CrimsonBull9584

Members
  • Content Count

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

303 Platoon Sharer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Atlanta, GA
  • Favourite Teams
    Seattle Seahawks, Montana State Bobcats

Recent Profile Visitors

3,078 profile views
  1. How did schools like Arkansas State, North Dakota, and Louisiana-Monroe handle this situation? Like their fans wearing gear? Seems like whatever policy they had at Ark State was laxed.
  2. True, but I still think that the name change is pointless if not enforced on some level. No reason they could't give away some gear. Like a guns for toys deal. Give a Redskins shirt and get a replacement.
  3. 1. I honestly don't know, but I could't imagine there has been a case of that happening. 2. I think that if the policy is made clear, say a point of purchase, and the fact that it's on private property (its a business and all), then they have every right to turn away their business if they don't follow policy.
  4. I understand your point and the difference in the two. But if this is to be a meaningful change, should't banning people wearing the Redskins logo be one of the needed steps? I don't think FedEx and Pepsi will still give their money if the name is changed, the colors remain the same, and everyone in the stadium is still wearing Redskins gear.
  5. On that point, I know that the University of Utah will not allow you to wear anything with feathers, or a head dress, or anything Native American related or you will be kicked out of the stadium. Would't Washington need a similar policy? Because it seems to me that if you keep the colors and history, only remove Redskins, and allow fans to keep wearing Redskins gear... then what are we talking about? I'm defiantly on the side that Redskins needs to go, but it would seem that there are a lot of opportunities for "fans" to protest the name change and continue to wear Redskins gear and I would think there needs to be a policy to prevent that.
  6. One thing that I'm not hearing in these discussions is the possibility of dropping the team history. Such as when Cleveland moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, leaving the Browns identity behind completely. Could cutting ties to the past, and essentially starting as a new franchise, be a way to go? Because even if they have a new name, at the end of the day, aren't they still linked to that name? No one thinks of the Ravens as "the team that use to be the Browns". So would't the problem inevitably be that fans who refuse to let go of the racial slur, continue to call the team by that name if there isn't a 100% break from the team history? I once traveled to an Arkansas State football game in 2014 and, despite having changed from Indians to Red Wolves in 2008, many fans were still wearing shirts and hats with "Indians" on it. So I can imagine that if they become the "Washington (insert name)", and keep the colors, a good number of stubborn fans will still continue to wear Redskins gear in defiance of the name change. And the only way to possibly avoid it is "retiring" the Redskins for good and starting over as a "new" franchise. Am I wrong on this thought?
  7. And it shows how some of the "excess" isn't going to people who need it. (Don't worry, I'm not going to get up on my soap box... this time.)
  8. As someone who loves championship rings, and have three of my own, I still don't get why you need three for one season. Isn't one enough?
  9. Would't it be fair to say that if UNLV does indeed change their logo and mascot, that Ole Miss would be compelled to do so? If not outright forced by the SEC and NCAA? Given current conditions, I totally see the SEC dropping Ole Miss if the state doesn't change the flag and/or UNLV changes and Ole Miss doesn't. Now that I think about it, I can see the NCAA doing what they did with Native American mascots and forcing all schools with Rebels or Confederate symbols to change.
  10. So why is it that UNLV is the one considering the name change? Ole Miss is far more problematic, and given that both the NCAA and SEC are coming down hard on the state to change its state flag... well I'm just surprised that UNLV is ahead of Ole Miss on this. I get why UNLV is changing it, just that Ole Miss should have been first. And I think that UNLV can stay the Rebels, but they need to probably change the mascot into some sort of animal. But yeah... Ole Miss won't be the Rebels much longer.
  11. Same here! I think bowl sponsors are trying to outdo each other on the most ridiculous names.
  12. New Mexico State has a new secondary logo.
  13. I don't understand the hate for the Rams uniforms. They're rather simple, not flashy or complicated, bright, and they look like the rams. The only comment I have is that I wish they would use yellow pants on the road, but they are otherwise great.
  14. For the college championship, they used a modified CFP logo for a patch.