"Redskins" Team Name Might Be Wrong, But Is The Motive Behind Name Change Correct?

“Fourth and one, from the 42. We know where this play is going. Theismann takes the snap, hands off to Riggins, he’s got the first down…he’s GONE, he’s GONE… Touchdown, Washington Redskins!!!”

This logo and name has become very unpopular
in the court of public opinion, at least if you believe what
Congress people and a few select others have to say

There’s a bit of paraphrasing in this play recall from Super Bowl XVII, so I apologize to longtime DC broadcaster Frank Herzog. But for many years, from the 1970’s to the 1990’s, his call on a Washington football score was always punctuated with the all too familiar “Touchdown, Washington Redskins!”

For many of us who grew up in the DMV (District, Maryland, Virginia) region as fans of the Burgundy and Gold, Herzog’s touchdown call was part of our lexicon, just as much as the fight song, “Hail to the Redskins,” the Hogettes, and the Redskinette cheerleaders. The Redskins were the one constant in the D.C. area, the one element that brought Republicans and Democrats, blacks and whites, Virginians and Marylanders, together. Sundays in the fall were almost holidays inside the Beltway as hundreds of thousands of fans waved their Washington banners and conglomerated in homes and local taverns to cheer for Sonny or Billy, Chris Hanburger, Darrell Green, Charlie Taylor, Dave Butz, and all the other Redskins. RFK was our sacred ground.

For most of my lifetime, that wasn’t a problem.

Then about five years ago, somebody found a problem with the team name.

While a number of Native Americans have stood against
the team name for the Washington football club, a lot of
dissenters seem to have found their voice just in time to
ride the media wave associated with this cause.

The reasoning wasn’t out of the ordinary. Several colleges, such as Marquette, William and Mary and St. John’s had changed their team names from Warriors, Indians and Red Men to Golden Eagles, Tribe, and Red Flash.

Still, the professional teams are mostly privately owned entities, so the change didn’t hit the big leagues. In fact, it still hasn’t. The Cleveland Indians and Atlanta Braves still roam their fields of dreams, while the Golden State Warriors take to the hardwood 82 times each winter. Ironically, the only exception came when Abe Pollin personally opted to change his basketball teams name from the Bullets to one of five choices which eventually became the Wizards. But Pollin’s choice was made because of his personal discomfort with the team name in such a crime infested city.

Times have certainly changed. While Pollin used his conscience to make a decision, there are now hundreds of individual citizens and small groups out there looking to force Redskin owner Daniel Snyder to change the name of his team, all in the name of political correctness. Sadly, one of these small groups is the United States Congress, which apparently has nothing better to do, although this might make sense since valuable legislative pieces from Capitol Hill are few and far between. Gotta fill in those time gaps between the shriek shows on CNN and Fox.

Here’s my problem. While I may now agree that the term “Redskins” could be seen as offensive, it wasn’t meant that way at the team’s inception. More importantly, I question the heart and underlying objective of most of these “concerned citizens” who seemingly had no problem with the Washington team name during the second half of the last century. In our growing 24-hour news cycle, it has become much easier to shine a spotlight on oneself by finding a cause and screaming to the heavens in favor or opposition. My primary worry is that more of these people are obsessed with personal promotion as opposed to tribal preservation. If I’m a Congressman, it would be easy to utter the phrase “I’m against the name Washington Redskins because it is offensive, and I’m all for human rights.” It brings news cameras to the office, and people will see me on TV touting a cause which sounds good, but really has nothing to do with my elected job.

I truly believe that Dan Snyder will continue fighting to keep his team’s name for two reasons. First, as a lifelong fan, he, like many of us, remember the winning tradition of the team headed by George Allen and Joe Gibbs. The Redskin name is synonymous with success (since a lot of us don’t recall the losing teams of the 50’s and 60’s), three Super Bowl trophies, and the Fight for Old D.C. Second, he is clearly a stubborn man. I don’t think that many people become billionaires by kowtowing to public opinion, even if it’s politically correct. They certainly didn’t become rich by doing what others tell them to do. 

And Snyder could be losing money defending his team’s name. A good marketing expert could tell you the financial windfall which could be gained by changing the team name, then selling old Redskin gear at a premium price while introducing a large new line of team swag. Of course the same expert might theorize that all publicity is good publicity, and Snyder should fight on to keep his own product in the news.

I think that the team name will change before the turn of the next decade. As with any other  company in the free enterprise system, the negativity arising from the court of public opinion will begin to hurt Snyder in his deep pockets. People will start boycotting home games, advertisers will disappear, broadcasters might stop using the team name, and there will be no choice left but to cave to public pressure and change the moniker. But I admire Snyder for sticking to his principle here. The name Redskin surely is offensive to a segment of the Indian population, much like the N-word is to African-Americans. I get that. But why are we only hearing about it now?

In any case, when the name does change, I’m casting my vote for Bravehearts. You wouldn’t have to alter the team logo or mascot too much, and the fight song can stay the same. Hail to the Bravehearts! Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath! Fight for old D.C.!!

Is Braves still OK, or will some other media whore grab a hold of that cause? Hmmm… Land of the Free...Home of the ...OK, I think we’re good.