Sports

[gardenman]

@teganslaw 

Most of the time when the assistant coaches follow a new head coach it's because they get a bump up the coaching ladder, and they know/trust the old guy more than whoever comes in to replace him.

When a new DC comes into Indy he'll want "his guys" as assistants and that can leave the existing coaches in a bad spot. As coaching slots fill, the job opportunities for those getting axed later get fewer and fewer. It's smarter to follow the guy offering a sure job than hope the new guy above you will keep you.

If the Colts hire Jim Schwartz as their new DC, he'll want to bring in the guys he knows from Detroit, Philly, and Tennessee (his previous stops) to fill out his staff. If you're a holdover from the old DC, the odds are you won't be one of "his guys" and you'll be replaced once the new guy comes in. 

It's smarter for an assistant coach to take the sure job than hope they can hang onto the old job. Assistant coaches make on average around $400,000 a year (some much less, some much more) so taking a sure new job beats hoping and praying you can keep the old one.

[stevieb]

@Spurt  You know I'm not much of a fan, but have to say I think 'Commanders' is just meh... Pretty much like everything else about this once proud and succesful franchise. ESPN ran an article that the team has a new name but the same old problem: Snyder runs the team... My preference would have been to see the team sold, moved and perhaps somewhere down the road start from scratch... I don't hate 'Commanders' but I don't like it either and quite honestly, there isn't much you can do with it, especially visually... They might just as well have kept WFT, at least it was sort of different...

[stevieb]

---

@gardenman wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but polls done on the former WFT/Commanders name showed that only 9% of Native Americans polled found it offensive, 90% had no issue with it at all, and some found it to be a positive reflection on them. The most commonly used word to describe the name among Native Americas was "proud."  It's not like everyone hated the name. Not even the majority. Most were proud of the name and didn't want it changed. If you did a poll today on the name "Commanders" you would likely find it offended more than 9% of the respondents and few would say they were proud of the name. What's done is done though. 

---

Once again, I think this was more a matter of the few telling the many they should be offended rather than the many actually being offended.

[stevieb]

---

@Caaareful Shopper wrote:

---

@gardenman wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but polls done on the former WFT/Commanders name showed that only 9% of Native Americans polled found it offensive, 90% had no issue with it at all, and some found it to be a positive reflection on them. The most commonly used word to describe the name among Native Americas was "proud."  It's not like everyone hated the name. Not even the majority. Most were proud of the name and didn't want it changed. If you did a poll today on the name "Commanders" you would likely find it offended more than 9% of the respondents and few would say they were proud of the name. What's done is done though. 

---

@gardenman  I am not at all surprised that it may depend on the specific polls or time, or region.  I read just the opposite.  In fact reading yesterday, different Native American groups were very pleased with the new name change to Commanders.   In fact, in  the Washington DC area, where I've lived for 25 years, the previous name was deemed "wildly offensive." 

---

What I read was that spokespersons for several groups were pleased. I'm not sure that equates to opinions held by the rank and file. That said, it's done and all the lamenting about the former name can now bessedly come to a halt.

[gardenman]

On other forums, there's talk of who the new mascot will be for the Commanders. I have no idea. When I hear of Commander I think of the movie "Master and Commander" featuring Russell Crowe. Do you make a cartoon version of him as your mascot? Holding a spyglass with a cutlass in his belt? I don't know. I don't think they officially revealed a mascot, so we'll have to see.

The Eagles have an eagle. The Cowboys have a cowboy. The Vikings have a viking. The Commanders have a ???

[Spurt]

---

@stevieb wrote:

@Spurt  You know I'm not much of a fan, but have to say I think 'Commanders' is just meh... Pretty much like everything else about this once proud and succesful franchise. ESPN ran an article that the team has a new name but the same old problem: Snyder runs the team... My preference would have been to see the team sold, moved and perhaps somewhere down the road start from scratch... I don't hate 'Commanders' but I don't like it either and quite honestly, there isn't much you can do with it, especially visually... They might just as well have kept WFT, at least it was sort of different...

---

@stevieb @gardenman 

Totally agree with everything you said, about the nickname, franchise, and owner..

And absolutely WFT was a much more acceptable as a name to  me too.......And I think the MOST OFFENSIVE of all is THE CURRENT OWNER who destroyed a once respectable franchise and Snyder and "his friends" are nothing but SCUMBAGS! ......It blows my mind that the NFL accepts the half empty stadium, as well as the conduct that took place..they made Richardson sell the Panthers but not Snyder....rather curious.....🙄

But what i think a columnist said was very true....if they get rid of Snyder, the spotlight might just start pointing the finger at some of the other owner's conduct..Just look at what might be uncovered....For example, the Patriot's Kraft escaped by a technicality (no pun intended)...that and his son actually runs the operation or so we're told...

I know a city in South Texas that has been trying to get an NFL team for some time ---the Washington team needs a change of sceneray--- a new owner, new city, and yet another new nicknamw and eager NFL fans who would love to support them---it fits the bill!!! ...Only another scumbag owner, Jerry Jones, stands in the way!!! Gee where is San Antonio's Billionaire Red McCombs when we need him....he said he and his wife, his children and grandchildren are all set moneywise for life....so any extra cash is ready to be spent!!!...(he was even the Vikings owner for a brief time, but they wouldnt listen when he told people they needed a new stadium so he re-sold it and made another fortune...and guess what...the Vikings DID eventually build a new stadium....shouldve listened to Red....he was right!) ....Yep smart man.....kinda like the one you wish the NFL had as an owner...just sayin! 

[Spurt]

---

@stevieb wrote:

---

@gardenman wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but polls done on the former WFT/Commanders name showed that only 9% of Native Americans polled found it offensive, 90% had no issue with it at all, and some found it to be a positive reflection on them. The most commonly used word to describe the name among Native Americas was "proud."  It's not like everyone hated the name. Not even the majority. Most were proud of the name and didn't want it changed. If you did a poll today on the name "Commanders" you would likely find it offended more than 9% of the respondents and few would say they were proud of the name. What's done is done though. 

---

Once again, I think this was more a matter of the few telling the many that they should be offended rather than them many actually being offended.

---

@stevieb @gardenman 

And Im thinking of one person in particular that led that charge.... she resides in the qwapital area and I wont say any more..)

[Spurt]

---

@stevieb wrote:

---

@Caaareful Shopper wrote:

---

@gardenman wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but polls done on the former WFT/Commanders name showed that only 9% of Native Americans polled found it offensive, 90% had no issue with it at all, and some found it to be a positive reflection on them. The most commonly used word to describe the name among Native Americas was "proud."  It's not like everyone hated the name. Not even the majority. Most were proud of the name and didn't want it changed. If you did a poll today on the name "Commanders" you would likely find it offended more than 9% of the respondents and few would say they were proud of the name. What's done is done though. 

---

@gardenman  I am not at all surprised that it may depend on the specific polls or time, or region.  I read just the opposite.  In fact reading yesterday, different Native American groups were very pleased with the new name change to Commanders.   In fact, in  the Washington DC area, where I've lived for 25 years, the previous name was deemed "wildly offensive." 

---

What I read was that spokespersons for several groups were pleased. I'm not sure that equates to opinions held by the rank and file. That said, it's done and all the lamenting about the former name can now bessedly come to a halt.

---

@stevieb @Caaareful Shopper @gardenman 

Well not actually---yes a certain group was pleased with the CHANGE but the majority of fans were NOT PLEASED WITH THE SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT-a contigeny of long time rank and file fans on Twitter state they will continue to use the name of Redskins....if the new name had been one of the fan favorites they might have reconsidered their position...but then the broadcast was made and it didnt sit well with so many....

[Spurt]

---

@gardenman wrote:

On other forums, there's talk of who the new mascot will be for the Commanders. I have no idea. When I hear of Commander I think of the movie "Master and Commander" featuring Russell Crowe. Do you make a cartoon version of him as your mascot? Holding a spyglass with a cutlass in his belt? I don't know. I don't think they officially revealed a mascot, so we'll have to see.

The Eagles have an eagle. The Cowboys have a cowboy. The Vikings have a viking. The Commanders have a ???

---

@gardenman 

Its a quandray how can you come up with a mascot with a name like that and still be "policially correct"  you cant come up with something like a person dressed like a "soldier" that might call to mind--- resurrection, rebellion.....not acceptable......🤔

BTW why does KC have a wolf mascot....never understood that....I used to think it was a rat until a KC fan enlightened me....but why a wolf....

And overall I think the nicknames of the DC/MD/VA sports teams are amongst the WORST ---

Lets talk NBA who in the heck came up with the name of "Bullets" of all things---the replacement was not much better---"Wizards" really?!?!?!? How is this acceptable???? It calls to mind the occult so Im surprised groups have not risen up in protest over that....oh.but I suppose Harry Potter fans are pleased.....

Nationals....i.e. Nats.....all that comes to my mind is GNATS.....pesky bugs

Capitals---DC is U.S. capital but how does this also tie in MD/VA?????  and what is their mascot???

@gardenman 

At least Philly did a little bit better...normal mascot-Eagles, city history ---76ers.....dont know about Flyers or Phillies kinda lame....🤔

Texas tends to go "old west"---Spurs, Mavericks, Texas Rangers, Texans, ...except for Houston and MLB and NBA .and then the switch to honor their modern industry Astros for Astronauts for NASA's Mission Control....and NBA stays with that idea with Rockets ....what can you expect from a city built over a swamp not many choices come to mind---Titans used to be the OILERS before they moved to Tennessee....

[teganslaw]

Spurt, Washington could have had a worse name. One poster said that they should be called the "Washington Snyders." 

Dolphins owner Stephen Ross denies Flores' accusations about offering $100,000 to lose games. He claims that they are malicious attacks and are false. This isn't over yet. 

The Giants are signing Chiefs' QB coach Mike Kafka for OC. Can Daniel Jones become another Mahomes? I doubt it, but Kafka might be a good choice.