• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

Around the NFL: News and Rumors

rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
RavensMania said:
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on this. First they absolutely will end up with a nickname and nicknames may not mean anything to you, but I'd guarantee skins fans or atleast 99.999999% of the team would like to refer to them as something other than Football Team.

If you were that skins fan and I know you aren't, you would be that .0000001% that wouldn't care.

Last I checked the NFL is played in the U.S, so if it's an American Thing to do to name the team, than it would be pretty normal as 31 other franchises have names and all of them are in the U.S.
Click to expand...
OK, but they can just refer to them as Washington then. Or basically do what the media has been doing for like 5+ years, since pretty much any left-leaning network covering their games refused to use the term Redskins any longer, and long before Snyder made the switch. I think if it were a big deal, they'd already have a nickname by now and/or be moving at a much faster pace to change the name.

Pretty much the simplest way to get around being worried about offending another very small portion of the population with whatever name you come up with.

I'm certainly not going to be overly concerned with what the "fans" want. The fans, based on polling, didn't want the name changed to begin with, so you've already effectively pissed them off (even without the poor on field performance). The only next step is to pick a name that pisses off a bunch of other people, which will apply to 100% of the names they choose.
 
RavensMania

RavensMania

Staff Member
Administrator
rmcjacket23 said:
OK, but they can just refer to them as Washington then. Or basically do what the media has been doing for like 5+ years, since pretty much any left-leaning network covering their games refused to use the term Redskins any longer, and long before Snyder made the switch. I think if it were a big deal, they'd already have a nickname by now and/or be moving at a much faster pace to change the name.

Pretty much the simplest way to get around being worried about offending another very small portion of the population with whatever name you come up with.

I'm certainly not going to be overly concerned with what the "fans" want. The fans, based on polling, didn't want the name changed to begin with, so you've already effectively pissed them off (even without the poor on field performance). The only next step is to pick a name that pisses off a bunch of other people, which will apply to 100% of the names they choose.
Click to expand...
they have been referring to them by "Washington" for obvious reasons why every other team is referred to by their nickname. Would be ridiculous to not drop the nickname. I still call the Wizards the Bullets and will probably be referring to the FT as Redskins no matter what the team name ends up becoming. I don't hate the team, I hate the owner.

Of course they didn't want the team name changed. Most people don't like change and this has been tradition for them since 1933 when the name was changed from Braves to Redskins. Back when they were the Braves thay played in the Boston Braves stadium and football teams took on the names of the baseball teams (or something similar) stadiums they played in. They then moved to Fenway for one year and became the Redskins.
 
Last edited:
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
RavensMania said:
they have been referring to them by "Washington" for obvious reasons why every other team is referred to by their nickname. Would be ridiculous to not drop the nickname. I still call the Wizards the Bullets and will probably be referring to the FT as Redskins no matter what the team name ends up becoming. I don't hate the team, I hate the owner.

Of course they didn't want the team name changed. Most people don't like change and this has been tradition for them since 1933 when the name was changed from Braves to Redskins. Back when they were the Braves thay played in the Boston Braves stadium and football teams took on the names of the baseball teams (or something similar) stadiums they played in. They then moved to Fenway for one year and became the Redskins.
Click to expand...
I think my point is that fans, generally speaking, don't care about nicknames. A lot of fans of a lot of teams hate the nicknames of the team they root for to begin with. If you're going to stop being a fan of a team because they changed their nickname, chances are, your fan card was going to get turned in for a lot of different things that triggered you, and you were probably looking for a way out to begin with.

That's why I'm saying that, even to the most "hardcore" Redskin fans, the nickname is irrelevant. They watched the team when they were the Redskins. They watched them when they were WFT. They'll watch them with whatever name will be next, or if there isn't one at all.

If the Ravens dropped the Ravens as a name and wanted to call themselves the Baltimore Football Team, I wouldn't lose an ounce of sleep over it.
 
RavensMania

RavensMania

Staff Member
Administrator
rmcjacket23 said:
I think my point is that fans, generally speaking, don't care about nicknames. A lot of fans of a lot of teams hate the nicknames of the team they root for to begin with. If you're going to stop being a fan of a team because they changed their nickname, chances are, your fan card was going to get turned in for a lot of different things that triggered you, and you were probably looking for a way out to begin with.

That's why I'm saying that, even to the most "hardcore" Redskin fans, the nickname is irrelevant. They watched the team when they were the Redskins. They watched them when they were WFT. They'll watch them with whatever name will be next, or if there isn't one at all.

If the Ravens dropped the Ravens as a name and wanted to call themselves the Baltimore Football Team, I wouldn't lose an ounce of sleep over it.
Click to expand...
And I believe your point is dead wrong. However you can try and find me the statistic that says 'a lot of fans don't like the nickname of the teams they root for but I suggest not wasting your time, you won't find it.

I'd also bet the overwhelming majority of fans would disagree with you. I believe they want the team to have a nickname but wouldn't stop rooting for them if they changed to a name they didn't like. BTW, if the Redskins pick FT as their team name, than you are right about the skins fans not caring about the nickname, but that won't happen.

Fans pick teams for various reasons when they are just getting into the game. Some like the colors, some like the nicknames and others just have the normal rooting interest like the team is in the area they live or parents root for the team.
 
Last edited:
gtalk12

gtalk12

Ravens Ring of Honor
There was a study conducted by the University of Michigan and Berkeley. They polled 1000 Native Americans from different backgrounds and demographics. 148 Tribes across 50 states were represented in this study. This was twice the size of the original study that found that they did not have an issue with mascots etc.

83% of the people polled were not raised or living on a reservation.

This poll found that 49% of Native Americans found the name as offensive. 13% indifferent and 38% not offensive. Stark contract from the 2016 Poll done by the Washington post with significantly smaller sample size which used a total of 400 people only 98 of which identified as Native American. They found 90% not offensive.


Just change the name. Not really a big deal unless we make it a bigger deal than it has to be.
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
RavensMania said:
And I believe your point is dead wrong. However you can try and find me the statistic that says 'a lot of fans don't like the nickname of the teams they root for but I suggest not wasting your time, you won't find it.

I'd also bet the overwhelming majority of fans would disagree with you. I believe they want the team to have a nickname but wouldn't stop rooting for them if they changed to a name they didn't like. BTW, if the Redskins pick FT as their team name, than you are right about the skins fans not caring about the nickname, but that won't happen.

Fans pick teams for various reasons when they are just getting into the game. Some like the colors, some like the nicknames and others just have the normal rooting interest like the team is in the area they live or parents root for the team.
Click to expand...
Disagree with me about what, specifically? That they prefer a certain nickname or that they'd prefer their team have one? I'm sure the answer to that question would be yes. I prefer my team have a nickname and I'd prefer if I liked it.

But that question would be useless to poll on, because you wouldn't draw literally any conclusions from it from a business perspective. It'd be like polling children and asking them "do you like candy". Of course the answer is going to be yes. Cool, so I now know kids like candy. What now? Do I become the one thousandth company to sell kids to candy?

The relevant question is how important is a nickname to you, in terms of financial decisions impacting the business. I.e... if I choose a nickname you don't like, is it going to change anything you do in regards to the team? Is it going to make you purchase more or less merchandise? Is it going to make you start or stop watching games, buying tickets, etc.

And I think if you polled the Redskins fan base or most fanbases, with the exception of a small handful, and those people responded truthfully, they'd tell you that the nickname of the franchise has an extremely immaterial impact on the purchasing decisions made surrounding that franchise. i.e., they'll watch games all the same, they'll buy merchandise all the same.

Do I know that for certain? Nope, I don't. But I think if I was wrong, I'd be able to see tangible revenue models showing me that fans did, in fact, care a TON about the previous name, and that they were so offended and appalled by its changing that they stopped supporting the franchise, and as such, a sharp revenue decline ensued. I haven't seen that yet, but if it happened, feel free to let me know.

If Daniel Snyder opts to keep WFT as the name of the franchise, its not going to be because he thinks fans like it. Daniel Snyder has done very few things in his entire life as a NFL franchise owner to give any vague suggestion he's considerate of what fans want, and I doubt after him being forced to change the name, that he's all of the sudden going to start now. If he keeps the name as WFT, it'll be because he doesn't see any value in adding another nickname, it'll make historical marketing gear that already didn't have the Redskins name on it still able to be sold, he'll get to keep the colors, making marketing that much easier (which they've pretty much already said they're doing), and it'll save him a ton of money in consulting fees, legal fees, and a bunch of other nonsense costs he'll have to go through to change the name, including making sure it didn't offend a few dozen people centuries ago.

And honestly, if I were him, that's what I'd do. I'm a bit cynical like he is. If you're going to play the little PC card and force me to change the nickname, I'm just not going to give you the pleasure of getting another one. You'll take WFT and that'll be that. And I'll wager that you'll whine about it on social media sites and tell all your friends how much you hate it... while wearing a burgundy and gold T shirt and watching the game.

I'm sure others feel differently about it. But they're also mostly talking the talk and not walking the walk. That's your pretty standard NFL fan right there, and Owners have known that for decades now.
 
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
gtalk12 said:
There was a study conducted by the University of Michigan and Berkeley. They polled 1000 Native Americans from different backgrounds and demographics. 148 Tribes across 50 states were represented in this study. This was twice the size of the original study that found that they did not have an issue with mascots etc.

83% of the people polled were not raised or living on a reservation.

This poll found that 49% of Native Americans found the name as offensive. 13% indifferent and 38% not offensive. Stark contract from the 2016 Poll done by the Washington post with significantly smaller sample size which used a total of 400 people only 98 of which identified as Native American. They found 90% not offensive.


Just change the name. Not really a big deal unless we make it a bigger deal than it has to be.
Click to expand...
So partially agree, partially disagree (at least with the last part)...
They already changed the name, so its past tense. It's done, and its not coming back. I understand why they refused to for so long, and I understand why they were forced to and why a decent number of people think they should have. I think society as a whole as beaten a dead horse in regards to the political and "offensive" side of this, and it quite frankly just bores me at this point.

Honestly, the whole process was the epitome of "America", circa 2021. Americans are exceptionally great at two things:
1. Telling business owners how to run their business
2. Telling other people with more money than they have what they should and shouldn't be doing with their money.
There is literally nothing more American than that right now.

And this is a classic case of it. The "no big deal" argument comes from a position of effortless behavior. Basically, nothing is ever a big deal to people when they don't have to do anything. Just tell a rich white guy what he should do, which will cost him a whole bunch of money, effort, hours, time, etc., for, what value, precisely? Daniel Snyder should spend millions of dollars to change merchandise, pay consulting fees, lawyers, etc. to change the name of a franchise that offends, what, less than 1% of the US population? Is him changing the Redskins name going to like give a whole bunch of land back to Native Americans? Is it going to stop negative stereotypes in its tracts and instantly boosts the perception of Native Americans through the U.S.?

Like at the end of the day, this is just purely consumers and businesses telling rich people to spend millions of dollars to make a small population of people feel better about themselves. That's it. Any way you break it down, that's all this exercise is.

And in my humble opinion, if you replaced "telling the rich people to spend millions" with "make the consumers pay to fix their own problems", then these exercises would stop being a common occurrence. Especially true when the rich person, in this example, didn't create the problem to begin with.
 
gtalk12

gtalk12

Ravens Ring of Honor
rmcjacket23 said:
So partially agree, partially disagree (at least with the last part)...
They already changed the name, so its past tense. It's done, and its not coming back. I understand why they refused to for so long, and I understand why they were forced to and why a decent number of people think they should have. I think society as a whole as beaten a dead horse in regards to the political and "offensive" side of this, and it quite frankly just bores me at this point.

Honestly, the whole process was the epitome of "America", circa 2021. Americans are exceptionally great at two things:
1. Telling business owners how to run their business
2. Telling other people with more money than they have what they should and shouldn't be doing with their money.
There is literally nothing more American than that right now.

And this is a classic case of it. The "no big deal" argument comes from a position of effortless behavior. Basically, nothing is ever a big deal to people when they don't have to do anything. Just tell a rich white guy what he should do, which will cost him a whole bunch of money, effort, hours, time, etc., for, what value, precisely? Daniel Snyder should spend millions of dollars to change merchandise, pay consulting fees, lawyers, etc. to change the name of a franchise that offends, what, less than 1% of the US population? Is him changing the Redskins name going to like give a whole bunch of land back to Native Americans? Is it going to stop negative stereotypes in its tracts and instantly boosts the perception of Native Americans through the U.S.?

Like at the end of the day, this is just purely consumers and businesses telling rich people to spend millions of dollars to make a small population of people feel better about themselves. That's it. Any way you break it down, that's all this exercise is.

And in my humble opinion, if you replaced "telling the rich people to spend millions" with "make the consumers pay to fix their own problems", then these exercises would stop being a common occurrence. Especially true when the rich person, in this example, didn't create the problem to begin with.
Click to expand...


To an extent, I agree with you.
 
RavensMania

RavensMania

Staff Member
Administrator
rmcjacket23 said:
Disagree with me about what, specifically? That they prefer a certain nickname or that they'd prefer their team have one? I'm sure the answer to that question would be yes. I prefer my team have a nickname and I'd prefer if I liked it.
You said your point was that fans don't necessarily care about nicknames and hate their teams nicknames. That is what I disagreed.

But that question would be useless to poll on, because you wouldn't draw literally any conclusions from it from a business perspective. It'd be like polling children and asking them "do you like candy". Of course the answer is going to be yes. Cool, so I now know kids like candy. What now? Do I become the one thousandth company to sell kids to candy?
That was my point, it would absolutely be a useless poll. Of course it would, but I only said it because you decided to say on your own that fans don't care about nicknames without backing it up. Point is you can't back it up and it's most likely untrue.

The relevant question is how important is a nickname to you, in terms of financial decisions impacting the business. I.e... if I choose a nickname you don't like, is it going to change anything you do in regards to the team? Is it going to make you purchase more or less merchandise? Is it going to make you start or stop watching games, buying tickets, etc.
The point is they have a nickname. I wouldn't want a team without one, but I wouldn't base it on a reason to root for them either. Some people it absolutely would change the way they support the team in purchasing merchandise, while others wouldn't care at all. It's never an all or never situation and this isn't about me, this is about fans in general.

And I think if you polled the Redskins fan base or most fanbases, with the exception of a small handful, and those people responded truthfully, they'd tell you that the nickname of the franchise has an extremely immaterial impact on the purchasing decisions made surrounding that franchise. i.e., they'll watch games all the same, they'll buy merchandise all the same.
I do remember in several different threads on Extremeskins.com that said people wouldn't root for the team if they changed the name. Those people were fareweather fans and this shouldn't impact a fan. Again the point is that they have a nickname vs having a nickname. Most would PREFER having a nickname, no matter what it is. I WOULD PREFER A TEAM TO HAVE A NICKNAME and I believe most fans would agree with me. This is the point and the point that you said people didn't care about.

Do I know that for certain? Nope, I don't. But I think if I was wrong, I'd be able to see tangible revenue models showing me that fans did, in fact, care a TON about the previous name, and that they were so offended and appalled by its changing that they stopped supporting the franchise, and as such, a sharp revenue decline ensued. I haven't seen that yet, but if it happened, feel free to let me know.
If you don't know for certain, than don't say it, especially if you phrase it like it's fact, when it's clearly not. If it's your opinion then say it as such.


If Daniel Snyder opts to keep WFT as the name of the franchise, its not going to be because he thinks fans like it. Daniel Snyder has done very few things in his entire life as a NFL franchise owner to give any vague suggestion he's considerate of what fans want, and I doubt after him being forced to change the name, that he's all of the sudden going to start now. If he keeps the name as WFT, it'll be because he doesn't see any value in adding another nickname, it'll make historical marketing gear that already didn't have the Redskins name on it still able to be sold, he'll get to keep the colors, making marketing that much easier (which they've pretty much already said they're doing), and it'll save him a ton of money in consulting fees, legal fees, and a bunch of other nonsense costs he'll have to go through to change the name, including making sure it didn't offend a few dozen people centuries ago.
Regarding the 1st sentence... I can't believe you think you need to tell me this. I could tell you things about Dan Snyder that have never been publicized, which I will not do on these boards or any for that matter. It's the reason I CAN'T root for that team or owner for that matter. Fans are voting for the team name but they won't have 100% voice and Snyder will make a bundle whether he has a new name or keeps it as WFT, but my oveerwhelming bet is they have a new team name and imo I believe it is one of the names that starts with an R. There are other good options as well.

And honestly, if I were him, that's what I'd do. I'm a bit cynical like he is. If you're going to play the little PC card and force me to change the nickname, I'm just not going to give you the pleasure of getting another one. You'll take WFT and that'll be that. And I'll wager that you'll whine about it on social media sites and tell all your friends how much you hate it... while wearing a burgundy and gold T shirt and watching the game.
Cynical is a compliment when referring to Dan Snyder. IMO, there is little to no chance the team name stays WFT. The only reason the. team didn't have a new nickname last year is they had no time to do the due diligence. WFT was always an interim name and that's it. Seriously if they were only going to refer to the team as Washington, than they wouldn't have needed FT last season either.

I'm sure others feel differently about it. But they're also mostly talking the talk and not walking the walk. That's your pretty standard NFL fan right there, and Owners have known that for decades now.
Click to expand...

I just bolded within your post for your answers.

Lets just agree to disagree as we are far off in our opinions, and they are opinions. because you aren't going to change my mind and in regards to Snyder, I clearly know a lot more about Snyder than you do. That is a fact.
 
BoredMarine13

BoredMarine13

Ravens Ring of Honor
rmcjacket23

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
RavensMania said:
I just bolded within your post for your answers.

Lets just agree to disagree as we are far off in our opinions, and they are opinions. because you aren't going to change my mind and in regards to Snyder, I clearly know a lot more about Snyder than you do. That is a fact.
Click to expand...
OK. I guess the idea is that you're largely just refuting my opinions with more opinions, as opposed to refuting them with facts. I don't really care if you know more about Snyder or not. I already know he's a terrible person and team owner, so there's really nothing else that would need to be said on it. We actually agree on Snyder. My comment about him was that, if I were an owner like him, who was forced through political correctness to pay millions to change a name, I'd do it for as cheap as possible, and piss off a lot of people in the process. And making the team permanently WFT would be a great way to do it.

As for why I think people don't care nicknames, we actually do have examples of this. Its hard to find in American sports because, again, its an American thing, but it does exist. There are multiple soccer teams who don't have a nickname. I'm unaware of significant fan displeasure or outcries of support for those franchises to have nicknames.

You could argue that, because its Soccer, its more of a "European" model of sorts, which may or may not be true. But what I think is also true is that the reason fans of NFL teams prefer to have a nickname (and don't really care what the nickname is, which was my largest point), is because that's really all they've known.
 
Edgar

Edgar

Ravens Ring of Honor
RavensMania said:
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on this. First they absolutely will end up with a nickname and nicknames may not mean anything to you, but I'd guarantee skins fans or atleast 99.999999% of the team would like to refer to them as something other than Football Team.

If you were that skins fan and I know you aren't, you would be that .0000001% that wouldn't care.

Last I checked the NFL is played in the U.S, so if it's an American Thing to do to name the team, than it would be pretty normal as 31 other franchises have names and all of them are in the U.S.
Click to expand...
always thought Washington Natives would be a pretty nice name change
 
RavensMania

RavensMania

Staff Member
Administrator
rmcjacket23 said:
OK. I guess the idea is that you're largely just refuting my opinions with more opinions, as opposed to refuting them with facts. I don't really care if you know more about Snyder or not. I already know he's a terrible person and team owner, so there's really nothing else that would need to be said on it. We actually agree on Snyder. My comment about him was that, if I were an owner like him, who was forced through political correctness to pay millions to change a name, I'd do it for as cheap as possible, and piss off a lot of people in the process. And making the team permanently WFT would be a great way to do it.

As for why I think people don't care nicknames, we actually do have examples of this. Its hard to find in American sports because, again, its an American thing, but it does exist. There are multiple soccer teams who don't have a nickname. I'm unaware of significant fan displeasure or outcries of support for those franchises to have nicknames.

You could argue that, because its Soccer, its more of a "European" model of sorts, which may or may not be true. But what I think is also true is that the reason fans of NFL teams prefer to have a nickname (and don't really care what the nickname is, which was my largest point), is because that's really all they've known.
Click to expand...
you aren't refuting anything with fact, nothing at all. You are the king of opinions. Now giving examples of European sports isn't an example at all. We are talking about the NFL and that is how I started my point way back in my first post and since we are talking about the NFL, there are no examples. You stating that the overwhelming majority of fans don't care about nicknames and don't like their nicknames. That certainly isn't fact and you thought they wouldn't or don't need a nickname at all because it's only an American thing.

It's funny that you say I'm refuting opinions with more opinions when you do that in EVERY argument. You have not shown me any facts and you won't find any facts on this matter and it has now become so god damn stupid because you are totally turning this into a right vs wrong issue. The truth to the matter is you absolutely don't know your first point and can't prove it and shouldn't have stated it in the first place.

Say what you want from here and I'll let you have the last word, because I will not respond.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top