Washington Redskins will NEVER change name

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Well thats just psychotic. First we are going to ignore that you are insulted by our team's name then if it changes we are going to kill you because you were offended in the first place?

---

You're expecting reason from people who do this:

http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-cont...8251328672.jpg

http://blu.stb.s-msn.com/i/AD/54F4D6...EE705AF1AB.jpg

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2011/0616...helmsk_600.jpg

Because their team won/lost?

Is there a discussion going on in this thread about the danger of rioting from a name change? I thought that was joking at first but now I'm beginning to think it's seriously being presented as a reason not to change the name.

Ew. The chick in that third pic has a frontbutt. So nasty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

Is there a discussion going on in this thread about the danger of rioting from a name change? I thought that was joking at first but now I'm beginning to think it's seriously being presented as a reason not to change the name.

---

I don't know if it's being discussed as a reason against the name change and I was mostly joking in my replies but as I said earlier, who knows what will set fans off? If an alien visited us tomorrow and we explained sports and fans to them he would probably think fans would celebrate by hugging and high fiving after a win, not torching cars and assaulting police officers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

No. If BP changes their logo, who is going to notice? You? If they do are you going to stop buying gas at the gas station because of it? No.

---

Since you ask, BP's market share reached a plurality in 2003 (after they introduced the new logo in 2001) then gradually declined (as they kept it).

Quote:

---

If your favorite basketball team changed their logo to a pink and purple fairy would you buy that team's products anymore? Could you stand to watch them play a game in those jerseys?

---

Allow me to educate you on something, Terry. This is what's called a "straw man" argument. When you make a "straw man", you purposefully exaggerate the opponent's position until it is totally unrelated. This "straw man" is a type of "fallacy". Washington has many options besides racial slurs and fairies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm

Since you ask, BP's market share reached a plurality in 2003 (after they introduced the new logo in 2001) then gradually declined (as they kept it)

---

So you're agreeing with me then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm

Allow me to educate you on something, Terry. This is what's called a "straw man" argument. When you make a "straw man", you purposefully exaggerate the opponent's position until it is totally unrelated. This "straw man" is a type of "fallacy". Washington has many options besides racial slurs and fairies.

---

Actually this would be a "false dichotomy", get your fallacies straight!

And answer the question.

But I'll give you another scenario. Let's say your favorite basketball team had the best logo/name in the world...no, the universe! Literally, it was just the best, no doubt about it. By definition any change to the logo/name would be worse than the previous logo/name.

Now you know what the owner of the Redskins is going through. No matter what he'll lose.

By the definition of not using racial slurs, the Washington name change would be an improvement. Therefore your argument is invalid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm

Therefore your argument is invalid.

---

Your face is invalid!

If the number of Redskins fans who want to keep the name is more than the number of Native Americans who want to change it, then the name stands, right? Democracy, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackWhisper

Ew. The chick in that third pic has a frontbutt. So nasty.

---

I think that's a dude. I think.