Skip to content

Momentum builds for a Redskins name change, and one man can make it happen

Getty Images

It was mentioned in today’s one-liners, but the topic demands an article of its own.

The NFL franchise assigned to Washington, D.C., has a name that is both racist and offensive.  Most Americans have become desensitized to that fact.  But it is a fact.

And the time has come for the name to change.

Last Friday, Mike Wise of the Washington Post pressed Commissioner Roger Goodell on the topic, during Goodell’s annual pre-Super Bowl press conference.  (It’s often called the “State of the League” press conference, but at any given moment the “State of the League” can be summarized thusly:  (1) we’re really rich; (2) we’re really popular; and (3) we do what we want.)

Goodell provided a non-answer that produced the faint sound of tap shoes.  “I don’t think anybody wants to offend anybody,” Goodell ultimately said.

Nobody may want to offend anybody, but the name offends plenty.  Even if few notice.

I think when people say Redskins we hear cup or bedspread,” Wise said at a Thursday symposium conducted by the National Museum of the American Indian, via  “The sound is the same, but when you go to the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota that name is equivalent to the ‘N’ word.”

Wise, with whom we’ve disagreed a time or two in the past, is right on this one.  It’s an offensive name.  And we’re all numb to it.

Indeed, we’re now numb to the fact that, for more than a generation, efforts have been undertaken to try to change it.  For many, it’s become a quaint footnote to America’s ultimate reality show.  A small pocket of people are complaining, no action is being taken in response, and it’ll stay that way until the small pocket of complainers find something else about which to complain.

It shouldn’t.  The name should change.  And there’s likely only one way it will change, at any point in the next 10-15 years.

Quarterback Robert Griffin III needs to stand up and demand that it change.

Athletes who stay firmly in the middle of the road rarely are criticized for not taking a stand.  Michael Jordan stayed out of political issues, because as he once reasoned, “Republicans buy shoes, too.”  (Of course, there’s a chance Jordan never actually said that.)

But Griffin has a unique opportunity.  There’s no real downside to requesting that the Redskins change their name.  Few truly believe in their hearts the name isn’t offensive.  Instead, fans of the team resist changing the name because, for them, the term taps directly into their football loyalties.  With Griffin becoming the player to whom those loyalties most fervently now trace, he’s the only one who can make it happen.

Other than, of course, the owner of the team.  But Daniel Snyder has shown no inclination to change the name during his 14 years of owning it — in large part because he has been for decades one of those fans who see “Redskins” not as a word that connotes hate, but as the representation of the NFL team he loves.

Here’s hoping Griffin does the right thing, since Griffin could be the only man to persuade Snyder to follow suit.

If Snyder won’t, perhaps at least 24 of his colleagues in ownership eventually will compel him to.

Permalink 350 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
350 Responses to “Momentum builds for a Redskins name change, and one man can make it happen”
  1. glac1 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:21 PM

    anyone offended can follow the team of their choice… and an individual could refuse to work or play for them. So far it hasn’t been an issue for those who are closely involved with the Redskins….. so the leftist media should shut up.

  2. RedRuffensor says: Feb 9, 2013 2:21 PM

    It should be changed, because it is clearly offensive to aboriginal Americans.

    Why not adopt the name of one of the local Indian tribes (see, e.g., Chicago Black Hawks)? That way, the theme is the same but the offensive name is gone.

  3. tremoluxman says: Feb 9, 2013 2:21 PM

    How about the Washington Warriors? If that’s not offensive to the Native American community, they could still use the logo.

  4. charger383 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM

    I quit liking the washington-balitmore basketball team when they quit being The Bullets

  5. howiefeltersnatch says: Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM

    This is complete silliness. If Native Americans are that offended, lets change the names of all teams that represent those citizens and pretend like they never even existed.

    People only want the name change to make themselves feel like they are somehow intellectually superior to those that do not. No one cares about the feelings of anyone.

  6. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM

    I think the real issue is the Packers name, that should be addressed first. It’s not cool to tease the gays anymore and that name is disgusting.

  7. fran021 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:23 PM

    I don’t think you can put it on RGIII to see that the change happens, and I agree it is long overdue.

    What if there were a team called the Mississippi Blackskins? How would people feel about that?

  8. rg3andthensome says: Feb 9, 2013 2:25 PM

    This is a joke…Name Stays….Ya’ll leave if you don’t like it…Go watch soccer.

  9. rr2000k says: Feb 9, 2013 2:26 PM

    I’m offended by Roger Goodell.

  10. lionsfan2014 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:27 PM

    Snyder being a businessman who cares about cash, I would think he would see that if he changed the name then all the fans would have to go buy new jerseys, sweatshirts, car flags, etc., so he’d print money on the merchandise. Then the nfl would have stop him from changing it every few years thereafter.

  11. ghostofnflpresent says: Feb 9, 2013 2:27 PM

    The Washington Thereisalwaysnextyears has a ring to it

  12. dietrich43 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:27 PM

    Packers were named for the Fish Packers, the local industry. Like the Steelers arent named for burglars.

    I think most fans of the Washington football club would be happy to separate their past glory from the arrogant little twerp who owns them now.

  13. shackdelrio says: Feb 9, 2013 2:27 PM

    It’s pretty amazing to think they have not changed the name or the logo yet. Look at all the colleges and universities (Illinois, Stanford, St Johns, Syracuse, etc.) that have changed their names and/or mascots. Snyder should do the same. Why not bring back the helmet with the “R” on it?

  14. poiuyt7 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:28 PM

    tremoluxman says:
    Feb 9, 2013 2:21 PM
    How about the Washington Warriors? If that’s not offensive to the Native American community, they could still use the logo.

    Ask Marquette University about that one.

  15. insertcrypticnameher says: Feb 9, 2013 2:29 PM

    bunch of mindless drudgebots whining about the “PC Police” are about to infest this page, but anyway you slice it the name is ridiculously racist and has only survived this long because native Americans are so marginalized.

    No other ethnic group is subject to so much derogatory cartooning as they are, let alone one that was a victim of a genocide by the ancestors of the same dittoheads pleating on about how sensitive everyone is and wah waah something something tradition 1950s.

  16. tennesseeoilers says: Feb 9, 2013 2:29 PM

    You’re spot on. When I saw the headline, I thought you were pointing at Dan Snyder being the man who could do it. As I started reading, my thought was, “Actually, I bet RG III could be the catalyst for change.” And then you nailed it.

    I think it’d be cool for the team to change it’s long beloved name. I say that as someone who was a die-hard (not die never) Redskins fan from 1978 until 1997 when our little grassroots movement brought the Oilers to Nashville.

  17. johnster67 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:29 PM

    its only offensive to those with nothing better to do than bitch about others. Get your own house in order first. There is no such thing as a non-offensive name. The Dallas Cowboys are the most incompetent, weakest team in the league. I doubt real cowboys like that association. What about the Saints and their bountygate. I best the Pope doesn’t appreciate that, nor those anointed as saints with them playing a violent sport. 49ers are gold diggers, Is that complimentary? Real eagles don’t complain about Philadelphia only because they don’t speak English. What exactly is Giant about the New York franchise? Do you think Southwest Airlines like that other team in New York calling their inept selves Jets?
    Get real… this is polical correctness run amok.

  18. hellafiedfc says: Feb 9, 2013 2:30 PM

    we have become a nation of sissies….

  19. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 2:31 PM

    Does anyone here know that the Indians used to call the white man, the white man and they called the black man, the black man. Redskins is a tribute, not an insult.

  20. gbar22 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:31 PM

    As a redskins fan our loyalties are to the team first and always will be. Players come and go but the team always remains. Your suggestion that a single player could change our minds just because he had a great year and might potentially be our franchise quarterback (and I say might only because we need to see him do this a few more years and stay healthy) is insulting to a true fan of the team. Bandwagoners love Tom Brady real fans love the patriots. Case closed.

  21. dfeltz says: Feb 9, 2013 2:31 PM

    HAHAHAHA – This article was okay until you think RG3 should do something about it. That would be the absolute worse thing for a 2nd year franchise quarterback to do to an extremely proud fan base.

  22. tonyugoh says: Feb 9, 2013 2:32 PM

    I love all the comments here complaining about this article, as if you guys are Native American. Fact is, its a regrettable part of our nation’s history and if you refuse to understand how offensive the Redskins name is, maybe your should go educate yourself by reading some history books.

  23. gibbsandflair says: Feb 9, 2013 2:32 PM

    Change it along with K.C. Chiefs. What is good for one is good for all

  24. buttsecksprovider says: Feb 9, 2013 2:32 PM

    Just rename them the Washington Nigskipoos. That’ll fix EVERYTHING.

  25. gbar22 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:32 PM

    Also as a gay man I concur with onebucplace the packers name is highly offensive…

  26. wrenches2pipes says: Feb 9, 2013 2:33 PM

    Why are they called the Packers?

  27. profootballwalk says: Feb 9, 2013 2:33 PM

    The team’s name should really represent the city. How about the Washington Lobbyists? Washington Bureaucrats? Washington Regulators? Washington Revenuers? Washington Bloviators?

  28. chicagobtech says: Feb 9, 2013 2:35 PM

    The Blackhawks were not named after the Indian tribe, they were named after the machine gun unit that Frederic McLaughlin commanded in World War I. That unit was not named after an Indian tribe either, it was named after a Sauk Nation chief.

  29. jimnaizeeum says: Feb 9, 2013 2:35 PM

    How about the “Bribing Lobbyists”…or “Crooked Politicians”?

  30. stevemcilveen says: Feb 9, 2013 2:36 PM

    Really? this is rediculous. The PC liberal media has another lame cause to make up. Get a life and worry about real issues.

  31. noburghfan says: Feb 9, 2013 2:36 PM

    Where does it end ? There would still be the
    Browns , and the ‘burghs throw-backs are
    offensive to bumble bees .

  32. rammmjammm says: Feb 9, 2013 2:37 PM

    Can’t they just drop the “Red” and be the Washington Skins?

    Kinda weird, I know but Tampa Bay did it in MLB a few years back.

    Or I know, how about the Washington Pigskins!

  33. sdakota says: Feb 9, 2013 2:37 PM

    seriously? ya, the Redskins picked that name because they thought it was a way to put down the American Indian… give me a break.

  34. wgray981 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:37 PM

    Right it is SO offensive. Notice how I never get offended by the “Yankees” or the goofy celtics logo? Know why? Because I am proud to be white. People are such losers about this type of stuff. It isn’t hurting anybody so get over it.

  35. azr1988 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:38 PM

    I have read this blog at least once a day since it was a one man show back in 2005. I have for the most part either agreed with, or ignored, the most controversial or inflammatory declarations that have been made over the years. I appreciate the amazing job that Mr. Florio and his team have done over the years bringing every relevant piece of football news to one place.

    With that said, I can state with almost complete certainty that this may be the single most asinine point ever made on this blog. To believe that a 23 year old boy, who may not even play next season in part due to his own willful stupidity, should stand up and demand that a logo and mascot should change…come on back down to the real world.

  36. whoisedgy says: Feb 9, 2013 2:39 PM

    Isn’t it a bit presumptious to give a rookie quarterback who may not even be in the league in a few years the “power” to change a franchise name. Nothing better to talk about today?

  37. helloanybodyhome says: Feb 9, 2013 2:39 PM

    The “Washington Money Grubbing Politicians” has a nice ring

  38. andyp03 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:40 PM

    I’m an Eagles fan so I don’t really care either way, but placing this issue on RGIII’s shoulders is completely unfair to him. I almost don’t even know if Florio is serious or not.

  39. wrenches2pipes says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    Washington Steelers

  40. gibbsandflair says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    They can call them paleskins. Use my likeness a bald white guy. Im not offended

  41. fredneck2 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    why is it the responsibility of RGIII to speak on behalf of changing the name? it seems that it is viewed as the right thing for RGIII to do if he happens to agree with you. those who have been on this bandwagon are just looking for an advocate.

    get off his case and quit using tactics like this. just make your case and if it is the right hing to do based on your argument then change the name. get rid of the emotion and hype.

  42. bison4me says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    I’ve never met Mr. Florio before, but I wish he would interview Elders from the many Nations across the country. Talk to the members of those Nations and we would tell him like we have told the Supreme Court, newspapers, pollsters, and other surveyors, that we are NOT offended by the name Redskins. Please stop saying its offensive.

    I’m one of the people you think is offended by the team’s name or the logo on the helmet. What would anger me more is to see the likeness of the warriors of old removed from the helmet. As a boy it was the team I was drawn to and is the team when presented with the other team helmets. Many Nation members are drawn to it, and to add a bow on top, it’s rival are the Cowboys. It’s sport, its fun, and it’s insulting for you to tell me what I should be insulted over, when the name and logo are held in high regard amongst my friends and family. I understand that some are put out by it, but an overwhelmingly majority love the logo and name.

    RG3 please do not come against the name, and please keep that Brave on your helmet!

  43. 69finfan says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    I’m vertically challenged (you know, short) so should I be offended by the NY Giants or Tenn Titans?

  44. gregstep says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM

    They can finally be the Deadskins since they have been so bad for so many years.

  45. bradford08 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:41 PM


    Now that this article is online those of you that live in the world of political correctness can go have a juice box and snack.

  46. lennydpocketqb says: Feb 9, 2013 2:43 PM

    This is insane that this keeps being a issue. Please let this happen. Please let this happen. LOLOLOLOL

  47. pftbillsfan says: Feb 9, 2013 2:43 PM

    That’s ludicrous to ask RG3 to demand a change. You would then hammer him if he demanded a player be taken off the team because he had too much control. There is a double standard and you’re placing too much on his shoulders.

  48. fantasychumps says: Feb 9, 2013 2:43 PM

    This is ridiculous. Tired of all of the politically correct horse s**t. I’m of native american decent and don’t find the name offensive. I think you will find that an overwhelming majority do not care if the Redskins keep their name.

  49. beastmnb says: Feb 9, 2013 2:44 PM

    How about the Washington Bullets?

    oh, wait……….

  50. garrisjs says: Feb 9, 2013 2:44 PM

    First of all, if you want RG3 to lead the charge for a name change, everyone responsible for ‘fixing’ the results of NFL games better put the fix in for RG3 to win SuperBowls or else he won’t have the political capital to pull off a name change.
    As a life long Redskins fan, I’d happily trade the Redskins name for some SuperBowl wins by RG3.
    Washington RedWolves would be pretty sweet.

    2nd: of course the name is offensive and it should be changed, just as all of the following NFL team names should be changed as well:

    Cowboys- Offensive to Native Americans. Symbolizes the aggression taken against Native Americans by United States. Also, Cowboys are the earliest example of organized crime in America (according to the movie Tombstone which is the greatest ever)

    Giants, Titans- Offensive to abnormally large people. Team names imply that large people are mean and brutish.

    Vikings, Buccaneers, Raiders- Offensive to victims of theft and oppression. All team names represent barbaric ruthlessness.

    Packers- Offensive to the lactose intolerant.

    Saints- Offensive to atheists.

    Lions, Bears, Eagles, Falcons, Panthers, Seahawks, Ravens, Bengals, Jaguars- Offensive to victims of assault/battery. All team names represent predatory aggression.

    49ers- Offensive to families living in poverty. Symbolizes greed and get rich quick lifestyle.

    Patriots- Offensive to immigrants in the US. Implies that only descendants of Revolutionary War vets are true Americans.

    Dolphins- Offensive to animal rights activists who believe dolphins should be allowed to stay in their natural ocean habitat rather than be captured and forced to perform for humans at Sea World.

    Jets- Offensive to all Americans. Team name is the weapon used by terrorists in 9-11 attack.

    Steelers- Offensive to the hardworking members of the plastics industry.

    Cardinals- Offensive to anyone who had their eye pecked out by a cardinal.

    Browns- Offensive to little people.
    Mascot is a ‘Brownie’ which is an elf like character.

    Colts, Broncos, Rams, Bills- Offensive to anyone who has been trampled by a stampede.

    Texans- Offensive to peaceful natives of Texas. Implies all texans are fierce and willing to go to war without just cause or a plan to keep the peace.

    Chiefs- Offensive to Native Americans. Implies all Native Americans are aggressive war loving clans.

    Chargers- Offensive to electrocution victims.

    If you start with sweeping changes of ALL offensive names in ALL of sports (high school, college, pros) then you would have a better shot than singling out the Redskins.

  51. insertcrypticnameher says: Feb 9, 2013 2:46 PM

    wgray981 says:
    Feb 9, 2013 2:37 PM

    “Right it is SO offensive. Notice how I never get offended by the “Yankees” or the goofy celtics logo? Know why? Because I am proud to be white. People are such losers about this type of stuff. It isn’t hurting anybody so get over it.”

    Both of those teams are self-named by the group they represent. Yankees is a term that simply refers to a region of the country and is in no way derogatory.

    Why don’t you let the actual targets of the slight decide if it “hurts anybody.”

    And why are you “proud to be white?” You had zero control over it, so maybe start accomplishing something to be actually proud of and lose the sense of entitlement that tells you you can dictate to others whether they should care about it.

  52. beedubyatoo says: Feb 9, 2013 2:47 PM

    How about the Vilkings? I had a friend in school who was from Norway, and he was pissed!!

  53. mattman56 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:48 PM

    That is ridiculous. That name has been around longer than most of us have been alive. As a Giants fan, I couldn’t imagine a different named team playing in Washington.

  54. rockislander says: Feb 9, 2013 2:48 PM

    Wow, can’t believe many of these comments. Seriously the guy somewhere above comparing Redskins to Eagles; and how eagles don’t complain and how the Pope might be offended by the ‘Saints’. C’mon man. None of the other nicknames in the NFL refer to a race of people. And in this case, it’s a derogatory and racist term. If you can’t see that, then you’re not very intelligent. If Daniel Snyder was Native American, I bet they would have changed their name the day after he bought them.

  55. kev86 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:48 PM

    Can we just say Skins? Wash

  56. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 2:49 PM

    How about the Washington RGBskins the three color process in the name would allow for any color combination so that way it wouldn’t exclude anyone AND it kind of sounds like RG3. It’s a win-win, everyone is included and think of all the color choices for merchandise.

  57. clu1perceiver says: Feb 9, 2013 2:50 PM

    What is needed here is a healthy dose of DE-SENSITIVITY training.

  58. replacementwriter says: Feb 9, 2013 2:50 PM

    Apparently you can speak freely as long as use don’t use words on the PC banned words list, though some words are allowed to be spoken dependent on your race and seemingly harmless phrases may not be said by certain races because they could be code for racist stuff. There is no freedom of speech, there is freedom from being offended, unless it offends rich white males, thats ok.

  59. beedubyatoo says: Feb 9, 2013 2:51 PM

    Here’s the actual story on where the Packers’ nickname came from.

    The Green Bay Packers were founded on August 11, 1919[1] by former high-school football rivals Earl “Curly” Lambeau and George Whitney Calhoun.[7] Lambeau solicited funds for uniforms from his employer, the Indian Packing Company. He was given $500 for uniforms and equipment, on the condition that the team be named for its sponsor. The Green Bay Packers have played in their original city longer than any other team in the NFL.

  60. broncobrewer says: Feb 9, 2013 2:51 PM

    If you ask American Indians they don’t care. They were asked a few years ago about the Seminoles, redskins and fighting Sioux and they said they thought it was a away for their heritage to live on. It’s the liberal media making it a big deal. Why don’t you go ask the American Indians if they want it changed again? Ask the people that really matter not GODell

  61. kev86 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:51 PM

    Can we just use Skins? Indian can just be the logo representing all skin.

  62. eaglesfan94 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:51 PM

    I agree that if the team were named after a slur for a more prominent group than Native Americans, then it would have been changed a long time ago.. but I don’t really care, it’s their team they can call themselves what they like.

    To the dude who said he’s proud to white… why? Be proud of your achievements and accomplishments, not your skin color that you can’t control. Not saying to be ashamed that you’re white (I am too) but skin color shouldn’t be a source of “pride” no matter what your race is.

  63. nepo784 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:52 PM

    Drew Brees demands an explanation

  64. beedubyatoo says: Feb 9, 2013 2:52 PM

    Sorry, forgot the attribution. That was from Wickapedia.

  65. beastmnb says: Feb 9, 2013 2:52 PM

    I think the Washington Wigmans is pretty intimidating.

  66. hbwestcoastsales says: Feb 9, 2013 2:52 PM

    I’m part Indian. Not offended.

  67. theobamaphones says: Feb 9, 2013 2:52 PM

    Besides renewing that stalking restraining order on logicalvoices, this needs to be at the top of Robert Griffin the third’s agenda this off season.

  68. boknowsvt says: Feb 9, 2013 2:54 PM

    Washington Federals. They can buy the old WWF logo and use that. They could have “The Million Dollar Man” Ted Dibiase out for the coin toss. The best part would have to be when someone on Washington knocked out an opposing player, Dibiase could come out and stuff 100 dollar bills in the guys mouth while laughing manically.

  69. raiderlyfe510 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:55 PM

    Kind of foolish to change the name of a brand that is associated with 3 Lombardis. I doubt that most native Americans are offended by it. It’s honoring the bravery and fight of a culture.

    I think the Cowboys vs Redskins thanksgiving day games is pretty insensitive though.

  70. bengalsstillsuck says: Feb 9, 2013 2:55 PM

    Change everyone names then animals have feelings to oh how bout the Vikings or the Irish or maybe the patriots ppl cld fine that offensive too just change every team name to colors how bout that wow this world is filled with whimps.

  71. kennyrogerschicken says: Feb 9, 2013 2:57 PM

    onebucplace says:
    Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM
    I think the real issue is the Packers name, that should be addressed first. It’s not cool to tease the gays anymore and that name is disgusting.


    Hey moron – it was never cool to tease gay people.

    Maybe, since we’re being completely politically correct, we change the Buccaneers and Raiders names to something less offensive – weren’t pirates known to rape and murder? Maybe the Vikings, too, since they were famed for the same thing – and their mascot Ragnar historically was the worst killer them all. What about the Bears? Don’t bears kill people? What about the Cowboys? Didn’t cowboys kill indians like we see in the movies? When does it end?

  72. replacementwriter says: Feb 9, 2013 2:57 PM

    Don’t worry if you are not offended by the term “redskins” Native Americans, the PC police are more than happy to be offended for you and force everyone to bend to their narrow will.

    Wait a minute, natives were called indians because columbus thought he found a new route to India, this is offensive to both natives and people from India… It’s like calling the Japanese Koreans for 520 years! This PC injustice must be repaired!

  73. ripper327 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:57 PM

    I think it’s more of a fact that a lot of Americans are desensitized to what real racism is. Is the name of redskin potatoes racist? I imagine more fans appreciate the admirable, football-valuable attributes of a people they don’t consider inherently inferior than do revel in the destruction and ongoing mocking of the same.

    Is there any research on this? I recall reading some years ago that when Miami of Ohio was exploring a team name change, several local tribespeople turned out against the change.

  74. vindicatus says: Feb 9, 2013 2:58 PM

    Get over it.

  75. by2117 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:58 PM

    Here’s the problem. You do on they all go. Steel workers are offended. Gold miners are offended. PETA is offended so there goes every animal. Hell I’m offended by people being offended. You open the door, everybody will run through it.

  76. seahawks80 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:58 PM

    I don’t like cats so let’s change the Panthers, Lions and Bengals too……..this story is ridiculous!!!

  77. bigredscouting says: Feb 9, 2013 2:59 PM

    So this post is a call to arms for RGIII? America’s gotten too sensitive. I understand why Redskins is offensive, but this is another kick to a dead horse that leaves nothing, but apathy for everyone’s gripes over not being called this or that.

  78. sg419 says: Feb 9, 2013 2:59 PM

    I guess we will have to change the name of the Saints also. Don’t want to offend a bunch of atheists

  79. rick1k6 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:00 PM

    First time poster here. Being a Mel Brooks fan how about the Washington Blazing Saddles? Some already know the title song. Or maybe the Washington Little Big Horns? Some probably think that was their last great victory. Their new slogan: “Custer had it coming.”

  80. diehardcatz says: Feb 9, 2013 3:00 PM

    I’m a Panthers fan and have no affinity for the Washington team, but the Redskins name is NOT offensive! In fact, it’s exactly the opposite. The fact that the team is named after the American Indian is an honor! Not just that, but the ‘Skins are a classic, American football franchise. To change the name would be ridiculous and would be detrimental to the history of our game.

  81. offthelows says: Feb 9, 2013 3:01 PM

    Well, as long as we’re going down this road, the District of Columbia was named after Christopher Columbus, and he doesn’t exactly have the best reputation amongst Native Americans…

  82. larrydavid7000 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:01 PM

    Don’t even put this on RGIII its not for him to take a side. The Redskins have been in D.C. since 1937 and we are still talking about this issue. People get over it this coming from a native american.I have not or been offend by this name at anytime.

  83. crazyphatdude14 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:01 PM

    Why do leftist, liberals think that this is offensive? As a Native American I can tell you that most Natives don’t care about the name. A few do, but those people are also the ones that want to take back the country and send all the whites packing, and/or Native Leaders who think it’s their job to protect the Native image by removing anything that the world deems “negative or insulting” to Natives. “Redskin” is not like “the ‘N-word'” anywhere in this country. I’ve been to Pine Ridge, Eagle Butte, Winnebago, Ho-Chunk, and many more. I am a Native American and what we are sick of is the media always speaking for us and acting like they know better. Has anybody asked the Natives what they think? Yes, NBC sports in fact carried an article where 90% of polled Natives acknowledged that the name doesn’t bother them. But that isn’t what the media is talking about. They claim that it is offensive to so many people and we have to make sure that they are happy. The real problem is that the media thinks political correctness has to be shoved down all our throats so they will say anything to push their agenda. The University of Northern Colorado has a basketball team named the “Fighting Whities”. But nobody is freaking out about that??? Because it’s ok to use Caucasians as a mascot but not Natives? Whatever. People take things too seriously. Also, this country needs to stop always worrying about what the minority vote thinks. As a Native American, I think it’s wrong that a single “offended” Native can stop a Columbus parade. Which has happened before. I HATE columbus, but it’s not right that a single person can negate a whole city’s celebration of the major incident that ultimately brought their ancestors here and they now live in a free land. Columbus was evil, but without what he did, this land of freedom wouldn’t exist. And with that Freedom, we are allowed to have our own beliefs; instead of the Politically Correct Media trying to tell us what we should be offended by, and how we need to change it. “Redskins” should stay. Oh, yeah. One more thing. GO RAIDERS!!!!!

  84. toooverbearing says: Feb 9, 2013 3:01 PM

    “Redskins” is not the equivalent to “Chiefs”, “Indians”, “Celtics”, “Yankees” or “Warriors”. It literally clumps together a bunch of people by the color of their skin. If native Americans find no offense in that, then this is a non-issue. But if an overwhelming amount do, I think that trumps the opinions of everyone else regarding the right thing to do.

    If this is the case, and the only barrier to a name change is financial, I would sign a pledge and happily go through with a promise to by a hat and a jersey representing the franchise’s new name. In a nod to their own past, I think they should call themselves the “Hogs” after the championship caliber offensive line that blocked for John Riggins and protected Joe Thiesman in his pre-bladder problem days.

  85. barrywhererufrom says: Feb 9, 2013 3:03 PM

    the same leftist you brought you overseas contingency operations instead of the war on terror.. enough the PC b*******.. about the Washington abominations

  86. highlander72 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:03 PM

    I’m part Indian, but mostly American. It doesn’t bother me about the name, i’m also not a baby. I look white, people call me white. That too doesn’t bother me.

    I imagine most Indians would get over the insensitivity of it all if we allowed Indian owned to open around the DC/Baltimore area. If it has money attached to it, most are very forgiving.

    I wonder how long before the liberal sissies start complaining about animal nicknames exploiting their name-bearing creatures and teams should pay a fee to the WWF for royalties?

  87. Robert says: Feb 9, 2013 3:04 PM

    Washington Redstorms 2014!

  88. a55hol says: Feb 9, 2013 3:05 PM

    According to Richard C King’s “The Native American Mascot Controversy” (2002):

    Despite vocal and legal action from Native American groups and scholars, the majority of people surveyed on the subject do not find the name offensive. Following the 1992 Super Bowl protests, the Washington Post posted a survey in which “89 percent of those surveyed said that the name should stay.” In a study performed by the National Annenberg Survey, Native Americans from the 48 continental U.S. states were asked “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or does it not bother you?” In response, ninety percent replied that the name is acceptable, while nine percent said that it was offensive, and one percent would not answer.

    90% acceptable!! drop it.

  89. says: Feb 9, 2013 3:05 PM

    We Americans are becoming way too soft and sensitive.

    Whatever happened to “sticks an stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” ??

    What do we tell our children when they are dealt with something similar to this? I doubt your answer has anything to do with starting an activist group to change what YOU can’t ignore.

    If you’re that insecure that a team name hurts your feelings, you need a change in the mirror, not a teams name.

  90. 44mpo says: Feb 9, 2013 3:05 PM

    I know the off season gets boring, but must we start it with nonsense posts like this? This and the Rooney Rule get beat to death beween now and September.

  91. thesmedman says: Feb 9, 2013 3:05 PM

    Washington Lobbyists

    Washington Cliffers

    Washington Columbians

    Washington Dealmakers

    Washington Sequesters

  92. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 3:06 PM

    What we really need to do is go after the Denver Broncos and Indianapolis Colts — horses aren’t native to Colorado or Indiana or even to the United States. Horses were used by Europeans in their battles with native people when they didn’t have any. Horses were a sign of wealth which hurt poor peoples feelings. Horses were used by white slave masters to help recapture run away slaves. The NFL MUST make this to prove that they don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings.

    Also Indianapolis needs to change it’s name since it has Indian in it. Also the state of Indiana has to go as well.

    Don’t even get me started on the Minnesota Vikings and how offensive their name is to northwestern Europeans.

  93. ripper327 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:06 PM

    And “Yankees” is hella derogatory depending on who’s saying it and how. I’d guess it’s used derogatorily these days more than Redskin.

  94. highlander72 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:06 PM

    *** Meant if allowed to open INDIAN OWNED CASINOS *** around the DC/Maryland area, the complaints would go away. As long as cold hard cash is included, people are amazingly forgiving.

  95. robonious says: Feb 9, 2013 3:07 PM

    I feel dumber just reading that……really…….get over it people.

  96. dlr4skins says: Feb 9, 2013 3:07 PM

    Maybe the league can say there is a rule broken by the using name, even though the league proudly takes Washington’s revenue to share with all, and fine them 36 million in cap penalties and have it never brought up in the press and then act like it never happened and not tell them until the day free agency starts.

    That’s it make up rules as you go, enforce them as a Dictator – judge and jury! Let’s allow the league to go back at their discretion and allow these cap penalties to occur years later even though the rule nor penalty is written anywhere on a piece of paper, actually the opposite of the rule is written and spoken instead. Let’s also allow this Dictator the ability to destroy or fabricate any evidence at will and take his slimy lawyer abilities to cover what he chooses.

    Goodell has ruined more in the game in a couple years than Tags did in a career. GO AWAY ROGER AND GIVE THE COWBOYS AND REDSKINS THERE CAP BACK AND FINE THOSE THAT DID NOT SPEND ENOUGH THAT YEAR AS WRITTEN AS RULE!


  97. cometkazie says: Feb 9, 2013 3:09 PM

    I didn’t realize the term “Asian” is now considered offensive. Gimme a break.

    There is no such thing as a native American. Everyone’s ancestor came over from somewhere else. Except for the first wave of aboriginals, each subsequent wave annihilated the previous.

  98. txpackfan52 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:09 PM

    I am neither agreeing with the name change or arguing against it. This article could very well be the correct stance, but I believe that asking a rookie football player to choose a side is unfair to him.

  99. themackstrong says: Feb 9, 2013 3:09 PM

    You said ask a Native American if the name is offensive. Well I am a Native American and and yes the name is offensive. I understand that is not the intent but “Redskin” is a slur and insult in itself. It doesn’t bother me much but for groups that are trying to progress or move past stereotypes you can’t ignore that. Dave Chappelle actually made a joke about New York Knicks changing their name to a slur for black people. When you say that maybe you will understand my point.

  100. midwestwarrior says: Feb 9, 2013 3:10 PM

    RG3 needs to change his name to Kel Mitchell since they look alike. RG3 can begin his movie career by playing Kel Mitchell in a sequel to the movie Good Burger. Cmon BobG3, we all want to see you on a movie screen yelling “Welcome to Good Burger , home of the Good Burger, can i take ya awwwrder!”

  101. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 3:10 PM

    I know that no one is going to be believe me but I swear I’m telling the truth, I just talked to Flipper and he said the Miami Dolphins is extremely offensive.

  102. stampnhawk says: Feb 9, 2013 3:12 PM

    Where is this “momentum”? Because a Redskins beat reporter got invited to speak somewhere and agrees with you?

    At least call it as it is…yourself and probably others don’t like the team name and you’d personally feel more PC/comfortable/whatever, if it it changed.

    Plus, as part of this pandering for false mometum, its not up to Griffin, just as it wasn’t up to Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, Joe Gibbs, Joe Theismen, Art Monk or anyone else with national noterity that played on the Redskins over the years. It’s also completely unfair to throw this cause behind him, as the implication is, he if he does nothing he’s a racist, right?

  103. lanjoith says: Feb 9, 2013 3:12 PM

    You really do have a vagina Florio. I’m Cherokee on both sides of my family and I haven’t thought the name was racist ever. There will never be racial peace in this country because people like you won’t stop pointing it out. Live and let live. Should we change the name of Indiana or Indianapolis? Or Sioux City? Pretty soon we will all be drones who aren’t allowed to have a differing opinion.

  104. macdaddyspeed says: Feb 9, 2013 3:13 PM

    A simple test: travel to the nearest Reservation and address one of the locals using the term “redskin”. Since I could not do this, I must conclude the term is wrong. That’s just me though. I love tradition as much as the next person, but change is inevitable. Hail to the Red Potato Skins.

  105. nineroutsider says: Feb 9, 2013 3:13 PM

    I’m a Northern California liberal who says…keep the name!! At the very least, it serves as a reminder of the way we were, plus it really isn’t overly offensive these days. It was meant as a misguided sign of reverence for the fierce nature of the Natives…keep it!

    I’ll tell you what, if Native Americans come out in mass to protest the name, this deserves consideration. I understand why politicians would want to do this for the purpose of grandstanding about ending racism, but turn your focus to areas where real expressions of hate are still occurring today.

  106. kw27p says: Feb 9, 2013 3:14 PM

    80 years of redskin football. Why change it now? C’mon man

  107. cheddarrob says: Feb 9, 2013 3:14 PM

    Why now is the name so offensive but wasn’t 10-20 years ago?

  108. bananaballs says: Feb 9, 2013 3:15 PM

    I wish this site would just give us football news instead of continuously trying to beat us over the head with their political views. We get it you don’t like the redskins, concepts of owners hiring the coaches of their choice, or players who arent gung ho about gay marriage. You champion all those who agree with you and deride those that don’t. It’s been old for a long time and it’s a real shame because this is a great collection of actual football news the times where you’re not injecting your political opinions every 3rd posting. People use sports as an escape from politics but nowadays we can’t even avoid it there, just stop it already. You’re turning this into what Craig Calcatera has destroyed over in Baseball Talk.

  109. dlr4skins says: Feb 9, 2013 3:16 PM

    onebucplace says:
    Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM
    I think the real issue is the Packers name, that should be addressed first. It’s not cool to tease the gays anymore and that name is disgusting.

    Best post in a long, time!

    Who would you suggest champion that cause?

    Remember they must be connected to the Pack in some way!

  110. destroyedbydansnyder says: Feb 9, 2013 3:17 PM

    Ever since Mike Wise started doing talk radio, he ALWAYPLATA THE RACE CARD. On EVERY issue. From what I understand he used to cover the Knicks. He’s not a Washingtonian. I do not want him speaking on the behalf of REDSKIN nation. All he is trying to do is make himself more known. I’m sick of him trying to change our team. I’m so glad they took him off the radio. He’s a fool.

  111. wrenches2pipes says: Feb 9, 2013 3:18 PM

    They do have a great looking logo. Makes me wish “Pat Patriot” was still here. Permanently. Flying Elvis. What a joke.

  112. dlr4skins says: Feb 9, 2013 3:19 PM

    Didn’t we all spawn from the same species?

    Should we all be offended?

    Political correctness continues to ruin this country.

  113. natinals10 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:19 PM

    Hail to the Redskins

  114. bigbluefan11 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:20 PM

    The Washington part of the team name is most offensive. Gridlocked government that can’t get anything done without getting bogged down in partisan garbage. New movement. Change the name to the Maryland Redskins.

  115. foosballisthedevil says: Feb 9, 2013 3:21 PM

    The Washington R-Words

  116. decon49 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:23 PM

    if doug willaims couldn’t what makes you think rg3 can?

  117. stunzeed5 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:23 PM

    Yawn….I’m 100% native AMERICAN and a REDSKIN fan. Move along to the next “oh let’s not offend anybody” crusade because me and those on the rez up here in ND don’t care. Hail.

  118. hooterdawg says: Feb 9, 2013 3:24 PM

    I guess only on this site can the author claim that his opinion is a FACT. It is NOT a fact that the Redskins name is racist and disgusting. If that was widely considered to be true, then it wouldn’t be regarded by most people as generic a term as ‘cup or breadspread’. Anyone who bothers to Google the name can see the Redskin name is rich in tradtion since the team was located in Boston. Should there be an outcry against the Atlanta Braves and the Cleveland Indians as well?

  119. fringetastic says: Feb 9, 2013 3:25 PM

    Saying Griffin is the one who could change the name is just unbelievably stupid. And also conduct detrimental to the team.

    “the name offends plenty”
    The number who aren’t offended are much plenty-er. If people stop taking offense from a word, it loses the power to offend.

    I moved to the DC area in 7th grade, around 1980, and have been a fan since. I always took the word to be a synonym for native american, like “Indian” and “Brave”. It was never used as an insult. (Who insults native americans these days anyway?) I think I first heard of people being offended in the ’90s, and it was a small group of native americans, and there were more native americans who said it didn’t matter.

    If you want to talk about injustices, focus on bigger on things.

  120. sirthorazine says: Feb 9, 2013 3:25 PM

    The difference between “Redskins” and “Cheifs” or “Seminoles” or “Braves” is that “redskins” is an intentional derogatory term.

    In this politically correct day and age, there is really no argument. Redskin is in fact a racial descriptor. It isn’t the name of a specific tribe it is a slur.

    Apply all the arguments people are giving to preserve the “Redskins” name and see how racist and silly it sounds when applied to something that hits a little closer to home, imagine a team called the Harlem porchmonkies. Who would dare defend that?

  121. thebadguyswon says: Feb 9, 2013 3:25 PM

    The Pinko Political Correctness crew can eff off. My god this country is sad.

  122. echoplex89 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:25 PM

    You’ve got so many non-natives who say they’re not offended.

    1. no one is asking you how you feel. It also doesn’t matter if you claim to be 4% Indian.

    2. It’s not a tribute. No American Indians were ever apart of the team’s ownership group.

    3. Don’t compare it to the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, a school that was founded by Irish Catholics for Catholics before there were public universities, before the Land Grant Bill.

  123. andjmoore says: Feb 9, 2013 3:26 PM

    So… the only response I’m hearing to why we shouldn’t change the name of the team is:

    “It’s not racist! Shut up!”

    If that’s the best you can come up with, if that’s the only argument you can muster, if “Shut up!” is the only response you’ve got, you don’t have much of a case. I hope some of you will see that. Unless you can’t mount a actual argument for why a team must keep its name even if that name is racist by the minority group to which it refers, you haven’t got a leg to stand on.

    “Because I like it,” is not a good enough reason to insult or oppress a minority group.

  124. rocketman2010 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:27 PM

    Change the name to the REEDSKINS

    There must have been a bunch of reeds when Washington crossed the Delaware.

  125. sschmiggles says: Feb 9, 2013 3:27 PM

    If Native Americans are that offended, lets change the names of all teams that represent those citizens and pretend like they never even existed.

    The way their opinions are being dismissed by people like you, it’s like they never did anyway. Absolutely disgusting. You’re literally telling them not to be offended because YOU aren’t offended.

    Racism is alive and well in this country, and this thread proves it. If you really cared about “remembering” native Americans, you’d call the team something that respects them.

    My idea is to call them the “Washington Rednecks” and then dismiss white people’s opinions by saying I’m just “respecting Southern culture”

  126. EJ says: Feb 9, 2013 3:28 PM

    The Washington Governors.
    The Washington Collectors.
    The Washington Generals.
    The Washington Leviers.

    Maybe use the $ symbol for the logo? Or Uncle Sam?

  127. 28skins28 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:29 PM

    if the word redskins is offensive to native americans then how do you explain the red mesa arizona high school?

    its a high school on an indian reservation and there mascot is the redskins.

  128. bg0lden says: Feb 9, 2013 3:29 PM

    Wow. I’m a little surprised and sad to see that the consensus on here seems to be that people who find a sports team called the “red skins” offensive are deemed to be overly sensitive, leftist whiners. Really?! What could be more racist and offensive than taking an entire group of oppressed people who have been shoved into this country’s least desirable nooks and crannies and then turning them into a sports team logo identified by the color of their skin? Native Americans are not animals like “bears” or “dolphins”, nor inanimate objects like “jets”, nor proud American icons like “cowboys”, “49ers”, or “patriots”. They are a proud people who should not be objectified simply for the pleasure or “tradition” of insensitive white people who don’t appreciate or respect them. And I’m as big an NFL fan as any of you.

  129. chocopoppy says: Feb 9, 2013 3:29 PM

    Change to the name to the “Reskins”. That’ll do it.

  130. highlander72 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:29 PM

    Where’s the WWF fighting for the animal rights that the NFL violates with every use of their signature creatures. I believe that the NFL should kick back 10-25% of media revenue for this wrong to be righted. Then, AND ONLY THEN will things be fair and harmony returned to Gaia and her creatures.

  131. nodrugarrests says: Feb 9, 2013 3:29 PM

    Anything they come up with will offend more people than the Redskins name will

  132. culturalelitist says: Feb 9, 2013 3:30 PM

    I abhor political correctness as a rule, since it does little to solve real problems of prejudice, instead taking the easier routes, such as nitpicking about semantics.

    Reading the comments of those staunch opponents of a name change, or even consideration of one, I can’t help but wonder how many of those folks enthusiastically and breathlessly jumped on the bandwagon ten years ago when conservative politicians in the very same city insisted that french fries must now be called “freedom fries,” because of France’s decision (wise in retrospect) to oppose the US invasion of Iraq. Lest you think that this was merely a symbolic gesture, congress took it to a vote, and officially changed the name on the congressional cafeteria menu. Liberals aren’t the only ones who foolishly practice “PC,” and one needs only to look back at the “patriotically correct” thought policing pushed by conservatives, especially during the needless Iraq war.

    I also can’t help but wonder what would happen if Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, or someone of that ilk bought the New England Patriots. I have no doubt that the “freedom fries” crowd would demand a name change, since no team owned by a raging liberal could truly be called “patriots.”

    The Redskins name situation is a tough one, and I’m not sure what the answer is. Hanging it all on RG3 isn’t the way to go. An honest dialogue between NFL owners, Native American leaders, and thoughtful members of the fan community would likely yield a reasonable solution.

  133. thelastpieceofcheese says: Feb 9, 2013 3:30 PM

    The name redskins is offensive to white people.

    It originated when the pilgrims landed in America and called the native indians redskins, because they were drunk as a skunk from the whiskey they drank in the voyage and only saw red.

  134. lov2smile says: Feb 9, 2013 3:31 PM

    I consider myself a political junkie.

    However, when I click to a “Sports” site I expect to get sports news. NOT the political view of a sportswriter.

    I beg you. PLEASE, do not bring your political views in a sports information site.

    Please Mr. Florio, stick to what you know best and leave politics to the crooks in Washington DC

    That being said, there appears to be more thumbs up to keep the name as for those that want a change.

    So majority rules!!

  135. searchingwithmygoodeyeclosed says: Feb 9, 2013 3:31 PM

    Here’s an idea: if you don’t like the team name, save up your change and buy the team from Mr. Snyder, then you can change the name. Until then, let Mr. Snyder run his team the way he see’s fit. Leftist are pansies!

  136. zatoichi7 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:32 PM

    to say this is on rg3 is ludicrous.

  137. salventuri says: Feb 9, 2013 3:32 PM

    Its NOT racist or offensive. Whoever thinks it is should GET A LIFE!

  138. highlander72 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:33 PM

    As a Scottish, German, English, Indian mutt, the name does not offend me. When you call folks Highlanders, a term for Scotsmen, that does not offend me. If you show a man wearing a quilt, who looks like the janitor on the Simpsons, that does not offend me.

    People need to grow a backbone.

  139. highlander72 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:35 PM

    That being said, I think the Cleveland Browns should change their name. The elf is really a coverup.

  140. darkjedi42 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:35 PM

    These people don’t care about the name like they say they do. They are mad because someone else is making money off of the name and not them. Just drop it already. This same thing happened to the Atlanta Braves several years ago. And what the hell is offensive about the Braves and a tomahawk? And I’m a Falcons fan. Better be careful, bird lovers will get a class action suit against us, ravens, Seahawks, cardinals, and eagles.

  141. Panda Claus says: Feb 9, 2013 3:35 PM

    Mike Wise is basically the D.C equivalent of Skip Bayless. It’s all about ruffling feathers and generating traffic for these two (or newspaper sales in Wise’s case).

    Come back next month and see what he stirs up next.

    Florio, for whatever reason you’ve decided to start becoming our moral compass–give it a rest. You’re not qualified to make our decisions for us.

    And what a brilliant idea for trying to get RG3 to take a stand on this. He’s been in DC for less than a year. This is reminiscent of how everyone wanted Tiger Woods to influence controversial issues when he was at the top of his popularity (prior to his TMZ event).

  142. ialwayswantedtobeabanker says: Feb 9, 2013 3:36 PM

    Not a big fan of the preachy policitally correct crap that streams from a particular stain, or I mean, strain of a person.

    Not a big fan of people getting so profoundly offended by nicknames of sports teams. Seriously, that is what you’re concerned about?

    Not a big fan of people getting angry about all kinds of b.s. causes, and then trying to get legislators, mayors and other governmental forces on board. When people directly order a hot cup of coffee come back and sue for millions because the coffee was too hot, it’s a total buzzkill.

  143. thunderskins007 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:36 PM

    once a month the writers here try to stir the pot on a redskins name change. when the redskins moved from boston and changed their name from braves to redskins im sure the owner wasn’t a racist and thought up a racial slur to degrade the native americans. were native americans protesting in DC about the name change? what about the first 50-60 years of this team’s history? nobody complained then? you can look at the name redskin and come away with whatever you make of it. i love the name washington redskins and i wear their stuff with the name and logo because i am proud of my team and love everything about it. the logo is awesome, the best in its history. i cant imagine the team called something else. what they did to the basketball team here is a joke. how bout this, relax and report on something that is a relevant topic in the nfl. like free agency, the draft, salary cap or maybe about what rehab RG3 is doing. Quit worrying about the Washington Redskins name and logo. and to come up with a thread that its in RG3’s hands is the most ridiculous idea i have ever heard of. you call yourself a journalist? maybe your a hater. did snyder diss you somehow? definitly seems like you have it out for snyder and the Redskins. since you have a hard time ever posting something on here that paints the Redskins or snyder in a positive light next time they have a protest at the White House about this topic you can take the day off and get you some pom-poms and protest your head off. make sure to take some snapshots of yourself so you can pat yourself on the back about you leading the charge on the Redskin name change.

  144. sandy102270 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:39 PM

    Maybe you should tell RG3 what opinion he should take on gay marriage, gun control, and universal health care while you’re at it Mike.

    The idea the you feel strongly about a topic does not imply that anyone else gives a tinker’s damn about it, nor that they should speak publicly on said position, as you assert in the article.

    The fact that you have placed a 23 year old kid in the middle of a debate because you feel it is important is unfair to him, and is, quite frankly, pathetic.

  145. ruggyup says: Feb 9, 2013 3:39 PM

    I am not sure Florio is qualified to state categorically that “most Americans” feel this way or that. I know many Americans are sick of people with their own agenda who arbitrarily state that a word or phrase is racist and offensive. While there are too many morons using sick language in public it does not mean we have to carry this sensitivity issue to an extreme. Can you honestly say use of the Washington team name is done so with intent to abuse and denigrate?

  146. bsharpe327 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:40 PM

    I thought they were named for a potatoe

  147. lumas101 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:41 PM

    I saw one person make this point, but I think he or she made it in jest: the team should be named the “Pigskins”.

    I am a non-Redskins fan who lives in DC. There are three important facts about what it would mean to name the team the “Pigskins”. First, people call them the “Skins” all the time anyway, so it would have little impact on the team’s nickname. Second, the franchise identifies wholeheartedly with the Hogs (named in the past for their offensive line, but now very nearly synonymous with the team itself), so the idea of pigs is not too foreign. Third, many Redskins fans believe that the team IS football, so the team might as well be named as such.

    The fact that the team can make such a small change to the name and go from the name being offensive to being actually quite fitting just makes too much sense.

  148. thebuzzonny says: Feb 9, 2013 3:42 PM

    This country has become too damn PC. Suck it up people. If your offended, root for another team. Name stays.

  149. EJ says: Feb 9, 2013 3:42 PM

    The Packers were named after the fish packers industry.
    The Bills were named after Wild Buffalo Bill.
    The Steelers were named after the steel industry.
    The Buccaneers were named after the pirates off the coast of Florida.
    The 49ers were named after the gold miners.
    The rest of the teams are self explained.

  150. chilomane says: Feb 9, 2013 3:43 PM

    Quit crusading over a football franchise name there is more important stuff to throw your weight around.

  151. melikefootball says: Feb 9, 2013 3:44 PM

    Americans, we are so full of ourselves. Could we all just get real .

  152. offthelows says: Feb 9, 2013 3:44 PM

    If a team had to change their name, I would have picked the Redskins before the Bullets. That name change was truly political correctness run amok. But, if the Redskins were to truly change their name, I would suggest there should be a military theme. Nationals and Capitals are team names that already address the location, and Senators is in use in Canada and given the pathetic state of congress, they aren’t worthy of the recognition.

  153. ubummer says: Feb 9, 2013 3:45 PM

    Want to explain to me why Redskins is offensive but Cowboys is not?

  154. ialwayswantedtobeabanker says: Feb 9, 2013 3:45 PM

    Also not a big fan of placing this burden solely on the shoulders of a 22 year old. “One man can make it happen.”

    Gimme a break.

  155. fissels says: Feb 9, 2013 3:46 PM

    Seems to me that they named the team out of respect for Redskins.

  156. geniusesq says: Feb 9, 2013 3:46 PM

    Native Americans aren’t even offended by it. SHUT UP

  157. jerrydalejones says: Feb 9, 2013 3:47 PM

    For the love of God!!! Please you overly sensitive, I need for the world to understand my feelings, except my lifestyle cause it hurts when people stare. Jeez, as a black American it’s not a day to day battle that I choose to fight. It’s definitely one that my heritage reminds me of daily. That being said I choose not to wear my feelings on sleeve, my grandmother’s advice. Change the
    name of the redskins is ludicrous. Damn let’s just play ball. We are trying to infuse so much of our world with all the political correct terms and life generation that we forget that one and most important thing. Life is too short, we are not going to let’s all just get along. TOUGH, but to the fair minded and the reasonable we can actually live in peace but let’s put the focus on the children, the environment, our elderly and much more life changing issues. People become offended only when media and the special groups what face time for their own agendas. I want to watch FOOTBALL!!! I believe that the name isn’t as offensive as some would like us to believe. And of course they want a black American to be the mouthpiece. Isn’t it ironic?

  158. stugie says: Feb 9, 2013 3:47 PM

    A white man telling a black man that he should speak up for the native Indian. Well lets ask the native Indian’s what they think.

    And I quote………”less than 18% of Native Americans are offended by Indian Mascots in pro sports. In a March 4, 2002 Sports Illustrated 7 page editorial entitled “The Indian Wars”, a poll was conducted amongst Native Americans. Surprisingly, the following information was gathered……”

    “Asked if high school and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81% of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83% of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters and symbols.”

  159. fafaflunky says: Feb 9, 2013 3:48 PM

    gtf over it..not for nothing i was born in ny love the REDSKINS with every fiber of my being..i met a guy who was a redskin fan in a bar and started taliking to him,questions like so how did u become a redskins fan and he said pretty much that he is half native american..he wanted to root for a team that had relavance to his heritage..go away liberal richards and leave it be..

  160. foosball11 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:49 PM

    Looking forward to the coming civil war. We will finally be able to forcibly eradicate all leftists from our shores.

  161. rambo888 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:49 PM

    Leave the name as is if anyone doesn’t like it don’t follow that team or watch it! Enough said

  162. cleminem757 says: Feb 9, 2013 3:49 PM

    The term actually derived from a tribe in the New England area that would paint their faces and skin red. So it is not about their skin color at all. Please stop saying it is.

  163. hooterdawg says: Feb 9, 2013 3:50 PM

    I think it is racist to suggest a black man should support a trivial cause for some whining lobbyists rather than making his best efforts to support underprivledged African American families and children. Why doesn’t PFT Live march down south to demonstrate against the widely-televised Tomahawk Chop ( Atlanta Braves, Florida State) that seems much more derogatory (when practiced by 60000 – 100000 fans) than a mere name.

  164. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 3:51 PM

    Does anyone have this week’s updated list of all the banned and offensive names we’re not allowed to use? I was on vacation for a week and would hate to accidentally offend someone.

  165. 70chip says: Feb 9, 2013 3:52 PM

    I am offended by that 36 million dollar cap hit

  166. herbertjablonski says: Feb 9, 2013 3:53 PM

    I like the SNL skit where native american tribes bought the washington football team and changed the name to the washington rednecks.

  167. fafaflunky says: Feb 9, 2013 3:53 PM

    even if the name change does go through..the new fight song could be..hail to the redskins, fight for RGIII

  168. snarcasms says: Feb 9, 2013 3:53 PM

    I don’t know about you guys and gals. I never came here for the editorials. It was just the one stop shop of copying and pasting links at its best.

    Glad to see that hasn’t changed over time.

  169. rg3bionicknee says: Feb 9, 2013 3:53 PM

    Washington Pigskins
    The colors could remain the same, with a football instead of an Indian on the helmet, or even use that cool brown throwback helmet they used last season. The Hogs would fit in just fine with a team named the Pigskins, and everyone would still call them the ‘Skins anyway. I love the team, the players, and the coaches, and the Burgundy and Gold, and switching a name or logo makes no difference to me, especially since it really bothers another group of people. If something can generally said to be a stumbling block towards another group of people (Native Americans) then we should show them love and sensitivity, not apathy or hostility.


  170. zzr600guy says: Feb 9, 2013 3:54 PM

    A team could be called the crackers or honkeys and i wouldnt be offended, however, it is the native americans call, if they want it changed it should be changed. Maybe the Washington Redcoats?

  171. 70chip says: Feb 9, 2013 3:58 PM

    Skins could change their name to The Washington RedTape

  172. jackbassett says: Feb 9, 2013 3:58 PM

    A few ideas…

    Washington Pork (matches nicely with what happens on Capitol Hill and allows them to keep the “Hogs” label)

    Washington Monuments

    Washington Landovers

    Washington Russets (they can eventually make their way through the rest of the potato types)

  173. CKL says: Feb 9, 2013 3:59 PM

    sschmiggles says:
    Feb 9, 2013 3:27 PM
    My idea is to call them the “Washington Rednecks” and then dismiss white people’s opinions by saying I’m just “respecting Southern culture”
    I’ve never heard of a single “redneck” who minded being called that.

    Unless we all have detailed knowledge of our ancestry at hand, I think it’s pretty safe to say none of us knows exactly what we are racially to 100% certainty. The more things are set up to define us using race for either “good” reasons (there really are none, but I mean things like affirmative action that were set up to help people) or bad (as in derogatory epithets) the harder it is for us to move past the whole thing as a point of divisiveness. Our president is known to be of both white and black ancestry. He’s never referred to as white, ever. His white ancestry is not how he is defined, or characterized ever. Should white people be offended? No. Why? Because color and race aren’t what’s important, how a person does their job is important. And you know what? I’d bet he isn’t the first man of mixed heritage ever to be president either. We just don’t know of or publicize any others. Heck they may not have know it. And that’s how it should be because its not important to how they should be doing their job.

    Also, as long as we’re beefing about petty stuff, would the people in charge consider moving the “report comment” link to the right instead of having it right under the post ratings? I accidentally “reported” a comment I didn’t mean to report while trying to rate it.

  174. briang123 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:00 PM

    Yeah, there is a lot of “momentum” to change the name. Sure.

  175. rtant2013 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:01 PM

    Why should RG3 stand up for something if he doesn’t agree with it? And the past 80 yrs no one has stood up for it to change. One of the longest running franchises in the NFL would have its history ripped away because of a select few want it to change its name. And you say no bad could come from RG3 standing up and asking for a name change is ludicrous. That would make alot of Redskins fans hurt, because we do have such a rich history in football

  176. skins4seven says: Feb 9, 2013 4:04 PM

    This will fall on deaf ears as I’m late to the party. We are the nations capital. Go military. I love my skins but I think this is the only out for Snyder. Team up with are armed forces and donate money to them while using a patriotic name. You will make up the money in sales, the college military jerseys sell in ridiculous numbers. I hate to see my beloved redskins go away but it’s just a matter of time. Be ahead of this one before you are forced to.

  177. roadtrip3500 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:04 PM

    These same PC people demanding the name change because they fear offending Native Americans probably laughed their butts off watching reruns of F Troop as kids… and hmmm… what word appears in the theme song lyrics?

  178. whatjusthapped says: Feb 9, 2013 4:04 PM

    I live near and work with a number of “Native Americans” I asked them about this issue and although it is a small sample, none were insulted and all thought the issue was laughable. One is a woman and not a football fan and she thought the name was stupid, as in a lack of creativity.

    I love how everyone states this is clearly racist and offensive and then you ask the people who are actually Native American Indians and they chuckle. Its like the VW ad in the Superbowl, the New York Times jumped all over it but yet the Jamaicans loved it because it helps promote tourism in their country.

    Maybe the liberal media should find something else to champion, this is getting old.

  179. hooterdawg says: Feb 9, 2013 4:05 PM

    The ‘Skins can’t be renamed the Washington Pigskins without an outcry from APFA – the American Pig Farmers Association. It’s bad enough that their pigs are kicked, pounded, and shaped to look ridiculous when rolling on the ground. Now you want to take their name in vain?

  180. jiggy1971 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:06 PM

    I would like to actually see a representative of offended parties voice and/or opinion. Not some white journalist or white wannabe sports expert that are trying to do nothing but get noticed. I have yet to see an actual native american speak out, etc.

  181. jackericsson says: Feb 9, 2013 4:07 PM

    What do American Indians shout when they jump out of an airplane?

  182. hooterdawg says: Feb 9, 2013 4:10 PM

    This just in: Hugh Hefner buys the Redskins and changes the name to the Washington Lambskins. I can’t wait to see the cheerleaders promoting safe sex.

  183. autoriot says: Feb 9, 2013 4:11 PM

    This is a really tough situation. Getting an entire fanbase to disregard all of their previous, known, history that has always been associated with a single identity, will be very difficult. That being said, I personally think the name can be changed and probably should be.

    I would propose changing the name to something having to do with Hogs or Pigs, or whatever the hell Redskins fans where on their faces at games that has absolutely nothing to do with Indians to begin with. It should make for an easy transition.

  184. o0omorriso0o says: Feb 9, 2013 4:12 PM

    Washington Generals?

    I dont know but this is all really stupid lol

  185. 00otto says: Feb 9, 2013 4:12 PM

    how bout the redskins change their name and in return we require all indian casinos to pay taxes

  186. jprcox says: Feb 9, 2013 4:12 PM

    So long as they are not renamed the Pelicans I am cool changing the name.

  187. upperdecker19 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:12 PM

    Washington Casino Beneficiaries has a nice ring to it?

  188. j0ey15 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:13 PM

    I don’t know how fair it is to just go ahead and throw this on RGIII like he’s the sole reason the redskins could change there name… Michael Jordan stayed out of politics Just like it says in the article, so should RGIII

  189. bearclaw69 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:16 PM

    I’m sick of this. If someone gets offended, that’s TOUGH. There is NO right in the country NOT to ever be offended. If a group of people don’t like Chic-Fil-A, then DON’T EAT THERE. If someone doesn’t like the Redskins name, no one is holding a gun to their head to buy a game ticket. I wish someone would go out and name a team the Nig-ers. It would offend plenty of people, and if I was black I might be one of them, but I would show my displeasure by refusing to patronize that organization in any way. I would not, however, make demands on someone who owns the team who could rightfully tell me to shove my opinion where the sun doesn’t shine.

  190. asuthyo says: Feb 9, 2013 4:16 PM

    I’ve got a good idea. How about we eliminate all team names so no one is offended!

  191. offthelows says: Feb 9, 2013 4:18 PM

    How about just changing the name to “Washington” and use George Washington as the logo? GW University Colonials do that now, but it could be made to look different. Then you’d have to change “Hail to the Redskins” to “Hail to Washington” #HTW.. It has already been changed before to remove “Scalp ’em”, “Dixie”, etc.

    Hail to Wash-ing-ton!
    Hail Victory!
    Brave and on the Warpath!
    Fight for old D.C.!
    Run or pass and score — we want a lot more!
    Beat ’em, Swamp ’em,
    Touchdown! — Let the points soar!
    Fight on, fight on ‘Til you have won
    Sons of Wash-ing-ton. Rah!, Rah!, Rah!

    Hail to Wash-ing-ton!
    Hail Victory!
    Brave and on the Warpath!
    Fight for old D.C.!

  192. SparkyGump says: Feb 9, 2013 4:24 PM

    Call them the Washington Potomics. You won’t have to change the logo, the uniforms or anything else.

  193. jbcommonsense says: Feb 9, 2013 4:25 PM

    Half of our country quietly has Native American names for towns, states and cities. I like the idea of using a local tribe name, but perhaps even better would be using one of their most marketable words. Something that means ”fierce” and rolls off the lips. Let’s have a collaborative effort between selected local Native Americans and the Redskins’ marketing dept.

  194. adkfootballfan says: Feb 9, 2013 4:25 PM

    Clearly Florio looking to generate web hits on the weekend following the Super Bowl.

    When did we, as a country, become afraid of controversy and concerned about placating everyone?

  195. sixjak says: Feb 9, 2013 4:26 PM

    Bison4me. Thank you. I have 2 very dear Native American friends and both think think this argument is offensive and are embarrassed by any NA so “weak minded” to BE offended.
    As though they are so fragile that the name “Redskins” is going to ruin their day. One is a Redskins fan and the other is a Cowboys fan. Go figure.

    This is the kind of nonsense that makes us Not The Greatest Country Anymore.

  196. lov2smile says: Feb 9, 2013 4:28 PM

    Tell ’em we’ll change when the Notre Dame Fighting Irish change their name.

  197. denbronx says: Feb 9, 2013 4:29 PM

    Call them the Washington Socialist. That is what DC is doing to our country anyway right???

  198. Deb says: Feb 9, 2013 4:30 PM

    Great article–although I think you’re overestimating RGIII’s popularity and expecting too much from a player just going into his second year. The one person who could have had that kind of influence over the Washington fanbase was Jack Kent Cooke. Perhaps if Griffin winds up with the kind of clout Montana had in SanFran by the end of his career (which did him little good when they wanted to make a QB change), he might approach that topic.

    As a Southerner who can’t fathom why Americans still want to fly the flag of long-defunct Confederacy, I can tell you people will fight for their traditions no matter how racist, indefensible, or downright stupid they may be.

  199. coltzfan166 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:30 PM

    But North Carolina “Tar Heels” isn’t offensive?

  200. northshorejag says: Feb 9, 2013 4:30 PM


    Really. You put it all on the back of a 22 year old/first year employee whose future is already in doubt with multiple injuries.

    Go back to your pseudo soap box and try again

  201. spytdi says: Feb 9, 2013 4:31 PM

    I’m a Cowboy’s fan. If the change the name, I will no longer watch anything associated with the NFL.

  202. northshorejag says: Feb 9, 2013 4:33 PM

    Players have no juice in the system

    Manning couldn’t even change his cleats to honor Johnny U

  203. ditkadontbutkus says: Feb 9, 2013 4:36 PM

    They should change it to the Injuns, that’ll fix it

  204. drbob117 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:37 PM

    “Racist” and “offensive” are not meant to be put in the same sentence with the word ‘fact’. You may agree that those 2 words can be used to signify another word or you may not , but it’s pretty damn arrogant to say it’s a “fact”. So if someone says ‘Redskins’ is racist , there’s nothing wrong with having an opinion about that either way, but that doesn’t make it a fact. I’m a diehard Eagles fan, but I know that several different owners, including the current one have spent plenty of money and years building that Redskins brand to mean ” the NFL entry from Washington DC” , so if they feel it’s in their best interest to keep it right where it is, that doesn’t make them racists. The few people that are against them keeping the name aren’t NFL fans anyway, so Snyder should do what is best for his fan base and his business, and I guarantee you that if they polled the season ticket holders they would vote at 95-5 in favor of keeping the name. That’s much closer to ‘fact’ than the nonsense that has been presented as such here.

  205. cervetta12 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:37 PM

    If we as Americans are SO concerned with the Native americans feelings why don’t we just give back the land we stole from them way back? Ya know? The process where the white man killed every man, woman & child in sight to obatin this land illegally and immorally? Trail of tears ring a bell? History major here

  206. wwwmattcom says: Feb 9, 2013 4:38 PM

    coltzfan166 says:Feb 9, 2013 4:30 PMBut North Carolina “Tar Heels” isn’t offensive?

    Ya know google would be quite helpful for insightful comments like this.


  207. stormcrow44 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:38 PM

    I’m part Native American. I have about as much as Elizabeth Warren, I bet… and I’m not offended.
    Hail to the REDSKINS!!!!

  208. therolandobottom says: Feb 9, 2013 4:39 PM

    How about the Washington Kenyans?

  209. flavordave says: Feb 9, 2013 4:39 PM

    This country needs more backbone against these pressure groups. Lets call the Redskins the Redskins.

  210. upperdecker19 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:41 PM

    Tonto is flabbergasted

  211. jessethegreat says: Feb 9, 2013 4:42 PM

    I’m part Native American and it does not offend me. You want to know what offends me? This political correct crap.

  212. jbcommonsense says: Feb 9, 2013 4:42 PM

    It’s wrong to put this on Griffin. He has immense potential, but that should not require him to suddenly become a 22 year old civil rights leader. I’ll be happy if he has the gumption to say ”no” the next time some coach asks him to play with an injured knee.

  213. fanofevilempire says: Feb 9, 2013 4:45 PM

    This is not a joke, it is offensive.
    Too much money involved for anyone to have the balls to make the change. This is a good project for Goodell to attack.

  214. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Feb 9, 2013 4:45 PM

    Washington Liberals

  215. lasher1650 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:45 PM

    It isn’t for “us” (non-Native Americans) to judge what is and is not offensive on this subject. If Native Americans find the term “Redskin” offensive, then by default it is offensive.

    Change the name – it is the right thing to do.

  216. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Feb 9, 2013 4:45 PM

    Washington Liberals… Hows that?

    jesus find something else to complain about left wingers

  217. ham1 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:47 PM

    What? RG3 is going to go political and be the agent of change to a franchise in need of a name change because you and mike wise deem he should?

    I think the kid has enough on his shoulders trying to bring relevancy back to a franchise that has sorely needed it for years as well as rehabbing a significant injury.

    You guys need to quit trying to put the cart before the horse. Let this kid even see if he can play in the NFL again.

    I have over the years the squeaky wheel gets the oil. First the DC mayor not wont say the name REDSKINS, and Mike wise and Mike Florio have deemed that somebody else (RG3) should make the change. Wow. Have you ever tried that yourself or do you just put that on RG3?

  218. eagles512 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:48 PM

    What a joke. So sick of political correctness.

  219. Deb says: Feb 9, 2013 4:48 PM

    coltzfan166 says:

    But North Carolina “Tar Heels” isn’t offensive?
    You have a problem with North Carolina’s long history as a resource for pine tar?

  220. lasher1650 says: Feb 9, 2013 4:51 PM

    based on the majority of the comments on this subject, I am pretty sad – such small-mindedness just kills me. Its a name, its a team – if it is (and it is) offensive, change the darn name, its 2013, we are supposed to be better than this (despite the fact that clearly we are not).

  221. Cereal says: Feb 9, 2013 4:52 PM

    DC Defense Spenders

  222. oldbyrd says: Feb 9, 2013 4:55 PM

    Has absolutely nothing to do with The Washington Redskins. It”s all about The smacko, leftist commies trying to take over the country. Remember Saul Alinsky said ” Introduce communism into America that no one will notice”

  223. gtrdonald says: Feb 9, 2013 4:55 PM

    What most people don’t seem to know is that the team was originally named the Boston Braves. Is would be very easy to switch the team name back to the Braves.

    Also, the name is offensive. Just because it isn’t offensive to you, doesn’t make it unoffensive. The people clamoring about political correctness and other issues are failing to see the crux of the issue–respect. Let’s face it, there are no teams named the Pale Faces, nor Slant Eyes, and for good reason.

    The Redskin name is offensive, racist, tired, and outdated. It’s time to change it back to the Braves.

  224. dtriebel says: Feb 9, 2013 4:58 PM

    90% of Native Americans find the teams name acceptable, according to a National Annenberg Survey. Their opinions are the only ones that matter IMO.

    Sports teams are almost always named after things people respect and/or want to emulate. This is just PC idiocy.

    I so wish these idiots could find a worthy cause like the Governments never ending encroachment on our freedoms to crusade against.

  225. kagey7 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:01 PM

    I vote for the Washington Taxers. That name represents many years of intimidation and is something they have excelled at.

  226. misterwinston says: Feb 9, 2013 5:01 PM

    Redskin fan here for the last 38 years. If they change the name like the Bullets did…. I’m out !

  227. adammuz says: Feb 9, 2013 5:02 PM

    I went to a school that had the mascot “Tribe”. They changed the school logo (just two feathers crossed) because it was “offensive”. I think it’s getting to be a bit much, no?

    Idiots like Florio are the ones demanding these changes, not the people that these mascots/logos represent. I think it’s a little backwards and it’s time to stop.

  228. roadbiscuit says: Feb 9, 2013 5:04 PM

    Curle Lambeau worked at Acme Packing Company in Green Bay. A meat packing company. They contributed some cash to getting the football team started.

  229. phillyphanatic77 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:06 PM

    I am really surprised by the number of people on here who have attempted to rationalize the calls for a name change as nothing more than liberal PC police going wild. “Redskins” is an offensive term, there is no arguing that. If it considered a racial slur among native Americans then it should be changed. Changing the name doesn’t erase the tradition or pride one feels in a franchise. Tradition doesn’t trump common sense. I don’t see why it’s such a crime to call for a change. If there was a team called the “San Antonio Wetbacks” would people not agree to change it? Saying the Philadelphia Eagles is offensive to eagles is not a relevant point. I don’t think the KC Chiefs should have to change their name because it’s not a demeaning term, but Redskin surely is.

  230. hoosiercolts says: Feb 9, 2013 5:07 PM

    Someone find Hank Hill and get him to ask John RedCorn his opinion.

  231. prosb4hos says: Feb 9, 2013 5:07 PM

    The Washington Florios sound great to me.

  232. ncarolinarn7 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:08 PM

    I’m offended someone named florio writes goofy PC articles and NBC and it’s parent GE took freaking billions of tax payer dollars to keep GE financial from caving in due to it’s derivative load and Mike might have receive at least a dollar indirectly from tax payers and is unaware and hasn’t thank us profusely.

  233. duncanthecat says: Feb 9, 2013 5:15 PM

    What is wrong with the term. I don’t get it unless it
    has to do with all the liquor they drink.

  234. clarkgriswoldblogger says: Feb 9, 2013 5:19 PM

    I’m a twin and I’m not insulted by the Minnesota twins name.

  235. letemplay says: Feb 9, 2013 5:19 PM

    Since it’s in the political capital of the nation, let’s vote on it. Here’s the thing, the only people allowed to vote are native Americans. If they vote to change the name, then I’m all for it.

    I couldn’t possibly care less if some non native American, bleeding heart liberal is offended by the name.

  236. grifter93 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:31 PM

    Keep the name, embrace the history and orgin of the symbol as opposed to Native Americans sinking further into irrelevancy. This is another mistake if it changes by a sensitive society who has no interest in history.

  237. cpr1287 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:34 PM

    The Name Clearly Is Offensive & Derogatory To Native Americans. But Since They Are Not A Majority In This Country Most People Are Insensitive To It. If The Team Was Called The Washington *N Words* For The Past 80 Years, Would That Make It Ok, Just Because Of History?

  238. tonyc920 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:37 PM

    I suppose the Indians wouldn’t be offended if they renamed the team the Washington Casinos.
    They basically steal whiteys money by not following mandates to pay out 90% on slots.

  239. zinn22 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:47 PM

    I went to School at Miami of Ohio when they were the Miami Redskins. Some years after graduated the name was changed to the Miami Red Hawks. I recall being upset and offended they changed the name.

    But some time later I became close friends with a couple that were native American. They found the name quite offensive as its not a very flattering description. Imagine if the name was Blackskins or Redneck Trash.

    I have since changed my mind and now am supportive of changing the name. To use a name that characterizes an entire race of people as savage warriors is well wrong. It is a direct attack on their dignity and an attempt to marginalize them as people. While its not intentional it has the same effect. Thoughtlessness should not be an excuse for attacking an entire race of people.

  240. mrbigass says: Feb 9, 2013 5:51 PM

    Recently the Astros were going to do some throwback jersey’s with the old Colt 45’s logo and some were goin’ bat crap crazy because it has a gun on it.

    Seriously, dont’ we have more problems to fix in this country besides agonizing over some team logos from 50 years ago? And it’s all media driven because now it only takes a half dozen people or so to complain about something and within 5 minutes the whole world knows about it.

    It’s beyond ridiculous……..

  241. 4getu says: Feb 9, 2013 5:55 PM

    Maybe we can change all the teams to things in nature, such as the Pittsburgh trees, Carolina hills, Philadelphia rivers, Denver boulders. Etc. oh wait, the hippies might not like that. I guess there’s no winning here

  242. charger383 says: Feb 9, 2013 5:55 PM

    The Rooney Rule needs the Snyder clause added, all coaching jobs must interview an Indian.

    How many Indian coaches are there?

  243. rapskins says: Feb 9, 2013 5:59 PM

    Has Wise ever been to the Pine Ridge Indian reservation? Has he ever been to western SD?
    If he would come in the fall, and winter, and right after Christmas, during the football season, he would see a lot of native americans who are REDSKINS fans, and wearing the REDSKINS colors. In all my time in western SD I have never heard any native american ( I have a Lakota grandson) equate the word REDSKINS to the “N” word. But leave it to east coast people like Florio and Wise to tell us how it is out here in western SD…….

  244. manilovethepftcensors says: Feb 9, 2013 5:59 PM

    It is nothing short of utterly ridiculous of you to suggest that RG3 should somehow be responsible for leading the charge to change the name. I’m about as liberal as you could be and I think this is all a bunch of politically correct bs.

  245. irishnativeson says: Feb 9, 2013 6:01 PM

    No matter your associations, race, creed or genetic heritage, to assume you speak for anyone else is asinine. That is why I can say this with all conviction. The vast majority of comments here make me ashamed to be an American. We are doomed. It’s pathetic really that most people are so self absorbed that they refuse to even attempt to see an issue from another perspective.

  246. raiderapologist says: Feb 9, 2013 6:05 PM

    gtrdonald says: Feb 9, 2013 4:55 PM

    The Redskin name is offensive, racist, tired, and outdated. It’s time to change it back to the Braves.
    That is not a solution. “Brave” is just another stereotypical term coined by whites. Would you prefer they be called the Washington “Noble Savages”? The National Congress of American Indians started campaigning back in the 60’s to end the appropriation of Indian names and images by sports teams, including the Braves, Chiefs, and Indians, to no avail. I’m fairly old, but when I was a kid, black people were called negro or colored. Then it was black, and now it’s African American. The name changes have done nothing to promote racial harmony. It’s just a different term. Native American. African American. European American. Maybe the Redskins should just change their name to the Washington Americans, on the condition that Native, African, Asian, and any other hyphenated Americans start referring to themselves simply as Americans.

  247. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 6:08 PM

    I find the LA Lakers name terribly offensive. Thousands of people die every year in water related accidents and their families don’t need to be reminded of these horrible tragedies.

    Also I find the New Orleans Pelicans name offensive. It’s just dumb.

  248. defscottyb says: Feb 9, 2013 6:13 PM

    My Grandmother is a 100% Native American living in the DC area. She is a huge lifetime Redskins fan and has no problem with the name. The idea that RG3 should be a part of this is just stupid. The name is not racist, it glorifies the American Indian in a tasteful way. A proud warrior, not a racist cartoon character like the Cleveland Indians. Frankly, American Indians like my grandmother and myself should be proud and greatful our heritage is represented in such a good light. Let it go, the name won’t ever change. Hail to the Washington Redskins! Thank you.

  249. americankris says: Feb 9, 2013 6:14 PM

    The number of white guys with no sympathy on this site is appalling. I am sure if the Braves went back to being the Atlanta Crackers the same white guys would claim racism.

  250. northshorejag says: Feb 9, 2013 6:16 PM

    How did the Mascot come to be? I always thought it was some kind homage to Natives

    oh and by the way offensive or not. Native Americans are Natives, Not Americans. Not then and not now and they seem to like it that way.

    Those of you with Native blood who take offense to that. It’s because you’re American not Native

  251. darocnessmonsta says: Feb 9, 2013 6:20 PM

    In my opinion the people that say its only a small pocket every think hmmm Well if your ancestors didnt wipe out more than half of the Indian Race when their country was stolen from them Im sure we would have a much bigger Pocket of people finding any college or professional team using their image negatively offensive!!!

  252. beefjerky1 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:21 PM

    I am 100% of Italian decent. If there was a team called the NY Wops or the NJ Pisians…… I would not be offended at all, everyone just needs to lighten up

  253. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 6:21 PM

    I find it offensive that someone would say the Redskins name is offensive. If the name of the team was changed because it was deemed offensive, that would mean they’d have to change it back since I’d find the change offensive and they already set the standard that if someone is offended it has to be addressed.

  254. stratus5ss says: Feb 9, 2013 6:22 PM

    The Washington Skin Flints

  255. davem23 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:22 PM

    Where is all the rage over the “Packers”?

  256. northshorejag says: Feb 9, 2013 6:23 PM

    Are the Pats offensive to Immigrants

    ARe the Steelers offensive to Alloys

    Do the Titans and Giants offend dwarfs

    Are the Chargers offensive to Green technology

    The Saints to atheists

    Do the cowboys glamorize violence

    Do the Bills glamorize cowboys

    Do the Bucs and Raiders offend the Coast Guard

    Do the Packers offend vegans

    If they’re are so many Animal mascots why not Plants

  257. liquidmuse says: Feb 9, 2013 6:24 PM

    WHY would a team, even in our more ignorant days, attribute to themselves a racist name? A team mascot is supposed to be an ideal to live up to. It literally makes no sense that as a source of pride & honour, you’re going to pick a name that’s meant to belittle a race of people. Why do sanctimonious gentlemen like Mr. Florio—who belittles the very men he makes money off of by establishing an “arrest count” on his site—always forget this little logical tidbit…

  258. attyken says: Feb 9, 2013 6:24 PM

    They need to change the name of the Ravens to the Baltimore Slashers.

  259. franklinandbashandflorio says: Feb 9, 2013 6:26 PM

    One of the main reasons why the teams still have mascots and indian names is because the indigenous population is small as a whole. We are the minorities of the minorities and that is why the indigenous nations are politically weak. Genocide was performed by this government and everyone wants to wipe it under the rug. The fact that this debate even exists just tells we’re not far from the 1950’s.

  260. NotoriousKDV says: Feb 9, 2013 6:26 PM

    The one thing that will make Snyder change the name is if the team starts losing money and the cause of that is the team name. If people make a statement that they don’t like the name and they won’t be giving their money to the team via ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc. etc. until the name is changed then that will be the only way that Snyder changes the name.

    Right now though, the team is very profitable. It’s what, the third most valuable franchise in the NFL. As long as that’s the case then Snyder sees no need to change the name. So the only way that I think that people can get through to Snyder is if there is some sort of boycott of the team because of the name.

  261. Deb says: Feb 9, 2013 6:27 PM

    The nastiness and bigotry in some of these comments is depressing the heck out of me. Sure hope that sad stuff is being written by junior high kids and not adults.

  262. prmpft says: Feb 9, 2013 6:27 PM

    how about the blood thirsty savages or the injuns?

  263. SilentMajority says: Feb 9, 2013 6:27 PM

    If this was really a big deal the name would have changed a long time ago. Native Americans are very good at lobbying for causes they care about, the fact that they don’t lobby for a name change just goes to show that it isn’t that big of a deal to them.

  264. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Feb 9, 2013 6:28 PM

    americankris says:
    Feb 9, 2013 6:14 PM
    The number of white guys with no sympathy on this site is appalling. I am sure if the Braves went back to being the Atlanta Crackers the same white guys would claim racism.


    As a white guy… I’d find it HILARIOUS

    “Now up to bat for your Atlanta Crackers… BJ Upton.”

  265. huskersrock1 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:29 PM

    Actually the name Cowboys is just as racist. Freed slaves working in the west were called “Cow boys”, whites were called frontiersmen or roughriders. The term Cowboy was made popular by Hollywood.

  266. stratus5ss says: Feb 9, 2013 6:30 PM

    The Washington Door Knobs

  267. onebucplace says: Feb 9, 2013 6:30 PM

    americankris says:
    Feb 9, 2013 6:14 PM
    The number of white guys with no sympathy on this site is appalling. I am sure if the Braves went back to being the Atlanta Crackers the same white guys would claim racism.


    The Atlanta Negro League Baseball team was called the Atlanta Black Crackers. Personally I’d think it was awesome to have a team named the Crackers.

    Some Indian high school a few years ago changed their logo to a stereotypical 1950s era white guy to make their point about it being offensive — of course all they really did was raise a ton of money for their school by completely selling out of merchandise within a matter of hours. Amazingly enough they happily pocketed the money while their original point was completely invalidated since it raised no ruckus was whitey just didn’t care.

  268. defscottyb says: Feb 9, 2013 6:33 PM

    A recent poll by Native Americans resulted in over 91% of voters not being offended by the Redskins name. The United States has been very good to the Native People. They own their own reservations with MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CASINOS (not too shabby). The native people LIKE MYSELF have spoken. Mike Florio must be a Cowboys, Giants or Eagles fan… let it go Mike. This is a non-story, write about something that people actually care about. Love the PFT site, but c’mon man.

  269. sdbengal says: Feb 9, 2013 6:35 PM

    I live near the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota and I can tell you one thing, nobody uses the word “Redskin” around here. Not because it’s taboo, just because it’s not part of the language here.

    I have many of Native friends and coworkers and I know the mascot of the NFL team in Washington is of no real concern here. Some people and their crusades need to just chill.

  270. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Feb 9, 2013 6:35 PM

    Florio how do you feel about the West Virginia Mountaineers having a mascot dressed as a mountain hillbilly that uses animals fur as clothing and carrying around a gun? You know, since you’re from WV and all.

    I find it offensive that the mascot is allowed to carry a gun on the field during a college football game.

  271. crazyphatdude14 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:39 PM


    If you actually read some of the comments and did some REAL research; you would find out, in fact, that most (90%) of Natives DON’T find Redskins to be offensive. Most Natives that I know find Injun, Tonto, Chief, and Savage much more offensive than Redskins. Don’t spew things that you know nothing about. Clearly, Redskins, is a non-issue.

  272. richndc says: Feb 9, 2013 6:41 PM

    One thing is for sure: whenever you point out a truth about racism, you are going to get a lot of racists showing how f**king stupid they really are.

  273. rodell77 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:47 PM

    johnster67, understand this FYI.

    The weak and hapless
    Cowboys have owned George Preston’s Red Skins from their 1960 start. Talk about a racist!!!. 8 Superbowl births. 5 or more NFL-NFC championship games. Beat that Fore
    skins. Now there is a name for you.

  274. stull60060 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:50 PM

    This is still a free country unlike most of the rest of the world. If you don’t like the name don’t watch the games on tv or go to the stadium. If a name bothers you then I think you have larger issues going on in your life. Maybe you better go see a shrink. Liberalism is a mental disorder. I don’t like lima beans so I don’t buy them or eat them. However when a liberal doesn’t like something they have to make sure everyone doesn’t like it. They demonize those who don’t agree with them. They pass laws to ban them. They are tyrants. The world would be a much better place without these fools around. The only way to stop this stupidity is to fight back. Don’t give in. Eventually they find something else to bitch about. Just like a tyrant the only thing they will understand is force. I am not a Washington Redskin’s fan. It is not racist. Most people don’t even know what the word racist means. It’s used for just about anything these days. GO REDSKIN’S !!!!!!!!!!!
    P.S. There are no native Americans. Even they migrated to North America from Russia and China across the Bering Strait.

  275. gregmorris78 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:56 PM

    What’s next?

    Pieta challenging the way we use the Bear, Eagle, Bengal, Tiger…

    Really not worthy of changing the name….

    Florio your a troll…

  276. breakmyrustycage213 says: Feb 9, 2013 6:57 PM

    rodell… what is the record between our teams in the playoffs? skins won a few NFL championships before you were even in existence. since you want to count those as well, you aren’t ahead of us.

  277. kevpft says: Feb 9, 2013 7:01 PM

    The comments here, and the vote tallies, show exactly why the name hasn’t been changed yet. It’s because the NFL fan base lives down to its worst stereotypes of ignorant white-privilege meatheads. It’s depressing, honestly, to hear so many people decry not using a blatantly offensive racial epithet as “PC”. More accurately, it’s pathetic.

    Especially when a name so suited to the city is readily available: the Washington Gridlock, anyone?

  278. hor2012 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:06 PM

    When I frist started reading the post I thought that it was a joke until I saw the reference to the “N” word. Now, as a black man I’m really offended with Florio from using that has a example. Now, I don’t want to seem insensentive but Native Americans are the only ones that can really come out and say that they find that term offensive. And, up until now I haven’t heard any of them saying that they have a problem with it. And, by Native American I don’t mean someone who was told that your great, great, great, grandfather or grandmother was native american. That doesn’t count. Unless someone can determine by simply looking at you that you’re Native American then you don’t have the right to determine if it’s a offensive term. If anyone could see me you would see a middle age black man. I have dark skin. But, my great, great, great, grandfather was a white man from france. I promise you that if there was a KKK meeting I wouldn’t be invited. Personal I wouldn’t want the name to be changed. I think it’s serves a great purpose for the Native Americans. Because, any child that doesn’t know what a Redskin is has to ask his or her parents. And, then they will have to answer the question, “why do we call them Redskins” The name itself keeps the history of the Native American in the fore front of our minds. And, the fact that the team plays in our Nations capital serves as a reminder of the horrible mistreatment of the only group of people that can claim to native americans have endured.

  279. TheWizard says: Feb 9, 2013 7:12 PM

    It’s obviously done in tribute, or that dude on the helmet logo would be knocking back a bottle.

  280. gregmorris78 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:13 PM

    And I am offended by the plastic bag tax – so what?

  281. normaneinstein7 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:14 PM

    Shocker. Another white liberal crying about the name. Funny, the Redskins have native American fans, yet it’s always a white liberal trying to stir something up. The name will not change. Get over it.

  282. osbdav says: Feb 9, 2013 7:26 PM

    it is an offensive name and should be changed. no question.

  283. manasewitsch says: Feb 9, 2013 7:33 PM

    The Vikings are portrayed in a non-historic manor. They did so much more than pillage and rape 😦 It is so offensive to my ancestor. I don’t have blond hair or blue eyes, stop labeling me! Why did the Celts go and kill all my people??? Change the Vikings name now or at least make the dude on the helmet have red hair and darker skin.

  284. stopdk12 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:41 PM

    Momentum? there is no momentum. Wise revisiting this issue is not building any “momentum”….

    as far as RG3 goes, he bears no responsibility and there is no “needs to stand up” anywhere on his “to do” list…his job is to do his best to get better… that’s it.

    this is a very bright 23 year old man, but lets leave him alone, he has enough on his plate.

    the name will change- like mike wise said- when FEDEX says they won’t pay a cent for the naming rights anymore until the name changes…then all the other corporations line up behind FEDEX… in short, it will happen when hell freezes.

    Besides, HAIL TO THE REDSKINS is by far the best home town fight song ever written…and thats not changing either.

    so put that in your Peace Pipe and Smoke it.

  285. metalhead65 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:43 PM

    gee what a shock florio jumping on board with the pc police trying to change something for no reason other than somebody finds it offensive. I hate to break it to you and the rest of the left wing media but when you say redskins 99% of the people assume you are talking about the football team and the native americans you are so concerned about offending. I am sure that along with you tree hugging friends you are doing your fare share in helping out these native americans get out of the poverty they find themselves on the reservations right? and of course you are doing all you can to help battle the alcohol problem and substance abuse problems to right? and of course you are doing everything you can to help in their getting a good education to right? no it is allot easier to whine about a non issue than to tackle real ones isn’t it?

  286. metalhead65 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:44 PM

    that should read and not the native americans you are so concerned about.

  287. leonitas21 says: Feb 9, 2013 7:54 PM

    Hey Florio, see how most of these comments don’t agree with your post? Guess “most people” aren’t offended by it after all you ass clown.

  288. jwrunion says: Feb 9, 2013 7:56 PM

    Who actually cares what those liberal left wing Anti-American socialists really think about the Washington Redskins name? They are only out for their own ACLU thinking. They could not care any less what the football team is calling their team name! They are only out to get across their leftist agenda and would throw under the bus ALL Indian tribes if it meant they could have their own agenda get across. I am so sick and tired of political corruptness. If you do not like the name Redskins, go root for the Packers, Steelers, Cowboys or whoever but stick it up your ….. If you do not want to be a fan of the Redskins. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!

  289. mrx149 says: Feb 9, 2013 8:16 PM

    Florio, if you are going to write on a topic, you should probably know what you are talking about. Get the facts straight and leave your opinion at home. Please look-up racist in the dictionary and explain to the rest of us how the team name is racist. I live in the southwest and my work often takes me to casinos on reservations. Do you know who they root for, Arizona Cardinals…nope. Dallas Cowboys…nope….the Washington Redskins. A group of people, most of whom have never left the west coast, root for a team 2,000 miles away. If the Indians are so “offended” perhaps they should set a better example. Lookup Red Mesa High School in Arizona and tell me what the mascot is. I’ll save you the trouble because you obviously don’t research very good, it’s the Red Mesa Redskins. It is located in Apache County and the racial makeup is 82% Native American.

  290. kjack59 says: Feb 9, 2013 8:20 PM

    People on here complaining about liberals are the same people that don’t believe in equality of any kind. Women or any race outside of white. That’s why Republicans went down in November and will continue to because they have no clue how to adapt to a changing world.

    To suit their corporate interests, the lied, denied and stood in the way of doing something about climate change and now we’ll all see harsher more powerful weather systems.

    Republicans believe once this planet is decimated by pollution they can just go to another planet to live.

    One more thing rape sperm doesn’t cause pregnancies. They continue living in the dark ages. Or are simply lying to make sure their corporate polluting campaign donors keep donating. In their world the rich get richer and the middle class shrinks. Many middle class republicans support this because they are ignorant to the truth. Red state residents take far more so called entitlements than blue states. They have no clue they vote against their own financial interests. It’s sad. Their party leaders know this and keep feeding them lies.

  291. blspears says: Feb 9, 2013 8:21 PM

    If they change the name Im not watching anymore. Thats my team, there is a heritage with that name. People are to sensitive about everything anymore.

  292. numbskull111 says: Feb 9, 2013 8:23 PM

    Why is this RG3’s fight? Why is it his responsibility to get this name changed? ….because he is an African American?

    Florio, it seems to me you are pigeon holing the star minority on the team to take up this fight. What you do in this piece is terribly unfair to him. You try to “paint him into a corner” to where he has to take up YOUR fight against this name….or look like he is letting down the good conscience of America.

    RG3 is a player….nothing more, nothing less…..stop trying to make him a superhero that has to stomp out all of society’s evils.

  293. elduderino13 says: Feb 9, 2013 8:31 PM

    Not surprised to see a bunch of trolls on this thread. There is a huge and unrecognized bias on the East Coast, where I used to live, and the lower 48 in general. I never recognized it until moving to Alaska where there is an actually powerful Native culture, not marginalized reservations. You people calling PC or liberal bias should bring your butts up here and use the language you use and see how far it gets you. Bigots.

  294. jackbassett says: Feb 9, 2013 8:34 PM

    Quick comment for the clowns who bring up Titans/Giants offending dwarfs, Saints offending atheists, etc.: you look foolish. I’m in favor of the Redskins keeping their name, but to use these extreme examples is ludicrous and detracts from any credibility you might have. One caveat: you’re exempted if your wife/girlfriend is legitimately offended by the name Georgia Bulldogs. Look, not every chick can be pretty.

    Why don’t I mind the Redskins name? Unlike the “N” word, which 99%+ of African Americans find offensive, there is no consensus among Native Americans that the “R” word is offensive. Some Native American groups even stand behind keeping the name. So, despite Florio’s fake declaration of being offended, the need for a name change is not so clear cut.

  295. istateyourname says: Feb 9, 2013 8:38 PM

    Dumbest thing I’ve ever read on this site and that’s saying something. RGIII, the poor man is laying in a hospital bed right now with his leg broke off into two pieces and you’re going to put this on his shoulders too? That’s not fair and he has zero-zippo-nada to do with the name of the stupid team.

    If they do go for a new name, they should name it after the fore fathers of the country… the Washington Foreski,,,uh, nevermind…

  296. mrapt102 says: Feb 9, 2013 8:38 PM

    The fact you put this on rg3 is a joke. If any action is to take place, he needs to stay as far away from it as possible.

    I am a skins fan, and in understand the negative connotation, but it is still my team. If the named changed, while I may be upset for a few years, this will always be my team. But I don’t want my star player getting involved.

  297. mrx149 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:02 PM

    The idea Owner Dan Snyder can make money from a name change is a joke. What would you do? A) Buy the new Washington Warriors shirt or B) Cling to and cherish the shirts bearing the name Redskins because it is the name you grew up with and loved. I think the answer is obvious.

  298. geemoney713 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:07 PM

    Hail to the Redskins, hail victory. Braves on the warpath, fight for old DC.

    That must mean that Redskins = Braves. I don’t think Braves is offensive. I feel like the fight song shows that the name Redskins is meant to represent strength. If anything, if I were a Native American, I’d see it as a tribute to my ancestors.

  299. rmcnulty234 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:09 PM

    Mike Wise has hand this agenda the first day he signed with the Washington Post. What is noteworthy is that you can find his recent article 1-13-2013 regarding the Redskins name change on Google search but the Washington Post has removed it from the archive section on stories written by him. He was fired from his radio job he had with local CBS Radio station 106.7 just a few months ago. His comments to Roger Goodell received very little air play here in DC or for that matter even the Washington Post. He is a pathetic journalist who is now realizing nobody cares to listen to him…

  300. screechdaddy says: Feb 9, 2013 9:09 PM

    Here’s the thing…

    People who are self-serving remain unsympathetic to the pain of strangers until it either happens to them or to someone THEY care about. Therefore it matters not to a bigot that roughly 376,000 Native Americans (10% according to last census) object to the “Redskins” name and find it offensive. Yet it will only take ONE objection by a friend or family member they have compassion for to trigger a raising of their individual consciousness and cause them to see how selfish they’ve been all along.

    And that is exactly what this is about: selfishness. How one can weigh the meaninglessness of a sports team nickname against the dignity of an entire culture, even if it’s just 10 percent of said culture, is a very sad comment on who we are as Americans. We’re supposed to be better than that.

    I also find it interesting that so many here immediately equate those who are in favor of changing the name to being “leftists” or “liberals,” when no such political partisanship was mentioned by Mr. Florio or those who agree with him. But it does speak volumes as to why the vast majority of bigots tend to label themselves as conservatives or Republicans.

    The nickname “Braves” was the team’s previous name before it was Redskins, and would maintain the logo and be a truly respectful homage to Native Americans. Fans would have to alter the lyrics to their stupid song a bit, but surely a small cost to return dignity to 100% of the culture you CLAIM to be honoring.

    Kudos to you, Mr. Florio, for posting this in light of the heat you must have known you would receive in return. I do, agree, however, that putting this issue on RG3’s shoulders, at least for now, is a bit soon for a rookie. Perhaps once he has become synonymous with the franchise like Brady is with NE or Rodgers with Green Bay, as I have no doubt he will be in 2-3 more seasons.

  301. bmacwillconn says: Feb 9, 2013 9:17 PM

    Must be nice to tell a 22 year old kid who already has the weight of the entire franchise on his back that he must also initiate a highly contentious campaign to force his employer to change the name of the company.

    Here’s a recommendation Mike….if it’s such a big deal to you then quit your job and lead the charge to force a name change. Don’t act like a typical liberal and tell others to do the hard work while you sit on the sidelines reaping the benefits.

  302. northshorejag says: Feb 9, 2013 9:19 PM

    I would like to see Florio ask this of RG3 to his face

  303. oxfordblue06 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:24 PM

    Author Wrote: The NFL franchise assigned to Washington, D.C., has a name that is both racist and offensive. Most Americans have become desensitized to that fact. But it is a fact.

    Lie!!!! That is not a FACT. That is YOUR OPINION. If you have facts, use them to support your position. Like most liberal pundits, you ignore the facts. The fact is the majority of native americans are not offended by the name.

    Go away and focus on something meaningful like lack of blacks in senior positions in the NFL or the fact that gays are unwelcome in todays NFL. Wow, a conservative is concerned about these issues? Indeed, we’d rather focus on REAL issues and not this made up manure.

  304. whythecardinals says: Feb 9, 2013 9:27 PM

    As much as I hate to admit it, This team has always been “thorn in my side”….. They bring no dishonor on any people or heritage… In fact, I think, recgonizing the as a part of out “heritage” brings honor to the American Indians, and helps remind us of tradition….

  305. steelersfan88007 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:28 PM

    I think the notion that someone would name their team after anyone or anything as a slight is downright ridiculous. If you name your team after an animal it is in homage to it’s strength, speed, tenacity, etc. Same if named after a group of people. The Vikings are not making fun of Vikings but wanting to express toughness and a warrior mentality, and so it is with the Redskins. It’s a tribute, not a mockery. This is why you’ll never see teams like the: Sacramento Sissies, Kentucky Chickens (actually, that might be a good one :). or the Tallahassee Tallywhackers. Why would you name your team something you’re trying to make fun of? This whole debate is stupid!

  306. guinsrule says: Feb 9, 2013 9:30 PM

    Change their name to the Washington “We-had-a-great-young-franchise-quarterback-but-our-coach-ruined-him”

  307. dawglb says: Feb 9, 2013 9:38 PM

    Generic words such “warriors” (because all Native Americans were not warlike people, “redskins” (for obvious comparisons to the “n-word”),….are words that represent ignorance (from the view of proud Native peoples). I respect that.

    Teams that honor specific Nations do it right. They have the blessings of those Nations. They consult them when making various decisions. Smart.

    Should the Redskins seriously consider a name change? Yes.

    Will they? No

    The Owner, not RG3, should lead this discussion. I realize that of the 2, RG3 is significantly more loved and respected.

    Ball is in your court, Danny….

  308. fordraptorforum says: Feb 9, 2013 9:40 PM

    Completely agree with the author and I’ve been saying this for years. It’s a racial slur. Change the name. Would we even be having this conversation if it were the Whiteskins, the Blackskins, or the Yellowskins? No, we wouldn’t.

  309. scrap7681 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:48 PM

    I love reading some of these comments. For instance, they are serious when the write Pieta meaning PETA, R2D2/RG3, ect! Keep em coming!!!

  310. dachozen1 says: Feb 9, 2013 9:53 PM

    Should the Steelers name be changed? Does this insult anyone who works in the steel mill? Is the name ‘Redskin” itself offensive? Is it demeaning for the old New England Patriots helmet, Buccaneers, Chiefs, etc??? It appears they are proud of these logos, I dont see anyone wearing them to make a mockery of it?? This is way too confusing but everyone should hold the right to be offended of anything.

  311. mazblast says: Feb 9, 2013 10:10 PM

    As a short person (but not what the PC police call “little person”), I find the name “Giants” very offensive. I demand that Roger Goodell FORCE John Mara to change the team name. Likewise for “Titans”; I demand that Bud Adams change his team’s name–again.

    The name “Patriots” is offensive to those who are not patriotic. Bob Kraft must be forced to change his team’s name.

    The names “Raiders” and “Buccaneers” are offensive to anyone whose ancestors were harmed by pirates. “Browns” is offensive to all whites, reds, blacks, and yellows. “Cardinals” is offensive to those who like bluebirds. “Steelers” is offensive to those who prefer aluminum or titanium. “Rams” and “Colts” are offensive to females. “Packers” is offensive to vegetarians and vegans. “Bills” is offensive to those who don’t want to pay theirs. “Panthers”, “Lions”, “Bengals”, and “Jaguars” are offensive to dog lovers. “Saints” is offensive to sinners.

  312. osage44 says: Feb 9, 2013 10:33 PM

    Florio has too much time on his hands. And I think RGIII has enough on his plate without trying to force his employer to change its name. The PC police never sleep.

  313. hendawg21 says: Feb 9, 2013 10:45 PM

    Problem one the mere fact that you mention Mike Wise gives this article no credibility as he sucked as a radio talk show host lost that job. Point/problem 2 this whole argument is old and pointless, for every native american you dig up to agree you can find 2 who disagree that the name is racist or offensive. As one with both Cherokee and Blackfoot heritage I have not one ounce of an issue with Redskins.

  314. kinguga says: Feb 9, 2013 10:54 PM

    I’ve seen this a few times further up the page, but just call ’em the Skins and move on. That’s what most people call the team.

  315. kinguga says: Feb 9, 2013 10:56 PM

    And let’s face it, the vast majority of the moral failing-addled commenters here shouldn’t be trusted with an opinion, much less access to internet capability.

  316. jayhit says: Feb 9, 2013 11:01 PM

    Why change the name? Change the logo to a potato and everyone can be happy!

  317. ontheteebox says: Feb 9, 2013 11:17 PM

    Change the name, already.

  318. blackqbwhiterb says: Feb 9, 2013 11:19 PM

    I’m white & I’d laugh like hell if the called the team the Washington Crackers or Honkies, I wouldn’t sue and act like I’m all offended to get my name in the paper…. The people really behind these complaints are lawyers and activists making big bucks by going to court, not Native Americans…. If I was Dan Snyder I’d tell you to got to /:;(

  319. selldannysell says: Feb 9, 2013 11:28 PM

    Washington Warpath.

  320. robgilman says: Feb 9, 2013 11:33 PM

    onebucplace says:
    Feb 9, 2013 2:22 PM
    I think the real issue is the Packers name, that should be addressed first. It’s not cool to tease the gays anymore and that name is disgusting.


  321. johnschatzan says: Feb 9, 2013 11:40 PM

    From what it seems you’re implying RG3 is bigger than the franchise. And his voice and opinion carries more weight than those “offended”.

  322. waterfalldungeon says: Feb 9, 2013 11:55 PM

    Since most people here are obviously unaware of the origin of the term “REDSKINS” sit back and read this little history lesson:

    William “Lone Star” Dietz was the first coach of the Redskins football team. His mother was a full blooded Sioux Indian and it was in his honor that the team was named “Redskins”.

    The term “REDSKIN” was conferred upon the native inhabitants by the English Colonists because of the red body paint the Indians wore in battle.

    Now is someone honestly going to tell me that the TRUE meaning behind the term “REDSKIN” is offensive?

  323. paredskinwarrior1985 says: Feb 9, 2013 11:58 PM

    as a lifelong redskins fan for 30 years I think that should finally change the name, bc the country is different from 10 years ago!!

    move with the times end this nonsense!!!

    create a New scary wicked Badass logo, colors should be burgundy red and real gold, and Change the name to the Warrior-King’s!!!

  324. blindzebras says: Feb 10, 2013 12:15 AM

    Florio writes….(It’s often called the “State of the League” press conference, but at any given moment the “State of the League” can be summarized thusly: (1) we’re really rich; (2) we’re really popular; and (3) we do what we want.)

    And don’t forget (4) you have a nice paying job because of that insensitive league.

  325. ninthwardfriend says: Feb 10, 2013 1:02 AM

    How about the Washington pale skins?

  326. ndn247 says: Feb 10, 2013 1:37 AM

    As a Native American who participates in traditional ceremonies, I find all Native themed logos in sports offensive. I feel the antics that go along with these logos such as the tomahawk chop, the Native themed costumes mocking traditional regalia and the “war” chants and dances are very disrespectful to the traditions of Native Americans. I feel these actions make a mockery of my traditions and culture, and give an inaccurate view of my people. WE ARE NOT MASCOTS!!! Our ancestors fought and died so these traditions can be kept alive and carried on by future generations. To see these ways be made fun of is disrespectful and wrong.

    Would it be OK if a team was called the Detroit Blacks? San Francisco Asians? I would like to believe some members of these communities would speak up against their race and culture being displayed in such a manner as Native mascots are today

  327. rick1k6 says: Feb 10, 2013 2:15 AM

    The way Snyder handles his money, maybe they should change the name to the Fiscal Cliffs.

  328. bartlettruss says: Feb 10, 2013 6:19 AM

    The problem is that people, like most commentators here don’t care because it doesn’t offend them personally. Those of us who grew up watching westerns know that “redskins” is a derogatory term. It’s totally different from “Cleveland Indians” which is non-judgmental. Redskins only differs from the N word in that there are fewer Native Americans to do the complaining.

    I’m not a liberal btw. I agree with the poster who suggested that they use the name of a local tribe after getting that tribe’s permission just like the Florida State Seminoles did.

  329. bartlettruss says: Feb 10, 2013 6:23 AM

    Also, I think it’s unreasonable to expect RG3 to take on this burden. He’s a second year player coming off of a second torn ACL. He’s trying to do endorsements. Let the adults in DC do the adult thing and change the name.

    It’s still the same team with the same traditions. A lot of teams would be better off if they did change their names. We wouldn’t have to deal with stupid names like the Utah Jazz or LA Lakers whose names made sense when they played in New Orleans and Minnesota respectively.

  330. audient says: Feb 10, 2013 11:08 AM

    Redskins is a rude name for a team, and it ought to be retired.

    There is one man to make the change. It isn’t RG3. It is Daniel Snyder.

  331. jwreck says: Feb 10, 2013 12:36 PM

    A lot of good comments above (like 500,000 of them), but the important thing to note here is that the name “Redskins” is not racist. Is it offensive in this day and age? OK, I’ll give you that one. But the point is, you have to look at the context in which the name was given.

    In the 1930’s, that was just the term one would use to when referring to an American Indian. It is in no way meant to degrade them, but rather use the Indian as a symbol of strength, power, and prowess on the battlefield. If you need more convincing, compare the Redskins’ logo to that of the Cleveland Indians (which is guilty on all counts of being racist, offensive, and just plain wrong). The Boston/Washington “Redskin” has always been serene, serious, and determined: never goofy or mocking.

    The point is, whatever else you want to say about the Redskins name or logo, calling it “racist” is just flat-out inaccurate. While the word has become far less acceptable in modern times, it was never meant to degrade, insult, or mock any individuals or ethnic groups.

  332. onebassplayer says: Feb 10, 2013 1:16 PM

    Why not focus on giving Native Americans back the land that was stolen, or reparations for the distruction of their culture and way of life in this country? All of this “change a name” talk feels more like an attempt to whitewash atrocities perpetrated on the Native American people. Why not focus on the real issue?

  333. purpleguy says: Feb 10, 2013 2:13 PM

    The old D-lineman from the Redskins (Grant)said all of this best: it’s not what the 332 opinionated posters above think that matters, it’s what native americans think. If they as a rule find the name offensive, we should too.

  334. footballer4ever says: Feb 10, 2013 4:20 PM

    How about it’s renamed to : Landover Redskins!?? That is more appropiate and less offensive to the people of Maryland.

  335. dontfeedgigantor says: Feb 10, 2013 5:16 PM

    “The NFL franchise assigned to Washington, D.C., has a name that is both racist and offensive.”

    That’s ridiculous. It’s only offensive if the name is intended to reflect hatred of Native Americans. As horrible a human being as Dan Snyder is, racist towards Native Americans is not something I can attribute to anyone in the Redskins organization.

  336. laserw says: Feb 10, 2013 5:40 PM

    How about the Washington Bellyaching, bribed, always a victim, always wrong, always politically correct, exempt from laws on the rest of us, overpaid, underworked, lazy bastards?

    Helmet logo can be a middle finger

  337. delhommed says: Feb 10, 2013 6:43 PM

    Florio has a VAGINA! Biggest d bag in all of sports media… one would guess he would propose the name change.

  338. jaylee202 says: Feb 10, 2013 8:20 PM

    Well here’s a bit of truth. All this bickering and insults on this thread. The name WILL be changed. Like it or not. The Patent and Trademark office already have documents of the filling for the name “Washington Warriors” back in 2001 and 2007.

    See the problem is, it’s not that people don’t accept change, they don’t accept BEING changed. Folks, Change is good when your attitude is great! So the name will eventually be changed, end of story! So everyone go on home and enjoy your families.

  339. jwil444 says: Feb 10, 2013 11:56 PM

    Beyond ridiculous, (aside from the name change stupidity) suggesting that RG3 should join the PC police.

  340. realtruth99224 says: Feb 11, 2013 5:11 PM

    Things are always gonna offend people in this world. As long as people are different. Get over yourselves.

    Oh by the way, this just in…

    The descendants of the miners in the gold rush of 1849 are upset and want the 49ers to change their name.

    Men of all ages that are named ‘Bill’ are offended by Buffalo’s choice of team name.

    New York is offended by one of their teams being called the ‘Jets’.

    Turds everywhere are mad that Cleveland calls their team the Browns.

    Descendants of Andrew Carnegie are pissed about Pittsburgh’s team name.

    Norway and Sweden are still pissed about the Vikings.

    People that owe massive credit card debt are pissed about the ‘Chargers’.

    Shall I go on?

  341. ohpulease says: Feb 11, 2013 5:26 PM

    Let’s have the Cowboys change their name to the Pale Faces, then the big rivalry can be the Redskins vs. the Pale Faces just like the old westerns!

  342. TheWizard says: Feb 11, 2013 6:09 PM

    Why not focus on giving Native Americans back the land that was stolen

    Yeah, we’ll start with your property.

    I have three other responses to that but I doubt they would be well received by Comrade Florio.

  343. burnzido says: Feb 13, 2013 11:57 AM

    If the Redskins name is so offensive to so many people why then have they been one of the top 5 most valuable sports franchises in the world since forever? Even without a winning team the last 20+ years.

    Ill try and take a stab at the answer to that question…………

    Its due to the FACT that a large majority of Americans including Native Americans couldn’t be less offended. Dont believe me take a nation wide poll. Include reservations

    I get enough of the liberal news media trying to brainwash me and push there agenda on me. I don’t need my football news to do the same. I realize that this a blog and you feel the need or obligation to state your opinion but please dont tout your opinion or others opinions as fact. Thank you.

  344. kjack59 says: Feb 13, 2013 12:33 PM

    There sure are a lot of meatheads on this board that believe might is right. Typical former high school football player that never accomplished anything in life after those glory days. People with strong opinions yet incredibly uninformed. Sad but that’s what you get from simple minded lazy people. Carry on meatheads!!!!

  345. mogogo1 says: Feb 14, 2013 10:03 AM

    Bottom line is there’s no “momentum” for a name change. Outside of this article there’s been basically zero mention of this anywhere else and these comments are running probably 95% against the idea.

  346. oaktown49er says: Feb 14, 2013 11:32 AM

    Can’t we call them the Washington Wizards, everyone loves that name……

  347. toonloonboon says: Feb 14, 2013 9:30 PM

    I think Washington would change their helmet logo to a potato. a redskin potato. keep the name and say they are honoring American agriculture.

  348. axespray says: Feb 15, 2013 11:58 AM

    I’m white, so I’m not offended, so that means people that had to put up with “Get-R-Done!” racism through out their lives don’t have to “act” offended by things that don’t offend me personally.

    Cause what do I know about having to be a minority.

    by the way, what’s the argument to keep the name the way it is now?

    If the name doesn’t bother you, then what’s your argument to Not change the name ?

  349. axespray says: Feb 15, 2013 12:01 PM

    laserw says:
    Feb 10, 2013 5:40 PM
    “How about the Washington Bellyaching, bribed, always a victim, always wrong, always politically correct, exempt from laws on the rest of us, overpaid, underworked, lazy bastards?

    Helmet logo can be a middle finger.”

    How about we name ’em the washington guys that went from 20 million down to less than 300,000 and have to put up with racists like yourself ?

  350. buffedwhiteman says: Feb 16, 2013 2:31 PM

    Mike Florio…..Head cheerleader “left-wing parrot’s “,lol,lol

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!