ball 623 times, fumbled eight times, and the 'Skins recovered two of them. So, you have less than one lost fumble per one hundred carries and you'd off him for a fifth round pig in a poke. Why do you believe that the pig in the poke will be better than Betts?

And, how was it up there pounding them down with Jasno? Did he pay, or did you?

On a purely football note, I'd love to know who people think should replace Gibbs. Cowher? Man-boobs? Um, Saunders? I'd like to see Russ Grimm get a shot, maybe someone from the Patriots franchise.

What do people think?

sams3, greerdoggy, welcome to you lads, and to all the other new peeps posting comments up here today. Great, great guest post and good jibba jabba down here.

sams3, PDX = Portland, Oregon.

doggy, I'm with chRis Larry and many others, hoping for Grimm. But no matter who gets the job, it is my solemn vow to invest unrealistically high expectations in the new coach, and maintain those unrealistically high expectations even in the face of poor results. That's how I roll.

greerdoggy,

Sorry man, I just can't follow your logic. There is nothing wrong with the name and people who are concerned about it need a better use of their time. First, when the average person hears the term "redskin" he thinks about a football team, not an ethnic group. One could say that the term doesn't even refer to American Indians anymore.

Second, the research I've read is that "redskin" was used as a descriptive term and not generally as a slur. In that sense, it is more akin to Jew or Black than the "n" word or the "k" word. Not only is it a legal name, but there is NOTHING wrong with it. If it was the Washington savages, that would be a different story.

Not Cowher. Please not Cowher. I'm not one of these crazy "we can win the superbowl in the coach's first season" people, but I'm not up for the 17-year plan Cowher employed in Pittsburgh.

LiberalMike, I disagree with your assertion that "there is nothing wrong with the name." You could make that claim about "Eagles" or "Steelers" or "Packers" or any other mascot in the league, but not about "Redskins." A nothing-wrong-with-it name wouldn't engender the kind of debate that this name does.

And as before, we can line up on either side of the rename-or-not argument, but it's going to take a court order or some magnificent impact to the team's bottom line to cause us to adopt a new mascot.

And as before, I'm voting for "Warriors." Danny already owns the rights, it's pleasantly alliterative, nothing else has to change in the color scheme or logo, etc.

Wow, I feel the same way.

I could never stay calm enough to write that while all those horrible memories came rushing back. It would digress into a bunch of @*&#*#$^#@^ by mid point.

BTW, to the guy who said we aren't cursed. It's true! we are.......and the curse really set in after they let Dan Turk die alone in his Ashburn house without so much as a visit from a player or coach the off-season after that bad snap against Tampa. His wife said she hated the org for it and it hurt him.

The curse was put on us after the '91 SB.

Posted by: P00P | November 13, 2007 03:56 PM

Not much of a shaman if he waited until we'd won three super bowls, is he? Did it take him that long to graduate from Shaman U.?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | November 13, 2007 04:01 PM

Yes T_E...he got his doctorate in "Curses n Stuff" in the summer of '90 upon which he joined in the protest for the Redskins moniker after they garnered national attention going 14-2 that year.

His name is Walk-run Stiffarm and I love him.

*** Geelong Cats post for Kost ***

It seemed like such a good idea...

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22750529-661,00.html

*** End Geelong Cats post for Kost **

"A nothing-wrong-with-it name wouldn't engender the kind of debate that this name does."

Nate, all due respect, you are crazy if you believe this statement in the hypersensitive P.C. world we live in. Also, I would point out that plenty of crazies b_tch about the Chiefs, the Braves, and the Seminoles, among others. Also, "Warriors" paired with the skins logo would send a bunch of lunatics on the "warpath" about how it portrays American Indians as violent when we all know they were really the peaceful, one-with-nature innocent victims portrayed in Disney's Pocahontas.

Vincent:

Nice blog, really well written, man. I'm a big skins fan as well as a buddy of a mutual friend, Wayne Xia, who told me to read this post. I couldn't agree with you more. Be sure to tell Wayne to let me know when you're around NYC, and we can mourn skins losses together.

"Q: Why don't Native Americans like sports teams with Indian mascots?
A: Some Native Americans find the concept of using humans as mascots spiritually offensive, but most native people who object to sports teams are doing it because of specifically racist aspects of the teams. For example, "Redskins" and "Squaws" are such crude words I really hesitated to use them on this page at all, but major professional and college sports teams use them as their names. Other teams with non-offensive names, like "Indians" or "Warriors," still use offensive pictures (like the Cleveland Indian mascot) or have white dancers mimicking Native American religious rituals. These things are hurtful and make Indians feel angry, just as mocking pictures and names making fun of you would. Most Native Americans do not have a problem with sports teams that have non-offensive names and do not include rude pictures or religious insults. Some Native American tribes have welcomed local sports teams named in their honor when those teams treat them respectfully."

"It's better to avoid using "Red Indian," for two reasons: first, this name originally referred to a specific tribe, the Beothuks, who painted their bodies and faces with red ochre. So it may cause confusion if you use it to refer to all Native Americans. Second, the term "Red Indians" has been used by racists in the United States, so using it may hurt somebody's feelings or give them the wrong impression. Please do not call native people "savages," "primitives" or "redskins." Those are always rude words."

http://www.native-languages.org/kidfaq.htm

What ever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me?"

I can't see the case for those who would limit a person's freedom of speech on the grounds that a third party's feelings would be hurt. If someone wants to hurt a third party's feelings, then I may not think well of him, but that's his right.

way to cite to an unbiased organization Bigfish. So some dude made a website in his basement about why he doesn't like the name.

Also, "when those teams treat them respectfully" = $$$$

Seriously, these people need to get a life. And, actually, if they wanted to call it the Washington LiberalMikes and have a logo of my face, I don't think it would make me angry at all.

What about our current logo is "making fun" of American Indians again?

Mike, That "dude" happens to be an American Indian. If I want to know how blacks feel about being called a ni**er then I'l ask a black person. If I want to hear how Jews like being called a k**e then I'll ask a Jewish person. Do you see any other American Indians on this blog giving opinions?

Seriously, these people need to get a life. And, actually, if they wanted to call it the Washington LiberalMikes and have a logo of my face, I don't think it would make me angry at all.

Posted by: LiberalMike | November 13, 2007 06:25 PM

I hope you're kidding. Assuming you're white how about they call it the Washington Whitetrash Honk**s and put a picture of you in it?

I'm sure if we were the Washington Indians with that same picture on our logo then there would have never been any problems.

On a purely football note, I'd love to know who people think should replace Gibbs. Cowher? Man-boobs? Um, Saunders? I'd like to see Russ Grimm get a shot, maybe someone from the Patriots franchise.

What do people think?

Posted by: greerdoggy | November 13, 2007 05:25 PM

I'll take Marty Shottenheimer back. I disagreed with his handling of some of the vets, and his hiring of too many family members. But he was clearly in charge and he's the only coach who steered the Skins in a winning, competent direction.

I think Gibbs is making progress, but I would say Shottenheimer did the best coaching for the Skins since Gibbs 1.0.

After him, we started going after "big names" (Spurrier, Deion, Norv, etc.) and killing ourselves with the salary cap.

JLC you lard F
we HAVE A WINNING RECORD you D

"I'm sure if we were the Washington Indians with that same picture on our logo then there would have never been any problems."

You are crazy if you believe that. Look at the Chiefs. They get protestors. Whats offensive about their name/logo? Or the Seminoles? There are a lot of bored people out there looking for things to complain about.

To me, White Trash Honk__s would be akin to Savages or something like that. The name is inherently insulting and offensive, not simply descriptive. It offends not only low income white people but other races as well by implying that they are already "trash."

There is nothing wrong with having the redish hue to your skin tone that many American Indians had, so there is nothing insulting about describing that hue.

"To me, White Trash Honk__s would be akin to Savages or something like that. The name is inherently insulting and offensive, not simply descriptive. It offends not only low income white people but other races as well by implying that they are already "trash." "

See Mike this is my whole point. It is easy for those of us who are not American Indians to say that we don't think the name is offensive. Let me ask you this. If you or Dan Snyder or any of us were in a room full of American Indians would any of us address them as "Redskins"?

Also the Chiefs don't get 1/100 of the criticism that the Redskins get for having their name and the Seminoles are one of those organizations that have gained respect from the American Indian community by dropping their Indian-like war dance during halftimes and when the team scores. Mostly all Indians don't have a problem with them because their name represents a proud tribe that is Indigenous to that area.

"See Mike this is my whole point. It is easy for those of us who are not American Indians to say that we don't think the name is offensive. Let me ask you this. If you or Dan Snyder or any of us were in a room full of American Indians would any of us address them as "Redskins"?"

I'm sure I would not, but it is not because I think it is offensive. It is because everyone in the room, American Indians included, would think I was referring to a football team, not to them. In modern usage, that is what the term means. Its as simple as that.

And it can't be subjective like you seem to think. The "N" word and the "K" word are offensive not just because black people and Jewish people think so, but because a vast majority of our society thinks so. Can't say the same thing about "Redskin" because the vast majority of our society think of it as a team name, not as a description of American Indians.

By the way, when Schottenheimer was coaching in Cleveland he hired Bill Cowher to Cowher's first coaching job--special teams coach.

Schottenheimer's got the playoff knock against him, but I'll settle for just GETTING to the playoffs at this point.

Since the mascot debate version5.3 is such a snooze, I should clarify my comment above and note that there is one other NFL team mascot I find troubling: the Buffalo Bills.

Buffalo Bill Cody slaughtered the majestic buffalo by the thousands, and personally saw to their near-extinction. So the football team based in the team named for this great animal selected as its mascot... the dude who almost wiped that animal from the face of the earth! What the eff?!

And don't get me started on their helmet with the buffalo logo! If their mascot is the Bills, then they are a team of Buffalo Bill Codys! Their team logo should therefore feature a guy with a gun, shooting a buffalo dead!

In the NFL mascot debate, nobody speaks up on behalf of the American bison (the name they prefer, by the way!), do they? Come on, people!

Also on my annoying mascot list, the Toronto NHL franchise. This team is always referred to as the Maple Leafs, but the plural of leaf is leaves! Come on, people!

LiberalMike I am going to take it that you are white. It never shock me how it always no big deal to you guys. If you think a name is no big deal go in the hood and call a brother the N word.

And it can't be subjective like you seem to think. The "N" word and the "K" word are offensive not just because black people and Jewish people think so, but because a vast majority of our society thinks so. Can't say the same thing about "Redskin" because the vast majority of our society think of it as a team name, not as a description of American Indians.

Posted by: LiberalMike | November 13, 2007 06:57 PM

And why do you think this is? Personally I believe it is because the vast majority of our society has been brought up to be aware of offensive words towards Blacks, Jews, Middle Easterners, Asians, etc because those races make up the majority of the minorities in the last 50+ years. Just like the vast majority of our society thinks of "Redskins" as a football team because that's the only use of the word that they have known for the last 50+ years and they have never come into close personal contact with true American Indian to know anything different.

I don't want you to think that I'm pushing for a name change because I'm not. I just think that those who are have an extremely valid arguement. On that note I would love for our name to be the Washington Indians. Wouldn't have to change anything except the name.

Nice comic relief Nate even though you do have a good argument on the Bills there. Much needed. Thanks!

Alan4, maybe I misread your comment above, but I think the big name signings predated Schottenheimer, actually started the year after Norval's playoff run, when Snyder signed Neon Deion and Mark Carrion and Bruce "They're Not Saying Bruce, They're Booing" Smith. We were just a few players away, thought Danny, so he brought in a bunch of guys who had been in the Pro Bowl... back in the mid-90s.

In any event, I agree that Schotty did more in one year to turn around the team on the field and in the sense of the salary cap than anyone else has done (since salary cap law was different in Gibbs 1.0). And I feel confident that we would have been a tough-nosed team, in the playoffs just about every year, if Schotty had been kept on and not fired because Danny had a hankering for the ol' ball coach.

Ugh. Just thinking about all that made my tummy hurt.

Hail.

Allright, for the team name debaters, lets just change the logo to a potato and keep the name Redskins.

We can follow in the footsteps of the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

Problem solved.

Allright, for the team name debaters, lets just change the logo to a potato and keep the name Redskins.

We can follow in the footsteps of the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

Problem solved.

Allright, for the team name debaters, lets just change the logo to a potato and keep the name Redskins.

We can follow in the footsteps of the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

Problem solved.

"Bruce "They're Not Saying Bruce, They're Booing" Smith."

LMGO!!!

...sorry for the triplicate!

Nate, your right.. I forgot Noval came before Marty. But you assessment of Marty's single season is the same as mine--he was clearly turning the franchise around.

If you keep going to the dance every year, sooner or later you'll score (I hope that's not too crude for this crowd). I think Marty could have found playoff success here, just my gut feeling.

I just hope the poor fella doesn't have a pistol or a razer blade close by.

Allright, for the team name debaters, lets just change the logo to a potato and keep the name Redskins.

We can follow in the footsteps of the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

Problem solved.

Posted by: Alan4 | November 13, 2007 07:16 PM

-- But what would the Redskinettes and the marching band wear? potato sacks?

Oh dear... I didn't think I'd start seeing these until the Skins were undoubtedly out of playoff contention:

http://www.firejoegibbsnow.com/

Here is a neat stat that i looked up:

Of the 22 starters on opening day we put on the field, 9 were drafted in round 1 and 7 were drafted in round 2. The total average draft position of those 9 is 10.5. So essentially 50% of our team is a 10.5 overall draft pick if you want to look at it that way.

2nd round average overall draft pick for starters was 49.2. That is out of the remaining 11 players almost two-thirds or 63% to be exact was drafted almost exactly in the middle of the 2nd round, again this averages.

2 others, Fletcher and Sellers were undrafted and we all know they are worth their weight in gold, well at least silver to us.

So why bring this up? My point is what else do our coaches need to make us a contending team. How many more 1st rounders do we need? I'm almost willing to bet that most other teams dont show these types of draft picks.

hmmm well there are quite a lot of great comments here so ill try and answer them all...

The Article: Well written and as a Redskins fan of 25 years or so i feel your pain. I personally dont watch the Skins because i feel the need to lose or follow losers. I do it out of loyalty to a team that ive been following for years. It really is only a matter of time until they get back on top. How long, who knows.... BTW the Skins are the only team i follow like that. Probably because I cant stand that much pain in one year!

The Curse: The idea of a curse is as ridiculous to me as is Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, etc... But then again with most of the world believing in organized religions and mythical figures deciding our fates im guessing that statement is going to just make people angry. But whatever... I said it anyway.

The Team: I dont believe in curses but i do believe in mass team mentalities. And ill pose this to you. If we as fans go into every game knowing, KNOWING, that our team raises its arses in the air and gives it up every 2nd half, what do you think the Redskins think of themselves? I know that if I was on that team id be preparing myself for defeat at every half....

The Name: I think that when this name was chosen it was because the name was meant to be a nod to a strong, proud and honorable race of people. Time has a way of changing things and when once a name was chosen as a symbol of honor it now seem like a symbol of racism. I mean really, do you think they chose to call the Redskins the Redskins to bash a whole race of people or because it simply was a strong sounding name? Lastly on this subject, I think that if someone is going to do something about this it should be Native Americans themselves. But the problem there is that even most of the Native Americans dont care! IF they did we'd hear a whole lot more about this than we do. Oh and BTW - If the Redskins were owned by a Native American and still called them the Redskins, NO ONE would be complaining about a thing. Oh and im not white...

The Problem: Team mentalities are the responsibility of the coaching staff and the play calling. Although I gotta admit, this last game had a little of everything: Really bad play calling and time management, an offense that cant score in the Redzone (not the coaches fault) and now one less WR to rely on, and a Defense that just plain rolled over in the second half. And know Sean Taylor is out indefinitly!

Not looking good for the rest of the seasons guys!

Perhaps its the curse of "The Squire".

Dave97869797u89678689798,

How many of those players are actually playing

Speaking of curses, and apropos to nothing else...

I've got this collection agency calling me because of a bill that is 5 months in arrears. Here's the thing, they never billed me in the first 4 months, AND I went to the company personally and paid the bill 19 days ago!

Can anyone suggest any recourse to this harassment, or at least suggest some dirty tricks I can play on them? I have already busted out some colorful language.

Actually,

The team has been cursed for a long time. When they refused to change the name years ago, many native Americans put curses on the team.

This is no joke, it happened at one of the protests held outside the park.

I never believed in that stuff, but maybe...

Curse? So why do you get to rout the Lions? What have lions done to anyone that they are not naturally programmed to do?

1. Did anyone see Randle El on Comcast say that "sometimes this team plays not to lose instead of to win"? The players know...

2. I said at the beginning of training camp that Taylor was going to get hurt b/c he was so thin and he's always launching himself. The camera has caught him on several occaissions either get up very slowly or taking himself out of the game.

The guest blog was typical liberal pretentious nonsense. As Mark Twain said: "use the right word; not its second cousin."

That entire piece of drivel was brilliantly summed up by jm220:

"...the Skins are like a paper cut. You know when you touch it you will experience pain but you do it anyways."

Why didn't that graduate-level egghead just say that and be done with it?

Jm22: you da' man, even though we argue 'bout Gibbs!

"On that note I would love for our name to be the Washington Indians."

You don't really think the P.C. police would let that fly do you? Indians are from India dude. Show some sensitivity for goodness sake.

"If you think a name is no big deal go in the hood and call a brother the N word."

jm220, If you read my comments you would see I distinguish the N word and other slurs from Redskins, which I don't believe was ever intended as a slur. More to your point, though, I don't think names are a big deal in general. Do you think MLK marched on Washington to stop name calling? Is that keeping our "eyes on the prize." As long as people are caught up fighting over labels the bigger picture goes unchanged (or gets worse). I think the N word is a lot less prevalent than it was 20 or 30 years ago wouldn't you agree? No question, that is a good thing, but is it a reflection of any real progress? How about education in most black neighborhoods? Is that up to snuff yet? Plenty of opportunity to go around now that labels aren't in the way? Of course not. So if you ask me, no, labels and name-calling aren't a big deal. There are much bigger fish to fry.

Also, this is way to intense a conversation. Wish this team would string some victories together so we'd have something fun to talk about.

Smacking myself in the back of the head for continuing this conversation, but here is some copyrighted material I stumbled upon whilst searching for any archived news on protests of the team's mascot held at the stadium. Like Ray, I remember some protests, but haven't yet found a story to link to...

From "Handbook of Sports and Media," Raney and Bryant, URL here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=sC3TGxZplK4C&pg=PA570&lpg=PA570&dq=redskin+protest+stadium&source=web&ots=qudZ-Rgjzz&sig=mjSOhhF1B0yNp0Ia2hbI1w2BVQ8#PPA569,M1

"The consistency in the responses of those who oppose the move by Native Americans and their supporters to rid the American landscape of [Native American stereotypes in general and Native American mascots in general] truly is remarkable.

"Whether it is in supposed neutral polls like the one commissioned by SI, the editorial pages of newspapers and magazines, or radio call-in talk shows, three rhetorical tools are used by mascot supporters to defend their position. To summarize, supporters of these mascots are wrong using three specific lines of logic: honor, trivialization, and claiming Indianness (see also Davis, 1993; King, 2003).

"According to those who wish to retain Native American mascots, claims of honoring Native Americans are to be accepted regardless of whether Native Americans wish to be honored or feel honored. Within this construction, Native Americans are wrong to be insulted, regardless of how objectionable the image may be to them. The mascot supporters who use this argument take the position that if they explain their belief that the images are indeed honoring Indians often enough, then any offended Indian will see it differently. The Washington NFL franchise has put forward perhaps the classic in this strain of logic. In the face of strong evidence that the word redskin is a pejorative and a negative racial reference to American Indians, the club owners argue that they have used the name in a positive non-racialized manner for so long that the term now has taken on a new and positive meaning. The franchise did not, however, put forward any examples of the use of the term redskin that were positive other than the references to their team. If, in fact, the word had taken on a positive meaning, there would be within literature, the press, and movies or television examples where the term was used in the positive manner. No examples were presented because none exist...

"Those who wish to retain Native American mascots often attempt to make Indians' concerns seem ridiculous by associating them with what the speaker believes are even more ridiculous concerns. Think about the straw arguments that are often thrown up. "Should we ban the Giants because tall people are offended?"... This is always from individuals who are trying to bolster their challenge to Native Americans' concerns about racial stereotypes. The invent their own theoretical concern or point to imagined concerns that they would find equally ridiculous. They do not identify any protest they have made at a stadium or to officials at the offending school. Indeed they can't because they haven't...

"Another offensive retort is from those who have never professed any Indian heritage until they need to ratify their position that Indian mascots are a good thing by claiming that they are Indian. Indians are not a monolithic group that thinks one way about anything. There are in fact some Indian people who like the name of the Cleveland baseball team or the imagery of the Washington football team. But many Indian people are seriously skeptical of those who defend Native American mascots and then state an Indian heritage that they possess although they can't name the tribes their ancestors are from."

Hail to the Redskins!

Only thing I can find is some mentions of an American Indian Movement protest staged during the Redskins-Bills Super Bowl. But like Ray, I seem to remember multiple protests over the years. Hmm...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2DC1639F935A15752C0A964958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

One nice piece from that Super Bowl week... (enjoying this more for the memory of that magical bandwagonesque season than for the mascot protests)

Found this on a website called the language log (http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002961.html)

I think that it is well established that redskin is taken by most people today to be disparaging. What is more interesting is whether it has always been so, as Harjo et al., as well as various others, claim. One interesting piece of evidence is the origin of the name Washington Redskins. In 1933, George Preston Marshall, the owner of the team, which was then located in Boston, renamed it the Boston Redskins in honor of the head coach, William "Lone Star" Dietz, an American Indian.³ When the team moved to Washington in 1937 it was renamed the Washington Redskins. George Marshall clearly did not consider the name disparaging.

³ Harjo et al. question this story of the origin of the name, but as the Circuit Court noted (p. 13, footnote 6), they provide no evidence whatever to the contrary and give no convincing reason to disbelieve the primary source, a newspaper article presenting the account by Marshall's grand-daughter. Some authors have also claimed that Dietz was not an American Indian. The articles cited, however, do not cite their sources, so it is difficult to evaluate their claims. It is, however, undisputed that Dietz presented himself as an American Indian and that George Marshall publicly presented him as one. George Marshall surely thought that Dietz was an American Indian, which is really what counts here.

Oh Rigoo44, you really do parody yourself my man....your response to the Glog was text book bro!

George Preston Marshall was a class A rascist by all accounts, so not really putting alotta stock in that......

1. Call them the whiteskins and put JP Morgan face on the helmet

2. This team has talent and lacks coaching. I love Joe Gibbs, but he isn't the same Joe from 80's & 90's. The fire is not there and the team shows it in the 4th quarter.

3. The curse is because they left RFK for the soul-less confines of Fed-Ex Field at Redskins Stadium nee Jack Kent Cooke at whatever the fake name they came up with for Landover was...

Oh yeah Raljohn, soory I'm getting older the mind is becoming a steel sieve

cHRisLaRRy, when does this week's F-list come out?

-Potato salad

Bobby Kennedy: Say Pete how about some black players on the Redskins or lose your anti-trust exemption.

Pete Rozelle: I'll call George again but he ain't going to be happy about.

F Romo
F Ken Hamlin
F Tank
F Jason Garrett
F Marion Barber
F Rigoo44
F Dan Snyder
F Ledell Betts
F Leonard Davis
F Emmitt Smith (old times sake)
F Terry Glen
F Whitten
F that Italian back up TE, Piasan or some siht
F Football
F the the NFC South and west
F the Giants
F Jeff Garcia
F that Frank gut that does all those lame impressions on TBS
F the dude who stole P Diddys dog
F the studio execs for making writers strike
F HBO for cancelling Deadwood
F Mon-Thur
F quitting weed
F diets
F unfunny RI posters

Hows that?

"If, in fact, the word had taken on a positive meaning, there would be within literature, the press, and movies or television examples where the term was used in the positive manner. No examples were presented because none exist..."

Wow. They did a fine job of proving the team's point there. Redskins means the Washington NFL franchise. Thats all. How about they cite a modern perjorative use of the term. Oh...wait...they can't because its not used that way.

Also, did everyone like the argument in the article that its doesn't matter that many descendants of American Indians have no problem with the term because most of them cant even identify their ancestral tribe? HOW RIDICULOUS IS THAT? So if a black man, whose ancestors were slaves, can't identify what regionof Africa they came from, he has no say in whether the N word is offensive. Good luck with that line of reasoning.

Moss is still unsure whether he'll play this week. Can a bruised heel really be that bad? I mean Daniels separated his shoulder earlier this year and was still able to play the following week. Does Moss even want to play? What the hell, I don't profess to know about NFL injuries, but how long does a freaking bruise last?! I'm starting to seriously question his toughness. You get paid millions every year to play through injuries. Take a pain killer and earn your check this week!!

Moss is still unsure whether he'll play this week. Can a bruised heel really be that bad? I mean Daniels separated his shoulder earlier this year and was still able to play the following week. Does Moss even want to play? What the hell, I don't profess to know about NFL injuries, but how long does a freaking bruise last?! I'm starting to seriously question his toughness. You get paid millions every year to play through injuries. Take a pain killer and earn your check this week!!

F liberal mike for continuing this lame arguement/conversation/dead (crazy) horse and being mad boring about it!

Can I take a pain killer please?

mbearden,

"I think that it is well established that redskin is taken by most people today to be disparaging."

How do you figure? Who "established" that? I ask because that is the exact opposuite of what our courts have held when the redskins rights to thename have been challenged on the grounds it is offensive.

If you walked up to ten people downtown and said "hey look a redskin!" would they look around for Chris Cooley or Clinton Portis or do you think they'd scan the crowd for American Indians? Nobody uses the term to insult American Indians. Heck, nobody even uses it to REFER to American Indians. Its an issue created out of nothing.

CL,

If youlook up a few posts I tried to end it and NateinthePX saw fit to revive it.

It was some pretty impressive research Nate did finding that book though. No joke.

GA8085,
Not a doctor but I assume that a receiver has to put a lot of pressure on his heal to make sudden cuts and stops. I thought it was strange the first time I heard a player miss a game because of turf toe (how could a big burly football player not play because they hurt their toe) but it seems to happen often.

Lets face it. We are routing for laundry. I am fanatical about routing for my laundry in BURGUNDY AND GOLD. Which is much better than blue and white with a f&%*&%ing star on it. Hate that laundry

"routing for laundry"....that will be looking for work clothes in about 7 hours....

mbearden
Yeah, but bruises don't usually last that long from my experience. Maybe if he runs on his tip-toes it wouldnt be that bad? Or some extra padding on his heal? Or a cortisone shot? Or a hit of the crack pipe? He could do many things to alleviate the pain. Just get out there!!

Impressive was transcribing it all by hand, LiberalMike! Hah!

Again, smacking myself in the back of the head. F me for carrying on an argument that will result in a total of zero people changing their minds on this issue. And which sucks the life and energy out of the blog every time it comes up, which is approximately every seven weeks.

F dog theft. I hadn't even heard about that and now I have to go root through the archives to find out what the story is.

F talking to the woman who sits across from me at work, a Cowboys fan. She's going to be nice about it, but it's still going to be gloating if we lose this game.

F any outcome to the Cwoboys' season that doesn't include a spectacular, soul-crushing playoff defeat, ideally at the hands of a clearly inferior team, and involving at least one critical gaffe by their golden boy QB.

LiberalMike,
I wasn't making a commentary I was just passing on information. Personally I don't care what the name is except I have known them as the Redskins for over 40 years and am kind of use to it. I don't necessarily see it as derogatory but I am not Native American so I don't have the same perspective. Maybe they could change the name to the Washington Monuments, except I am sure someone would take offense to the logo on the helmet and its potential symbolism.
Of course it wouldn't surprise me if Danny doesn't rename the team to set up some kind of tie in with Six Flags.

Masochist that I am, I just watched the game again on NFL Replay. Like I stated on Monday, in my opinion, the defense lost the game for us with stupid penalties. Far too many times the Eagles were able to keep the drive alive because our defensive penalties. Other observations...Yoder WAS definitely in....but we had no timeouts left so that can be blamed on the coaching staff.

Jason Campbell was excellent and Portis had a great game.

HAsn't turf toe gone away for the most part, now that they switched to the new kind of turf that everybody loves?

What freaks me out is when you see guys skid on the new carpet and there is like a little cloud of black dust that kicks up -- really shows up in the HD and slo-mo -- which is like tiny particles of rubber or something. You know that crap is toxic. Instead of debilitating knee injuries we'll be reading about the stars of today needing lung transplants in like 20 years because they've ingested so much of that stuff.

My last argument in why American Indians should support our use of the name is, of course, the time honored truism: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Lets face it American Indians of the world, we can at least agree on this: WE HATE THE F-ING COWBOYS AND THEIR STUPID F-ING STAR!

HAIL!

GA8085,
Agree he should step it up and play if he can, however, as previously pointed out on the RI, the Redskin passing game seemed to work best the two g