NFL Debate #59: Redskins Name Change

[Jon]

If the Redskins are forced to change thier name, what should they change it to?

[Jon]

The options all come from sites I saw as potential replacements.

[Cory]

Warriors rings off the tongue better.

[Jon]

Yeah, so  abit of background on some of these.

Skins: This just basically takes off the "red" portion of the nickname. Replace the logo with a football or something else. Allows the team to keep its colors and fans to still call the team the "Skins".

Warriors: Apparently Daniel Snyder has this trademarked for the city of Washington when he was looking to start a arena football team. Would be an easy transition. Logo would be the same one the Skins use with just the arrow across the helmet.

Braves: This goes back to the old name of the Washington Braves. They could also use the same logo as the Warriors.

Federals: This is a play off the other Washinton teams Capitals (NHL) and Nationals (MLB). This would require a full overhaul of logo an dcolors most likely.

Hogs: This would act as a tribute to the now retired Hogettes. Would also require, at the very least, a logo overhaul.

-----

Personally, I'd like to see them go back to being the Braves.

[Black Republicans]

I wonder what the infatuation is with an Indian tradition.  I'm not so sure the Capital of America should celebrate the Native American heritage, it just seems so wrong on alot of levels.  Unless it really is a "hey, we're sorry" so we want to use the name.

[GM Franchise]

I went with the Warriors.

[Mike Powers]

I think all the names stink.

Until I see a Native American group protesting the Redskins, I am chalking this all up to white guilt.

[T-Bonizzle]

They protest it all the time.

[Mike Powers]

To be fair, I don't particularly go out of my way to look up Redskins news.  I never see it on any national news, or things of that nature.

If they do, then fair enough.  Change the name.  But, I still think those choices stink.

[Black Republicans]

It has to be more than White Guilt if you wouldn't walk up to a Native American and call him a Redskin.

[Jennifer]

I don't think 'nobody's complaining' is a valid reason not to consider problematic a name that ultimately is really f'n racist.

[Mike Powers]

I don't think 'nobody's complaining' is a valid reason not to consider problematic a name that ultimately is really f'n racist.

I think it is a good reason.  If the people that should be offended aren't, then what's the problem? 

[Jennifer]

Even if it weren't protested (which it is), the fact of the matter is that systematic racism is never an acceptable thing. It becomes a matter of 'Oh it's okay because we've always done it' or 'it's okay because it's traditional'. It's hardly 'white guilt' to acknowledge that being white gives a huge leg up over people of colour (including native americans) and think that maybe it's not such a good thing to appropriate another culture (which was near enough wiped out by the ancestors of the people appropriating it), and show a little more sensitivity towards the whole issue.

I don't know where it is right now, don't remember off the top of my head. But I recall seeing a picture of a fan of that football team - in full on headdress and 'warpaint' etc standing right next to a native american man, just looking at one another. It's one of the most cringeworthy things I've ever seen.

[Mike Powers]

I acknowledged earlier that I wasn't aware of the protests.  As I said, if people are offended, then it I have no problem changing the name.

But I personally think that people put way too much stock in words.  How can best friends call each other the most vile names on the planet, but neither one of them get upset?  It is because of their intentions, not because of the words.  There are no such things as bad words, only bad intentions. 

I don't believe in words inherently being good or bad.  I believe in the context and usage of words.  I can talk to someone, and degrade them terribly without using one "bad" word.  Likewise, I can talk to someone and use terribly "offensive" language, but due to the context and the usage of the words, not offend them one bit.

But, that is getting waaaay off topic.

Back on topic:  If the name offends people, change it.  I don't like any of the nominated names.

[Ty]

My perspective.

The reason there isn't more controversy surrounding the name is because the majority of Natives love the Redskin name. At least north of the border, it's the top selling football apparel among Aboriginals.

We don't see it as racist, at least not on the same level as some teams (Chiefs, Braves, or any team that uses a position of honour to describe their team or even worse, blatantly racist teams like the Edmonton Eskimos of the CFL b/c Eskimo means fat eater and was a term the Brits used to describe the Inuit people).

We see that the controversy surrounding the name to be much more offensive then the name itself. We see the team, the media, and everyone else singling out Natives to ask their opinion and claiming 'while my native friend is okay with it'. Then the white men in power are acting on what they feel is best for the Native man by making them change their name. No consulting the Native people, they don't have any say in this change that is being forced on their behalf.

Yeah, your always going to have the minority who claims to be offended or even those who will use this for personal attention. We don't want this changed on our behalf, we would rather have other issues addressed that have long been ignored rather then changing a non-offensive team name on our behalf.