Quote:
Originally Posted by bn2cardz
Leprechauns are fictional/mythical creatures from Irish folklore they are not a people group. Also what version of the logo are you referencing with the red hair?
Yankee is a term for any American with Yankee Doodle being a song from the revolutionary war. Damn Yankee would be a more southern/northern term. Also the region of the country is not an inherent heritage.
Los Angeles Angels is a play on the city name. Just as San Diego Padres is (surprised you didn't bring that one up). They really would have to change the city name to remove the "offensive words".
Native Americans are an actual set of people that are being stereotyped. Your comparisons aren't similar.
Putting words in my mouth. You even had the quote right there and you still got it wrong. I did not says "fans will be fans no matter what". I said they wouldn't lose fans, they may gain some though.
Those 15% that you claim are offended could potentially not be buying any Cleveland merchandise currently due to the logo or term "Indians".
Also you will not see me protesting any team's logo, but that doesn't mean I have to be hostile towards those that are. A little empathy and compassion can go a long way.
|
1) I'm referring to the live mascot. The logo has "black" facial hair which is just a cover up to make it more PC. And the Irish are a group of people by the way, and so depicting the leprechaun in an aggressive manner, with all Irish traits, would technically be stereotyping the Irish. Not that I care, nor do I think anyone should, just saying.
2/3) Would rebranding in return lose fans though? And would they lose more fans, and sell less merchandise if they rebranded? I'd say there's a good chance. The block C doesn't sell as well as Chief Wahoo I don't believe.
You're saying that the rebrand would almost guarantee a stronger following, but I don't think it would. Like I said, most Indians fans like Chief Wahoo, and it's not like a Cubs fan is going to jump onto the Indians bandwagon all of a sudden.