witesoxfan Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Also, I would have no problem if they kept the name Redskins but changed their logo to a red potato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:09 AM) There used to be a high school in North Dakota (many, many Germans and Scandinavians) whose mascot was the Wops. I had never heard anyone use that phrase, but it's still an incredibly derogatory name. They are now the Huskies. Wow, that's pretty hard to believe. I think that may even be worse than Illinois' own Pekin Chinks (now "Dragons"). And FWIW, I don't think "Redskins" can be fairly lumped in with "Indians," "Braves," "Illini," "Seminoles," "Utes," "Sioux," or, for that matter, "Vikings," "Irish" or "Dutchmen." Language evolves, and even if it hasn't always been to the same degree, the term has certainly become pejorative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Wite, you need to dig up the Wop logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:26 AM) Are there any Illini fans here who think the Redskins name has to go but where pretty upset when they dumped the Chief? That was a controversy, but apparently the Chief offended some. My thing is if the Redskins name really does offend, and it does seem to do just that, just change it. What really is gained by keeping it? The Washington DC NFL team isn't going to be any less popular. I think the only problem is where do you draw the line? People will be offended by everything, especially if they know being offended will get some change. I think Redskins and Chief Wahoo are far enough on the wrong side of that line to go away. They are far more offensive IMO than Illinois' Chief or Marquette calling their teams Warriors. This is pretty much me. I think Chief Wahoo is farthest across this line. When I was at Illinois (in the 80's), I felt the same way about some older, cartoonish indian caricatures that you would sometimes still see around. I was very sad to see "The Chief" go, but I understood. I am more pissed about the hypocrisy that deems a horse riding, spear-chucking indian acceptable, but a dancing one "hostile and offensive." Edited June 4, 2014 by PlaySumFnJurny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) Wow, that's pretty hard to believe. I think that may even be worse than Illinois' own Pekin Chinks (now "Dragons"). And FWIW, I don't think "Redskins" can be fairly lumped in with "Indians," "Braves," "Illini," "Seminoles," "Utes," "Sioux," or, for that matter, "Vikings," "Irish" or "Dutchmen." Language evolves, and even if it hasn't always been to the same degree, the term has certainly become pejorative. Illini are named after a newspaper (which coined the term) fwiw. That's why there's no controversy about that name. Ironically the term has retroactively been taken from the University and applied to calling the Illinois Confederation by that name. Edited June 4, 2014 by Buehrle>Wood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:26 AM) Are there any Illini fans here who think the Redskins name has to go but where pretty upset when they dumped the Chief? That was a controversy, but apparently the Chief offended some. My thing is if the Redskins name really does offend, and it does seem to do just that, just change it. What really is gained by keeping it? The Washington DC NFL team isn't going to be any less popular. I think the only problem is where do you draw the line? People will be offended by everything, especially if they know being offended will get some change. I think Redskins and Chief Wahoo are far enough on the wrong side of that line to go away. They are far more offensive IMO than Illinois' Chief or Marquette calling their teams Warriors. What if Washington was like, ok well change our name to just "Skins" but kept that same logo and everything. Is there still an argument to be made that the name is still offensive even if the Red has been knocked off of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:47 AM) Wite, you need to dig up the Wop logo. This is the best I can do, as a quick search doesn't pull up anything. Dickinson High School (also ND) is known as the Mighty Midgets. See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 3, 2014 -> 07:06 AM) Still bitter about Miami changing their name? They didnt need to change theirs either, they actually had the support of the Miami tribes to keep the name and the school changed it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 09:48 AM) This is pretty much me. I think Chief Wahoo is farthest across this line. When I was at Illinois (in the 80's), I felt the same way about some older, cartoonish indian caricatures that you would sometimes still see around. I was very sad to see "The Chief" go, but I understood. I am more pissed about the hypocrisy that deems a horse riding, spear-chucking indian acceptable, but a dancing one "hostile and offensive." Getting rid of the Chief was f'n stupid. All the Chief stuff was a celebration of Indian heritage, and now for the sake of political correctness, no one is going to remember American Indians ever existed in Illinois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 10:16 AM) Time to start a petition. As an irishman, i am starting my own so i can take down Notre Dame. There really isn't any difference between the Fighting Sioux and the Fightin' Irish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 11:49 AM) There really isn't any difference between the Fighting Sioux and the Fightin' Irish. Did the Sioux start the University? Because ND was founded by the Irish Catholic, whom I assume chose the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Did the Sioux start the University? Because ND was founded by the Irish Catholic, whom I assume chose the name. ND was founded by a French Priest, but the nickname came about during a period when the football team had a high percentage of Irish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 12:57 PM) Did the Sioux start the University? Because ND was founded by the Irish Catholic, whom I assume chose the name. French Catholics. Irish came from early football players that had Irish heritage. Newspapermen gave the team the nickname. http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-8034642 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Alright. whatevs. I dont feel that the university image is disrespectful of my heritage as much as the Redskins are to Native Americans. I dont feel the Fighting Sioux are either, but that isnt my heritage and I certainly couldnt speak for any Sioux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Anyways, Marcell Dareus and Aldon Smith should pal up and see how many laws they can break together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 11:21 AM) Getting rid of the Chief was f'n stupid. All the Chief stuff was a celebration of Indian heritage, and now for the sake of political correctness, no one is going to remember American Indians ever existed in Illinois. Eh, it was a celebration of sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) NFL dropping Roman numeral in favor of "50" for 2016 Super Bowl, @darrenrovell reports: http://t.co/Z75QjenQZI pic.twitter.com/0Tkhq4L3jX— ABC News (@ABC) June 4, 2014 I'm Ok with ditching the roman numerals preeminently. Edited June 4, 2014 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 01:06 PM) Alright. whatevs. I dont feel that the university image is disrespectful of my heritage as much as the Redskins are to Native Americans. I dont feel the Fighting Sioux are either, but that isnt my heritage and I certainly couldnt speak for any Sioux I don't think either should/should have changed and I think it's ridiculous the amount of people who pretend to be in uproar about it, but I think there could be a legitimate claim from Irish-Americans that the name 'Fightin' Irish" with an image of a leprechaun in a fighting stance could conjure up some negative images of a "drunken, brawling Irishman" of the early 20th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Colin Kaepernick got paid: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/colin-k...ugh-2020-060414 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 4, 2014 Author Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 03:22 PM) Colin Kaepernick got paid: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/colin-k...ugh-2020-060414 I wonder what the guaranteed money looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 03:25 PM) I wonder what the guaranteed money looks like. $61 mill, most ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 03:33 PM) $61 mill, most ever Wow they overpaid badly. 61 million guaranteed money for CK not even a top 10 ranked QB. Cam Newton loving this for his new deal. Edited June 4, 2014 by Soxfest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 4, 2014 Author Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 03:33 PM) $61 mill, most ever Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) I have a feeling every QB signed next few years will be "most paid ever". Cap is growing a lot and QBs are important. Also, lack of durability concerns with QBs. They are basically soaking up all money that went to RBs as well. Edited June 4, 2014 by bmags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 03:55 PM) I have a feeling every QB signed next few years will be "most paid ever". Cap is growing a lot and QBs are important. Also, lack of durability concerns with QBs. They are basically soaking up all money that went to RBs as well. Joe Flacco winning the Superbowl broke the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts