The Cleveland Guardians

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,885
31,075
113
Margaritaville
I’m sure for some there is but not all. I think for many it’s the direction the country is going (perceived or real); the virtue signaling; the leftist media; ideas of redistributing wealth; frustration over an evolving economy that leaves many behind; technology; shaming a swath of people that have never done anything but work hard and mind their own business. Many things. So changing a team name they’ve know for 75 years isn’t really about some dumb sport; that name change is a totem for all the shit I described and so much I’ve left out
Okay, I mean obviously fear of socialism and distrust of media are not necessarily racially-motivated. So this could be a complex phenomenon. But whenever one of the issues that gets rolled up in this is an issue that could conceivably be summed up as "Those uppity (insert minority)," then it's hard to not think of race as at least a big part of it, especially when it's widespread.

Going back to my obsession with Clevelanders, if a lifelong baseball fan from Parma is mad about the name change, I get that he could hold that anger without any ill feelings toward Native Americans at all. When some conservative radio host from bumf*ck, Florida who doesn't even follow baseball gets all up in arms about it, it sounds like he's just race-baiting for ratings. Similarly, I would draw a distinction between a North-central Georgian's reaction of disgust at the idea of obliterating Stone Mountain and the same outrage from some huckster 1000 miles away who has no connection to the culture of the state. Either one could have racial motivations, but only one might genuinely be something else, something deeper.
 

mcmurtry66

Hall of Famer
Mar 14, 2019
10,685
8,530
113
Okay, I mean obviously fear of socialism and distrust of media are not necessarily racially-motivated. So this could be a complex phenomenon. But whenever one of the issues that gets rolled up in this is an issue that could conceivably be summed up as "Those uppity (insert minority)," then it's hard to not think of race as at least a big part of it, especially when it's widespread.

Going back to my obsession with Clevelanders, if a lifelong baseball fan from Parma is mad about the name change, I get that he could hold that anger without any ill feelings toward Native Americans at all. When some conservative radio host from bumf*ck, Florida who doesn't even follow baseball gets all up in arms about it, it sounds like he's just race-baiting for ratings. Similarly, I would draw a distinction between a North-central Georgian's reaction of disgust at the idea of obliterating Stone Mountain and the same outrage from some huckster 1000 miles away who has no connection to the culture of the state. Either one could have racial motivations, but only one might genuinely be something else, something deeper.
As I said there’s doubtless a racist faction but I don’t ascribe racism to it by default nor do I think it constitutes the majority of magas etc. I think it’s nostalgia - simpler times, perceived better times. The race baiters will point to racism when the reality is that for most of those folks they never give race a thought. They are far more threatened by coding than blacks/women etc
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,885
31,075
113
Margaritaville
As I said there’s doubtless a racist faction but I don’t ascribe racism to it by default nor do I think it constitutes the majority of magas etc. I think it’s nostalgia - simpler times, perceived better times. The race baiters will point to racism when the reality is that for most of those folks they never give race a thought. They are far more threatened by coding than blacks/women etc
Maybe, but don't forget that some of the people who "never give race a thought" are likely still motivated by racial concerns, and just don't realize it.
 

stollcpa

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 26, 2010
14,489
13,035
113
Not the point, but sure you knew that.
How. come you never responded to comments I posted about the Lake Erie Indigenous Council? They seemed to be pretty happy with the change. Are they just too "woke"?
Does the council actual speak for most Native Americans or are they like BLM more interested in making money for themselves? If Native Americans want them gone fine. If wanna be woke white libs like we have on here want them gone, no.
 

Bulk VanderHuge

All-American
Dec 20, 2017
8,241
9,553
113
The Southern Sun
Does the council actual speak for most Native Americans or are they like BLM more interested in making money for themselves? If Native Americans want them gone fine. If wanna be woke white libs like we have on here want them gone, no.
I'm done arguing about this. What you want and think is obviously much more important than a group of people who might be affected by the name.

Here is an interesting and entertaining story (long) about the possible origins of the Indians name, the cartoon, and Chief Wahoo. The story is even apolitical.

Enjoy.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,885
31,075
113
Margaritaville
Does the council actual speak for most Native Americans or are they like BLM more interested in making money for themselves? If Native Americans want them gone fine. If wanna be woke white libs like we have on here want them gone, no.
From polling I've seen, this is a double-edged sword:

1. Yes, most Native Americans think the team names are offensive.
2. No, it's not a priority for them, because of all the other major challenges the community faces.

So, it does appear that virtually all, if not all, NA groups that have spoken out so far have been supportive of the change. But, I think they'd be more supportive of stronger programs to battle poverty and addiction among the NA community, along with a slew of other problems far more important than a team name.
 

Bulk VanderHuge

All-American
Dec 20, 2017
8,241
9,553
113
The Southern Sun
From polling I've seen, this is a double-edged sword:

1. Yes, most Native Americans think the team names are offensive.
2. No, it's not a priority for them, because of all the other major challenges the community faces.

So, it does appear that virtually all, if not all, NA groups that have spoken out so far have been supportive of the change. But, I think they'd be more supportive of stronger programs to battle poverty and addiction among the NA community, along with a slew of other problems far more important than a team name.
Doesn't matter. Stoll, the AOWIO (Arbiter of What is Offensive) has spoken. Those "woke" NA's need to shut up so his world doesn't have to change.
 

Crayfish57

Junior
Sep 18, 2013
1,330
1,406
113
From polling I've seen, this is a double-edged sword:

1. Yes, most Native Americans think the team names are offensive.
2. No, it's not a priority for them, because of all the other major challenges the community faces.

So, it does appear that virtually all, if not all, NA groups that have spoken out so far have been supportive of the change. But, I think they'd be more supportive of stronger programs to battle poverty and addiction among the NA community, along with a slew of other problems far more important than a team name.
Maybe licensing and paying them for the use and the money go to help some of those problems would be a good thing. Cleveland would make a lot more $$ off Indians logo than Guardians.
 

Bulk VanderHuge

All-American
Dec 20, 2017
8,241
9,553
113
The Southern Sun
I'm done arguing about this. What you want and think is obviously much more important than a group of people who might be affected by the name.

Here is an interesting and entertaining story (long) about the possible origins of the Indians name, the cartoon, and Chief Wahoo. The story is even apolitical.

Enjoy.
Sorry for the self-reply, but the best part of the article is how the NA player who may have been the basis for the Chief Wahoo nickname was traded and crushed it for years with the Yankees.
Oh, Karma, thou art a DANC.
 

Courtsensetwo

Hall of Famer
Oct 16, 2004
27,489
13,411
113
Just to make it as clear as possible. There are exactly two responses to this that you should take seriously:

"I'm from Cleveland, and I'm glad they changed the name, but I think Guardians is a bad choice."

and,

"I'm from Cleveland, and I didn't want them to change the name, but at least they chose a good replacement."

If either of those narratives become widespread, then you know it's probably the right take. Any other opinion at all, especially one that doesn't start with "I'm from Cleveland," is probably just political posturing and should be discarded without thought.

Edit: Just to be extra clear, I'm only talking about whether or not Guardians is a good name. Obviously, everyone can have an opinion about whether or not the name should have been changed, even if they aren't a Clevelander.
There are a hell of a lot more people not from Cleveland than from Cleveland. Add that to the choices.

the other one that you forget which is the largest single “from ,Cleveland and will admit it.” Take is. “I hate this name but will pretend it is awesome’
 

Courtsensetwo

Hall of Famer
Oct 16, 2004
27,489
13,411
113
From polling I've seen, this is a double-edged sword:

1. Yes, most Native Americans think the team names are offensive.
2. No, it's not a priority for them, because of all the other major challenges the community faces.

So, it does appear that virtually all, if not all, NA groups that have spoken out so far have been supportive of the change. But, I think they'd be more supportive of stronger programs to battle poverty and addiction among the NA community, along with a slew of other problems far more important than a team name.
Your data is flawed in that it groups all team names together. The obvious question is about the Indians. Redskins is a different animal entirely and when you lump them in together the data is useless.
 

Lucy01

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Sep 16, 2014
10,501
5,026
113
Since they got rid of the name Indians, because it was offensive to Indians. I think Cowboy’s would be more offensive! Since the cowboys shot their dumb ass’s!
 

twenty02

Hall of Famer
Jan 28, 2011
18,125
18,106
113
Have you actually looked at the stats? They suggest otherwise.

fredgraph.png


fredgraph.png


fredgraph.png

Don't get me wrong... these are places that will never be what they once were in population or economic power. But that ended a long time ago.

Cleveland is still a dump. And I don't include them in the up and comers.

Detroit is an odd place, and is hard to pigeon hole. 2008 wrecked what was left of way over-supply of housing. But they've basically "right-sized" the place over the last decade, in many ways. It's a very weird place, but the momentum I've seen is generally postive in the last few years.

Pittsburgh is doing fine. And is a pretty decent place to live. I've enjoyed my visits there.
 

twenty02

Hall of Famer
Jan 28, 2011
18,125
18,106
113
Slow your roll. All I was saying was that, if you aren't a Clevelander, your opinion on whether or not "Guardians" is a good name means squat, and is almost certainly informed by how you felt about the name Indians. I'd bet money virtually everyone who wanted the Indians name to go will claim Guardians is a great name, and virtually everyone who wanted the Indians name to stay will claim Guardians is a terrible name. Neither side is offering an objective critique of the name; they are just reflexively responding according to their opinion on the larger issue. That's it.


My BIL is from Cleveland.... giant Cleveland fan of all the city's sports teams. He knew the Indians name was going, but absolutely hates Guardians. Apparently there were other options floated.

There's my anecdotal input.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,885
31,075
113
Margaritaville
My BIL is from Cleveland.... giant Cleveland fan of all the city's sports teams. He knew the Indians name was going, but absolutely hates Guardians. Apparently there were other options floated.

There's my anecdotal input.
That counts as one of the opinions I noted as actually valuable many posts ago.
 

Joe_Hoopsier

All-Big Ten
Dec 21, 2010
4,556
1,724
113
And jut like that, we found out the major stake holders of Cleveland base Balls are Lesbian Transvestites.
I sure hope this is the rock bottom we needed to hit as a society, before we stat healing.
 

Joe_Hoopsier

All-Big Ten
Dec 21, 2010
4,556
1,724
113
I can only imagine the normal morning breakfast country folk, at the local dinner, FINALLY being overheard bitching about how bad they are offended about that Indian baseball team. They had just had all they could take and I am sure that is what caused all of this. .

We are officially earlobe deep in stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lucy01

Lucy01

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Sep 16, 2014
10,501
5,026
113
I can only imagine the normal morning breakfast country folk, at the local dinner, FINALLY being overheard bitching about how bad they are offended about that Indian baseball team. They had just had all they could take and I am sure that is what caused all of this. .

We are officially earlobe deep in stupid.
The people that supposedly are offended never attend baseball games anyway!
 

JamieDimonsBalls

All-American
Gold Member
Jun 28, 2015
7,966
5,294
113
Don't get me wrong... these are places that will never be what they once were in population or economic power. But that ended a long time ago.

Cleveland is still a dump. And I don't include them in the up and comers.

Detroit is an odd place, and is hard to pigeon hole. 2008 wrecked what was left of way over-supply of housing. But they've basically "right-sized" the place over the last decade, in many ways. It's a very weird place, but the momentum I've seen is generally postive in the last few years.

Pittsburgh is doing fine. And is a pretty decent place to live. I've enjoyed my visits there.

I'm not suggesting that they aren't decent places to live (not my desired location), particularly given COL. But, the population declines don't seem to be slowing up per the data above. That is going to put some real economic pressure on those locales and states.
 

82hoosier

All-American
Sep 7, 2001
7,537
5,211
113
I’m concerned about Tom Hanks. Does he think he’s from Cleveland now? Does he think he really landed on Omaha beach on D-Day?
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,648
8,869
113
CoH, certainly you aren't saying "traits like self reliance and hard work" are part of a culture not shared by people of color.

Let us face it, people who are self reliant and hard working fall between the cracks everyday such as when businesses fail and health problems come into play.
Government bankruptcy laws to help folks recover from financial failures ad health care programs such as Medicaid for the less affluent are also part of a our culture.

Feeling oppressed isn't just a people of color feeling as we have white folks among us who are feeling oppressed by being marginalized. Being marginalized by a "woke" culture which has seeped into institutions such as higher learning, the media, and a major political party.
No, I’m not saying that. And I believe that all emotions and character traits do not know race. As my neuroradiologist friend often says, you can’t determine race by looking at the brain. My point was to challenge the whole concept of pigeonholing people of color as marginalized and the relatively new idea of describing “whiteness” by character traits such as being a hard worker. This is becoming the primary focus of our ideas about race and it is not just self-fulfilling for some people of any color, but it is horribly destructive of any hope of common culture.
 

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,807
2,411
113
No, I’m not saying that. And I believe that all emotions and character traits do not know race. As my neuroradiologist friend often says, you can’t determine race by looking at the brain. My point was to challenge the whole concept of pigeonholing people of color as marginalized and the relatively new idea of describing “whiteness” by character traits such as being a hard worker. This is becoming the primary focus of our ideas about race and it is not just self-fulfilling for some people of any color, but it is horribly destructive of any hope of common culture.
Call me naive, but I think we do have a common culture in many respects.

Unfortunately, all too many of us prefer to focus on our differences rather than all the values which we have in common.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,648
8,869
113
Call me naive, but I think we do have a common culture in many respects.

Unfortunately, all too many of us prefer to focus on our differences rather than all the values which we have in common.
I agree with both points. Our common culture gave us a social, economic, and political system unmatched in the world. We strove to expand access to it and have its advantages spread to all. we were making steady progress. Then along came the “fundamental change” movement in 2008 which has morphed into challenging and IMO weakening our very foundations.
 
Last edited:

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,807
2,411
113
I agree with both points. Our common culture gave us a social, economic, and political system unmatched in the world. We strove to expand access to it and have its advantages spread to all. we were making steady progress. Then along came the “fundamental change” movement in 2008 which has morphed into challenging and IMO weakening our very foundations.
The only "fundamental change" which has occurred since 2008 in my view is "Obamacare" which somehow has survived.

Let us face it, Trump rolled back much of Obama's agenda with Biden now trying to restore it. However a GOP Congressional sweep in 2022 along with the current Supreme Court will stymie Biden.

So from where I sit, as the Oval Oval Office and Congress keep going from one side back to the other along with the divisiveness between parties...fundamental change either for good or bad over the long haul isn' t going to happen.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,648
8,869
113
The only "fundamental change" which has occurred since 2008 in my view is "Obamacare" which somehow has survived.

Let us face it, Trump rolled back much of Obama's agenda with Biden now trying to restore it. However a GOP Congressional sweep in 2022 along with the current Supreme Court will stymie Biden.

So from where I sit, as the Oval Oval Office and Congress keep going from one side back to the other along with the divisiveness between parties...fundamental change either for good or bad over the long haul isn' t going to happen.
I think you are taking too narrow of a view of fundamental change. Obama’s influence is much deeper and wider than the office he held. While I don’t think he was very good at actually being president, he was a master manipulator and had a significant impact in igniting racial and social activism all under the banner of “Fundamental Change”.
 

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,807
2,411
113
I think you are taking too narrow of a view of fundamental change. Obama’s influence is much deeper and wider than the office he held. While I don’t think he was very good at actually being president, he was a master manipulator and had a significant impact in igniting racial and social activism all under the banner of “Fundamental Change”.
There are certainly Republicans who look at the Obama presidency and vow to never let something like Obama to ever occur again. Along the same lines, Democrats are saying the same about Trump.

Neverthess, lots of Dems and Pubs look at these presidents fondly. So as the barbs and plaudits survive these guys. The bad vibes linger.

Should we hold Obama and Trump responsible for being Obama and Trump? Or should we blame a political climate which has creeped slowly into existence which is making our way of governing at the federal level dysfunctional ?
 

Latest posts