Smithsonian Museum - yet another thread on team name

Call me crazy, but I think the word Savage sounds more offensive/worse than the word Redskins.

If they changed the name to whiteskins i wouldn't have a problem with name. How about the Washington Caucasianskins? I hope they never change the name.

Yeah, like Poser's article. the earliest usage of "Redskin" a Google search yields me are examples of indians like "Black Thunder" referring to themselves and whites as "red skins" and "white skins" non-pejoratively.

The racism associated with the name "redskin" came later, in western entertainment like old cowboy movies. These people trying to sue the Redskins should go after those estates / copyright holders. Maybe the club and we fans should join the protesters in that lawsuit, lol.

To suggest the Washington football team would pick an insulting name to call THEMSELVES, for people TO CHEER FOR, is beyond stupid. It's ignoring facts of the name's origin, it's origin with the team, and current usage, to try to win a political issue (Common tactic for liberals/conservatives/everybody it seems sadly), and maybe a guilty liberal "feel good", or bashing those rowdy football fans, or power trip telling an NFL franchise what to do, or even a monetary gain behind taking away a club trademark. Who knows? It's ultimately just plain ignorant to bash the Washington Redskins today.

Lastly, what George Preston Marshall did with segregation was evil and wrong. But ours wasn't the only NFL franchise to segregate, only the last to change because of one racist, the owner. I'm tired of our club being singled out as if all the other clubs old as ours were clean.

I vote we change the name to "Youoverbearingpoliticalcorrecttreehuggingpinheadsc ankissmyroyalassandgosuckeggsinacloset"

What it all boils down to is INTENT. Is the name being used to intentionally to degrade a specific person or group of people? And that answer is NO. I doubt the NFL would have let any owner past or present use a name that was intended to degrade anyone or any group.

If anything its intent was to promote or give a positive light to a group of people. They should, instead of complaining, be proud and glad the American Indian is in such a spot light for the world to see.

But for those who seek change and would like DS to change the name so he would get even more money because EVERYONE would want the new Jersey with the new logo and name...... I suggest a slight name change so there is no major difference. I recommend the name "REDNECKS".

The colors can stay the same and most rednecks I know would be proud of the name on a professional team. Pick whatever logo works for that name. Lol.

Go back to the R logo, which I like better anyway, and claim the Redskin name refers to potatoes. We don't need to have a potato logo. Packers is for meat packers, but you don't see a butcher as their mascot.

I vote we change the name to "Youoverbearingpoliticalcorrecttreehuggingpinheadsc ankissmyroyalassandgosuckeggsinacloset"

Don't bring tree huggers into this.

What it all boils down to is INTENT. Is the name being used to intentionally to degrade a specific person or group of people? And that answer is NO. I doubt the NFL would have let any owner past or present use a name that was intended to degrade anyone or any group.

If anything its intent was to promote or give a positive light to a group of people. They should, instead of complaining, be proud and glad the American Indian is in such a spot light for the world to see.Great point!

On CSN last night Brian Mitchell said that if the name is offensive to even ONE person it should be changed and I have to call BS on that. I'm not saying "Redskins" can't be used as an insult, but individual people are nuts and can be insulted by the dumbest crap!
I guarantee you could find a PETA member who finds any animal-based team name offensive because they think it exploits the animal for human entertainment.
I bet there are born again Christians who find any name with the words "Devil" or "Daemon" offensive because it invokes evil.
There are probably extreme pacifists and/or environmentalists who are offended by Jets and Rockets.
Hell, there are probably color-blind people who find color-based names offensive!
(okay, I've been watching too much Parks & Rec; this is turning into one of those town forum scenes)

The thing is the Indian head (logo) has been such a great tradition. So if you can't beat them join them. If every Indian bought into the Redskins as being their team and said "it's awesome how the team is promoting Indians" this whole issue would be a different story. One would think the American Indians would be complaining that there are no other teams recognizing the Indian.

I've often wondered the same thing about the Rebel flag. The flag originally was not a negative symbol. It was a symbol to differentiate the North from the South and it was only used in battle. Later a bunch of racists adopted the flag and the sentament has changed about the flag. What would happen if Black Americans started flying the flag? wearing shirts with the flag on it? sported it more often? The whole conotation more then likely would change and those racist groups would not want to fly something their enemy is flying.

This "debate" has been what, 20+ years in the making? Gotta think if it had real merit something would have changed by now.

Goodell was asked about it at the SB and he basically shrugged it off as no big deal. Doesn't seem to be an issue on his radar.

I suspect Goodell shrugged it off because it was something he didnt want to deal with during SB week but I am sure its on his radar.

I dont have a problem with the name Redskins and I dont care if they change it or not, but I do think that the fact the debate has been going on so long means it does still have some merit. Just because something is debated over many years without a resolution doesnt mean something wont change in the future and anyone who thinks the name isnt going to change at some point is fooling themselves. The name will be changed in the next 5 years.