DarthMonk wrote:I hesitated to start this thread but I think it's relevant.
I didn't do so to start a fire or fan any flames and for all I know it will die with few views and no replies.
I've been a Redskin fan for a long time - not as long as some of you but probably longer than most. I'm old enough to remember riots in DC in the '60s. I remember seeing signs like this in my neighborhood.

I remember no black QBs. I remember RFK and the team truly being Washington's. It really wasn't that long ago.
Indy and we are about to choose "the face of the franchise."
I think one of the reasons Indy/Luck Washington/RGIII is best is due to race.
Washington DC is currently 51% black, 38% white, and 11% other. I am sure if I went downtown right now and asked 1,000 people at random who they'd want as our QB, RGIII would win and one of the main reasons, voiced or not, for many, would be his race.
Indy is currently 69% white, 25% black, and 6% other. I am also sure my random poll there would produce Luck as the winner and that race would be a main reason.
I'm not saying this to stir up controversy. I don't think it's wrong to lean one way or another based on race. I'm a Blackfoot and would have loved to have seen us land Bradford (Cherokee) a few years ago. One of the reasons I would prefer RGIII is I think he'd be a more appropriate "face of the franchise" given the history of this area as I have experienced it.
I'd be interested to hear other thoughts. I'm not going to argue unless it's in self-defense after being outright attacked.
Anybody want to chime in?
DarthMonk
Washington DC is currently 51% black, 38% white, and 11% other. I am sure if I went downtown right now and asked 1,000 people at random who they'd want as our QB, RGIII would win and one of the main reasons, voiced or not, for many, would be his race.
Indy is currently 69% white, 25% black, and 6% other. I am also sure my random poll there would produce Luck as the winner and that race would be a main reason.
I'm not saying this to stir up controversy. I don't think it's wrong to lean one way or another based on race.
Darth, if you left it at that, I would get what you are saying.
The Harvard Implicit Association Study supports this. For fun take the test -
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/Indy and we are about to choose "the face of the franchise."
I think one of the reasons Indy/Luck Washington/RGIII is best is due to race.
I find the second statement puzzling. "Is best due to race?" Best for who and how is it best? Later you say, "more appropriate." What are you saying here?
You have mentioned the turbulent racial times of the 60's in D.C. (and D.C. is certainly not alone) and you mentioned that you saw no black QBs and that that wasn't long ago; however, since those turbulent times:
D.C. has had a black QB win a Super Bowl. A black QB drafted in the first round and a black QB snatched up so fast in free agency that few saw it coming. These were ground breaking events and certainly made some folks feel good at the time these events happened.
Indy has had two black head coaches and one winning a Super Bowl and one going to a Super Bowl. Cetrtainly ground breaking in Tony Dungy's case.
You point out that Indy has a larger white population than D.C., but when you consider fanbases (you said "face of the franchises" not "face of the cities"), both have prodominately white fan bases.
Again, how is it best for the black to go with black and the white to go with white. Isn't this thought process 60 ish?
Indy has never had a star starting QB, if you want to assume that both Luck and RGIII will be stars in the NFL, and if you want to talk race, wouldn't it be more of a groundbreaking event in this 21st century for RGIII to go to the Colts. I think that that event (not that I want it to happen) would cause more of a buzz and possibly provoke change more change in Indy than in D.C.
Racially speaking, which is "best" RGIII going to the Redskins or RGIII going to the Colts? Depends on your perspective
if you
want to speak racially.
Doug Williams starting in a Redskin unform made a lot of folks, black, white and other races proud that our team demonstrated a lot of racial progress. Doug Williams made a made a lot of folks in our nation, Redskin and American, proud that a black QB won a Super Bowl and that we could put that notion to rest that it couldnt be done and the not in our lifetime will we see it.
Folks today, still talk about Doug Williams. Why?
Because he won. At the end of the day, if RGIII must win to be "best" for any reason.
It's 2012 - We will never be a colorblind nation - I get that. I get that it is
your preference for RGIII for football reasons and for racial reasons.
I don't see anything wrong with that, but when you say it is
"best" or "more appropriate", I ask what groups or persons is it "best" or "more appropriate" for and why?