MLB Changes 2017

[MJD7]

I would agree with the sentiment that what Florida State did is probably the best way to go with this, by receiving the approval and collaboration of the tribe they're basing their identity off of.

 

Just out of curiousity, if the Braves and Indians were to hypothetically do this, which tribes would they work with, respectively? Would it be the Creek for Atlanta, and the Erie for Cleveland?

[larrypep]

Ah, how about them Padres unis, any updates?

[worcat]

7 hours ago, McCarthy said:

 

Which is why it would take a star player with some leverage to tell the Redskins to go sh** in a hat in order to make a difference. If RGIII*, for instance, had said "no, I'd rather not play for a year than sign with a team called the Redskins" right after they traded so much to get him then it would've been a huge statement. I understand why nobody's been willing to risk their NFL future, upset the apple cart before playing a snap in the NFL, go through the blowback, and maybe lose millions of dollars to make that statement, but I could see somebody doing it in the future. 

 

 

*In my understanding in reality RGIII took the exact opposite approach towards the nickname. 

Ah yes, only if a player could kneel in protest of the logo.

[Dynasty]

I don't know how to post Twitter messages so I'll just leave this here.

 

https://twitter.com/atf13atf/status/768547204147490816/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

[Thomas]

On 31/10/2016 at 6:22 PM, McCarthy said:

 

Which is why it would take a star player with some leverage to tell the Redskins to go sh** in a hat in order to make a difference. If RGIII*, for instance, had said "no, I'd rather not play for a year than sign with a team called the Redskins" right after they traded so much to get him then it would've been a huge statement. I understand why nobody's been willing to risk their NFL future, upset the apple cart before playing a snap in the NFL, go through the blowback, and maybe lose millions of dollars to make that statement, but I could see somebody doing it in the future. 

 

 

*In my understanding in reality RGIII took the exact opposite approach towards the nickname. 

LOL, except for disrespecting the US flag,  wife beatings, murder, and other criminal activity. 

 

Pretty sure NFL players got better (much worse) things to do then lying sleepless at night over a logo 

 

 

 

[worcat]

12 minutes ago, Thomas said:

LOL, except from disrespecting the US flag,  wife beatings, murder, and other criminal activity. 

 

Pretty sure NFL players got better (much worse) things to do then lying sleepless at night over a logo 

 

 

 

[Thomas]

Exactly, "No Timmy, you are not allowed to watch the Indians game, their logo is offensive. Switch to the football game instead , look at number 78, he is great, he just shot someone last weekend, now watch him break someone´s femur. Go 49ers!  Timmy, are you even listening to me !? 

[Sport]

11 hours ago, worcat said:

Ah yes, only if a player could kneel in protest of the logo.

 

4 hours ago, Thomas said:

LOL, except from disrespecting the US flag,  wife beatings, murder, and other criminal activity. 

 

Pretty sure NFL players got better (much worse) things to do then lying sleepless at night over a logo 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, worcat said:

 

4 hours ago, Thomas said:

Exactly, "No Timmy, you are not allowed to watch the Indians game, their logo is offensive. Switch to the football game instead , look at number 78, he is great, he just shot someone last weekend, now watch him break someone´s femur. Go 49ers!  Timmy, are you even listening to me !? 

 

You guys are so smart!!!!!!!    Nice contribution to the discourse. Really helpful. It was a hypothetical scenario. 

 

Whatever you think of Kaepernick you can't deny his stance has had an impact, gotten people talking about an issue, and at the very least, resulted in the 49ers donating a million dollars to Bay Area groups focusing on Racial issues. That's not nothing. If a player spoke out against the Redskins name or Indians logo it would speed things up and nowhere did I suggest such a thing should happen, but saying that such a thing might happen. That's all. 

 

[Dinsmore16]

5 hours ago, Thomas said:

Exactly, "No Timmy, you are not allowed to watch the Indians game, their logo is offensive. Switch to the football game instead , look at number 78, he is great, he just shot someone last weekend, now watch him break someone´s femur. Go 49ers!  Timmy, are you even listening to me !? 

My thoughts exactly.

[Gothamite]

I think that's really telling about how our society still feels about Native Americans, and how invisible they are to us.

 

If this was the logo of a club, nobody would suggest that there are more important things than getting rid of it:

 

Spoiler

 

But in pushing First Nations farther and farther to the fringes of our society, we really don't seem to give them the same consideration we afford to other human beings.

 

 

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I think that's really telling about how our society still feels about Native Americans, and how invisible they are to us.

 

If this was the logo of a club, nobody would suggest that there are more important things than getting rid of it.

 

 

But in pushing First Nations farther and farther to the fringes of our society, we really don't seem to give them the same consideration we afford to other human beings.

 

I can remember a conversation that I once had with a former friend, a guy with whom I had grown up, but who got increasingly difficult to be friends with as we got older and older.  At the time of this conversation, we were about 18 or 19.  During the conversation (the topic of which I have forgotten), this guy said, as an analogy to some point he was making, the old phrase "the only good Indian is a dead Indian".  I chided the guy; but his response to my sharp rebuke was: "What's the problem? They're extinct."

While this guy (who had embarassed me many times before and would do so again after that, until I finally ended the "friendship" a few years later) was on the extreme end of the stupid/ignorant scale, his comment differed from mainstream Americans' unconscious perceptions of Natives only in degree, not in kind.  To very many Americans, the category "Indians" essentially names an exinct group, in the same way that "Trojans" or "Romans" or "Vikings" does.  To this way of thinking, these names just represent characters from history that have no actual relevance to today's world; so the imagery associated with these groups can be freely mined for logos, for Halloween costumes, or for rhetorical flourishes as metaphors.

 

By contrast, we can be sure that no American has the perception that black people are extinct; and this is why the caricature that you presented above strikes people in the U.S. very differently from the caricature of Chief Wahoo.  Decent people are disgusted by that black caricature; racists are tickled by it; in either case, all people seeing that caricature understand that it depicts an existing people.  It thus has a vibrancy, and elicits some sort of an emotional response.   

But, to the mainstream American consciousness, Chief Wahoo stands alongside the Vikings' logo or the USC Trojans' logo as an abstract depiction of a people who are no longer in existence.  It is important to note that this presupposition of extinctness is not necessarily accompanied by any conscious feeling of hatred; it is there even when the conscious intention is to pay tribute to the group in question (as in the case of teams called "Vikings" and "Trojans", and as in the case of the misguided girls high school basketball team in Iowa with the nickname "Indians" which commissioned a poster showing the players in Native garb).  For this reason, the power of the Wahoo logo tends to go completely overlooked; indeed, this is the only reason that that logo has survived to the present day. 

Every time someone fails to acknowledge the concerns of the Native people who are hurt by the Wahoo logo, every time someone dismisses the whole issue of Native imagery and nicknames, what we have there is a reflection of the same strain of thinking that was so starkly expressed by my embarassing ex-friend when he said about Indians "they're extinct".

[Gothamite]

Well put.

[leopard88]

I feel like I just stumbled into a college classroom discussion, as opposed to reading a post on a sports logo message board . . . and I mean that in a completely serious and positive way.

 

Very well stated.

[Around the Horn]

Couldn't have said it better.

[hawk36]

17 hours ago, larrypep said:

Ah, how about them Padres unis, any updates?

Still waiting but expecting to be underwhelmed.

[OnWis97]

On 10/31/2016 at 0:22 PM, McCarthy said:

 

Which is why it would take a star player with some leverage to tell the Redskins to go sh** in a hat in order to make a difference. If RGIII*, for instance, had said "no, I'd rather not play for a year than sign with a team called the Redskins" right after they traded so much to get him then it would've been a huge statement. I understand why nobody's been willing to risk their NFL future, upset the apple cart before playing a snap in the NFL, go through the blowback, and maybe lose millions of dollars to make that statement, but I could see somebody doing it in the future. 

 

 

*In my understanding in reality RGIII took the exact opposite approach towards the nickname. 

I could see, maybe, a future free agent saying "I chose the Chargers over the Redskins because I don't like the racial slur" or "I chose the Royals over the Indians because I don't want that ridiculous logo on my hat."  

 

But most players, early in their careers don't have a lot of choice.  Even as free agents, the vast majority have minimal choice because of salaries/caps or because few teams are  not interested in their services.  I suspect there are some players that are not entirely comfortable with it but  not to the point that they'll take huge pay cuts.

 

Suppose Andrew Miller (he's gonna be a free agent, right?) said "I've enjoyed my time in Cleveland but I really cannot wear that logo any more" and then signed with the White Sox...While most fans would rip him, the team may start thinking about going faster on dumping the logo.  Again, my guess is players are like fans, most could care less and consider us weirdos "PC," a few don't love it but won't really let it impact them, and those weirdos like us don't have the luxury of viewing it from the outside.  I have no memory of a player ever saying anything about it...maybe some day one will.

[MC Buffalo]

18 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

I could see, maybe, a future free agent saying "I chose the Chargers over the Redskins because I don't like the racial slur" or "I chose the Royals over the Indians because I don't want that ridiculous logo on my hat."  

 

The only hole I see in this type of argument is that for years teams in smaller markets have had a harder time getting free agents to sign with them, because often a free agent who can pick where they want to play is going to be drawn to a larger city. Of course if a team has a winning tradition, this can compensate for market size like the Steelers. Teams like the Packers, Bills, Royals, Pirates, have to build from within, which is why it's only every decade or so (longer in some cases) that these teams have a really great team. In some cases they will OVERpay to get a top free agent who they hope will put them over the top and convince other free agents that "maybe they're building on something...."

If a couple free agents decide they prefer not to go to Cleveland because of Chief Wahoo, or Washington because of the name, it would just add those teams into the same group with small market or struggling franchises.

 

Oh and on the New Era Flag on the caps issue.... It's always been very obvious in the NHL what Stick a player uses, what Helmet he prefers wearing and who makes the team uniforms. Even go back a ways you knew Gretzky used a Titan stick and Jofa helmet. If a kid showed up in a backyard rink with a Titan Stick or Jofa helmet he felt like a pro.

With sponsor patches coming to all sports at some point, either soon (NBA) or way off. The mfr of the actual equipment getting to display their logo seems like a pretty minor indiscretion.

 

[Brummie]

The Mariners just posted this picture of a 40th anniversary patch the team will wear on their uniforms next season. No clue where on the jersey it will go. Thoughts?

[hawk36]

Just now, Brummie said:

The Mariners just posted this picture of a 40th anniversary patch the team will wear on their uniforms next season. No clue where on the jersey it will go. Thoughts?

I could do without the skyline. Like the 40th Anniversary part though.

[WSU151]

3 minutes ago, Brummie said:

The Mariners just posted this picture of a 40th anniversary patch the team will wear on their uniforms next season. No clue where on the jersey it will go. Thoughts?

 

Probably will go on the right sleeve, like most MLB anniversary patches.  Not a bad logo but not great, either.