ADVERTISEMENT

Changing a team name seems like a no brainer. Because the fan base regardless of beliefs...........

Great idea, so when do they get the Native Americans involved? After they decide to change all the names?

So if Native Americans aren't engaged, who is? Maybe the owners themselves though changing the name is a good idea. Or maybe sponsors and leagues/owners believe that the names are bad for business. It's their money.
 
agree - names have brand value. Baltimore should have been Baltimore Browns not Ravens, as the owners have the brand. The fact that there was a dispute over this shows the concept of brand value. losing a name is a loss of value, UNLESS the brand had diminished to a level where a change adds value. this is the property owners' decision alone. If the customer base (current and future) find that a name is offensive, they will not support the team and/or buy merchandise.....which will lead to advertisers to abandon the brand also. the market provides the answer.

footnote: there are some factors in trademark law that impact names and look in terms of being offensive. I do not think there are any cases that have ever held to force a sports team name change due to offended.
After how Art Modell screwed the city, he had to change the name. Fact is, he was only too happy to change it because he HATED Paul Brown (whom he fired when he bought the team). If you didn't know, the Browns were named after Paul Brown. Model, an advertising exec by trade, also hated the name because it was hard to sell in terms of a logo. There is no icon for "brown".
 
On a somewhat related note, I took a required sensitivity/diversity training at work some years ago, and the instructor told us that “Hold down the fort” was offensive to Native Americans and that we shouldn’t say it. I don’t think that notion has caught on, yet.
 
The business of victimhood.

The Cleveland Indians negotiated with several tribes and they agreed Chief Wahoo had to go but the tribes had no problem with the name Indians so that is what they settled on. the Indians shit-canned chief wahoo last year. So the goalposts have now been moved.

I've also posted this before: There is a small group of native Americans that protest the Tribe's home opener every year. It is usually a pretty good back and forth so I spoke to one about 15 years ago. I started by saying that the nickname is not a pejorative but a compliment. No team wants to use the nickname of "idiots" of "knumbskulls". They use nicknames of Tigers, Lions, Bears, Indians, etc. His response was something like "yeah, I know. I hope they never change the name. This is a great platform to add awareness to the plight of native Americans. The name just gives us an excuse."

Business of victim hood? Who is making money?
 
Business of victim hood? Who is making money?
LOL...I was involved in a bank merger and had to oversee the audit of mortgage loan application approvals. After a few weeks, it was clear that the applications were 100% based on numbers. The bank didn't even know the applicant and addresses were assessed without people intervening. So the merger gets announced and the rainbow coalition immediately files a lawsuit for "redlining" and they'd try to block the merger approval in congress. A few weeks later it is announced that the bank merger was on and operation push was going to get a donation of something like $1.5m. (don't hold me to the number, can recall exactly). Later I was speaking to an exec and asked "why did you pay this group? there was no redlining and it was proven in my paper?" He said "Oblviax, we had preapproved a $3m buy off knowing the lawsuit was coming. It is standard operating procedure in bank mergers. Your paper saved us $1.5m."

Who is making money? The so-called 'victims'
 
LOL...I was involved in a bank merger and had to oversee the audit of mortgage loan application approvals. After a few weeks, it was clear that the applications were 100% based on numbers. The bank didn't even know the applicant and addresses were assessed without people intervening. So the merger gets announced and the rainbow coalition immediately files a lawsuit for "redlining" and they'd try to block the merger approval in congress. A few weeks later it is announced that the bank merger was on and operation push was going to get a donation of something like $1.5m. (don't hold me to the number, can recall exactly). Later I was speaking to an exec and asked "why did you pay this group? there was no redlining and it was proven in my paper?" He said "Oblviax, we had preapproved a $3m buy off knowing the lawsuit was coming. It is standard operating procedure in bank mergers. Your paper saved us $1.5m."

Who is making money? The so-called 'victims'

We're talking about Native Americans and team name changes? Which victim is making money.

And while what you describe happens, your client spent $1.5mm that they didn't have to.
 
So one person gets to decide everything? What if one person just decides to be a pain in the ass and say something bothers them? Hey, it’s not right to name a team after an animal and it bothers me....you must change the name (Bears, Tigers, Lions, etc). If only one person is bothered by smoking, they shouldn’t come to the party.
Unfortunately one person can decide how everyone behaves because of legal threats to an individual or an organization. Take work for example. During the late 80's, even the early 90's we could talk about any subject, laugh about it and move on for the day. But something happened between 1995-2005 where an inappropriate comment could lead to a write up, dismissal or even a potential lawsuit. Today, my work colleagues quietly wish one another Merry Christmas and exchange small gifts in the privacy of ones office. If a particular group feels slighted or offended they can create serious problems for a sports team, so I would not be surprised if the Redskins and Chiefs end up changing their names.
 
We're talking about Native Americans and team name changes? Which victim is making money.

And while what you describe happens, your client spent $1.5mm that they didn't have to.
Why are they protesting then? Are you seriously telling me that the name "Cleveland Indians" is offensive to anyone?

Follow the money.
 
Unfortunately one person can decide how everyone behaves because of legal threats to an individual or an organization. Take work for example. During the late 80's, even the early 90's we could talk about any subject, laugh about it and move on for the day. But something happened between 1995-2005 where an inappropriate comment could lead to a write up, dismissal or even a potential lawsuit. Today, my work colleagues quietly wish one another Merry Christmas and exchange small gifts in the privacy of ones office. If a particular group feels slighted or offended they can create serious problems for a sports team, so I would not be surprised if the Redskins and Chiefs end up changing their names.

Indeed, back then it was part of the culture to make dumb, denigrating comments and move on for the day - we could smoke our Kent Golden Lights in the office and maybe play some grab-ass with the receptionist ..
Oh the memories
 
Why are they protesting then? Are you seriously telling me that the name "Cleveland Indians" is offensive to anyone?

Follow the money.

Protesting? I haven't seen any reports of Native Americans protesting to have team names changed.

But wait a minute, so these "protestors" want the names changed AND they want money, too? Point me in the direction of that owner.
 
So if Native Americans aren't engaged, who is? Maybe the owners themselves though changing the name is a good idea. Or maybe sponsors and leagues/owners believe that the names are bad for business. It's their money.

You're an idiot just throwing crap against the wall.

If we all ignore him, he can answer his own rhetoricals
 
You're an idiot just throwing crap against the wall.

If we all ignore him, he can answer his own rhetoricals

Why don't you tell us what's going on, buttfvck, and provide some documentation in the process?
 
Indeed, back then it was part of the culture to make dumb, denigrating comments and move on for the day - we could smoke our Kent Golden Lights in the office and maybe play some grab-ass with the receptionist ..
Oh the memories
Remember Tareyton Cigarettes? Talk about memories


1965tareytonad.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xnsAAOSwns1a-C-4/s-l400.jpg
 
Protesting? I haven't seen any reports of Native Americans protesting to have team names changed.

But wait a minute, so these "protestors" want the names changed AND they want money, too? Point me in the direction of that owner.
tell me how changing the name of the CLE Indians is going to improve the life of any Native "American?" Thanks in advance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU31trap
So if Native Americans aren't engaged, who is? Maybe the owners themselves though changing the name is a good idea. Or maybe sponsors and leagues/owners believe that the names are bad for business. It's their money.
My point is they might want to get Native Americans involved instead of listening to the professional whiners.
 
My point is they might want to get Native Americans involved instead of listening to the professional whiners.
The Cleveland Indians, for one, did. The result was to kill "Chief Wahoo" but they were fine with the name. Apparently, the goal posts moved.

il_570xN.1541919472_ek70.jpg
 
tell me how changing the name of the CLE Indians is going to improve the life of any Native "American?" Thanks in advance.

As I've said before, not my issue. But getting money should improve someone's life. You said that was going to happen, didn't you?
 
If he offends you he should get a free lifetime subscription to the Lion's Den. But, as I can amply testify, that doesn't work.

I think you give yourself way too much credit Art. You looking for every opportunity to split hairs and tell other people that they are wrong is eye-rolling, but it is not offensive. I am simply willing to point out your nonsense nitpicking of others that is almost certainly an overcompensation for a serious self-esteem issue.
 
As I've said before, not my issue. But getting money should improve someone's life. You said that was going to happen, didn't you?

Well, it is pro sports and it isn't my issue either. its a business. and that is my point, their are professional victims and that is what this is smelling like to me.


When I used to whine, my father and brothers would tell me to "rub some dirt on it". In the end, it got me to make money in a productive way. "Productive" meaning I and my customer both make money with my products. That is how society improves.
 
Most Native Americans don’t find it derogatory.

How many do you know? The ones I know personally are offended by it. They certainly have bigger fish to fry than racist/offensive sports team names, but it's a start.
tell me how changing the name of the CLE Indians is going to improve the life of any Native "American?" Thanks in advance.

And that’s the big issue both the Indians and the Redskins have - there isn’t anyone to negotiate with (like FSU and the Seminole Nation). Both Indians and Redskins (and Chiefs) apply to Native Americans as a whole - not any one particular tribe or band. Of course, people may still have issue with a tribal name, but if the Cherokee or Sioux leadership signed off on a deal (likely in exchange for money), there would be a lot less issue.

Curiously enough, one of the top hit for a Google search of Cherokee is a clothing company that sells in Wal-Mart.

I also saw the Edmonton Eskimos football team are keeping their name for now since after meeting with indigenous leaders for over a year they were unable to determine if a name change was the right course of action.
 
How many do you know? The ones I know personally are offended by it. They certainly have bigger fish to fry than racist/offensive sports team names, but it's a start.


And that’s the big issue both the Indians and the Redskins have - there isn’t anyone to negotiate with (like FSU and the Seminole Nation). Both Indians and Redskins (and Chiefs) apply to Native Americans as a whole - not any one particular tribe or band. Of course, people may still have issue with a tribal name, but if the Cherokee or Sioux leadership signed off on a deal (likely in exchange for money), there would be a lot less issue.

Curiously enough, one of the top hit for a Google search of Cherokee is a clothing company that sells in Wal-Mart.

I also saw the Edmonton Eskimos football team are keeping their name for now since after meeting with indigenous leaders for over a year they were unable to determine if a name change was the right course of action.
The ones I know don’t have a problem with any of the names. They can see changing the Redskins, but not the rest of them.
 
How many do you know? The ones I know personally are offended by it. They certainly have bigger fish to fry than racist/offensive sports team names, but it's a start.


And that’s the big issue both the Indians and the Redskins have - there isn’t anyone to negotiate with (like FSU and the Seminole Nation). Both Indians and Redskins (and Chiefs) apply to Native Americans as a whole - not any one particular tribe or band. Of course, people may still have issue with a tribal name, but if the Cherokee or Sioux leadership signed off on a deal (likely in exchange for money), there would be a lot less issue.

Curiously enough, one of the top hit for a Google search of Cherokee is a clothing company that sells in Wal-Mart.

I also saw the Edmonton Eskimos football team are keeping their name for now since after meeting with indigenous leaders for over a year they were unable to determine if a name change was the right course of action.
totally agree. And, I do find the "redskins" name as a bit of a pejorative. I don't find that to be the case with "Indians", "Braves" or Seminoles. No team uses a nickname to be offensive to their team and fans. No team is going to be called "The Washington Asshats" as appropriate as that may be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heckmans
The ones I know don’t have a problem with any of the names. They can see changing the Redskins, but not the rest of them.

It's not my decision, but if asked I would say:

Redskins: Racist
Chiefs: Not Racist
Indians: Not Racist (but, racist mascot that has been terminated)
Blackhawks: Not Racist
Braves: Not Racist, but mascot could use some work
 
  • Like
Reactions: OaktonDave
Tom McAndrew can answer this post. I would hope I don't offend and If I did say something that was so offensive then I should be, No?

Mr Potter, my reply was academic in nature.
You stated very clearly that one person being offended should drive major change.
So if a single native american claiming to be offended should require the redskins to change their name, why shouldn't one person being offended by your (or anyone's) posts require removal from this board, as an example?

You surely see the folly and peril in this position, no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pandaczar12
If Redskins is RACIST. :eek: , can we eliminate “white” and “black” (the terms about people, not the people :eek: )?

:eek:
 
If Redskins is RACIST. :eek: , can we eliminate “white” and “black” (the terms about people, not the people :eek: )?

:eek:

Is there a team nickname at play here? Some kind of 'official' use of those words? If not, good luck policing vernacular.
 
totally agree. And, I do find the "redskins" name as a bit of a pejorative. I don't find that to be the case with "Indians", "Braves" or Seminoles. No team uses a nickname to be offensive to their team and fans. No team is going to be called "The Washington Asshats" as appropriate as that may be.

And this is the folly in all of this. Teams names are chosen for local affiliation(Phillies, Nationals, Texans) or to command respect. It might be strength (bears, lions, Titans), hunters(eagles, falcons, jaguars, bengals), historical(patriots, 76ers), mystical(magic, wizards, mystics).

Were the Oilers offensive to oil workers? No, it paid homage to the strength and resolve needed to work in the oil fields of texas. Was the mascot derogatory because it was a caricature of those individuals?
Pirates were not meek people. Does that change because Tampa's mascot is a caricature of a pirate or because the mascot in Pittsburgh is cross-eyed parrot in a bandana?
Penguins are skilled survivalists and marine hunters in cold, harsh conditions - a fitting mascot for an ice hockey team. Is that diminished because the mascot looks more like a deranged muppet baby?

The truth is, that indian and tribal team names are chosen out of respect to native americans as warriors and hunters and to their societies. Whatever anyone feels or how the meaning of something can evolve or be twisted in the context of a certain time period, the notion that a sports team would seek to convey anything other than strength and respect with their team name is stupid and illogical.
 
And this is the folly in all of this. Teams names are chosen for local affiliation(Phillies, Nationals, Texans) or to command respect. It might be strength (bears, lions, Titans), hunters(eagles, falcons, jaguars, bengals), historical(patriots, 76ers), mystical(magic, wizards, mystics).

Were the Oilers offensive to oil workers? No, it paid homage to the strength and resolve needed to work in the oil fields of texas. Was the mascot derogatory because it was a caricature of those individuals?
Pirates were not meek people. Does that change because Tampa's mascot is a caricature of a pirate or because the mascot in Pittsburgh is cross-eyed parrot in a bandana?
Penguins are skilled survivalists and marine hunters in cold, harsh conditions - a fitting mascot for an ice hockey team. Is that diminished because the mascot looks more like a deranged muppet baby?

The truth is, that indian and tribal team names are chosen out of respect to native americans as warriors and hunters and to their societies. Whatever anyone feels or how the meaning of something can evolve or be twisted in the context of a certain time period, the notion that a sports team would seek to convey anything other than strength and respect with their team name is stupid and illogical.
Agreed. But I feel "redskins" is over the line. It is aways great to listen but this goes on and on and on and on.
 
Yeah re-brand an NFL franchise. Its so easy Dinger can do it. He trades in pro sports franchises and he'll collateralized his house for Dan Snyder to hedge off.some of that downside risk

What a dink.

Glad you got your tantrum out of the way. If you have anything substantive to add, use your words.
 
Indeed, back then it was part of the culture to make dumb, denigrating comments and move on for the day - we could smoke our Kent Golden Lights in the office and maybe play some grab-ass with the receptionist ..
Oh the memories
Actually my boss smoked a pipe, he was allowed to smoke in his office until 1995. He retired in 1998 truly a great man. I guess we judge the past from our own personal experiences.
 
It's not my decision, but if asked I would say:

Redskins: Racist
Chiefs: Not Racist
Indians: Not Racist (but, racist mascot that has been terminated)
Blackhawks: Not Racist
Braves: Not Racist, but mascot could use some work
I agree.
 
Agreed. But I feel "redskins" is over the line. It is aways great to listen but this goes on and on and on and on.

...and that is a conversation that can be had, but frankly, it's never been the conversation.
It's always been that all team names related to native americans are racist and pejorative which is absurd since they are selected to convey power and respect.

To be clear, this is not meant to be argumentative. Always enjoy having the conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obliviax
DC Sports Radio is all Redskins name change these days. Chad Dukes, the more likable, smarter, funnier DC version of Mark Madden (is he dead?) is exasperated by it all but some good names have been mentioned. Here is one that gets a lot of traction:

Washington Redtails

EcHBpOlUcAAxMjX


Helmet needs work but the logos are nice IMO Keep the color scheme and the script 'R' (which looks great) and you have a winner.

Another idea might be something like the Washington Red Foxes (or Redfoxes, or Fox, or Red Fox), which are native to Northern Virginia and the area. No other major sports team has a fox logo and it lends itself well to a cheerleader team nickname (vixen is a female fox). Also, can keep color scheme and 'R' logo. Just spitballin' here....
 
DC Sports Radio is all Redskins name change these days. Chad Dukes, the more likable, smarter, funnier DC version of Mark Madden (is he dead?) is exasperated by it all but some good names have been mentioned. Here is one that gets a lot of traction:

Washington Redtails


Helmet needs work but the logos are nice IMO Keep the color scheme and the script 'R' (which looks great) and you have a winner.

Another idea might be something like the Washington Red Foxes (or Redfoxes, or Fox, or Red Fox), which are native to Northern Virginia and the area. No other major sports team has a fox logo and it lends itself well to a cheerleader team nickname (vixen is a female fox). Also, can keep color scheme and 'R' logo. Just spitballin' here....

Something tells me the fans and other people of the DC area will be more offended by the word "fox" than they are by the current team name.
 
Something tells me the fans and other people of the DC area will be more offended by the word "fox" than they are by the current team name.
I do have to wonder why a person the low number of people being offended by the name "redskins" gets so much attention while a larger number of people being offended by scantily clad cheerleaders get zero. There are a lot of people upset by the objectification of women.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SheldonJoe2215
ADVERTISEMENT