Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 7, 2020, 8:35 am
Has anybody ever signed a 10 year contract before in the NFL?
Mike Vick did a 10 year deal with the Falcons back in 2004 at the peak of his powers.
The next longest i think was Tyron Smith signing for 8 years with Dallas off his rookie deal
The NFL website has an article that says just that. McNabb signed a 12 yr deal, Vick, Farve, Bledsloe and Culpepper all 10, Smith 8.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 7, 2020, 8:35 am
Has anybody ever signed a 10 year contract before in the NFL?
Mike Vick did a 10 year deal with the Falcons back in 2004 at the peak of his powers.
The next longest i think was Tyron Smith signing for 8 years with Dallas off his rookie deal
Not the ideal precedent for Chiefs.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 7, 2020, 8:35 am
Has anybody ever signed a 10 year contract before in the NFL?
Mike Vick did a 10 year deal with the Falcons back in 2004 at the peak of his powers.
The next longest i think was Tyron Smith signing for 8 years with Dallas off his rookie deal
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 7, 2020, 8:35 am
Has anybody ever signed a 10 year contract before in the NFL?
Mike Vick did a 10 year deal with the Falcons back in 2004 at the peak of his powers.
The next longest i think was Tyron Smith signing for 8 years with Dallas off his rookie deal
The NFL website has an article that says just that. McNabb signed a 12 yr deal, Vick, Farve, Bledsloe and Culpepper all 10, Smith 8.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 7, 2020, 8:35 am
Has anybody ever signed a 10 year contract before in the NFL?
Mike Vick did a 10 year deal with the Falcons back in 2004 at the peak of his powers.
The next longest i think was Tyron Smith signing for 8 years with Dallas off his rookie deal
Not the ideal precedent for Chiefs.
Sub optimal to say the least
TBF, Mahomes doesnt exactly look like a animal fights type of guy. Not that there arent 503mill other things he could get into
Interesting looking back at that Vick deal. After it they got 2 seasons out of him before the dog fight conviction, neither of which were winning seasons.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
McNabb signed his deal in 2002, between 2003-2009 he went 69-42-1, 5 play off seasons, 3 division titles, made the NFC championship game twice, super bowl once
But was was traded prior to the 2010 season, meaning he only saw 7 years of that 12 year deal.
Hard to imagine the Mahomes deal going the way of Vick or McNabb, but then at the time they signed people probably never dreamed those guys would be where they were 7 years later.
Matt wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 5:57 am
The Skins are no more...
Keanu and his Washington Sentinels, here we come
Not surprised. That one's been a topic for a very long time. The recent BLM movement has proven the catalyst. I'm far from a woke virtue signaller but still find that name pretty inappropriate to be honest.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Matt wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 5:57 am
The Skins are no more...
Keanu and his Washington Sentinels, here we come
Not surprised. That one's been a topic for a very long time. The recent BLM movement has proven the catalyst. I'm far from a woke virtue signaller but still find that name pretty inappropriate to be honest.
Me too. But they defended it for so long that Im still a little surprised they have finally caved.
Matt wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 5:57 am
The Skins are no more...
Keanu and his Washington Sentinels, here we come
Not surprised. That one's been a topic for a very long time. The recent BLM movement has proven the catalyst. I'm far from a woke virtue signaller but still find that name pretty inappropriate to be honest.
Agreed.
Most reasonable people know that name is a racial slur and it was not gone soon enough.
Funny that only when sponsors ramped up and Nike removed merch from their stores etc did Dan Snyder act. Speaks volumes about the character of that man.
In some "Not all heroes wear capes" news, some realtor in Virginia saw the way this headed and about 10 days ago filed for TM's on virtually every possible option and is now quite rightly extorting this rich, belligerent racist of an owner for his preferred name.
So shouts to Philip Martin McCaulay, i salute you. You are an american hero, and i hope you take Dan for at least 100 mil, that prick can definitely afford it
Matt wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 5:57 am
The Skins are no more...
Keanu and his Washington Sentinels, here we come
Not surprised. That one's been a topic for a very long time. The recent BLM movement has proven the catalyst. I'm far from a woke virtue signaller but still find that name pretty inappropriate to be honest.
Agreed.
Most reasonable people know that name is a racial slur and it was not gone soon enough.
Funny that only when sponsors ramped up and Nike removed merch from their stores etc did Dan Snyder act. Speaks volumes about the character of that man.
In some "Not all heroes wear capes" news, some realtor in Virginia saw the way this headed and about 10 days ago filed for TM's on virtually every possible option and is now quite rightly extorting this rich, belligerent racist of an owner for his preferred name.
So shouts to Philip Martin McCaulay, i salute you. You are an american hero, and i hope you take Dan for at least 100 mil, that prick can definitely afford it
I think the run away leaders in the club house are Warriors and Redtails
I think Dan and Ron Riveina are going to want to honour the military somehow because that's just sort of who they are as people.
I would go with Redtails.
It would allow them to basically shift seamlessly, because the uniform, colour scheme, fight song etc all can basically stay as is, except you replace the slur with "Redtails"
The Redtails were WWII Tuskegee Airmen, and were by in large minority military aviators, so it would be a nice pivot to go from an obvious slur to something that actually celebrates a minority group and their achievements.
Botman wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 10:50 am
I think the run away leaders in the club house are Warriors and Redtails
I think Dan and Ron Riveina are going to want to honour the military somehow because that's just sort of who they are as people.
I would go with Redtails.
It would allow them to basically shift seamlessly, because the uniform, colour scheme, fight song etc all can basically stay as is, except you replace the slur with "Redtails"
The Redtails were WWII Tuskegee Airmen, and were by in large minority military aviators, so it would be a nice pivot to go from an obvious slur to something that actually celebrates a minority group and their achievements.
I think they'll go with Warriors.
Yeah, seen the Redtail talk. I agree, would be a perfect shift.
Warriors is a bit meh TBH, but again, means little change for logo etc.
Thoughts on the NHL team having to do anything about theirs? Coz its a ripoff, but at least blackhawks is an ok representation
Botman wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 10:50 am
I think the run away leaders in the club house are Warriors and Redtails
I think Dan and Ron Riveina are going to want to honour the military somehow because that's just sort of who they are as people.
I would go with Redtails.
It would allow them to basically shift seamlessly, because the uniform, colour scheme, fight song etc all can basically stay as is, except you replace the slur with "Redtails"
The Redtails were WWII Tuskegee Airmen, and were by in large minority military aviators, so it would be a nice pivot to go from an obvious slur to something that actually celebrates a minority group and their achievements.
I think they'll go with Warriors.
The poll was a bit loaded by the look of it. Here's the results:
Warriors 23%
RedTails 28%
Hogs 12%
Generals 6%
Senators 3%
Redhawks 8%
Other 20%
A couple of decent options and several that are obviously a pisstake. Washing Generals would be a classic.
Why don't they go with Washington Braves? It's a name that would honour the native americans instead of using a derogatory name. I'm guessing people would also find that offensive in some way.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Botman wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 10:50 am
I think the run away leaders in the club house are Warriors and Redtails
I think Dan and Ron Riveina are going to want to honour the military somehow because that's just sort of who they are as people.
I would go with Redtails.
It would allow them to basically shift seamlessly, because the uniform, colour scheme, fight song etc all can basically stay as is, except you replace the slur with "Redtails"
The Redtails were WWII Tuskegee Airmen, and were by in large minority military aviators, so it would be a nice pivot to go from an obvious slur to something that actually celebrates a minority group and their achievements.
I think they'll go with Warriors.
The poll was a bit loaded by the look of it. Here's the results:
Warriors 23%
RedTails 28%
Hogs 12%
Generals 6%
Senators 3%
Redhawks 8%
Other 20%
A couple of decent options and several that are obviously a pisstake. Washing Generals would be a classic.
Why don't they go with Washington Braves? It's a name that would honour the native americans instead of using a derogatory name. I'm guessing people would also find that offensive in some way.
Isnt there a Braves in baseball? But yes, it would work.
Redtails does the same, and is unique.
Some other places do things a little differently than Dan
Like the Seminoles in CFB have an agreement in place with the Seminole tribe, and they provide a huge amount of funding, and they do culturally appropriate celebrations of that culture etc and everyone is happy. I know the Indians in MLB are likely going to change.
I think the Blackhawk's are going to be OK too because it is honouring a legendary figure in native american history, and there doesnt seem to be a big push to get them to change... though their time may come.
I mean it also helps that the chiefs, indians, blackhawks etc are maybe in somewhats cultural appropriation but they are not actually slurs like the term "Redskin" is, which is a key difference. It's, to borrow a phrase common these days "problematic" for someone people, where as i think the term "Redskin" is rightly scene as not problematic but actively offensive.
But these are indeed interesting times so i wouldnt shock me ONE bit if in 5 years time, the Seminoles, blackhawks, chiefs, indians and all culture appropriation of native americans are completely scrubbed from the sportsphere.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 11:02 am
A couple of decent options and several that are obviously a pisstake. Washing Generals would be a classic.
Im not a religious man but im praying nightly to 3-4 different gods that this dumb **** goes with the Generals.
My god, i'd dine out on that for YEARS
Botman wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 11:06 am
Some other places do things a little differently than Dan
Like the Seminoles in CFB have an agreement in place with the Seminole tribe, and they provide a huge amount of funding, and they do culturally appropriate celebrations of that culture etc and everyone is happy. I know the Indians in MLB are likely going to change.
I think the Blackhawk's are going to be OK too because it is honouring a legendary figure in native american history, and there doesnt seem to be a big push to get them to change... though their time may come.
I mean it also helps that the chiefs, indians, blackhawks etc are maybe in somewhats cultural appropriation but they are not actually slurs like the term "Redskin" is, which is a key difference. It's, to borrow a phrase common these days "problematic" for someone people, where as i think the term "Redskin" is rightly scene as not problematic but actively offensive.
But these are indeed interesting times so i wouldnt shock me ONE bit if in 5 years time, the Seminoles, blackhawks, chiefs, indians and all culture appropriation of native americans are completely scrubbed from the sportsphere.
Id have said Chiefs = Warriors. Same same. No worries there.
Indians... well, that potentially a problem. Coz its not a designation like Warrior or Chief, its a race.
Blackhawks, as you said, honours a person/ tribe. You could easily change the logo to a bird and change little else if you really had too.
Botman wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 10:50 am
I think the run away leaders in the club house are Warriors and Redtails
I think Dan and Ron Riveina are going to want to honour the military somehow because that's just sort of who they are as people.
I would go with Redtails.
It would allow them to basically shift seamlessly, because the uniform, colour scheme, fight song etc all can basically stay as is, except you replace the slur with "Redtails"
The Redtails were WWII Tuskegee Airmen, and were by in large minority military aviators, so it would be a nice pivot to go from an obvious slur to something that actually celebrates a minority group and their achievements.
I think they'll go with Warriors.
The poll was a bit loaded by the look of it. Here's the results:
Warriors 23%
RedTails 28%
Hogs 12%
Generals 6%
Senators 3%
Redhawks 8%
Other 20%
A couple of decent options and several that are obviously a pisstake. Washing Generals would be a classic.
Why don't they go with Washington Braves? It's a name that would honour the native americans instead of using a derogatory name. I'm guessing people would also find that offensive in some way.
Isnt there a Braves in baseball? But yes, it would work.
Redtails does the same, and is unique.
Yeah, would stuff up merchandising. Think these pro sports teams in the USA avoid such conflicts.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 11:31 am
Golden State Warriors might therefore put the kybosh on that one.
Yeah i think it probably helps that they're on opposite sides of the country (a bit like the SF Giants and NY Giants) but it'll certainly be a factor they'll take into account
I really think the Redtails is the best option but i dont see Snyder who thumbed his nose at those begging him to change the name until finally the corporate money came for him, going with a nickname that lionizes minority groups... i think he probably feels very aggrieved by being forced into this name change and the last thing he wants to do is further placate these people... so i do think they're going to go with something that is ultimately less cool and interesting like the Warriors or Monuments
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 14, 2020, 11:31 am
Golden State Warriors might therefore put the kybosh on that one.
Yeah i think it probably helps that they're on opposite sides of the country (a bit like the SF Giants and NY Giants) but it'll certainly be a factor they'll take into account
I really think the Redtails is the best option but i dont see Snyder who thumbed his nose at those begging him to change the name until finally the corporate money came for him, going with a nickname that lionizes minority groups... i think he probably feels very aggrieved by being forced into this name change and the last thing he wants to do is further placate these people... so i do think they're going to go with something that is ultimately less cool and interesting like the Warriors or Monuments
monuments.... how inspiring! Coolest logo and mascot ever!
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 16, 2020, 11:05 am
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
Doesnt really roll off the tongue. However, it suggests that even Redtails could be an issue
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 16, 2020, 11:05 am
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
Doesnt really roll off the tongue. However, it suggests that even Redtails could be an issue
Correct. It reduces the Tuskegee Airmen to a mascot. Now have to go through a list of options where being a mascot is not beneath them.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 16, 2020, 11:05 am
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
Doesnt really roll off the tongue. However, it suggests that even Redtails could be an issue
Correct. It reduces the Tuskegee Airmen to a mascot. Now have to go through a list of options where being a mascot is not beneath them.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 16, 2020, 11:05 am
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
Doesnt really roll off the tongue. However, it suggests that even Redtails could be an issue
Correct. It reduces the Tuskegee Airmen to a mascot. Now have to go through a list of options where being a mascot is not beneath them.
Monuments it is
Monuments > Mascots so no. About the only option based on that premise is Washington Senators.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Northern Raider wrote: ↑July 16, 2020, 11:05 am
Sotry today that The Navajo Nation was promoting the idea that they should change the name to Washington Code Talkers to honour the Navajos that were used in WW2 for radio communications. Apparently that then got backlash saying "the name reduced Indigenous people to a mascot" so they have rescinded the request.
Shows how hard it is to to find something that somebody won't find offensive. Stupid name for a sports team anyway.
Doesnt really roll off the tongue. However, it suggests that even Redtails could be an issue
Correct. It reduces the Tuskegee Airmen to a mascot. Now have to go through a list of options where being a mascot is not beneath them.
Monuments it is
Monuments > Mascots so no. About the only option based on that premise is Washington Senators.