Pondslider
-
Posts
563 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pondslider
-
-
Bridgewater is the one to tank for anyway.
-
Not to my knowledge but I was thinking they ought to do so for the scrimmage on Monday
I'm guessing a big part of it is not wanting to give access to other teams
The Bills are charging for the night practices. Not a chance they'll make it free online.
-
Patriots unveil BOLD NEW LOGO!*
*Same logo with new word mark that doesn't look that different from every other team's word mark.
-
Even good WRs don't get traded for all that much. Easley, who has proven nothing in 3 years, would get a 7th at best.
-
That's your opinion... cool... I understand. However, to throw around "bigot" and "stupid" isn't exactly the way to proving any kind of point.
Fair enough. If you don't see what's wrong with an NFL team using a racial slur to describe a race of people that the US committed genocide against as its nickname then at best you're ignorant, and at worst you're willfully so.
-
And a majority of Americans disagree with you.... the name is staying... tough.
It's wrong no matter how many people say they don't want it changed. Even if nothing changes, it's still wrong.
-
89% of Americans are bigots, then.
Or at least stupid.
-
It's time to build all new for the Bills... these renovations are nothing more than lipstick on a pig.
Looks like they managed to put all their fans in the stadium too.
-
After that 300k birthday party, I'm thinking it was around a 2
Come on. You only turn 29 once and then again every year for the rest of your life.
-
well.....if your sticking with Fitzpatrick.......then Welker is EXACTLY the kind of receiver you need.
Fitzpatrick is not accurate enough for Welker. Part of Welker's success is getting the ball where he needs it either in stride or where he can make a quick move and get upfield. Fitzpatrick is not good at that. Paying a lot for old beat up Welker when the Patriots don't want him is a bad idea.
-
The name is applied to the team, isn't it? Do you think that its owner would have just as readily named it the "Washington Wankers"?
It's a dehumanizing name from a time when the perception of Native Americans was that they had been murderous savages without culture.
-
It makes no sense to give a derogatory name to a team that's intended to represent a major metropolitan area and the people who live in it and, therefore, the name "redskins" actually denotes respect for Native Americans in this context.
LOL.
-
Yeah. I think Harbaugh's plan was to try and draw the flag and get a fresh set of downs to score and run the clock down.
-
If Crabtree runs upfield instead of into the defender, there's a parade in SF today.
Crabtree was probably instructed to try and run through the CB figuring either they'd get the call and a 1st down or they'd catch the ball and get the TD. Neither happened. I still blame the coach for calling those passing plays inside the 5.
-
Again. Agree to disagree. The refs are not in position to analyze things like you are doing. If it is a penalty, they have to throw it.
But the point is even if they had thrown it the result of the play is exactly the same. Your real argument is that the Ravens shouldn't have held on the play which you can believe if you want, but it was good coaching.
-
To be fair, it was a blatant hold and it cost SF the game. I think even Jauron might have shown emotion under those circumstances.
Harbaugh's ****ty playcalling after they got inside the 5 cost them the game. Refs missed calls all day. Some even benefitted the 49ers.
-
Read the previous post. I'm not speaking particularly to the Rooney rule (wasn't even my post). I'm talking about the mindset. You seem like an obedient little lap dog who is happy to take what his master deems him worthy of. For that you deserve a cookie. Good boy.
Thanks man. It's good to know there are a few who still get it.
Haha. So instead of refuting what I said and explaining how the Rooney rule and holidays trees restrict personal freedom of choice you are just going to dismiss the argument.
I will say in regards to Just In Atlanta' s list of scary things that obviously nobody here is in favor off censoring books and books being banned by specific school boards is wrong but as far as I know the government isn't burning books so we can drop the Nazi bull ****.
Also all of this is so far removed from the subject of whether Redskins is derogatory term or not that its really just clouded what should have been a pretty simple point. Changing the name of a sports franchise because it is archaic and embarrassing restricts nobody' s rights or freedoms.
-
That's a good boy. Here's a cookie. Good boy.
So nothing then?
-
How does the Rooney Rule limit or take away freedom of choice?
-
You're really asking me how political correctness has taken away freedom and free choice?
California mandating gay history. Colorodo mandating that private daycare centers must carry dolls that represent at least three different races. A RI town banning daddy-daughter dances. Schools calling Christmas trees holiday trees. Municipalities banning Nativity scenes. Universities banning the word freshman. Universities banning certain words and requiring that students take inclusion training. Kids getting expelled for hugs and drawing guns. Censorship of various books. The Rooney Rule.
Do you want more?
None of those take away freedom of choice. Sorry the world is changing. Seems to be pretty scary for you.
-
Dude, most of the Indian tribes that were here were pretty savage. That's just how it was. This Disney image we have of peaceloving agrarian saints being at one with the land ignores the brutal reality that existed. If you're arguing that it's unfair to the modern day decendents of those tribes (although most of us have some Indian blood in us) I suppose that's a fair argument, but the image isn't necessarily a false one when taken in an historical context.
They were no more savage than the Europeans. History is written by the winners and the Native Americans lost.
P.S.
This Disney image?
-
Take the Sologne "Circle The Wagons" its credited to Western Pioneers circling their wagons together to fight off attacking Indians, so shouldn't the Bills stop using it
And I am not shouting down anyone, I am are just point out facts & so are others, nobody has to agree with each other but it be cool if we could be civil about it, I see other opinion, all I am saying "Where does it end"
Have the Bills ever used that as an official slogan? It doesn't matter anyway because its not a derogatory term.
-
I think Redskins came from the savage image of the Indians/Native Americans that existed in popular culture until just a few decades ago. It's dehumanizing.
-
When someone gives a crap about the hideous Cleveland Indians mascot/logo, I'll take complaints about the Redskins name a lot more seriously.
Funniest in this exercise in PC - people complaining about the Florida State name and mascot, and the actual Seminoles tribe telling the complainers to shut up.
neither of those examples is what the discussion is about, but for the record Chief Wahoo needs to go too. Nobody here is complaining about Florida State.
The only reasons anyone can give for not changing the highly derogatory name are tradition and some imaginary line in the sand against the "pc police" and frankly both of those reasons are pretty terrible. You don't change the name because it's not pc or any other buzzword. You don't change it because the original owners were racist or fans that support it are racist, because I don't believe either of those is true. You change the name because it's a relic from a time in our history that we have moved past. We are better than that. Or we should be. You change the name because it's the right thing to do.
Marrone's sideline gear
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by Pondslider
The only coach to lead the Bills to a Super Bowl win.
Too bad he became kind of a racist jerk when he retired to be a Texas high school coach.