Hey Valmy, this thread is for you: Hail to the Foreskins!

[CountDeMoney]

I'd put this in the NFL thread, but it's so chock full of heady Snyder goodness, it deserves its own thread:

Redskins ban signs at FedEx Field



Do you see this sign? I fished this sign out of a garbage can outside FedEx Field. It was in the garbage can because there's a new policy that says no signs of any sort are permitted inside the stadium. Even signs sending best wishes to husbands in Afghanistan.

When and why was this change made? I asked Monday morning, and as of Monday evening, a Redskins spokesman said he still wasn't sure. I just know that there was a policy listed on the team's Web site as recently as Oct. 4 that merely banned inappropriate and offensive signs, or something to that effect, and that as of now, that wording is gone.

UPDATE: I found the old wording. You can find it in the Redskins section of most area Yellow pages. Here it is:

    Banners

    Banners are permitted at FedEx Field; however, Guests may not display banners that advertise or mention products or services. Banners may not cover existing FedEx Field equipment or signage. Signs may not be made with metal or wood. Management reserves the right to remove any sign, including those deemed to be obscene, inappropriate or which obstructs the view of other Guests. For the safety of all Guests, banner poles are not permitted. (emphasis added)

Now, no signs or banners are permitted whatsoever. A spokesman told me that this policy is meant to protect spectators from getting injured by signs, and also to make sure everyone can see the action. Because obstructed views at that stadium could not possibly be tolerated.

One security guard told me the policy went into effect at the beginning of the season. Another told me they were just told about it a few weeks ago. Either way, I can't imagine there was a rash of tragic sign injuries since last season, when I never heard of such a policy.

Now I've feigned a lot of outrage in recent days, outrage over the offensive line, and the GM, and the draft, and whatever else. I mean, that stuff is annoying, but I can live with it. It's still sports. It's still a game. It's still part of the general arc of entertainment provided by large men running around in tights. This, though, ruined it all for me. Now it's no longer a game. Now it's just sad, and unpleasant, and ugly. Read on.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2009/10/signs_banned_at_fedex_field.html

You have GOT to look at some of the signs he found in the trash outside the stadium.  Fucking classics.

Oh, and check out the other blog, with all the different anti-Snyder and anti-Vinny t-shirts:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2009/10/behavior_change_skins_tees_at.html

Hilarious.

[Valmy]

Awesome.  I look forward to all the creative ways the Redskins fans can undermine that moronic policy.

[Martinus]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

[citizen k]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

Another party pooper. 

[Syt]

racist

That at the home field of a team called Redskins (that name survives on tradition, not political correctness, though either way I have no problem with it) would be irony.

[HisMajestyBOB]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

Did you even read the article, or are you just an idiot?

[katmai]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

Did you even read the article, or are you just an idiot?

Hi HMbob, apparently SK has induced amnesia or you'd know it was Marcin so the answer is already clear.

[HisMajestyBOB]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

Did you even read the article, or are you just an idiot?

Hi HMbob, apparently SK has induced amnesia or you'd know it was Marcin so the answer is already clear.

Who are you?

[CountDeMoney]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

This thread wasn't for you, even though you chose the opportunity to yet again use the word "homophobic".
Next time read articles, faggot. :middlefinger:

[Martinus]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

This thread wasn't for you, even though you chose the opportunity to yet again use the word "homophobic".
Next time read articles, faggot. :middlefinger:

Sorry I thought the word "Foreskins" and thought it's about male circumcision.

[Eddie Teach]

I don't really care about the signs having offensive messages, but I imagine it would be rather annoying if the person in front of you decided to hold up some huge ass sign all game.

[The Brain]

I'm not going to a game if I can't bring my "Pi 3:14" sign.

[Valmy]

How is this policy moronic? I bet the idea is to prevent racist, homophobic or otherwise offensive signs, and it's their private property so they can make any rules they want. Offensiveness is hard to measure (since something someone deems perfectly acceptable could be offensive to someone else), and a legitimate purpose of going to a stadium is to watch a game, and not to make a political, personal or commercial statement. If some stupid broad needs to send a message to her hubby in the 'stan, she can use an e-mail.

People have been bringing in signs into football games for decades and it seems to be being used to keep people from critisizing the team management not keeping bigoted statements out.

[Josquius]

My objection to signs would be more on the basis that I'd hate to be sitting behind some dick with a sign. No matter its content.

[Valmy]

My objection to signs would be more on the basis that I'd hate to be sitting behind some dick with a sign. No matter its content.

That would actually be a legitimate complaint about a sign.  But that is not what this is about.