Teams Washington Commanders - Приветствую командиров ™

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Jim Zorn hired as Washington Redskins coach!!

The Great Barry Besanko said:
Oh f@#K!!! they've given him a 5 year deal!!!.
Let me get this straight, they hire Zorn as OC before a HC has been appointed, Spagnuolo tells Snyder to get stuffed, so they offer the only guy interested 5 years!! It's all going to end in tears, again.
Click to expand...

Surely Zorn must realise the Contract isn't worth the paper its written on, Zorn is the sixth Redskins coach since Snyder bought the team in 1999. If he makes it into year 3 I'll be surprised.
 
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3483483


WASHINGTON -- The Washington Redskins have won the latest round in a 16-year court battle against a group of American Indians, prevailing on a technicality that again skirts the issue of whether the team's nickname is racially offensive.


In a ruling dated June 25 and first circulated Thursday, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that the youngest of the seven Native American plaintiffs waited too long after turning 18 to file the lawsuit that attempts to revoke the Redskins trademarks.


The lead plaintiff, Suzan Shown Harjo, said Friday the group will appeal.
"She ruled as we anticipated she would: for the loophole that would allow everyone to avoid the merits of the case," said Harjo, president of the Washington-based Morning Star Institute that advances Native American causes.


Harjo and her fellow plaintiffs have been working since 1992 to have the Redskins trademarks declared invalid. They initially won -- the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office panel canceled the trademarks in 1999 -- but Kollar-Kotelly overturned the ruling in 2003 in part because the suit was filed decades after the first Redskins trademark was issued in 1967.


The U.S. Court of Appeals then sent the case back to Kollar-Kotelly, noting that the youngest of the plaintiffs was only 1 year old in 1967 and therefore could not have taken legal action at the time.


But Kollar-Kotelly's new ruling rejects that possible argument. She wrote that the youngest plaintiff turned 18 in 1984 and therefore "waited almost eight years" after coming of age to join the lawsuit.


The judge did not address whether the Redskins name is offensive or racist. She wrote that her decision was not based on the larger issue of "the appropriateness of Native American imagery for team names."


The Redskins declined to comment, referring calls to attorney Bob Raskopf, who has been representing the team and the NFL in the case. Raskopf did not immediately return a call seeking comment.


The case now heads back to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Should it agree that Harjo's group was too old to sue, she has a backup plan: A group of six American Indians ranging in age from 18 to 24 filed essentially the same lawsuit two years ago. That suit is on hold until Harjo's case is resolved.


Harjo therefore anticipates that one day, a court will have to decide once and for all whether the Redskins name is offensive.


"It's so ironic that they would like to get rid of this though the loophole of passage of time, when we're in our 16th year of litigation," Harjo said. "Unbelievable. If this [lawsuit] were a child, we would be preparing the child to go to college."
Click to expand...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

When you hear the word Redskins what do you think of?

I know I don't think about indegenous Americans.

I reckon that would be true too for most people that don't even follow American football.

If they drop the symbol I reckon they can get away with keeping the name and the colours.
 
Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

I understand where the reference came from gg even "Indian" is an offensive to a lot of native Americans (some probably even find that offensive).

Until there's a wave of public opinion against the Skins I think they'll do what the law allows them to do. However I reckon they'll attempt to break the link between the name and where it comes from and try and keep their branding.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

JeffDunne said:
I understand where the reference came from gg even "Indian" is an offensive to a lot of native Americans (some probably even find that offensive).

Until there's a wave of public opinion against the Skins I think they'll do what the law allows them to do. However I reckon they'll attempt to break the link between the name and where it comes from and try and keep their branding.
Click to expand...

Indian isn't racist, just not correct terminology.
Cleveland Indians would be fine and I'm not aware of any legal cases being thrown their way.
Braves, Chiefs, Indians....all non-racist.
I dont see a way for Washington to maintain Redskins but change the logo and try and break the link. The link is the name itself.
Even if the courts ordered them to change the name, the record books would still show Redskins as Superbowl winners, a history of their logos/helmets, etc.
Their logo actually would be better off on the Kansas City helmet.
I see Washington has tried to introduce different helmet decal of the spear in the recent past.
Still can't get around the whole thing....there's no other possible logo connotation for Redskins but native americans.
 
Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

gg said:
I see Washington has tried to introduce different helmet decal of the spear in the recent past.
Still can't get around the whole thing....there's no other possible logo connotation for Redskins but native americans.
Click to expand...

a_newhelmet_sp.jpg


Is this one gg?? This one lacks character. :thumbsdown:

I actually like the one they have had for the last 20+ years.. fills the tummy also. :p

35-37577-P.jpg
 
Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

gg said:
Indian isn't racist, just not correct terminology.
Cleveland Indians would be fine and I'm not aware of any legal cases being thrown their way.
Braves, Chiefs, Indians....all non-racist.
Click to expand...

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has asked for all team names and logos bearing Native American symbols to be changed.

Some people see the use of those terms and symbols as racist too.

I dont see a way for Washington to maintain Redskins but change the logo and try and break the link. The link is the name itself.
Even if the courts ordered them to change the name, the record books would still show Redskins as Superbowl winners, a history of their logos/helmets, etc.
Their logo actually would be better off on the Kansas City helmet.
I see Washington has tried to introduce different helmet decal of the spear in the recent past.
Still can't get around the whole thing....there's no other possible logo connotation for Redskins but native americans.
Click to expand...

The court won't force them to change the name directly (not in this case anyway) but rather it's a challenge to the trademark of the name. If Washington lose that then ecconomics may force a change but as it stands, there is no court sitting on a judgement that migh actually force them to change the name.
 
Re: Judge Denies Changing The Redskins Name

gg said:
Redskins is offensive. Chiefs and Indians arent.
Click to expand...

It could be offensive, but I think eventually it will get changed anyway. I think there was a local baseball team around here with a very similar name and they had to change it due to racial issues. I see both sides to the story. I dont think of race when I hear redskin though, but I do when I hear some black kid on the subway scream Yo N###a! (which is fine apparently so long as your not white a dont say it with a r sound at the end, it has to be an a):rolleyes:
 
Re: Hall signs with the Redskins

One thread on Deangelo not enough for you STO? ;)

The NFC East is a dumping ground for the league's misfits.

It's why those teams rate so well. They're reality TV with a football team.
 
Re: Hall signs with the Redskins

JeffDunne said:
One thread on Deangelo not enough for you STO? ;)
Click to expand...

The other was on his release, and turned into the usual Raiders circus.

Thought that a different story might warrant different discussion, especially given the redskins have already dipped into the free agency to sign Alexander. Are they really close to being contenders, and just topping up or desperate to bridge a gap?

JeffDunne said:
The NFC East is a dumping ground for the league's misfits.

It's why those teams rate so well. They're reality TV with a football team.
Click to expand...

That and the division consistently provides championship contenders, and a close race.
 
Re: Hall signs with the Redskins

JeffDunne said:
Every division provides championship contenders.

Hell even the NFC West get to send a team to the playoffs. ;)
Click to expand...

Not every playoff team is a genuine contender, but thats just my opinion.

NFC West jokes might fall short if the cards keep playing the way they are though. :eek:
 
Re: Hall signs with the Redskins

the skins have had injury concerns in the secondary so far this season. doesnt hurt to shore up this area.

i reckon playing primarily in a zone coverage setup, that he'll go alright. And Skin DC Greg Blache has displayed some great schemes so far this year, such as the game against the Cowboys. if you're a defensive-minded football follower, then you'd definately appreciate the way he managed to give varying looks to actual assignments with the secondary in that game. He bamboozled Romo constantly.

man-coverage killed him in Oakey-doke-land. He obviously doesnt play it well. It requires an exceptional athlete to constantly play man with receivers.......and a pass rush! The skins dont seem have the latter this year either, but it shouldnt matter as much. But his asset is being able to sit off and read the play. Let's not forget how many interceptions he managed to pick off in Atlanta doing just that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

aussiedude
NCAA 2023/24 - NCAA - Washington Vs Michigan [National Championship Game]
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
729
Views
13K
AJ_2000
AJ_2000

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top