What will the Redskins new name be?

[JWL]

I will forever refuse to use any other name than Redskins. And let's not back down to the communist mob for once. And make the NFL and all these other organizations pay a price for their wokeness. Don't accept any new name. Push on with Redskins forever

What Snyder is doing here is buying time and hoping this terroristic behavior directed towards him and his team is either defeated or dies down. Let this be a process...a loooong process. They stand to lose a lot of money and a lot of fans giving in as well. The NFL in general is unfortunately going to get slapped upside the head this year by its most loyal fans due to the direction it's taken. The comments on social media are very very ominous.

If you can go up to a Native American and shake his or her hand and say, "Hello, my redskin friend", then continue to argue for the team name. If you are not willing to make such a comment to the face of a Native American, then you need to get behind the removal of the team name.

Edit- I suppose nobody would normally go up to someone and say, "Hello, my white friend" or "Hello, my black friend" but you should get my point. Other than talking about a sports team with the name when do we ever use the term redskin?

[BD Sullivan]

87 years ago this Monday (7/6/33), this article appeared in the Boston Herald:

Boston_Herald_1933-07-06_20.png (20.12 KiB) Viewed 14029 times

[TanksAndSpartans]

I think it was from someone on here or maybe a different board that I heard they already trademarked the name Washington Warriors several years ago.

[JeffreyMiller]

Braves?

[Citizen]

"Communist mob"

[JeffreyMiller]

87 years ago this Monday (7/6/33), this article appeared in the Boston Herald:

Boston_Herald_1933-07-06_20.png

Of course, their was some question as to the legitimacy of Dietz' claim to being Native American. If the team was named in his honor, it might have been based on an untruth. Dietz had played at Carlisle Indian school, but there was some doubt as to whether he truly qualified to do so.

[Reaser]

So far the corporations have backed down to the "communist mob" every time.

They certainly have backed down to the [label of choice] mob over the past couple months during this latest cycle.

I personally just go with what the Native Americans in my home state and the ones that I've talked to have said.

Such as when -for some reason?- white liberals tried to force them to change the mascot on their own land last time the "Redskins" debate was this popular.

Wellpinit High School, on the land of the Spokane Tribe of Indians here in the Great State of Washington, their mascot has been the Redskins for a long time. 113 years or so, I believe. Which they named and they voted to keep in 2014 because they said they liked and took pride in calling themselves the Redskins. I take them at their word as actual Native Americans and not choose-to-be-offended white folk that like to speak for them or talk down to & try to tell them what they should be offended by as if they're a lesser people, or the for-profit alleged natives that try to milk controversy for political or other means of profit.

A high school that has football, basketball, etc that literally sits in the middle of the Spokane Indian Reservation is named the Redskins because that's what they named it and wanted the name to continue to be.

If they ever change it, cool, it's their high school and their choice. I defer to them and no there's no ulterior motive whatever they decide(ed). I can't say that nationally, of course. Particularly in the societal and political climate the country is and has been in for many years. So if someone is for/against and I don't know them or at least of them well enough, the default is to assume they aren't for/against because they're capable of thinking for themselves. The more likely conclusion is they're pushing the agenda of their self-labeled pick-a-side political party of choice.

I prefer a more pure and independent thought process, and direct source(s).

Regardless, I think it's pretty clear the wind is blowing towards the Washington Redskins changing their name.

[RyanChristiansen]

Unlike other names, which are the names of peoples (e.g. Seminoles, even Indians), the name Redskins is a blatantly racist term adopted by a blatantly racist owner that wanted to appeal to racists. I’m not so sure the franchise has much of a leg to stand on to keep the name.

An excerpt from something I've been working on:

George Preston Marshall, who founded the Boston Braves and who later moved the Braves to Washington, D.C., to become the Redskins, remained honest by saying he simply didn't want to hire black athletes. Marshall was a West Virginia native who aligned his team with the Jim Crow laws of his southern fan base, and he swayed league policy. When Marshall moved his franchise to D.C., the move positioned the team as the only one below the Mason-Dixon Line, and Marshall marketed the team as “the team of the South.” The team's fight song was set to the tune of “Dixie,” the de facto anthem of the Confederacy. And so from a pure business standpoint, Marshall did not see value in marketing the game, and his team in particular, to the black audience. In 1933, Marshall negotiated a gentleman’s agreement with NFL owners to ban black players from the league, a ban that no owner would admit to.

The Bears did not hire a black player during their first 32 seasons. The Giants didn't sign a black player until 1925. After releasing Ray Kemp following the 1933 season, the Steelers were all-white until 1952. The Redskins did not sign a black player until 1962, when Marshall succumbed to pressure from the Kennedy administration and the team signed Bobby Mitchell as well as Leroy Jackson, John Nisby, and Ron Hatcher. Marshall's refusal to acknowledge and sign black talent led Washington to become one of the worst teams in the league in the 1950s and early 1960s.

[rhickok1109]

I guess I missed the "mob" demanding that the Redskins' name be changed. I did see that the team's major corporate sponsors called for a name change but, if that constitutes a mob, it's certainly not a "Communist mob"

[ChrisBabcock]

I guess I missed the "mob" demanding that the Redskins' name be changed. I did see that the team's major corporate sponsors called for a name change but, if that constitutes a mob, it's certainly not a "Communist mob"

If anything it is anything BUT Communist. Sounds market driven to me.