Redskins Trademark cancelled

[ram29jackson]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

I hear ya, but I like the old yellow helmets with the R. Danny could be a total dick and actually put the word Redskins on the helmet. Again, the potato version, not the Native American version.

I just realized they went to a yellow helmet when Lombardi started coaching there..interesting and makes sense

[ram29jackson]

When Lombardi came to Washington in 1969 after a one year sabbatical, there was a buzz in the air to say the least. Much change was expected after 13 consecutive non winning seasons, but the first major change was an accident. Sand Knit was the predominate manufacturer of the Redskins jerseys from 1957 to 1968. Vince Lombardi's brother in law was a sales rep for Rawlings, so out with the losing tradition and in with new jerseys from Rawlings, but just days before the season a serious issue was discovered.

For a decade the Redskins had always worn dark burgundy jerseys with a burgundy or dark plumb colored helmet. After opening the boxes there was going to be a serious fashion faux pas, the jerseys were the wrong color. All helmets were quickly taken in the back equipment room stripped of their 9 part spear decals and spray painted the new lighter color of cardinal. Let’s face it, with just days to go, it was much easier to paint the helmets than to change the color of the jerseys. This was also the first and only year they used the single part multi colored spear decal. Looking closely at this featured helmet, you can still see the cardinal color paint from the previous year

Lombardi R

The in-laws may have unintentionally changed the helmet color in 1969 but Lombardi changed the design completely in 1970. He wanted to bring the prestige and look of his championship Packers to the Washington Redskins. Sadly his illness prohibited him from every coaching while this helmet style took the field. The design only lasted two years. Thanks Jim.

I like looking at helmet histories and similar stuff.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Here we go

Plaintiff in Redskins patent case urges Chiefs to change their name | ProFootballTalk

Yes!!!!!!!

Keep them coming. Please piss off as many different fanbases as possible!!!!

[tshile]

Originally Posted by ram29jackson

Lombardi R







I like looking at helmet histories and similar stuff.

That's a good looking helmet

[DynamiteRave]

I always loved the throwback helmets.

So I voted Bravehearts simply because I hadn't thought of that name and I like it. Otherwise toss me into thr Warriors group.

[los panda]

bravehearts?!? why is braves not an option?

[ram29jackson]

LOL now they are going after the Chiefs LOL, they are getting desperate

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by tshile

That's a good looking helmet

And those are just bird feathers. Nothing to do with Native Americans. "We just like how they frame the letter R". - Dan Snyder

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by los panda

bravehearts?!? why is braves not an option?

Why does it need to be an Indian name?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Why does it need to be an Indian name?

Identity. You gotta understand that not everybody on this board is a resident of the D.C. area, surrounding areas, or has been at some point. For me, I grew up 5 hours away from D.C. That isn't exactly being a part of the area, even though most of all Virginia is a Redskins state. So for me, I identified with the team by their name, logos, and color of uniforms. I don't have that hometown attachment to the team. So, if the team moved out west and still called themselves the Redskins, I'd still root for that team even if a new team moved into the D.C. area.

Having said that, I feel that most fans could embrace a name change if the change wasn't a complete and total change away from what the team is now. A name that could still embrace the old identity, colors, even the logo - if not for a transitional period. And then, once fans are used to calling the team the new name, then other changes (main colors if need be, logo, etc...) could gradually be mixed in. Over time, the change and transition isn't quite as harsh.

I understand the thoughts of some to just change the name completely, get rid of everything Washington Redskins, and just move on so that we're not having to hear about people like Susan Harjo or Amanda Blackhorse. But the truth is, that would be a very polarizing change. The hometown fans would embrace whatever, but the admirers from far away would be left feeling as if we got robbed.

[HoustonSkinsFan]

I think using Native Americans as mascots in general is the issue; some feel that they are honored by it, some feel dehumanized by it (Chief Wahoo is a pretty dehumanizing caricature if you ask me). So anything Native American will be off the table if this campaign is ultimately successful. Braves, Warriors, Chiefs, etc.

Perhaps the only option left would be an agreement with a local tribe, similar to what the Seminoles have with FSU. The Washington Powhatan has a nice ring to it.

[skinsguy]

But one thing I did want to comment about the "Braveheart" name. If it wasn't for the movie (and I LOVED the movie), I'd probably get used to that name. But since there is a move called Braveheart, I'd feel that name would be a little "Campy". I can't help but to picture a logo with Mel Gibson's panted face on it.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by HoustonSkinsFan

I think using Native Americans as mascots in general is the issue; some feel that they are honored by it, some feel dehumanized by it (Chief Wahoo is a pretty dehumanizing caricature if you ask me). So anything Native American will be off the table if this campaign is ultimately successful. Braves, Warriors, Chiefs, etc.

Perhaps the only option left would be an agreement with a local tribe, similar to what the Seminoles have with FSU. The Washington Powhatan has a nice ring to it.

Honestly, I think if the team ever did agree to the change, the other side would have to agree to a compromise. I think they could live with Braves or Warriors with the agreement that a certain percentage of income made was given to a local tribe or something like that. To me, if people like Susan Harjo or Amanda Blackhorse didn't agree to that, then it says to me it's all about the money. They may think they can stronghold them into an all or nothing change, but the truth is, I don't believe they have that much power. And knowing that these ridiculous lawsuits are popping up ($9B of the Cleveland Indians), eventually the general public is going to start thinking this is more about money than rights.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Identity. You gotta understand that not everybody on this board is a resident of the D.C. area, surrounding areas, or has been at some point. For me, I grew up 5 hours away from D.C. That isn't exactly being a part of the area, even though most of all Virginia is a Redskins state. So for me, I identified with the team by their name, logos, and color of uniforms. I don't have that hometown attachment to the team. So, if the team moved out west and still called themselves the Redskins, I'd still root for that team even if a new team moved into the D.C. area.

Having said that, I feel that most fans could embrace a name change if the change wasn't a complete and total change away from what the team is now. A name that could still embrace the old identity, colors, even the logo - if not for a transitional period. And then, once fans are used to calling the team the new name, then other changes (main colors if need be, logo, etc...) could gradually be mixed in. Over time, the change and transition isn't quite as harsh.

I understand the thoughts of some to just change the name completely, get rid of everything Washington Redskins, and just move on so that we're not having to hear about people like Susan Harjo or Amanda Blackhorse. But the truth is, that would be a very polarizing change. The hometown fans would embrace whatever, but the admirers from far away would be left feeling as if we got robbed.

Not really, I haven't lived anywhere near DC since 1973 and if we have to change names I want to dump the Indian thing entirely.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Honestly, I think if the team ever did agree to the change, the other side would have to agree to a compromise. I think they could live with Braves or Warriors with the agreement that a certain percentage of income made was given to a local tribe or something like that. To me, if people like Susan Harjo or Amanda Blackhorse didn't agree to that, then it says to me it's all about the money. They may think they can stronghold them into an all or nothing change, but the truth is, I don't believe they have that much power. And knowing that these ridiculous lawsuits are popping up ($9B of the Cleveland Indians), eventually the general public is going to start thinking this is more about money than rights.

I think you're being overly optimistic.

There's a bigger play at work here. And even if there isn't, the constantly shifting 'standards' of political correctness guarantee nothing if the team name is changed to anything that can be perceived as relating to any culture, race, creed, etc.

My opinion: if you change the name and leave any links to Native Americans in place, you're simply asking for us to go through all of this again at some point in the future. Personally - if we're going to change the name I prefer we change to something that doesn't mean decades of defending it again. I'm rather tired of the whole issue.