Skip to content

Josh Morgan happy with Snyder’s stance on team’s name

Morgan Getty Images

When Redskins owner Daniel Snyder opted for an all-caps “NEVER” regarding the possibility of the team changing its name, he risked galvanizing what has been a sputtering, disjointed, and half-hearted effort to alter it.

What he may have gotten was both a team and a fan base that will support him like never before.

Receiver Josh Morgan, a D.C. native, expressed pleasure over the development.  “I grew up right down the street from RFK Stadium,” Morgan told LaVar Arrington and Chad Dukes of 106.7 The Fan.  “As a matter of fact, I’m sitting here right now.  All I know is the Redskins, so I’m glad we’re not going to ever change the name. . . .

“I’m happy,” Morgan added. “I was kind of getting scared when everyone started talking about the Redtails and all this other stuff.  I was getting a little nervous about that.”

The chatter regarding the potentially offensive nature of the name won’t go away, now or perhaps ever.  But those who see the word as reflecting only the name of the football team they love surely love the fact that Snyder won’t ever bow to whatever pressure comes his way.

Permalink 35 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Washington Redskins
35 Responses to “Josh Morgan happy with Snyder’s stance on team’s name”
  1. rickyspanish says: May 11, 2013 5:58 PM

    Thank god Josh Morgan is okay with it. It’s nice knowing the face of the franchise supports his owner. Wait a minute, who cares?

  2. onebucplace says: May 11, 2013 6:01 PM

    Redskins was the name given to indians by early white settlers because of the red clay or mud they smeared on their skin, it’s not offensive in any way to those that bother to do more than 2-seconds of looking for the origins of the name.

    For those that think Indians find it offensive then explain why so many reservation high schools name their teams the Redskins.

    This is purely a politically correct BS campaign probably ran by some self hating white liberals who are explaining to indians and everyone else why they should be offended and how they can profit from it.

  3. mrphootball says: May 11, 2013 6:02 PM

    Ricky you must be a member of that failed franchise knows as the cowgirls.

  4. spamrok says: May 11, 2013 6:03 PM

    As a fan of the team I can’t imagine them without that name. I understand the potential offensive nature and I also understand that our fan base doesn’t think of it offensively at all. I also think however, that the ownership should be supporting every Native American cause they can possibly fathom. To show their respect.

  5. commonsensedude says: May 11, 2013 6:06 PM

    He should worry more about the possibility that Snyder will say he’ll never install a better playing surface at FedEx Field.

    And by the way, will someone remind the DC politician who came up with “redtails” – and all the rest of them – that the team is not in DC anymore and they should mind their business.

  6. 1590t says: May 11, 2013 6:09 PM

    This is the only thing Snyder has ever said that I a TOTALLY on board with. Enough with this topic already.

  7. romosmicrodongs says: May 11, 2013 6:15 PM

    commonsensedude, they have resodded the field and will resod in september and in November. last year it was just September. so now decembers field will look like octobers..

  8. contract says: May 11, 2013 6:16 PM

    Judging by the composition of the team and the District of Columbia, Dan Snyder should change the name of the team to the Washington Blackskins.

    I’m sure Josh Morgan would be OK with it.

  9. pnut87 says: May 11, 2013 6:19 PM

    Has anyone actually tried asking an Indian man or woman how they feel about the word? I have yet to hear anything of the sort in this whole escapade.

  10. kd75 says: May 11, 2013 6:29 PM

    Fighting Irish and Vancouver Canucks don’t offend this half Irish/half Canadian.

  11. logicalvoicesays says: May 11, 2013 6:32 PM

    We are a big family here in Redskinsnation. Everyone associated with this franchise breathes superiority. #burgundyandgoldstandard

  12. gallaghedj311 says: May 11, 2013 6:49 PM

    Yes. This may be the only thing Daniel Snyder ever did that I like.

    Although, as an Eagles fan, it would be nice to point the finger at the Redtails for never winning a championship…

  13. nagaswan says: May 11, 2013 7:02 PM

    As a huge Redskins fan, I say the name stinks. I would also say Dan Snyder is one of the worst people on the planet. People who are siding with Snyder should realize that there is something inherently wrong with that.

    P.S. This mattress I bought 10 years ago at Six Flags is still in great shape, so I guess he’s not all bad.

  14. thirdistheworrd says: May 11, 2013 7:24 PM

    Watch me end this argument:

    Everyone should Google “Native American Chief Talks About Redskins”. If PFT would post that, the whole issue could be over. Unfortunately, there’s way too much money in non-Natives BSing around on the internet.
    Choice quotes:
    ““People are speaking for Native Americans that aren’t Native American…we had a big problem with all the things that were coming out [of the discussion]…they were basically saying that we were offended, our people were offended, and they were misrepresenting the Native American nation… Redskin’ isn’t something given to us by the white man or the blue eyes, it was something in the Native American community that was taken from us. [It’s] used also as a term of respect, because that’s how we were. We respected each other with that term… It’s not degrading in one bit and that’s why I sent you guys an email. It just bothered me that somebody would twist something so negatively when it’s a positive.”

    “[Much of the discussion over the Redskins name is led by non-Natives, and that makes me] Irritated. Irritated is a polite term to say… When you have people trying to represent our nation, you should be from our nation. Don’t represent our nation if you don’t even have an ounce of blood in you.”

    And we’re done.

    Dodson certainly doesn’t speak for all Natives, but his opinion about who should be speaking for all Natives seems very conclusive. And I think that about wraps things up here.

    Goddamn, does anybody remember when this site was about football?

  15. tbolend says: May 11, 2013 7:28 PM

    I don’t understand why redskin is so offensive but they are ok being called Indians. The white men called them indians because they thought they were in India. They aren’t even indians!

  16. siggtacular says: May 11, 2013 7:35 PM

    Washington Warriors: beginning 2023

  17. ausernamethatisavailable says: May 11, 2013 7:35 PM

    I heard Colin cowherd mention an expert at the smithsonian said the term redskin was initially an honorary term among Indians and was not derogatory. Sounds like this whole discussion is bc a bunch of white people trying to determine what should and should not be offensive to another race.

  18. zeekey2013 says: May 11, 2013 7:37 PM

    How is this even news? Especially coming from a guy buried in a crappy teams depth chart

  19. shawtiernan says: May 11, 2013 7:38 PM

    Words only have the power that people give them. Culturally, it is easy to recognize that when a racist uses the “n” word it is deeply offensive. However, when African Americans use it freely amongst themselves, it is just as easily recognized that in their use of the word it is not offensive.

    Whatever the origin of the word “redskin,” it is not difficult to realize that it is not being directed at an individual as an insult or slander. It is being used to represent a team that it is a source of pride in its community in a sport where skill, intelligence, teamwork, loyalty, sportsmanship, resilience, and integrity are among the chief virtues valued by fans. That the community would recognize these traits in the Native American history of its region is a nod at the eventual admiration Americans developed for their culture, and in my mind no more moronic or offensive than the continued stupidity of referring to them as “Indians” in other sports franchises or popular culture. Yet they do not seem to have a problem with that.

    It is up to an individual to decide whether or not they are offended. I have to think that this fight is more about winning what battles you can against a government and people whose actions towards you are as bad or worse as the country’s participation in slavery, and the fact that among the two atrocities, theirs is by far the least cared about. I get that. But that doesn’t mean the name is offensive. Far from it. Context people. Context.

    For the record I don’t have a dog in this fight. Bronco fan. Could generally care less about the Redskins.

  20. 16to87 says: May 11, 2013 7:48 PM

    Josh, spoken like a true former niner, cully would approve. that being said I think the Washington redasses describes that franchise perfectly.

  21. thenew013 says: May 11, 2013 8:06 PM

    if the cheif on the helmet was red like the jersey that would be a bit racist but he is brown skinned like a real indian cheif would be. they arent degrading native americans…shoot if anything the should be honored they have 2 nfl teams refering to their heritage. white folks got the patriots the brothas got…well…they account for almost half the league so they dont need a team named after them.

  22. seaeagle707 says: May 11, 2013 8:09 PM

    The name does not need to change to satisfy the namby-pamby PC crowd, who really do not have history on their side. On the other hand, having to witness the blowhard statements from “logical” might cause the Skins’ faithful to consider adopting the name, Redfaces.

  23. jimnaizeeum says: May 11, 2013 8:15 PM

    So I guess he would be fine with the Yellowskins or Brownskins…because if it’s tradition it’s ok.

  24. charger383 says: May 11, 2013 8:48 PM

    Redskins forever

  25. FlyFromTheInside says: May 11, 2013 8:51 PM

    Dead Horse…let it go man….let it go…..

  26. blackqbwhiterb says: May 11, 2013 8:56 PM

    If you don’t like the name, you can root against them. Period…. Although it would be funny to watch Native Americans root for the “Cowboys” because they’re offended by the name “Redskins”….

  27. tomtravis76 says: May 11, 2013 9:15 PM

    This will never be an issue unless the league office gets involved. And the Indian Tribes stop entering into sponsorship/advertising agreements for their casinos. Money is what will change it or stay the same.

  28. kerryc21realty says: May 11, 2013 9:21 PM

    Here we go again with this politically correct BS. the minn governer questioning cutting the vikings punter, Obama calling a gay basketball player, now the liberals are trying to change the redskins name. Hey liberals, stop try shoving your liberal politics down everybody’s throat !

  29. kerryc21realty says: May 11, 2013 9:25 PM

    rickyspanish said
    Thank god Josh Morgan is okay with it. It’s nice knowing the face of the franchise supports his owner. Wait a minute, who cares?

    Hey idiot, Josh Morgan was a long time redskins fan before he was even on the team, he grew up in DC and maybe he just agrees with about 90 percent of all skins fans

  30. ravanator says: May 11, 2013 10:16 PM

    Ha Ha! Your team’s name doesn’t even matter. All casual fans don’t even know who the Redskins are because they never win! Change your name to Ravens and you might be relevant someday!

  31. voiceofauthority4343 says: May 12, 2013 3:38 PM

    RG3 is on steroids, hgh among other things. Cheater. just ask logicalvoicesays. Thankfully, he did not win the MVP

  32. ivanckstrong says: May 12, 2013 4:34 PM

    Hey Florio, you gonna post about anything else this year? You’re literally writing articles detailing how much of a dead horse this is. It’s an oxymoron gone bad. Drop it dude.

  33. themfman says: May 12, 2013 4:52 PM

    @ ravanator how many rings does your team have if we were in your division we would b champs of it cuz we beat that ass down in B-more. How relevant is that CLOWN.

  34. flavadave10 says: May 13, 2013 11:37 AM

    I mean, if Redskins fans REALLY give a crap about some regular season victory over the Ravens and would rather beat the Ravens in the regular season than win the Super Bowl…

  35. zragone says: May 13, 2013 6:08 PM

    “The chatter regarding the potentially offensive nature of the name won’t go away, ”

    Florio’s absolutely right. The “Chatter” is never going to go away because people like him will continue to make it a never ending media crusade to tell 90% of Native American’s that they don’t know what’s “offensive” to them or not and that white men in the media and a small minority of fellow Native American’s known better.

    90% of the Native American population don’t find the use of the name for the sports team offensive. 80% of American’s in general don’t find it offensive. The vast majority of people who hear the term immediately think of a football team, not a negative connotation of native americans. It’s funny but you don’t see the Mike Florio’s of the world showing similar vigor decrying OTHER sports names that have a history of being a slur.

    Yankee was (and still is) used in parts of the United States and around the world a pejorative ethnic slur. If the very nature that at one point in history a particular word was used somewhat regularly as a slur is enough to dictate a teams name should change, then why is the crusade singularly against the “Redskins”. Simple…it’s a transparent “feel good” crusade that is undertaken not because it actually makes a difference to the population its supposedly “offending” or because the individual has a sincere issue with it, but because the individual likes to lie to themselves about how caring they are while trying to stir up controversy and page hits.

    In this….Florio isn’t any better than the 4 letters he often decries. In this, Mike Florio and Profootballtalk is on par with things like First Take; purposefully and needless provocative on non-issues simply to get attention.

    But then again, this will mark itself as the 7th post about this subject that will magically be deleted off of ProFootballTalk’s comment section. When I first started responding I was doing so in an amazingly civil, purely fact based method…but when even being amazingly polite and academic in nature gets you deleted, why not just go ahead and speak ones mind.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!