The Commanders have used their current nickname for the past two seasons after spending the prior two years as the Washington Football Team and the 83 years before that as the Washington Redskins. Last summer, a group led by Josh Harris purchased the club, and although there have been rumblings that new ownership may want to change the name or even revert back to the Redskins, that is not the case, per Nicki Jhabvala of the Washington Post.
Prior owner Dan Snyder, who repeatedly insisted that the “Redskins” moniker would never change, finally succumbed to sponsorship pressure to make a switch towards the end of his tenure. Harris & Co. have said before that there is no intent to change the current name, but recent events have made some skeptical of that proclamation.
For instance, during the club’s rookie minicamp earlier this month, new head coach Dan Quinn wore an (unlicensed) T-shirt that featured the feathers that were a prominent part of the Redskins’ logo dangling from the stylized “W” that represents the entirety of the current Commanders’ logo (via JP Finlay of NBC Sports Washington).
As Eric Flack of WUSA9 wrote last week, Sen. Steve Daines (R-Montana), a key member of the Congressional committee advancing a bill that would give Washington, D.C. control of the RFK Stadium site — which would be used for a new stadium for the Commanders — is demanding that the team bring back the Redskins’ logo. To be clear, Daines is not advocating the use of the “Redskins” name, and in remarks prepared for a hearing on the proposed legislation, he wrote, “[m]ake no mistake, this logo was inspired and envisioned by [Blackfeet Tribe member Blackie] Wetzel as a tribute to Native Americans. It is not a caricature. It is a description of pride and strength. Of courage and honor.”
Additionally, the team recently posted birthday wishes to longtime linebacker London Fletcher on X, and in so doing, it used an image prominently featuring the Redskins’ helmet. As Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk observes, the team’s social media birthday wishes to Fletcher in prior years included images in which the Redskins’ logo was not visible.
As Florio opines in a separate piece, “there are no accidents,” and he believes matters like Quinn’s T-shirt are “trial balloons” to test the public response to the old name and logo (although the team had no official comment on the T-shirt). While it would be hard to imagine Harris deciding to bring back the “Redskins” name, it would be less difficult to see the team incorporate elements of the prior logo, especially in light of the merchandising sales it could generate.
Just go back to the WTFs since that’s more fitting anyway.
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, the Washington Redskins. Amen.
I’m fine if they go back to redskins
But alternatively they should ask local Indian tribes for words that mean “warrior” in their native language. Or another word.
For instance the Lakota word is Akicita, Navajo it’s Naabaahii.
Feel like it’s a common ground for everyone. Idk what local tribes existed or currently live in the DC area.
JFC, can’t we agree on a new name honoring Native Americans that ISN’T “Redskins”? It’s not that hard.
People got upset about “Chiefs”, “Warriors” and “Braves”…so clearly it is kinda hard to appease people.
As a native I could give two sh**ts about Warriors, Indians, Seminoles etc. Redskins is derogatory. Can you imagine the New York N-Words, the Walla-Walla Wetba***s, or the Chattanooga Chinks? I don’t think so. It’s not a tribute, it’s the result of a bigoted old man who thought he could get away with it. I do object to the tomahawk chop though. Can you imagine an entire stadium doing some tap dancing to honor black people, or maybe some karate moves to kung fu fighting to honor Asians, or how about flamencoing to la cucaracha to give tribute to Mexicans? Sorry to rant, but this hits close to home.
How do you feel, separately, about the logo? Do you see it differently on its own, dislike it on even its own, or hold it perpetually in association? This isn’t a trap or debate question, to be clear, I’m honestly just curious as to your opinion on it.
No problem with logo.
Appreciate your opinion on that, my friend!
Multiple polls of Native American groups showed they had no issue with team nicknames such as ‘Redskins’, Indians, Fighting Suiox, Braves, Chiefs, or Redmen. The people who had a problem with it were people other than Native Americans.
Exactly. White liberals being offended for groups that could care less what they think.
This is manipulation of data. One can always get polls to say whatever they want it to say, with confusing/vague wording, not revealing the point of the survey or how the data will be used, double barreled questions, and choosing to only survey people that you think are going to give you the answers you want.
Or just being upset you didnt agree with the results?
You speak for everyone? Interesting
Well for 83 years, no one offended by the name.
Jim Crow and lynchings were a thing 83 years ago, so not sure what your point is.
But similarly you have a straw-man argument. “The data isn’t trustworthy” when you aren’t providing any evidence that the questions were charged is the pot calling the kettle black. In all likelyhood, some individuals/groups have an opinion on it. Others could probably care less or even support it. It isn’t a blanket issue.
Well it is their superpower, that, and screaming at the sky
Sorry, our “group” aka Nation has a big problem with it. Problem is there are 500+ nations in this country right now, and contrary to popular/government opinions we do not look alike, speak the same language or even have the same beliefs or traditions. So,the groups that were asked may not have a problem, but the other 490 might.
No they don’t. I have “native” friends who love their favorite team, the Redskins. They wear merch with the name.
I have Native friends, family members, ancestors, neighbors, work colleagues who despise the name and the history behind it. So if we want to have a pissing match I win. So many Natives are wannabe whites we have a name for them, Apples. Red on the outside, white on the inside.
Hear me out, Washington Wedskins. It’s too cute to be offensive.
Bring Back REDSKINS AND THE REDSKINETTES CHEERLEADER SQUAD BACK!!!
I don’t remember this much backlash over Target changing their branding from Archer Farms to Good n’ Gather even though the second name sounds dumb. Maybe because Archer Farms wasn’t offensive to some minority group it wasn’t such a big deal. Although they did have a chicken mascot.
It’s pretty simple. Keep the burgundy and gold color scheme. Bring back the feathers and pair them with the current W logo and rename the team the Washington Warriors. Quinn’s shirt looked great — that should be the team’s primary logo from now on.
You really don’t want to have your search results buried under the golden state warriors, the much more successful and relevant team that already has that name.
It really is not that simple. Just to start, all of the area professional teams have a red, white, and blue color scheme. The logo’s also have patriotic ties, mostly stars, and are tied to the DMV (DC, Maryland, Virginia).
Please take that simple area criteria, make the re-brand digitally appealing, and not cop the Patriots in any fashion.
I understand what Daines’ motives could partially be here, especially with the tribal representation in Montana, but it does seem odd to me that a leader from Montana should make demands of a team in D.C.
Still, if this is merely a condition of purchase for the government’s stake in a new stadium, Daines acting as a representative of said government would make sense, and if Daines feels that the logo is representative of all tribal members (including those he may represent), then I could see why he’d think that the government should have a condition like this as a purchaser. The other side of the argument that feels odd to me though is having a leader from Montana make a demand to a team very far from his electoral base.
Daines is an asshat. Always was, always will be.
Nothing says “party of small government” like dictating what a business has to call itself.
The demand was about the logo, not the name, as a condition of any government stadium sponsorship if I read it correctly. Still, it appears to be mostly for headlines and vote garnering than anything substantive.
You can have a Native American nickname just don’t make them into a caricature like the Cleveland one was. I think the Redskin logo was fine it was just the name.
Florida St never changed their name since the Seminoles tribe respect the school. The school gives back.
If Washington did something for tribes, it may not be a problem.
Florida State actually asked the Seminole tribe if it was okay to use the name.
The Seminoles in Florida respect the school, but not the Seminoles in Oklahoma
The only way this makes any sense and isn’t grounded in romanticizing violent legacies or racist LARPing is to profit share or shared ownership with the tribes they are “honoring”. Give them 30% and a vote.
Well I guess racidm and cultural insensitivity not a surprise among Republican lawmakers.
Classic incorrect statement from a liberal looney tune.
Except it was the Democrats who kept voting to keep slavery, and slaves. Learn your history.
Seems your knowledge of history doesn’t extend to the migration of Asians over the frozen Bering straight?
I believe that is one theory about how we got here. Key word, THEORY.
This is a deceptive argument, as the values and platforms of the Republicans and Democrats mostly flipped post Civil War.
The platforms haven’t flipped at all, this is democrat propaganda to make you believe they somehow became the good guys.
Gee, then why did segregationists like Strom Thurmond switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party and vote against the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act?
They never flipped. Hillary Clinton never switched to the republican party, or former KKK recruiter William Byrd.
The Civil Rights Acts of 1960 and 1964, and the Fair Voting Act, never would’ve passed without Republican support. As mentioned, there was no flipping. By that logic, the Clinton’s, and former KKK recruiter William Byrd should be Republicans. But they weren’t.
On a side note, the Indian Removal
Act of 1830 (which lead the to the Trail of Tears and taking over Indian lands) was signed by none other than the founder of the democratic party, Andrew Jackson.
link to dailysignal.com
1830 was multiple major party shifts ago.
Then LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, and all the southern Dems became Republicans.
Real easy formula to know which was the racist party at any given time…
Who did/does Alabama vote for?
Even if you can convince yourself the old name isn’t derogatory in spirit and origin, it’s gross to name a team after a people that were violently removed from the land. You could always name the team for a powerful local entity that thrives. The Washington Lobbyists, perhaps.
Violently removed? Name a single country on earth that was t established following the removal of people from its land at one point or another. Grow up.
Even if your question were relevant or accurate, what does that have to do with the tastefulness of naming a sports team after people who were slaughtered and driven off the land the team now occupies?
Slaughtered? Your choice of words is laughable. These people were savages, and most died of disease and sickness, or killing each other. Every single nation on the planet was settled on land that was once roamed by tribal nomadic people. Only in America are the current inhabitants disparaged for it. Maybe take a look at local team names in other countries.
Again, even if everything you’re saying were true and relevant (no), it’s outside the realm of good taste or basic modern sensitivity to have a sports team named after a people who were forced off the land. I don’t give a damn what ahistorical nonsense you choose or pretend to believe to serve your garbage politics. Move on, bad driver.
You sir are an idiot with a white supremacy complex. Slaughtered? Yes. Let’s see you have the nuggets to walk into a gunfight with a bow/arrow and a knife. I hope you are a troll, or just ignorant, because your grasp of history leaves much to be desired.
How about Orange Chickens?
I’ve always been partial to the Washington Foreskins.
– By polling data, the Redskins and Chiefs were the favorite NFL teams of Native Americans specifically because of their name and logo.
– A recent petition was started by a Native American to bring the name and logo back and was signed by thousands of Native Americans
– the Redskins logo of a Blackfeet chief was designed by a Blackfeet artist and approved by the Blackfeet nation
…But the liberal white women know what’s best for you.
You do understand that one tribe doesn’t speak for all 500 nations? And thousands of the millions of Natives are a very small minority. If they were even Natives that were polled
Yet despite the nationwide polling (USA is the only actual nation, self governing tribes are not nations) saying the exact opposite, you speak for all tribes because you don’t like what everyone else has to say?
No, like I said there are 500 native nations in the US right now. How can a few speak for everyone?
Yes, we are nations. But if you must nitpick to satisfy your need to be supreme then have at it
Natives are people born in America. Tribal savages migrated here from Asia. Learn history.
Calling them savages is a great way to show you’re not bigoted against them.
I have. My ancestors were there. Do you live under a bridge or in your mom’s basement?
It’s not one tribe. That polling is of Native Americans generally. Throughout the country. The only thing having to do with the Blackfeet Tribe specifically is that the logo was designed by a member of that tribe and it depicts a Blackfoot chief. But the polling regarding the Redskins and Chiefs being the favorite teams of Native Americans was not Blackfeet specific.
“New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by Redskins name”
link to washingtonpost.com
“Poll of Native Americans’ view of Redskins name finds “proud” most common answer”
link to nbcsports.com
To me the name issue is rather irrelevant. The Washington franchise has a storied history that won’t be changed regardless of what name, logo or jersey is used. The old timers will always refer to the team as the Redskins anyway. I think someone is a rather pathetic excuse for a fan if they would abandon their loyalty to a team over something like a name change.
Damn bro, we don’t always agree, but you hit the nail on the head.
Well there are thousands of pathetic fans who probably followed the team before you were born but since you need to sound relevant let me explain that we are LOYAL fans. HTTR4EVER
No one said a word when they changed the name of the Hornets to become the Pelicans.
Or when the Bobcats became the Hornets.
Or when the Jets became the Coyotes.
Or when the Thrashers became the Jets.
Or when the Nordiques became the Avalanche.
Or when the Sonics became the Thunder.
No outrage or indignation at all.
And those are just the sports teams. How many websites, corporations and even countries are under different names than the original?
Off the top of my head I do recall a lot of anger when Aunt Jemina became…whatever it’s called now.
Don’t remember people screaming bloody murder when Bell Atlantic became Verizon.
I wonder if there’s a through line.
And, aunt jemima went out business following the name change.
…or is that what you want to believe? Or perhaps what you were told and accepted without question from people who want to believe it? Cuz…
link to fortune.com
link to samsclub.com
@Highwaymenace it didn’t “go out of business”, it was a brand owned by Quaker Oats. I am assuming because losers on social media made such a big hooplah over it, they probably decided it was best to “discontinue the brand”. I would guess they still sell pancake mix under a different name now.
Because those are relatively new teams that don’t have a real fanbase. Especially not one spanning generations. Plus all those names suck anyways.
Imagine what would have happened 40,000 years ago if the Neanderthal’s stubbornly refused to evolve because they were now going to be named Homo Sapiens…lol.
HTTR!!!
The name will return. It’s looks and sounds better than Commanders
The current name is meaningless and empty, as it simply represents capitulation to the noisy mob and a futile attempt by a bad owner to sell overpriced team merchandise.
The best thing to do is leave the name alone until the league allows them to move the team overseas.
NoPoliticsInSports, unless it’s my politics, then it’s okay
Neanderthal #1: “I just read in the Caveman Times that there is a plan to re-name us Homo Sapiens in another 10,000 years”.
Neanderthal #2: “Well that name just sucks. We should refuse to evolve and become extinct. That will teach them not to mess around with name changes”.
I learned a long time ago that ignorant people without a desire to further their knowledge about any given subject are the dangerous ones. They take talking points from equally ignorant people and run with them. Had a friend going on about herding blacks into zones in South Africa,(during apartheid )he cried about it for days. Finally I asked,”What would you call that… a reservation?” He shut up pretty quick. We, as a people, have had our history, language, customs, and culture erased from the planet in some cases. People think we get free college, free money etc. Never happened.I have to laugh at these college kids worried about Palestine and Israel supposedly occupying their territory, while they stand in My country, on my land, and decry the injustice of Israel. Really? Talk about occupiers stealing land, yet they are ignorant of their own history. We’ve got people in here calling names and trying to whip up a frenzy by spouting KKK or White Supremacy nonsense. Just shows your true colors.
Incoming “it’s only a word and only has as much power as you give it” and/or “that was hundreds of years ago”
Let’s ignore that “just words” have been historically used to dehumanize (US Constitution’s use of the word “chattel”), criminalize (’94 Crime Bill’s “super predators”) and marginalize (pick any random news).
I’m not exactly sure how the previous comments relate to the Washington football team’s name change but I find the avatars pretty interesting 🙂
Don’t believe social media’s definition of the term Redskin it was not derived from skin color! It originated as a term from the settlers to identify Native American Warriors as they would wear/hang the bloody scalps of their opposers on their person.
The Commanders will prevail down the road now that the organization has a elite quarterback. It would be cool to see the redskins feather dangling from the W on the helmet and on the C of the Commanders name on the jersey.