2015 Point & Laugh At The Washington Franchise Thread

[PhillyPhreak54]

ES is gonna be pissssed...they were all about Fangio and Donatell and they did not want Barry.

Isn't he the dude who drove through the Wendy's drive-thru drunk and naked?

[SD]

ES is gonna be pissssed...they were all about Fangio and Donatell and they did not want Barry.

Isn't he the dude who drove through the Wendy's drive-thru drunk and naked?

Him and Mcgloughan will become fast friends

[PhillyPhreak54]

The greatest PP guy in the NFL and awaiting HOF enshrinement Scot McCloughan?!

[MDS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8cA-bta1ww

cool ad but it wont last because they dont have permission to use the footage

[BigEd76]

"Dear Premium Club Member,

"The Washington Redskins thank you for your continued loyalty and support. Redskins fans are the best in the NFL and we greatly appreciate your dedication over the years."

"Head Coach Jay Gruden, new General Manager Scot McCloughan, and Defensive Coordinator Joe Barry will lead a nucleus of Ryan Kerrigan, DeSean Jackson, plus Pro Bowlers Trent Williams and Alfred Morris. The Redskins are poised to rebound next season!"

No mention of RG

[Eagaholic]

They don't need him to win Super Bowls anyway

[PhillyPhreak54]

http://blacksportsonline.com/home/2015/02/fan-spends-1500-on-used-rg3-cast-so-he-can-smell-it/

Wtffffffffff

[Eagaholic]

RG ought to start saving his jock straps. He'll need to have some way to bring in money when he retires.

[PhillyPhreak54]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2015/02/18/mike-shanahan-blames-daniel-snyder-for-rgiiis-infatuation-with-being-an-aaron-rodgers-type-guy/

[BigEd76]

AJ Smith is out

[Rome]

McLEAN, Va. (AP) -- A federal government decision to cancel the Washington taterskins' trademark because it may be disparaging infringes on free-speech rights and unfairly singles the team out, lawyers argued in court papers filed Monday.

The team wants to overturn a decision last year by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel the taterskins' trademark on the grounds that it may be offensive to Native Americans. But the team's attorneys say the law barring registration of disparaging trademarks is unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

The trademark board's decision unfairly singles out the taterskins ''for disfavored treatment based solely on the content of its protected speech, interfering with the ongoing public discourse over the taterskins' name by choosing sides and cutting off the debate. This the U.S. Constitution does not tolerate,'' the lawyers write in their brief.

The lawyers argue that the government has no business deciding that a name such as taterskins is disparaging and undeserving of trademark protection while deeming other names such as Braves to be content-neutral and allowable for trademarks.

The team still disputes that taterskins is a disparaging term and has asked the judge to rule in the team's favor based on that argument. But the court papers filed Monday focus on the constitutionality of the law that bans registration of disparaging trademarks.

The government has intervened in the civil lawsuit to defend the law's constitutionality. In similar cases, government lawyers have argued that the law doesn't ban disparaging speech; it just denies the protection of a federal trademark to those words. For instance, the taterskins would not be prohibited from calling themselves the taterskins just because they lose the trademark case - they would just lose some of the legal protections that go along with a registered trademark.

The team says free-speech protections should be understood more broadly. The team says the First Amendment can be violated by government restrictions that burden speech even if they don't ban it outright. The team argues that canceling a trademark represents such a burden, especially for a football club that has used the name since 1933.

A lawyer for the group of Native Americans that sought cancellation of the trademark did not return a call seeking comment Tuesday.

The team also argues that canceling the trademark after decades of lawful registration amounts due a denial of due process because of the difficulty in trying to defend itself so many years after the fact.

A hearing on the issue is scheduled for May 5.

Pure, unadulterated scum.

@ Todd... this is the worst farging franchise on the planet to play for no other reason than this.   The Phillies aren't even in the same universe as this pile of shtein.

[MDS]

no nfl player gives a flying farg what the team name is

[General_Failure]

I wish more people cared about the feelings of the players when it comes to this.

[ice grillin you]

i actually agree with the teams argument in this case....the problem is it shouldnt even be in the courts...the farging nfl/goodell should have made them change it a long time ago....but goodell is best buds with danni and a republican pos

whats sickening too is how silent the supposed progressive owners in the nfl have been on this...shame on the rooneys and mara's and even lurie...i mean the rooneys have a friggin rule named after them that was created to help minority hiring...but a team in their league has a racist name and crickets

[Rome]

Goodell probably slapped the owners with a gag rule.  He's a POS money-whoring shyster who couldn't begin to care if a bunch of natives are upset.  The R3dskins make the league a shteinload of money.  They have to appear to be fighting the good fight to appease the do-gooders, but down deep, they couldn't care less.   shtein, they don't even care about their own players ending up dribbling cripples... Why would they care about Injuns?