Poli-Sci: NFL to Play Black National Anthem in Week 1

[JAD]

I am about between the fences on this one. It’s morally reprehensible of me to support the exploitation of people for my entertainment. There is nothing besides porn that’s as exploitative as the NFL. You trade years off your life for riches you’re not taught to handle; if you manage not to injure yourself out of the game in the first year or two you might just survive to enjoy death by suicide in your fifties. It’s actively disgusting.

On the other hand go pack.

I had myself tempered off the NFL in 2018, and then Mahomes had to suck me back in last year. Hoping I can be more grown up in 2021, when they actually have another season, if they don’t go chapter 11 before then.

[DDTSGM]

I just can't imagine a team named "the San Francisco Celestials" or "The Detroit Spades" or "The Houston Wetbacks" would be tolerated to the same degree as the Redskins.

I think you are missing my point - would you consider a 'wetback' or 'celestial' as having the attributes of a winning sports team, or the traits you'd want a team to emulate in terms of grit and determination?

Why don't folks get offended by these:









Maybe because they view them as positives?

I kind of get what you are saying, but don't really agree.

[Nephrology]

I think you are missing my point - would you consider a 'wetback' or 'celestial' as having the attributes of a winning sports team, or the traits you'd want a team to emulate in terms of grit and determination?

Why don't folks get offended by these:









Maybe because they view them as positives?

I kind of get what you are saying, but don't really agree.

I don't really think Redskin is particularly complimentary towards Native Americans .... and no Irishmen are writing Notre Dame and saying they're offended by the mascot (at least as far as I know, maybe there are).

There, however, are a lot of Native Americans who seem to take issue with the Redskins. In the context of their historical mistreatment by the US gov't, it seems a little cruel to indirectly suggest they get over it.

It sounds like we will have to agree to disagree on this issue, but I would encourage you to read thoughts on the topic from Native Americans, which would provide probably a more informed balance to your view than I can as a white dude who doesn't really give a shit about a second rate team like the Redskins (GO PATS)

[DDTSGM]

I am about between the fences on this one. It’s morally reprehensible of me to support the exploitation of people for my entertainment. There is nothing besides porn that’s as exploitative as the NFL. You trade years off your life for riches you’re not taught to handle; if you manage not to injure yourself out of the game in the first year or two you might just survive to enjoy death by suicide in your fifties. It’s actively disgusting.

On the other hand go pack.

I had myself tempered off the NFL in 2018, and then Mahomes had to suck me back in last year. Hoping I can be more grown up in 2021, when they actually have another season, if they don’t go chapter 11 before then.

So, who was responsible for teaching me to handle my riches? As far as not being taught to handlke their riches:

You cannot be drafted into the NFL right out of high school. You have to be out of high school for 3 years and have used up your college eligibility. Underclassmen who want to leave school early or students who graduate with college eligibility still available must petition the NFL to enter the draft early.

What you do with that free education is up to you. Funny, some players become doctors, dentists or lawyers, as they go through their playing careers. Choices.

Personally, with the minimum contract at $510,000 per year, $705,000 per year after three seasons, and an NFL-wide average salary of about $2.7 million (in 2017), if I was talented enough I'd be minding my p's and q's with my money and have enough to get me started in something that will sustain me for another career after two or three years.

Yes, I think the NFL, hell, all major league sports, are exploitative, not just of the players but of the communities in which their stadiums are located.

But I'm pretty sure the players are willing participants and don't think it's my job to look out for them.

[DDTSGM]

I don't really think Redskin is particularly complimentary towards Native Americans .... and no Irishmen are writing Notre Dame and saying they're offended by the mascot (at least as far as I know, maybe there are).

There, however, are a lot of Native Americans who seem to take issue with the Redskins. In the context of their historical mistreatment by the US gov't, it seems a little cruel to indirectly suggest they get over it.

Well, living in Kansas, I'm kind of a Chiefs fan, I know that the atmosphere in ARROWHEAD stadium is definitely not anti-Native American. The one time I was at 'the launching pad' (Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium in the Dale Murphy era) I felt the Braves were also pretty happy and supportive of their team's namesake. Again, not a lot of anti-Native American sentiment to be seen.

I really think so very much of this is just a result of living in a culture where people are just looking for things to be offended about.

Is changing all these team names suddenly going to make it better for the Native Americans on the reservation? Not one iota. The problems there, from my limited experience doing volunteer work in the Hopi Tribal Area, are systemic, and will take more than just token work to correct.

The socio-economic challenges facing many of the black Americans living in urban areas will also take more than woken chanting of Black Lives Matter to correct.

But seemingly most folks don't want to dig in and get their hands dirty and their tax money involved in actually fixing the problems.

But yeah, Braves, Chiefs, and Redskins bad.

[Nephrology]

But seemingly most folks don't want to dig in and get their hands dirty and their tax money involved in actually fixing the problems.

I do completely agree with you there. Most people do not want to look at poverty, neglect, human suffering, etc and actually try to hash out solutions grounded in reality, because this is very hard, and often ethically muddled. It does not really leave anybody feeling like a winner. Being angry about it, however, is very easy.

I remember once having a conversation with my more left leaning friends about homelessness. I forget exactly how or where this was prompted in the conversation, but at some point I asked if any of them had actually sat down and actually talked to a homeless person. Total silence.

Frankly I would also have said no if it wasn't for my exposure through the ER. However, because of that exposure, I know there is no 'solution' as simple as "more social workers" or "let them camp in parks."

But yeah, Braves, Chiefs, and Redskins bad.

I'd disagree with you here, however - this doesn't really represent my view at least. Personally I don't think any of these teams - their owners, players, or fans - are "bad people." I don't even believe that they feel any anti-native American sentiments . I just think the teams were named in a different era and the tradition has carried forward in a way that I causes grief to many native americans.

I want to underline this point, because I think a lot of the media's take on this topic (L and R) is designed to deliberately engender unnecessary hostility and confrontation on every topic, including this. In L wing media, that means you're a racist if you're a Chiefs or a Braves fan. That obviously doesn't make any sense at all. I clearly don't think you're a racist for being a Chief's fan (mostly jealous your QB has his whole career ahead of him, instead of behind him), so I don't take your disagreement to be tacit admission to having a hateful racist mind (the take that MSNBC is hoping for).

I do think that it would be a meaningful gesture, however, and frankly a small sacrifice. At the end of the day, they are sports teams: names, cities, and mascots change all the time, and largely purely for reasons of profit that are a direct "fuck you" to the loyal home fans. Ask St Louis how their Rams are doing. If we accept that as normal for pro sports, changing a logo and a mascot seems like it could be the kind of magnanimous gesture that America needs more of right now.

[Kanye Wyoming]

I just think the teams were named in a different era and the tradition has carried forward in a way that I causes grief to many native americans.

If only social scientists had been been able to devise a means to get a rough gauge on how a given group of people feels about a given issue.

Nine in 10 Native Americans say they are not offended by the Washington Redskins name, according to a new Washington Post poll that shows how few ordinary Indians have been persuaded by a national movement to change the football team’s moniker.

The survey of 504 people across every state and the District reveals that the minds of Native Americans have remained unchanged since a 2004 poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found the same result. Responses to The Post’s questions about the issue were broadly consistent regardless of age, income, education, political party or proximity to reservations.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...f9a_story.html

A new survey has found that Native Americans are more likely to be proud than offended by the name of the Washington Redskins.

The survey, as reported by the Washington Post, asked 500 people who identify as Native American to pick from a list of words which one best described their feelings about the Redskins name. The word most picked was “proud.”

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...common-answer/

[Joe S]

I stopped watching them years and years ago. Useless, overpaid twats that suck away tax resources from communities. I found that going for a hike or walk with the wife or family is far more relaxing. IMO society would be better off if more folks spent time with their kids/families talking/doing instead of sitting in front of the TV.

Or you can even play football, if you like football. Or baseball or soccer or basketball...

I occasionally watch an MMA match. And I understand how it can be enjoyable to sometimes watch peak athletes do their thing. But it has always seemed strange to me that so many would rather be a passive spectator on other people's lives, rather than actively living their own lives.

[Hambo]

I just can't imagine a team named "the San Francisco Celestials" or "The Detroit Spades" or "The Houston Wetbacks" would be tolerated to the same degree as the Redskins.

Whether or not there is intent to harm, naming a sports team after a population of people who have suffered incomparably at the hands of the US gov't seems to me, optimistically, in poor taste.

Particularly when some of the visual depictions are so.... I mean what do you call this? Sort of shocked it was only retired in 2018.

As lifelong Tribe fan, I tell you that you're treading on thin ice. Chief Wahoo aside, do you know where the "Indians" name from? It wasn't uncomplimentary.

[JTQ]

As lifelong Tribe fan, ...

I am also, and since you brought up the term "Tribe", I've often wondered what if the Indians officially changed their nickname to "The Tribe" and changed the "Chief Wahoo" logo to have a white face, with a black broad rimmed hat instead of the headband and feather, and gave him sidelocks, and called him "Rabbi". Would everybody be offended, except for the Jews?