Skip to content

Packers CEO says Redskins name is “very derogatory to a lot of people”

Murphy Getty Images

The clock could be ticking toward “NEVER.”

With Commissioner Roger Goodell indicating that the NFL will continue to listen to concerns about the Redskins name and conceding to Congress that “reasonable people may view [the issue] differently, particularly over time,” the closest thing the Packers have to an owner has shared his two cents on an issue that ultimately could cost Daniel Snyder (or some future owner) a lot more than that.

“I don’t know if there is any way you can change Redskins,” Packers CEO Mark Murphy told WSSP-AM on Tuesday, via Bob Wolfley of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.  “The owner, Dan Snyder, has come out very strong that he will never change the name.  But I am sensitive.  It’s a name that’s very derogatory to a lot of people.”

That last part represents a clear break from talking points that insist the name honors the culture and heritage, and that no one should view it as offensive because the NFL and the Redskins say it isn’t offensive — presumably even if someone gets drunk at a concert and shouts, “I will fight every Redskin in here.”

Murphy played for the Redskins, and he was a member of the team’s first Super Bowl-winning roster.  He also has experience dealing with mascots that could offend Native Americans.

“When I was the athletic director at Colgate, their nickname was the Red Raiders,” Murphy told WSSP.  “At some point in time, there was an Indian mascot.  That went away.  They kept the Red Raiders name.  We studied it long and hard, got a lot of complaints, particularly from faculty on campus.  But eventually changed it to just Raiders.”

The issue isn’t going away, no matter how loudly those who don’t want to change the name try to shout down those who would have the gall to point out that the word, through the passage of time, has become problematic.  Murphy’s comments represent the strongest acknowledgement yet by anyone connected to the NFL that the debate is fair and appropriate.

And so the debate will continue until the name is changed.  And it will continue after the name has changed.  And the issue will be part of the NFL for a lot longer than the name has been.

Permalink 218 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
218 Responses to “Packers CEO says Redskins name is “very derogatory to a lot of people””
  1. johnnyjagfan says: Aug 7, 2013 9:34 AM

    Dude needs to worry about his own team.

  2. twilson962 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:39 AM

    Redskins Fans say your name is offensive to the GBLT community

  3. stellarperformance says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Before the obvious grade-school insults begin to arrive from Minnesota saying that the name Packers is offensive too (very original,) let me say I know from personal experience that Mark Murphy is one of the finest people you will ever meet. A very stand-up individual and a great guy to run this unique franchise. Enough said.

  4. logicalvoicesays says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Dan Snyder does what he wants, when he wants. I couldn’t ask for a better owner for my franchise. #WeAREtheREDSKINSdealwithit

  5. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Now here’s a Packer I can agree with.

  6. strokeytheclown says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Seriously, people need to shut up and let this go. Every year it’s the same thing and once the season starts people drop it. What’s next, are fat people gonna start being “offended” by the name “Titans”?

  7. eigglesnosuperbowls says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Just shup up and keep making those cheeseheads believe they actually own the team !

  8. floratiotime says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    While the Redskins are rapidly becoming one of the NFL’s more despised teams you have to wonder why this fool had to make a comment.

  9. exnavysub says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Oh enough already! People will find anything derogatory, it doesnt mean we change the name of everything else. You PC policemen (oh im sorry, policeMEN probably offends you too), need to knock it off and find something else to whine about.

  10. negativten says: Aug 7, 2013 9:40 AM

    Be careful Murphy, it is a slippery slope your on because it wont be long that the name Packers
    will offend “a certain group” and you too will be forced to change your name

  11. wethog66 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:41 AM

    I wonder how sensitive Murphy was to the Redskins name during the 7-8 years he was employed by the Redskins. He must of been absolutely tortured.

    Murphy needs to focus on his teams name. Packers is a derogatory name to a section of society. I will leave it at that.

  12. ckacv111 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:42 AM

    “What, me worry?”

  13. bordner says: Aug 7, 2013 9:42 AM

    It can’t be too offensive if everyone keeps saying it and every article keeps printing it out instead of using the term, “R-word” in its place. At least that’s what they seem to do with all of the other words that society has determined to be offensive. Maybe this one’s not as bad as we think?

  14. attyken says: Aug 7, 2013 9:44 AM

    Dan Snyder needs to put a potato on the Redskins helmets and call it day.

  15. cgravyboat says: Aug 7, 2013 9:45 AM

    He’s just mad because people have called him a ginger his whole life. You know, standing up for people like this still won’t get you a soul…

  16. nfloracle says: Aug 7, 2013 9:46 AM

    I wish this country would be one twentieth as concerned about its endless wars on terror and an economy that’s screwing everyone except the billionaires as it is about n- and r- words and all the rest of this PC BS that helps keep the 24 hour “news” (sic, ha) cycle alive.

    I will be SO glad when the season starts because maybe then the “reporters” will get off their butts and report some real news.

  17. thereisalwaysnextyear says: Aug 7, 2013 9:46 AM

    He should worry about his own team. Some may say “packers” is offensive to a certain minority group.

  18. kvaldo1 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:49 AM

    Call them The Washington ‘Skins’ and be done with It! In a day when there is high alert for political ‘corrected ness’, this is the smoothest way to transition!

  19. britishteeth says: Aug 7, 2013 9:50 AM

    What is this CEO you speak of? The Packers are owned and operated by the savvy people of Wisconsin….or something.

  20. talknfootball says: Aug 7, 2013 9:50 AM

    I’m glad to see more people w/ influence speaking out about this. Along a long list that includes Phil Jackson and members of congress, I’m glad to start finally seeing some powerful football people speak out. Why is this still even a debate? We would never make a team called the “N——-, much less try to defend the name and claim that some black people don’t find it offensive. There are some black people who don’t find the N word offensive, but that doesn’t make it OK or change the painful history for most of those kinds of derogatory names. The tide is changing and the owner of the WA team needs to change with it. The majority of ignorance is starting to give way to a majority to educated, conscious sensitivity to other races. If it’s only a name like so many fans claim, then why not change it, but then they’ll say, but it’s our identity. AHA! Identity – a sports team to you, a painful, denigrating reminder of unjust treatments to many others.

  21. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Aug 7, 2013 9:50 AM

    I thought the Packers were owned by the fans

  22. alphaq2 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:51 AM

    After looking at his picture it’s obvious he truly understands the plight of the Native American

  23. dretwann says: Aug 7, 2013 9:51 AM

    Why is worried about what is happening in DC? Dude stick to your own affairs.

  24. jessepinkman1199 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:52 AM

    What is this CEO you speak of? The Packers are owned and operated by the savvy people of Wisconsin….or something.

    __________________________________

    CEO’s don’t own companies.

  25. jhein23 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:53 AM

    It’s a very historic and proud franchise but the name itself is terribly derogative. The helmet doesn’t bother me as much. But the name is probably the worst in professional sports right now as far as hurting people’s feelings. I know I’ll get many thumbs down for this but I don’t even say the name I just always call them Washington.

  26. castleofcheese says: Aug 7, 2013 9:53 AM

    I don’t know all of the ins and outs of the WI tax code for native Americans, but they do have a large contingent in that part of the state. It may be in the best interest of the Packers to side with native Americans on this topic to ensure as much public support as possible for future stadium renovations, etc.

    Then again, maybe I’m over-thinking it and he just thinks it’s offensive.

  27. Jimmy Jam says: Aug 7, 2013 9:54 AM

    While I really don’t care whether the name is changed (it is offensive to many… But is it mostly Native Americans or is it mostly white people who feel guilty because of their Daddies’ actions?)

    I do want to say that you, Mike and most of your writers, are truly sanctimonious. You act as if nobody ever made a mistake… As if you have never done so. For you to continue to act as though a man (Cooper) should lose everything he has worked for because he said something that was terrible and incredibly offensive is hypocritical and offensive in itself. Paula Deen lost much of her life’s work andoublic respect (mostly from those who knew of her superficially) over admitting the use of a word years ago that she would not use now. Her actions show she is not the person that the media and louder individual factions have proclaimed that the use of the word shows she is. So, Mike, go ahead and continue to vilify those who make human errors… They may well need help to learn and change but who are you, or anyone else, to not give them that opportunity?

  28. mutohasaposse says: Aug 7, 2013 9:56 AM

    Stupid me for thinking that at this point we could actually start caring about the upcoming season.

  29. thejuddstir says: Aug 7, 2013 9:56 AM

    The same stupid argument could be made for Murphy’s “packers”, it could be considered derogatory and insensitive to gays…Only when the tree huggers get over their hyper-sensitivity to all issues will this country finally get back to taking care of the really important issues like the economy, education, healthcare, etc.

  30. iswearshewas18 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:56 AM

    And charging your fans for “shares” of the team that actually hold no value is perfectly ethical

  31. oranjellojones says: Aug 7, 2013 9:57 AM

    Oh please. We know you’re not going to let it go, you do your best to post about it at least once a week. But at least be honest about it. It’s never going to go away because people like you refuse to just let it go, not because it’s got legs and keeps going on it’s own.

    Unfortunately you trying to shout down the 90% majority of Indians who YOU claim are so offended won’t change the reality that those who people like YOU claim are offended have spoken loudly over and over that they AREN’T offended and DON’T want it changed. You refuse to listen or even acknowledge the mountain of factual evidence that nukes your take on it. We get it, believe me, but you aren’t going to convince the rest of us who know this is just a bunk cause.

  32. buhbay1c says: Aug 7, 2013 9:59 AM

    It’s settled. Washington Redheads. They may not win the Lombardi, but they will take your soul.

  33. paulsmith107 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:00 AM

    Well if the story should be dropped cause the term redskin is no big deal I guess the Riley cooper story should be dropped cause what he said was no big deal. See if we had done to the blacks what we did to the reds it wouldn’t be an issue because there wouldn’t be enough black people to bitch about Riley. Because we basically eradicated the Indians stole everything they had its okay. Funny how that works treat blacks as if they are the only people ever oppressed throughout time and any derogatory word that may have been used to describe them 60 years ago is so disgusting but redskin is okay to use

  34. bduncanscott says: Aug 7, 2013 10:02 AM

    I Live In San Diego California, I am surrounded by Native American reservations. The Native americans here, from ALL tribes call each other Redskins! Or the abbreviated version “Skins”I have seen it and heard it many times… So boys and girls you can’t please everyone in this world, this is life! Some will like you and some won’t, there is always something that will offend someone, YOU CAN’T NERF the WORLD!!!! I would gamble to say the American Indians find a government that steals their land, kills their people, and erases their history a TAD more offensive than an NFL team who’s name is meant to honor them and remember them on a large stage! So when the United States government give back all indian tribe the land they’ve stolen, taking their example only then should a name change be even considered!

  35. pkrjones says: Aug 7, 2013 10:04 AM

    The politically correct police are out, again…

    I’m HIGHLY offended that we are honoring marauding bands of rapers, pillagers and plunderers. Goodbye: Buccaneers, Raiders and especially Vikings.

    Also, why are the 1% being highlighted? Why are only the Chiefs getting the spotlight, while the warriors, hunters, gatherers, domestic workers and papooses being ignored?

  36. lightcleric says: Aug 7, 2013 10:09 AM

    I was wondering how long it would take for a Redskins name story to show up after the attempts to get Cooper cut failed…

    Can we have more talk about *football* and less talk about race?

  37. contra74 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:10 AM

    Crawl back into your hole that is Green Bay and shut up!

  38. oranjellojones says: Aug 7, 2013 10:10 AM

    Not much is more amusing around here than someone -who doesn’t know their history on this topic and doesn’t have any insight whatsoever as to the true factual history of it- calling others who HAVE ignorant and uneducated. Project much? LOL

    Redskin has NEVER been anywhere close to comparable to the N word. You out yourself as clueless by saying it is. It’s root is as an honorific and is something the Indians negotiating a treaty with James Madison referred to themselves as. There’s not one shred of evidence that it’s EVER been a pejorative. Facts are fun.

  39. ddorrelllittle says: Aug 7, 2013 10:11 AM

    You have to be kidding me . You have played to Redskins how many times without even speaking to there name ? Why would you not say something then , And why in the hell the Chiefs , Braves , Blackhawks , And the Indians get a pass ? Redskins will never change there name , So get over it . That’s for all the crybabies

  40. pksoze says: Aug 7, 2013 10:12 AM

    Its interesting a bunch of white posters don’t find the term Redskins racist. How surprising. And now if you complain about any racist term or dehumanizing name, it is now being “PC”.

  41. mogogo1 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:12 AM

    Wouldn’t be surprised to see the NFL have a little talk with Murphy over this. Hard to view those comments as anything but derogatory to another team. And as long as the NFL has no official stance, they really can’t have other teams taking shots at the ‘Skins.

  42. cooklynn17 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:13 AM

    Maybe he’s more bothered by this because he has a little red tinge in his hair…

    The Washington Red Heads!!!

  43. dpj1022 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:13 AM

    Now to Mr. Murphy. Funny, but I don’t recall him making these pronouncements about the Redskins name when they were paying his salary. He’s a hyprocrite. I would add that several years ago, PETA demanded that the Packers change their name because it glorifies the killing the animals. It’s true. Google Packers and PETA. Would Murphy care to address that contention?

  44. cooklynn17 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:16 AM

    Can someone explain to me why my post keep being erased?

    Never use bad words, never offend any groups and yet they vanish more than David Copperfield…

    Posting like a BOSS!!!

  45. jack3dsd says: Aug 7, 2013 10:17 AM

    Class organization the Packers are always right and those who don’t agree are jealous their team doesn’t actually speak their mind instead on being a puppet to Goodell

  46. prmpft says: Aug 7, 2013 10:18 AM

    There are those who could argue that ‘packers’ is derogatory. Are they going to change their name for those folks?

  47. 1oldpro says: Aug 7, 2013 10:18 AM

    Teams are not allowed to meddle with the players and coaches of another team. How is it that this guy is allowed to mess with the name of another team. It is meddling at the highest level when this guy is allowed to publicly influence another team to make changes they don’t have to make and he should be fined accordingly.

  48. eagles512 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:20 AM

    The only people offended are non-Indians so just shut up and let it go.

  49. eagles512 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:21 AM

    Indians aren’t offended by it. Period end of story. But the media and some others won’t give up on it for some reason.

  50. sg419 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:22 AM

    How long until an Atheist is offended by the Saints nickname?

  51. GenXJay says: Aug 7, 2013 10:26 AM

    who are we to judge people with a lot of money?
    I’m sure Snyder earned his. & he rightfully purchased a team with a name that, until this decade, had been established before hand. Whether the name is offensive depends upon your opinion.
    Let’s all move on to the next “fad” media political b.s. topic while I can legally buy a 32oz of pop in downtown NY.

  52. cowboywarrior says: Aug 7, 2013 10:27 AM

    Okay enough already. Just let it go. I am cherokee and irish and I’m mature enough to let this politically correct bs go away.

    I am a die-hard Cowboys fan (44 years & counting) who grew up 7 minutes from the Texas stadium. Some of my best sports memories are from the rivalry between the cowboys & redskins (yeah I said it!) at that stadium. Almost all of my relatives are either cowboys or redskins fans and NONE of us have issues with the name. But ALL of us have an issue with changing the name of a proud team with a grand heritage of providing the sports excitement that comes from this rivalry. It is like a mini-SuperBowl to all of us.

    Much as I despise the Redskins, I look forward to EVERY game we play and I do NOT want Snyder to back down on this one.

    Proud Dallas Cowboys fan!!!!

  53. jimmyt says: Aug 7, 2013 10:27 AM

    “Its interesting a bunch of white posters don’t find the term Redskins racist. How surprising. And now if you complain about any racist term or dehumanizing name, it is now being “PC”.”

    You see, that’s just it. Your ignorant statement brazenly implies that white people can’t understand racism. That may be how you see yourself but leave me out of your misguided world.

  54. mrlaloosh says: Aug 7, 2013 10:29 AM

    Wow oranjellojones, JAMES MADISON! I do like his wife,Dolly’s cup cakes.

  55. dirtydrynn27 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:32 AM

    I bet he didnt think the name was derogatory when he played in the Redskins secondary in the late 70s and early 80s,Now all of a sudden its derogatory! It wasnt derogatory in 1932 so why is it derobatory now?

  56. tennesseeoilers says: Aug 7, 2013 10:32 AM

    Johnnyjagfan said: “Dude needs to worry about his own team.”

    Get a clue, Jag Fan. I was weaned on the Redskins and Mark Murphy (one of their best safeties back in the day) was a key reason the Redskins got to–and won–that first Super Bowl against Miami. He has every bit as much right/authority to speak into this topic as Art Monk and Darrell Green, who did so recently.

  57. painsyndicate says: Aug 7, 2013 10:37 AM

    Funny, you won’t find this article on ESPN or CNNSI or Bleacher Report but you will absolutely find it here. Makes you wonder why this is such a favored topic for writers on this site. You know, when they aren’t bashing Riley Cooper or showering RG3 with love.

  58. avanderlay says: Aug 7, 2013 10:40 AM

    Riley Cooper agrees.

  59. august589 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:41 AM

    “It’s a name that’s very derogatory to a lot of people.”

    But not to a lot of Native Americans, according to most recent surveys. This is a non-issue. It’s time to move on.

    BTW, my Cherokee wife really loves her Washington REDSKINS T-shirt that I bought her for her birthday.

  60. micknangold says: Aug 7, 2013 10:42 AM

    Murphy should have stayed out of this.

  61. jack3dsd says: Aug 7, 2013 10:43 AM

    I’m native and I’m offended. How dare you say natives aren’t offended. If its such a huge deal Cooper SAID that other word how can a TEAM BE NAMED the “Redskins”

  62. 11inthebox says: Aug 7, 2013 10:44 AM

    I’m black. I really don’t understand the white folks who get all upset by this discussion.

    They make comments about “PC” this and “PC” that. If you AREN’T racist, and it ISN’T your intention to offend anyone, then why do you even care if the name is changed? Seriously.

  63. purple28mvp says: Aug 7, 2013 10:44 AM

    I’m glad opie let us no how he feels about this.

  64. iberiasaint says: Aug 7, 2013 10:44 AM

    Meanwhile is NOLA, local atheists want the name “Saints” to go. A Saint is associated with Christianity and that’s a no-no in today’s PC environment.

  65. trseann says: Aug 7, 2013 10:47 AM

    Slippery slope is a fallacy. I love how political correctness is the pejorative of choice for those who reinforce the status quo.

    People argue that changing the use of words will not change beliefs or does not reflect ones true perspective. But the idea of eliminating the use of certain words isn’t about you or me. It’s about posterity.

    Defending the right to be inconsiderate boggles the mind. This is not evidence that if we change this word the only logical conclusions is that every word would be seen as offensive. Again. Rational people can look at everything as a case by case basis. Not a “just because this we have to do this”. Stop being so scared.

    The evidence that native Americans used this word to describe themselves just further demonstrates the power words have by those in control. It certainly wasn’t the last time a minority group ignorantly referred to themselves by a word created by the majority to degrade them.

  66. osiris33 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:48 AM

    The fact that they changed their name from the Red Raiders is proof this idiocy has gone too far. I wonder if ginger boy would prefer a name that more accurately reflects the current regime in Washington? You know, like the Washington Libtards.

  67. pigskin28 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:48 AM

    i really don’t understan this. Spoke to a native american and she volunteered that her indian given name is redwoman. So why are some natives being named with thered in the name while others claim it’s derogatory.

  68. ddorrelllittle says: Aug 7, 2013 10:48 AM

    Since hearing this BS i have asked at least 10 Indians what’s there opinion on the Redskins name . I’ve always started the conversation with please sir tell me the truth . I promise I’m not making this up , But everyone of them start out laughing , And they all said they don’t , Nor any Indian they know have a problem . I’m in NC , So i guess it must be other tribes that have a problem . hahaahah Are just maybe its not the Indians at all . Hmmmm

  69. duluthfan says: Aug 7, 2013 10:49 AM

    OK, my post above was not very well written..at least the second paragraph. I will work on it for future postings. I hope the point is made and heard, though.

    Cheers

  70. geodude11 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:52 AM

    Its yhe name of a football team boo-hoo, you airheads need to get over yourselves.

  71. bills399 says: Aug 7, 2013 10:53 AM

    the owner said he will never change it, a majority of the people don’t want to change it, a majority of native Americans don’t find it offensive. case closed. a few white guilt liberals have a problem with it, big deal.

  72. pdxninerfan says: Aug 7, 2013 10:59 AM

    Just change the name to Skins and have them play shirtless.

  73. exhelodrvr says: Aug 7, 2013 10:59 AM

    Can we stop the line of thinking that whites were the only ones who had slaves, or who mistreated Native Americans?

    Blacks in Africa had slaves, and were highly involved in the slave trade selling black captives to the white slave traders. The Arabs were also very involved in the African slave trade.

    Native American tribes/nations enslaved and/or eradicated other Native American tribes/nations.

    Let’s not pretend that since the whites ended up on top here, they were the only ones who took part in those activities.

  74. dpj1022 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:00 AM

    still can’t believe florio is whining about being shouted down.

  75. baddegg says: Aug 7, 2013 11:01 AM

    One more thing, if you read the above article, it claims that Goddell “continues to listen” to objections to the Redskins name, with the implication that the walls are closing in on the Redskins. But follow the link and you get the true context:

    “I don’t see a comparison,” Goodell said. “That’s a name that has always represented pride, heritage, tradition; the things that, I think, have made Redskins fans so proud of that name. And they have always presented the Redskins in a positive light. We have to continue to be open and continue to listen, but we also want to make sure we’re doing what’s right to encourage that heritage and that pride we have in the Redskins name.”

    Why is it that these articles all take the moral highground, but if you look between the lines they are truly just advocating one position by misreprenting facts and quotes.

    Surely that is as offensive to fair-minded people than the use of a disputed term.

    If one is going to claim the moral highground, at least maintain your moral integrity in presenting facts and making arguments.

  76. trseann says: Aug 7, 2013 11:07 AM

    When degrading people through rhetoric, the best and most subjugating are the words that the specific group aren’t even aware are degrading. That’s when you’ve been the most successful implementing your mindset.

  77. thegonz13 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:08 AM

    The Packers were named after a meat packing company. Does that mean they’ll have to change their name because vegetarians are offended?

  78. chillyball says: Aug 7, 2013 11:08 AM

    Peckers, there is a reason why so many people hate your team. It’s not because of your egomaniacal QB, it’s because of the Peckers fans. You hold no accoutability for your own team. Nothing is your fault. If your team loses, it’s because of a bad call or a missed call. Peckers are perfect in your eyes and it has clouded your vision. America hates the Peckers because it’s fans are, and I’m not exaggerating, DELUSIONAL.

  79. taintedsaints2009 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:12 AM

    Oh no! Somebody is offended? Well let’s ban everything that is offensive!

    This country has such an overwhelming pansy syndrome going on right now.

  80. sikoix says: Aug 7, 2013 11:19 AM

    The more people go out of their way to perpetuate the notion that “Redskins” is offensive, the more it is going to be perceived as offensive. This site likes to create as much news as it reports.

  81. hagigun says: Aug 7, 2013 11:20 AM

    “presumably even if someone gets drunk at a concert and shouts, “I will fight every Redskin in here.””

    That right there is proof positive that Redskin is not on par with “The N-word”.

    No way PFT would post Riley Cooper’s quote without using an asterisk or something. The fact that we can freely throw around Redskin in journalism like this clearly shows people do not put it on par with some of the more offensive slangs words.

    This issue is just tired. Leave the team and name alone. If the people being put down, “Native Americans”, have a major issue with it, we will know, they will make it clearly known. Until then don’t let other people tell you what offends another person.

    If Redskin (NFL) wasn’t meant as a sign of pride, fighting spirit, etc…Snyder wouldn’t keep the name. If Redskin (NFL) was really meant to be demeaning and derogatory, he would essentially be putting down his own players, staff, fans etc. I don’t think you keep a name that rips on your own team and players.

  82. bearclaw69 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:20 AM

    Murphy had better shut his face. I’m not a Redskins fan, but I can see his comment opening up a can of worms for his organization when the fruitcakes start whining about the “Packer” name being offensive to all the fudge-packing brethren out there (not that there’s anything wrong with that). Well, yeah, there is.

  83. jjthesportsguy says: Aug 7, 2013 11:22 AM

    He’s not saying they should change it, he’s just saying it is offensive to many people. Spending much of his year in Green Bay, where there is a pretty large population of Oneida natives displaced from what is now the state of New York, I think that Murphy’s comments are very representative of how that population in the Green Bay area feels towards such a label, or team name, in this instance.

    I have yet to hear any prominent Native Americans speak out publicly on this topic, and until they make it a priority, I don’t think that we should.

  84. The Prophet says: Aug 7, 2013 11:23 AM

    the city of Green Bay has a very large Native American community, the Oneida Tribe who are very much present in this city. Because of that Mark Murphy would understand that there is no way the local team could’ve been called the “Redskins”. It would never have been considered for Green Bay.

    Most other NFL folk aren’t around Natives enough to fully grasp the idea.

  85. wnstonchill says: Aug 7, 2013 11:25 AM

    EVERYBODY is offended by something so it seems. It’s just a matter of time before the gay community takes offense to Green Bay’s team name. We’ll see how Mr. Murphy feels then…………….

  86. eagles19804 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:25 AM

    I lived in Montana and not a single person from any of the reservations I met found this offensive. This Redskins changing the name thing is so BOGUS. The home of the Free and Brave is becoming the home of the Imprisoned and Weak…..as a nation we can’t let the PC fools take over this country. It’s sad, these are the same people that say, “We need to take the word ‘God’ out of the Pledge Allegiance”. If anyone researches what the Redskins are doing is they are PAYING A TRIBUTE to Natives…it should be obvious. I’m a lifelong, diehard Eagles fan and I like 99% of the other Americans could careless about this name. Enough is enough already!

  87. facetooth says: Aug 7, 2013 11:26 AM

    While we are on the topic of changing the Redskins’ name. I think we should also start to consider changing and mascot that has a gender or race to a grey skinned transgender being. I envision that this being will look much like the “Gooback” episode of South Park.

  88. blackqbwhiterb says: Aug 7, 2013 11:27 AM

    Go to some Indian Reservations and let me know what team hats they wear……..Guarantee you they ain’t got many Cowboy hats, but there’ll probably be plenty of Chiefs AND REDSKINS fans….

    Matter of fact my guess is that most of the complaints are still coming from embarrassed white people, and I’ll believe it until I’m proven wrong

  89. chi01town says: Aug 7, 2013 11:27 AM

    the people in Washington dont care what a flat foot fool in Green bay thinks. and the Redskins are NOT trying to hurt anyone. thats just the name of the football team

  90. 12is3times4 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:32 AM

    I’m sure Snyder will keep the name for as long as he owns the team. Eventually though, he’ll have to either pass the team onto his offspring or sell it. Either way it would require NFL approval – approval that the league could easily make contingent upon a name change if it sees fit. (This, mind you, is how MLB was able to strong-arm the Houston Astros into switching leagues before this season.)

  91. 8man says: Aug 7, 2013 11:33 AM

    Someone essentially said Murphy is a fine human being. I’m sure he is. Still doesn’t make his opinion valuable on this issue. He’s not Dan Snyder.

    This is really getting old. And it’s offensive to those of us who don’t give a damn and stand behind an organization’s choice to keep their nickname and heritage.

    I’m not even a fan and I want to yell, “Hail!”

  92. grumpyoleman says: Aug 7, 2013 11:33 AM

    It’s only an issue NOW because tree huggers like Florio keep writing about it EVERY week. Go Redskins. And I’m not even a Redskins fan.

  93. northstarsmitty says: Aug 7, 2013 11:33 AM

    Hahaha the GB GM needs to shut his trap. The stupid FUDGE PACKERS is much more insulting, can be taken as derrogative more than the silly Redskins! Grip reality, guy

  94. somatg3 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:38 AM

    I have native American friends and they find the name Redskins EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE. Can you imagine if there had been a team named the Blackskins. How long do you think that would have lasted? The fact of the matter is that Goodell works for the owners. So, as long as the owners tell him that the name isn’t offensive, he will push their agenda. No logical thinking human being can sit and say that it isn’t offensive if there is a sizeable faction of native americans that believe it is.

  95. barnesaintnoble says: Aug 7, 2013 11:39 AM

    The government still calls the agency the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The only reason Native Americans are called “Indians” is because when Columbus arrived in North America he thought he was in India. 500 years later his mistake lives on. When the government decides to be correct about naming things, that’s when everyone can cry about sports teams. Until then, shut up.

  96. jimmyt says: Aug 7, 2013 11:44 AM

    Does anyone really believe the intent of the teams name is to insult or degrade someone?

  97. darthvoter says: Aug 7, 2013 11:46 AM

    OH GOOD LORD, these PC sycophantic liberals complaining about yet another “Phony” issue. Here in the real world, we’re getting ready for a great NFL season, while you perpetual malcontents continue to make issues out of outrage that just doesn’t exist among the party you “claim” to be victim. Oh quite the contrary, it’s only the “holier than thou” libturds who are steeped in their own sanctimonious sense of false guilt that continue to whine incessantly about non-issues. It’s a freakin’ FOOTBALL team! Don’t like it? Change the damn channel. Grow some skin already!

  98. cincy85 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:48 AM

    wonder what he’ll say when the gay community finds greenbays name offensive?

  99. tjacks7 says: Aug 7, 2013 11:50 AM

    As a guy who works for a moving company, I can say that I find the term “Packers” very offensive as do my coworkers.

  100. texansdude says: Aug 7, 2013 11:53 AM

    Dean Pelton says we should just call them The Human Beings.

  101. mrdavedetroit says: Aug 7, 2013 11:54 AM

    Mark, your team is called The Packers. Now sit down and shut up.

  102. doylemcmuffin says: Aug 7, 2013 11:54 AM

    Give it a rest Florio. It’s getting soooooo old now.

  103. expatpatfan says: Aug 7, 2013 11:55 AM

    Always nice of the white guys to let the minorities know when they can and cannot take offense to something.

  104. expatpatfan says: Aug 7, 2013 12:01 PM

    There are at least a half dozen posts here saying that Native Americans don’t care or we shouldn’t take action until they make it known that they do care. They protested the last two Superbowls the ‘skins were in. They have organized boycotts. They tried to sue the team over a “disparaging” trademark. What else do you want?

  105. raybguilty says: Aug 7, 2013 12:03 PM

    Who is he to talk — the name Packers
    probably offends a similar number of NFL fans,
    not to mention players. He has no “Kluwe”.

  106. leevi98 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:06 PM

    Meanwhile we still honor Columbus for discovering America (which he didn’t) What he did do was in slave, kill, rape and steal the Native Americas land. We still honor him with a National Holiday.

    Or even better thing to do for Native Americans is for all people like Mark Murphy who keep claiming this name is offensive and it should be changed…GIVE THE DEED TO YOUR LAND BACK! Yes that’s right..the land that they were killed for and forced out west to reservations. Oh that’s right you won’t do that! Hypocrites!

  107. tjacks7 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:15 PM

    I have yet to hear what an actual “redskin” has to say about the name. I wouldn’t even know a “redskin” if I saw one.

  108. dublindemonszfl says: Aug 7, 2013 12:19 PM

    They use the name as a source of pride and competition, not as slang or derogatory. Leave it alone. Solve healthcare and potholes.

  109. mshawn75 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:21 PM

    He didn’t have a problem with their name when it was on his paycheck, did he?

  110. section112 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:26 PM

    What’s next ? Will it be PETA complaining that it is offensive to use the name of an animal ? Bears, Lions, Jaguars, Panthers are now offensive ???!!!! Then the Audubon Society steps in with their complaint about Falcons and the Eagles hurting the feelings of bird watchers.

  111. kacimlangford says: Aug 7, 2013 12:28 PM

    Why can’t the other 30 team owners and the CEO of GB make him change the name? Everything is voted on.

  112. koolrepetoire says: Aug 7, 2013 12:33 PM

    Mark Murphy’s face & his grill are very derogatory & many people find both very offensive. LOL. (I’m sorry, somebody had to say it)

  113. posmoo says: Aug 7, 2013 12:39 PM

    Yeah it might very well be very derogatory, but american indians have not been granted the paternalistic embrace of liberal white elites.
    Face it, some races are just deserving of more protection than others (even if your race experienced a Holocaust, as opposed to simply enslavement).

  114. bearsfan4life says: Aug 7, 2013 12:45 PM

    Get the London look

  115. weepingjebus says: Aug 7, 2013 12:47 PM

    Yes, the name is so offensive that the franchise is now valued at an estimated $1.6 billion, despite regularly fielding a not so impressive team. That our social engineers insist it be changed anyway shows you why so many of them are not business people.

  116. thatsrightmike says: Aug 7, 2013 12:48 PM

    Some people living in Jacksonville find it even more offensive that the Jaguars use the city name as part of their name but I don’t hear them complaining…

  117. kepdogg23 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:49 PM

    I know zero Native Americans, and none of them find this offensive!!!

  118. sillec28 says: Aug 7, 2013 12:54 PM

    Very strange that some unknown number of Native Americans supposedly are offended by the name “Redskins” while the Seminole tribe of Florida not only allows FSU to use the name “Seminoles” for its sports teams but also allows FSU to use caricatures of Native Americans (Chief Osceola, Sammy Seminole, et al) to sell tickets, tee shirts, hats, and various other products. Of course the Seminole tribe of Florida gets paid to do those things. Which suggests to me that Native Americans have been very well integrated into American society in at least one respect – money trumps principles every time.

  119. chiadam says: Aug 7, 2013 1:00 PM

    Seminole is an actual tribe name, detective. There is no Redskin tribe. That’s like calling them the Washington Polio Blankets.

  120. rgledz says: Aug 7, 2013 1:10 PM

    My goodness…….something that Vikings fans and Packers fans can agree on. I……..agree…….with…….Mark Murphy. There, I typed it!

  121. poridge1214 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:15 PM

    What’s most amazing is that the fanbase of such a mediocre team is so diehard about keeping the name. One clown even wrote, “Dan Snyder does what he wants when he wants, deal with it”. Yes, he overpays for players that underperform. So, congrats for that. But at least this subject gives us a reason to keep talking about the R-words past week 17 of the regular season.

  122. boss81hogg says: Aug 7, 2013 1:16 PM

    Mark Murphy worked in the Redskins front office from 1977-1984. The Cooke family paid him well for his services and he never once complained about the nickname, even after he left the team.

    It must have been grueling working for a franchise with a “derogatory” name. I can imagine Murphy going home to his luxury condo in Ashburn and crying himself to sleep every night.

    #FirstWorldProblems

  123. johndont says: Aug 7, 2013 1:17 PM

    I agree they should go ahead and change the name to something else.

  124. muskyhunter2542 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:19 PM

    “Murphy played for the Redskins, and he was a member of the team’s first Super Bowl-winning roster.”

    This is the reason why he has the ability to speak on this subject.

  125. Advanced Strength Training Programs says: Aug 7, 2013 1:19 PM

    You gotta give they guy some credit. He has absolutely nothing to gain by jumping in the middle of this. Either he really believes it or he hates Danny for some personal reason, which is easy to believe.

  126. concord148 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:29 PM

    I agree they should change the name.

  127. hendawg21 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:33 PM

    I’ve been reading and listening to all the PC (Politically Correct) folks talking about how racist and derogatory the name Redskins is, well what say yee about buildings and roads and bridges named after racist people and slave owners? I hear nobody requesting that we rid ourselves of these…for example how many Presidents are on currency who were slave owners? How many schools/Universities etc.,… are named after Presidents who were slave owners and or racist? For example Woodrow Wilson…we have a bridge which carries you from Virginia into Maryland and this is what we know about Woodrow…

    Wilson was “deeply racist in his thoughts and politics, and apparently was comfortable being so. And was listed along with several other Presidents as being KKK members…

    Presidents who were members of the KKK:

    President Warren G. Harding, President Woodrow Wilson, President McKinley, President Calvin Coolidge, and President Harry S. Truman.

    If this does not offend you PC folks then the name Redskins shouldn’t either!

  128. pastabelly says: Aug 7, 2013 1:39 PM

    If they called them the Whiteskins, I would have no problem with that. Is Whiteskin racist?

    The Cleveland Indians logo is the most racist thing going, but we are talking about the Redskins. Pretty soon software programs will filter out the word redskins and we won’t be able to identify potato salad or a football team with that word.

  129. @Cereal_22 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:40 PM

    Murphy is right, it’s gross & it’s eventually going to be changed. Deal with it hicks

  130. finfreak17 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:41 PM

    Fact is we can find something offensive in almost anything nowadays, if we look hard enough. This topic is ridiculous. I’m of Irish heritage, so we get the drinking, potatoes, and fighting jokes constantly. I have never for one day thought Notre Dames mascot was offensive to my heritage, and Irish folks have been persecuted in their own country, indentured slaves in this country, and negatively stereotyped the world over. No complaints coming from me though, because I have REAL things to worry about in my life without blaming a football franchise for being offensive. Everyone’s heritage through out history has been thru its ups and downs at the hands of another culture, government, or religion, but never at the hands of a football franchise. Just sayin. C’mon people. WEAK!

  131. seanb20124 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:43 PM

    Why did he play for the redskins if name is so offensive?

  132. billgatesbarber says: Aug 7, 2013 1:47 PM

    The Redskins can simply change the mascot to Mr. Potato Head. Perfect!

  133. chrisbermanpleasegoaway says: Aug 7, 2013 1:48 PM

    My name is Bill and I’m very upset with Buffalo.

  134. jonbeck316 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:50 PM

    It is only offensive to people who want to feel offended

  135. raiderlyfe510 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:51 PM

    If its so derogatory how come nobody complained about when they were losing?

  136. dawgtown86 says: Aug 7, 2013 1:53 PM

    I’m not sure hurling insults based on appearance or sexuality is a the best way to show you’re the type of fan who has a clear view of this issue.

    In 1933 George Preston Marshall gained full control of the Boston Braves and changed the name. It’s not hard to find information about Marshall’s feelings about race or his refusal to integrate.

    (And yes, as a lifelong Cleveland fan I fully support a name change to our baseball team.)

  137. bigbenh8tr says: Aug 7, 2013 1:54 PM

    Hahahah this is too good. Skins make the playoffs, have the most polarizing player in the NFL, hall of fame head coach, and still a complete joke of a franchise.

    Its racist, deal with it.

    All you bright people criticizing PC, packers is not offensive to gays unless you put fudge in front of it. Clueless morons.

    Cannot wait for this day to come when all you hillbillies have to face reality. Who cares if Snyder loses money, the guy is a billionaire. Sometimes ethical issues need to rise to the top.

    Hahahahahaha….hail to the ?

  138. stevew5 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:07 PM

    Danno, never is on the way. The name will be changed, of that, I am sure. Will it cost alot of money? There’s a college in the Cherokee capital of Tahlequah, Oklahoma who call their sports teams the Redmen. It seems to me that would work, and you could keep the logo. You’re welcome, Dan.

  139. breadslicer says: Aug 7, 2013 2:13 PM

    Mark Murphy you just got yourself another fan here.

  140. girthbrooks2013 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:19 PM

    “….Our Fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal….

    …..”the world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced…..”

    -Abraham Lincoln At Gettysburg

    -November 19, 1863

  141. michaelc1112 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:22 PM

    Pre-Season has started and I cannot believe we are still talking about Off-Season debates. Let’s focus on the Skins winning the Super Bowl this year

  142. harvestern says: Aug 7, 2013 2:24 PM

    The issue should not be whether or not the name is offensive. The bigger issue is professional sports teams like the Resins making billions of dollars off of Native Imagery. A group of people whose culture and many lives were destroyed by the Europeans that conquered and settled the place where we all live. A group of people who could be extinct by the end of this century. Anyone with common sense and decency should see this is at the very least in bad taste.

  143. chalkruz1989 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:30 PM

    The Washington Redskins have been named so for a long time now. Why is this just becoming a need-to-cover story?

    I am sorry that this offends people but just get over it already, it’s a wasted conversation.

  144. jogante says: Aug 7, 2013 2:36 PM

    It’s amazing to me how an NFL player from Philadelphia is sent to counseling , may lose his career and some players may never trust him again. Yet those same players and the NFL accept and trust a team for doing the same thing all these years.

  145. thestrategyexpert says: Aug 7, 2013 2:37 PM

    All I want to know is a list of some examples from Mark Murphy of things that are only mildly derogatory, or insignificantly derogatory, or whatever other categories of derogatory he has come up with.

  146. catman72 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:42 PM

    You can spin it any you want, the name is offensive and needs to be changed.

  147. matt24bucs says: Aug 7, 2013 2:44 PM

    No Mark, there are not.

  148. normaneinstein7 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:44 PM

    kacimlangford says: Aug 7, 2013 12:28 PM

    Why can’t the other 30 team owners and the CEO of GB make him change the name? Everything is voted on.
    —————————————–

    Because the truth is, virtually all the owners and the league don’t want the name changed. The Redskins franchise is too valuable and nobody in the league wants to mess with it. It’s pointless to argue this any further. I don’t understand why the nfl “insiders” from the media never mention this when doing a report or story. Surely if they are true “insiders”, they would know this.

  149. erikinhell says: Aug 7, 2013 2:46 PM

    When the Cowboys play the Redskins, which team do you believe Indian Nations root for?

  150. bigkountry24 says: Aug 7, 2013 2:48 PM

    He needs to worry about the a## whipping they are going to receive in week two by the skins and not their name. What an idiot!

  151. texansdude says: Aug 7, 2013 3:07 PM

    “I have never for one day thought Notre Dames mascot was offensive to my heritage, and Irish folks have been persecuted in their own country, indentured slaves in this country, and negatively stereotyped the world over.”

    You also forgot to mention that Americans of Irish descent have been proud as hell to go there, too, for decades.

  152. bencrewe1 says: Aug 7, 2013 3:10 PM

    I bet Murphy wants Dan Snyder to go to Racial Senstivity training with Riley Cooper? Give it a rest it is as it will always be Hail to The REDSKINS!!!

  153. rcboulter says: Aug 7, 2013 3:15 PM

    Some people believe the word ‘Redskins’ is a racial slur. However, ALL people understand why the ‘N’ word is also a racial slur. A prime example is the backlash Riley Cooper received from the players, media, and fans after his comments.

    If both are racial slurs, then they are equal in magnitude. The players, media, and fans ALL still use the Redskins name everyday and don’t receive any backlash on the same level that Riley Cooper did. There is a difference between the two terms that people cannot explain. Growing up, I was never taught to not use the Redskins name due to its racial connotation, but I did learn what the N word represents.

    I’m a lifelong Redskins fan and don’t want them to change their name. But if society treats the Redskins name the same as using the ‘N’ word, then I’d prefer that the name be changed.

    Until the players, media, fans, and Mark Murphy starting referring to the Redskins as the ‘R’ word, I’ll keep standing by my Washington Redskins. Hail.

  154. nativesupport says: Aug 7, 2013 3:46 PM

    “The term “red” was adopted by French and English by the 1750′s after the reference to “red man” was made in 1725 by a Taensa chief. According to the French (1725), the Taensa referred to themselves as “Red Men.” Three chiefs of the Piankashaws wrote (1769), “…You think that I am an orphan; but all the people of these rivers and all the redskins will learn of my death.” In 1807 French Crow (Wahpekute, Santee Sioux) said, “I am a redskin…”

    The first known use of the word redskin to be published contemporaneously, as reprinted in Niles’ Weekly Register (Baltimore) for October 14, 1815, from an issue of The Western Journal (St. Louis) that does not survive. Shown is the first paragraph of the official translation of the speech that the Meskwaki chief Black Thunder made on July 20, 1815, in the treaty council at Portage des Sioux, Missouri Territory. Addressing Gov. William Clark according to Indian convention as “My Father,” he referred to Indians and Europeans in the Meskwaki language as “red skins and white skins.” These were idioms current in several Indian languages of the area which were translated into Mississippi Valley French as Peaux-Rouges and Peaux-Blanches, and from French into local English. Credit: Smithsonian Institution, Dibner Library

  155. girthbrooks2013 says: Aug 7, 2013 4:09 PM

    nativesupport you have done a wonderful job outlining the historical origins of the term “redskin”

    In a nation that is in pursuit of evaluating one by the content of character and no longer via the color of skin or country of origin or religious beliefs it sounds like the Pre-Civil War terminology might have run its course and usefulness.

    Holding on to old ideas that connote “us” and “them”as a people is no longer beneficial where doing so can only lead to hypocrisy and inconsistency. References to skin, eyes, nose, mouth or hair colors, shapes or sizes of same serves no redeeming purpose. Nature, Animals and inanimate objects are best for sports teams.

  156. dieselfan44 says: Aug 7, 2013 4:16 PM

    Shut up dude…You got a season to prepare for…and a week 2 tilt with the REDSKINS!!

  157. roverboy1949 says: Aug 7, 2013 4:30 PM

    The Law of the Politically Correct states that if “anyone” is offended by “anything”, the minority rules( and screw everyone else).
    Are you (finally) ready for some FOOTBALL?

  158. nativesupport says: Aug 7, 2013 4:35 PM

    What’s run it’s course is people trying to attach a negative meaning to a Professional football’s team name, where there is none. Do you use the term ” whites ” or ” blacks “? And if you use ” African Americans ” do you also use the term ” European Americans ” ?

    The fact is NO ONE can make Snyder change the name, and he won’t, nor should he.
    The historical origins, nor the polls of Native Americans are on your side. Yet, people seem to ignore them, all the while screaming about how offended they are for them.

    Their energy would be better spent combating the problems of alcoholism, poverty, and suicide rates on too many Native reservations.

    The Redskins changing their name does nothing to help these problems.

    Hail to the Redskins

  159. vmiller1223 says: Aug 7, 2013 4:55 PM

    It shouldnt matter if the 20 american indians you know dont find the term offensive. It shouldnt matter that the term was used by some American Indians themselves in the 18th and 19th century. It’s what the term REPRESENTS. Which would be a bloody, inhumane era in history in which indigineous people were hunted down, slaughtered, and removed from their homes. That’s not offensive??? RG3 is my and my family’s favorite player. Will I watch him play? Absolutely. Love the kid. Will I refer to the team as the Redskins? nope. And neither will my kids. Because we aren’t Redskins. We are On^yote? aka. (People of the Standing Stone-Oneida). And we are more of a mahogony color btw:) But to sit there and say that “this happen sooooo long ago, get over” is absolutely ridiculous. Ask my 100 year old grandmother if the memories of her being taken from her home by missionaries and placed into a boarding school where she was called Redskin and Squaw every day of her young life are gone now, where she was beaten for speaking our language…ask her if the term is ok with her. ps. I’m the farthest thing from a liberal politcal ranter as you can get. (psssttttt-I didn’t even vote for Obama either:) )

  160. nativesupport says: Aug 7, 2013 8:53 PM

    If you watch and cheer for the Redskins you are supporting them, whether you use the name or not.

    Most American Indians say that calling Washington’s professional football team the “Redskins” does not bother them, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey shows.

    Ninety percent of Indians took that position, while 9 percent said they found the name “offensive.” One percent had no answer. The margin of sampling error for those findings was plus or minus two percentage points.

    Because they make up a very small proportion of the total population, the responses of 768 people who said they were Indians or Native Americans were collected over a very long period of polling, from October 7, 2003 through September 20, 2004. They included Indians from every state except Alaska and Hawaii, where the Annenberg survey does not interview. The question that was put to them was “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?”

  161. rasta028 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:16 PM

    Mark Murphy….now that I find offensive with his GINGER hair and red freckled face, maybe that’s what my team thought of when they named the team, should a picture of Alfred E. Newman on the helmet.

  162. raiderapologist says: Aug 7, 2013 9:30 PM

    I bet the term “Ginger” really pisses him off.

  163. joedskins1959 says: Aug 7, 2013 9:33 PM

    Hail to the REDSKINS!!!!!!!! Thats all that needs to be said.

  164. undraftedstar says: Aug 7, 2013 11:06 PM

    Football is getting too soft , and too political.

  165. coachbeck says: Aug 8, 2013 7:58 AM

    If you don’t like their name and are offended then dont support them.

    I’m offended how uneducated many people are about very basic things. Does that mean they have to change as well ?

  166. bigblackanvil says: Aug 8, 2013 7:58 AM

    Look!!!! It’s ” Opie Cunningham”…lol…..plz be quiet…HTTR

  167. unsportsmenmic says: Aug 8, 2013 8:39 AM

    The best question is if the name were to change, who would it bother? Everyone who fights for the name is fighting to basically say we are tired of the PC movement thats cool and all, but one day I hope you are offended by something that majority deems or feels is not offensive and you have to live with that. People have even suggested the name Redtails for the redskins, who would ACTUALLY be a term of endearment and praise. Just because a known racial slur term has been glorified doesn’t make it right. Every type some one thats Black uses the “N” word doesn’t make it right, even if it is being used as a term of endearment. So the dumb battle against PC is just stupid if we all acknowledge it is hurting people. I know what your going to say “everything offends someone” Which is not true, somethings really don’t offend people and if it does offend someone look at why it offends them, not just right them off as too sensitive. I didn’t realize the undertone of the name redskin (and I grew up in Washington D.C.) until I lived in Atl and a non football/sports friend of mine asked me who do the Redskins get away wit there name. Never once did I think it was wrong until he asked me that question followed by do you know the orgins of that word. And yes it was first used in general by a Naive American until White settlers started using the term to degrade the race.

  168. dawgtown86 says: Aug 8, 2013 11:02 AM

    The name will be changed and when future generations read about fans who fought to keep the name of a skin color they’ll think it’s just as nuts as the name’s founder, who would have refused to draft RGIII because of his skin color.

  169. vmiller1223 says: Aug 8, 2013 11:16 AM

    Quick question-would having an organization named “the crackers” be acceptable? Some caucasions of the south used the term to describe themselves, in a proud manner, referring to families that lived on the land for generations-foreman who “cracked the whip.” Just wondering what the difference is?

  170. nativesupport says: Aug 8, 2013 12:00 PM

    Speaking of Griffin.

    ” In a land of freedom, we live under the tyranny of political correctness ”

    Robert Griffin III Apr 30, 1:41 pm

  171. laserw says: Aug 8, 2013 12:44 PM

    I suggest Murphy pay every dime he received while playing for the Redskins to some indian non-profit to assuage his pathetic guilt. It is obvious he had no issue while playing for them and he is the CEO of a team that could make Vegans upset.

    I am so sick and tired of the weakness of America today – our hyphenated American designations don’t bring us together – they divide us. Every minority thinks they are picked on and experience racism even as their own cultures use the same words without retribution.

    America needs to grow a set and move on. You have NO RIGHT TO BE FREE OF BEING OFFENDED!

  172. tvz33 says: Aug 8, 2013 5:57 PM

    I agree with ya Mark but every1 knows what the name means and it Absolutely has nothing to do with Bravery to the Indigenous population in America as some1 said it means exactly what it means “A wild n crazy (drunken, say it I know U guys wanna) ass Indian” nothing else!

  173. nativesupport says: Aug 8, 2013 6:39 PM

    I don’t know why you would want refer to Native Americans as ” wild n crazy ass Indians “, but continue with your narrative and ignore the facts all you want.

    The name is not changing.

    Hail to the Redskins.

  174. catpilotsteve says: Aug 8, 2013 7:42 PM

    I have friends that are gay and they have celebrated a small victory with the DOMA ruling last month. I am sincerely offended by Mr. Murphy’s team moniker the “PACKERS”. I feel that Green Bay stockholders must consider the feelings of gay men world wide by moving into the 21st century and immediately drop the offensive “PACKERS” from their teams name. I feel this must be done immediately to avoid humiliation of a proud gay nation especially all of those brave, gay, souls whom reside in Wisconsin and live with this humiliation daily…

  175. navyveteran says: Aug 8, 2013 8:09 PM

    Funny. The PC police wanted to get rid of FSU’s name, The Seminoles. They said it demeaned Indians.
    Guess what? The Seminole tribe said no. They did not find it offensive and wanted it to stay. They are proud of it. It puts that tribe in a national spotlight.
    The calls kept coming however.
    What does this say about the clowns who are offended by the name that they cannot see through their guilt ridden [whatever] to actually ask the person or group if they are offended by a particular term?

  176. dogtrainer7 says: Aug 8, 2013 8:19 PM

    The Braves, The Redskins, The Seminoles and so on.
    Now let me get this straight as I have lived in and around the Native community in my life.
    It seems to me that with all these pro and college teams taking up they`re names that they would be proud.
    I personally don`t think for a second that any of these names were intended to be insultive or what team would want to be them.
    Ask any players on those teams and I will bet they will tell you that they are proud to be part of that organization
    Am I missing something here?
    What is inflammatory about any of these names?

  177. nativesupport says: Aug 8, 2013 8:32 PM

    What they’re doing is basically telling a majority of Native Americans that they need to sit down and be quiet, because they know what’s best for them.

  178. catpilotsteve says: Aug 8, 2013 8:34 PM

    DETROIT’S NEMESIS has finally stepped forth into the limelight and is not referring to himself as the “anonymous GM”, any longer.

  179. vmiller1223 says: Aug 8, 2013 8:38 PM

    We should be proud of the name??? First of all, Seminole is very different from Redskins. Seminoles is an actually Tribe. Just like Irish as an actual group of people. So would it be ok to call a team “the slaves”, or “land stealing pale faces?” I mean, it’s just a part of those people’s history after all…

  180. navyveteran says: Aug 8, 2013 8:48 PM

    I am Irish-American. I demand that Notre Dame change the name of their team; the Fighting Irish because it is saying that all Irishmen are nothing but a bunch of drunken fighters. Also, I am offended by the use of a leprechaun with his hands up ready to fight. He is a sacred symbol in the Irish community.
    If the PC police want to get rid of the Redskins, well they should not be such hypocrites and should be demanding that the insulting term Fighting Irish go away and the completely insulting fighting leprechaun mascot be banned.
    Oh, they will never do that? That’s right, the Irish are part of that white “protected class”.
    This entire “controversy” revolving around the Redskins is pathetic. Now, let’s just play some football!!

  181. jsbgroup1 says: Aug 9, 2013 12:06 AM

    I want to weigh in on this debate of the “nickname” of the NFL Football Team in Washington.

    What is going on is absurd!!! My maternal granddad’s grandmother was a 100% Cherokee. Of course, he had Indian blood in him, so did my mother, and so do I! With the length of time we human beings have been on this earth, every single one of us has a mixture of who knows how many nationalities within our own blood makeup (why, I even have Irish blood in me too!).

    Any one who thinks for one moment of time, when the powers that be were debating the ‘nickname’ the NFL team that would be located in the Washington D.C. area would be known by, that they seriously set there, in that debate, and said, “Now, look here, what we need to do is to select a name that is going to be detrimental to a wide array of people, a name that is going to be insulting to a rather large group of citizens, a name that will raise the ire of any who disagree with the name…. hey, guys! Tell you what, why don’t we call ourselves the “Redskins! Yes!! Now that will do it, that will be revolting! That will be insulting! Yes, let’s do that and get ready for a huge backlash that we would receive right away…. and just imagine the “free” publicity we can get, though it would be negative in tone. Yes, let’s do it!!”

    That is garbage! As I said, I have Indian blood in me (And I am proud to have it, by the way!!), and I know that when the decision making process was going on in order to come up with the nickname the Washington team would be known by, that it was with “respect” in mind, and that it was done “in honor” of a very well respected group of people who were here on this land from a very early period of time. (BTW, a number of them were my fore-parents and other relatives).

    Dan Snyder, the team that you purchased was known as the “Washington Redskins”….. stay the course, sir!! You should not hang your head, nor should you apologize to anyone, the name ‘Redskins’ is in memory of a great group of people…. and many of them are my ancestors. They would be honored that a great sports team like the storied Washington NFL Football Team Franchise is named after them and in their memory. I know I am, and I have some of their blood in me!

    And, Commissioner Roger Goodell, this single issue is going to end up being the defining one of your tenure as the Commissioner of the NFL dynasty. Don’t blow it, sir! Don’t cave in and become a part of the rattle that is going around from those who claim they are ‘offended’ by the Washington team being nicknamed the “Redskins.” Just go back, sir, and read the history of how the team decided to give that ‘name’ to the NFL team there in Washington when they moved the “Boston Braves” from Boston.

    It was in respect for some good people, who were tough fighters, and a noble history about them. Don’t be cowed, sir! Research it, state the case as it was that the name was chosen, make a ruling that etches in concrete that the Team name was, is, and will forever henceforth be known as “The Washington Redskins” NFL Football Team. You are the commissioner. Make it clear. Issue that ruling, sir, in such a way that puts to rest once and for all this debate that is going on. It is silly, and it is ridiculous. And, remember, my granddad’s grandmother was a Full-Blooded Cherokee Indian!

  182. irishnativeson says: Aug 9, 2013 6:06 PM

    jsbgroup1, Since you feel that your blood quorum qualifies you as some manner of authority on the subject, allow me to retort. I am twice the Native American you are, literally and figuratively. My maternal grandmother was 100% Tshimshian which makes me exactly 1/4 and two times your 1/16 blood quorum. As one would guess by my user name, I also have Irish heritage as well, although I have as yet been unable to determine the percentage. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and appraise our heritages as parallel. Your a disgrace to both Irish and Native Americans as well as the entire species. If your ancestry somehow endows you to speak in defense of such a pejorative term then certainly my pedigree grants me extraordinary authority to condemn your sense of empathy along with your understanding of history. Since I’m feeling generous I’ll give you a clue about history jsbgroup 1. First of all your implication that you have any semblance of superior knowledge of history or imagine you possess any certainty of what the owners of the Boston Braves cogitated in 1932 “I know that when the decision making process was going on in order to come up with the nickname the Washington team would be known by” is patently the most ridiculous statement, perhaps of all time. They renamed the team after the 1932 season, one would imagine to alleviate confusion with the baseball team of the same name, they moved the franchise to Washington in 1937. If you’re keeping score, unless you agree with me, your ancestry isn’t the primary influence one should employ to support an argument in the defense of the indefensible. Perhaps that’s why it puzzles me so that you alluded to it so often. Not to mention the contrived reverence to Goodell and Snyder. Then again when you know in your soul, as you must, the futility and depravity of your position, desperately attempting to convince everyone that you are the authoritative knowledge probably isn’t a tactic completely without merit. Nice try though.

  183. nativesupport says: Aug 9, 2013 7:50 PM

    In 1933 the Boston Braves football team, moved from Braves Field which it shared with baseball’s Boston Braves. They relocated to Fenway Park which they would share with the Boston REDsox, and the name was changed to REDskins.

    Not all Tshimshian agree with your conceited and assuming ” verdict ” on the name, and I do KNOW that.

    Regardless of Native American ” credentials “, it certainly seems reasonable to question why an owner of a sports team, would choose a name for a team in an attempt to denigrate a group of people.

    ” HAIL to the Redskins “

  184. irishnativeson says: Aug 9, 2013 10:27 PM

    Show me where I made any “Assumption” or drew any conclusion nativesupport. I stated a matter of opinion, I consider the term to be a pejorative. You determined that my view was “conceited” which by definition, is the height of arrogance, because you don’t agree with my evaluation of how jsbgroup1 chose to remind us, six times, that one person of Native heritages interpretation of the term, should somehow be valued more than others. I found jsbgroup1′s injection of ancestry, at least that many times, redundant at best and obnoxious and disingenuous at worst. I especially found the “contrived reverence” to Goodell and Snyder fallacious, it just seemed to lend to an overall theme in the post that sounded self serving. Like Roger Goodell and Dan Snyder are ever going to be aware that somewhere jsbgroup1 is 16.67% Native American so every other Native American’s opinion accounts for nothing. Who on the face of this Earth holds both of those men in such high regard…Really. Stuff that Ooligan in your pipe and smoke it.

  185. irishnativeson says: Aug 9, 2013 10:30 PM

    I gotta give you a point tho for not giving me a thumbs down nativesupport. Your a bigger man than me, now you don’t have to guess who gave you one.

  186. nativesupport says: Aug 10, 2013 2:01 AM

    To hail is to ” cheer ” or ” salute “.

  187. jsbgroup1 says: Aug 10, 2013 12:11 PM

    You know something, irishnativeson, I stated my opinion; and in reply, you stated yours. We each are welcome to our own (as nativesupport also weighed in with his too; which is great, the more input, the better).

    Okay, you disagree with the Redskins using that name, and you feel that it disparages our people. I disagree with you. I feel it honors them. I have always been a fan of the Florida State Seminoles Football Team as well. That effort some years ago to have them change their name was ludicrous too…. just as this effort to force the Redskins to change their name is equally ludicrous.

    Just as the Seminole Tribe stood with FSU when that contrivance was raised by some who have nothing more to do than sit on the sidelines and gripe and complain because things are going counter to what their thoughts are as the way it should be. Though there were those on the fringes of the Seminole band who griped and raised the issue in the first place, the vote was solidly in support that Florida State University was honoring and extending the wonderful history of the Indians of our land known as the Seminoles.

    As you made your point so adamantly, that you too have Indian blood in you, and that you were also inclined to state your position…. Yes, you are, and Yes, you are open to your views on this subject (as we all are).

    However, as every poll on this subject matter shows, “as a whole,” as a “majority,” we agree with nativesupport with the statement “HAIL to the Redskins.”

    We KNOW the decision made back in the 1930′s was not made to be derogatory against the Indians of this land!! And anyone who thinks so is ‘touched in the head’ as the medicine men of our ancestors day would say! Those are the ones who are the real disgrace to their heritage.

    As to any reverence towards Goodell or Snyder, you sure do read a lot into things, don’t you? There was no ‘reverence’ directed to them whatsoever, simply urging them to stay the course as it has been….. as, in my opinion, they were in the right, and on the right side of this issue. Therefore, in that case, nothing needs to change!! Nothing.

    The Washington Redskins should always be known as the “Redskins!” To the vast majority of us who have ‘redskin blood’ in our veins, it is an honor to a people who were, are, and always will be, a clan of people worthy of honor and being remembered for all they stood for. A great race of people! Plain and simple.

    The fact is, there is no — and never has been any — disrespect intended in the use of the name; but when you place that name behind your team and all that you as a company and a team represent, it’s intent is to provide the highest salute you can give to an individual or group representing a people……. in this case, a very worthy people with a rich heritage, and one worthy of salute…. the Redskins of our Land!

    I am sorry, irishnativeson, that you are in the minority of our race of people who see it as an insult rather than the highest of accolades that a great people could be honored with, and remembered by.

  188. rasta028 says: Aug 10, 2013 1:47 PM

    Hail to the REDSKINS!!!!

  189. blakpearlz says: Aug 11, 2013 5:12 PM

    Just because some are not offended by the name does not make it right. Until we have a “honest ” discussion on race and history in this country, we will always have problems in this country.

  190. defscottyb says: Aug 12, 2013 3:23 AM

    Who cares what Alfred E. Neuman from Mad Magazine has to say about the Redskins name.

  191. sillec28 says: Aug 12, 2013 9:02 AM

    It must really be nice to live a life so free of real problems that you can spend time worrying about the nickname of a sports team, especially one that’s been in use for about 75 years. If the Redskins name is changed I wonder what new PC problem these people will find to be offended by?

  192. farleft57 says: Aug 12, 2013 9:33 AM

    First-off.., MURPHY.., there about 10K Indian names in Wisconsin; lakes, rivers, towns, forests, roads, etc., etc.

    This is true across this country. There are even starte-names which are derived from Indian words.

    All these names offend me terribly. Change them now.

    Quit your whining, you stupid milque-toast.

  193. farleft57 says: Aug 12, 2013 9:33 AM

    That was supposed to be ‘state’ names…

  194. terminatahx says: Aug 12, 2013 11:33 AM

    You’ll find very few non whites that find the use of Redskins as appropriate for a business. The fact of the matter is that if any other racial or ethnic group was used as a mascot for a team, there would be immense outcry and pressure to change it.

    Indians have had a dire and painful American history and this episode just underscores how much the majority American race could care less about race.

  195. irishnativeson says: Aug 12, 2013 12:17 PM

    You’re seriously comparing Florida State to Washington D.C. jsbgroup1? Please tell me your not that naive? Although I can see how someone with no particular capacity for intellect could be so easily misguided.
    I have no problem with a state university adopting a regional tribe as their mascot, especially when they use the proper name. Not really all that fond of the logo, or any logo depicting Native Americans that’s more of a caricature than an accurate representation. Take Washington’s logo, it resembles closely the design of the Buffalo or Indian Head nickel, designed by James Earle Fraser, no problem with an accurate depiction, just the derogatory term.
    I’ve commented numerous times on this subject, however I never felt compelled to inform anyone of my Native heritage, that was the point in case you missed it, simply because you have native blood doesn’t make your opinion any more or less valid on the subject, but you are beginning to convince me.
    Ever hear of a the phrase “tyranny of the majority” jsbgroup1?
    I take no offense to your inference personally, but I can’t help but wonder what world you come from where it’s acceptable to denigrate those with mental illness.
    For someone who’s made an attempt to employ Native wisdom you seem to have some difficulty with alternative perspectives. I wonder why that is?
    It really confounds logic, advocacy for the perpetuation of the term, names have been changed for less, I guess it’s to be expected when you’ve traveled through time to modify meanings and context to fit the fairytale that you live in.
    No need to apologize to me, I doubt the sincerity with the certainty of the voracity you plead your case jsbgroup1. My psyche doesn’t require that I side with the majority. As long as the balance of nature is preserved the Great Spirit will provide resolution, at least for me.

  196. nativesupport says: Aug 12, 2013 12:19 PM

    “It doesn’t bother me,” said Robert Green, 66 and chief of the Patawomeck Tribe in Virginia. “About 98 percent of my tribe is Redskins fans, and it doesn’t offend them, either.”

    Kevin Brown, 58 and chief of the Pamunkey Tribe of Virginia, said, “I’m a Redskins fan, and I don’t think there’s any intention for (the nickname) to be derogatory. The majority of the people in my tribe don’t have a problem with it. There are a few who do, and we respect their feelings.

    “I like the uniforms. I like the symbol (logo).”

    G. Anne Richardson, chief of Virginia’s Rappahannock Tribe, had to stifle a laugh when asked her feelings on the Redskins’ nickname.

    “I don’t have an issue with it,” she said. “There are so many more issues that are important for the tribe than to waste time on what a team is called. We’re worried about real things, and I don’t consider that a real thing.

    “We’re more worried about our kids being educated, our people housed, elder care and the survival of our culture. We’ve been in that survival mode for 400 years. We’re not worried about how some ball team is named.”

  197. irishnativeson says: Aug 12, 2013 5:20 PM

    Are you familiar with the term “anecdotal” nativesupport? While there certainly are more significant issues in the day to day lives of individuals, indigenous peoples inherently tend to be a minority in their own country. Given that fact, it behooves them in their fundamental struggle for equality, to engage any and all injustices, be they persecution to abuse, marginalization to genocide. Once these transgressions are neglected we have the situation as it stands now, not only has the term become accepted in certain circles, some have become convinced that it’s meaning has never had even the connotation of a racial epithet. Pretty good trick, wouldn’t you say, it’s like taking the term azzhole and telling people it’s a term of endearment. Whatever helps you make it through the day though brother.

  198. defscottyb says: Aug 12, 2013 6:11 PM

    Real Native Americans (the one’s who actually live on Reservations) couldn’t care less about this non-issue. They care about the real issues (decent health care, clean running water, corruption, alcoholism, drug use and a decent way of living). The only people that “care” about the Redskins name are the PC liberal left-wing media and politicians and those with white-guilt. It’s all a shame of fake outrage. Talk to most real natives and they are overwhelming in support of the name. Fact!

  199. defscottyb says: Aug 12, 2013 6:15 PM

    Meant sham and it is just that.

  200. nativesupport says: Aug 12, 2013 6:39 PM

    Are you familiar with the term ” context “?

    And, I’ve seen bigger loads of crap than this:

    ” Once these transgressions are neglected we have the situation as it stands now, not only has the term become accepted in certain circles, some have become convinced that it’s meaning has never had even the connotation of a racial epithet. ”

    … but not many.

    It was accepted in ” certain circles ” ( European and Native American ” circles ) , as far back as the 17oo’s , as evidenced above.

    I have never once heard any ” Redskins ” fan make the claim that the word had never been used at any time , ever, by anyone, in a derogatory manner.

    Here’s another ‘ quote ‘ though, to help you make your day a little brighter.

    ” Hail to the Redskins “

  201. txgator24 says: Aug 13, 2013 12:43 PM

    Wow….I read all those comments, some well thought out, some emotional, et al.

    I came away with one conclusion.

    There is nothing I hate more, nothing I cant stand more, nothing that makes me more naseous than someone ending thier post with.

    Fact!

  202. irishnativeson says: Aug 13, 2013 2:15 PM

    For someone who’s spent and exorbitant amount of time and effort attempting to prove that the term doesn’t raise the connotation of a racial epithet, your latest post appears to contradict your assertion that it doesn’t. How do you reconcile, now that you admit that the term is a racial epithet, your obstinate advocacy for the preservation of a teams nickname? I’m not a linguist, however I would venture to guess that since the term is quite obviously English, the term wasn’t coined by Natives. Even assuming Natives, in their own language, used some loosely translated term to describe themselves as red skinned, the term had to originate from someone who’s primary language was English. Once again nativesupport your declaration of “I have never once heard any ” Redskins ” fan make the claim that the word had never been used at any time , ever, by anyone, in a derogatory manner.” is the definition of anecdotal. Conversely, the zeal demonstrated by those advocates of the status quo doesn’t correlate with that assertion either. And then there’s this last little gem. Although I found it mildly amusing, while juvenile to be sure and indicative of your ilks temperament as well as disposition. I do so appreciate the tacit vindication. Your petulant endeavor to antagonize proves unequivocally the malignant nature of the term. Congratulations we have a new king of contradiction. Perhaps you should consider surrendering before you embarrass yourself further or get anymore butt hurt than you can afford too.

  203. therealvitaminv says: Aug 13, 2013 2:39 PM

    wow, his scary ginger visage offends me

  204. therealvitaminv says: Aug 13, 2013 2:43 PM

    Murphy never had a problem cashing his checks from the Redskins

  205. therealvitaminv says: Aug 13, 2013 2:47 PM

    What about redskin potatoes? I say sue the Produce Marketing Association

  206. nativesupport says: Aug 13, 2013 3:25 PM

    Mischaracterizations and your hypocrisy haven’t helped you so far irishnativeson, and they will not help you now.

    You write off ( and apparently become very irritated by ) the opinions of Native Americans that disagree with you.

    Your voluminous text add up to nothing.

    ” Hail to the Redskins “

  207. irishnativeson says: Aug 13, 2013 3:35 PM

    I must not have gotten the memo defscottyb. To whom shall I retire my “Real Native American” card to and why are you trying to make make Native Americans an even smaller minority than they already are? If and this is a ginormous if, it is as you say a “sham of fake outrage” then pray tell how would you describe the defense of a decidedly derogatory term? Heroic, noble, justified? This I gotta hear.

  208. irishnativeson says: Aug 13, 2013 4:22 PM

    Don’t go away mad nativesupport…. How about directly addressing any point I’ve made, as opposed to fabricating specious, self aggrandizing arguments. That ought to be a hoot. At least attempt to engage and defend a specific point and let me remind you it was your Aug 9, 2013 7:50 PM post which initiated our debate, if you can call it that. I can smell the rendering of Ooligan from here.

  209. defscottyb says: Aug 13, 2013 8:27 PM

    @irishnativeson: My Grandmother was 100% Cherokee and a huge Redskins fan from the DC area. She watched her beloved Skins every Sunday cheering. She felt so proud of her team and her native heritage. She felt that her heritage was being honored and respected by the Redskins as do most real natives. The Redskins name and logo made her so proud and me too, glorious proud warriors in battle: The Washington Redskins! So, yes I think I can speak on this topic as a man with significant Native Blood running through my veins. Yes, I am not 100% native but I have an opinion on the “issue”. You have surely impressed us with your magnificent vernacular and grand knowledge of the english language but the content of your posts is minimal. Changing the name won’t change anything or do anything for the native people. It’s an “issue” that the pc liberal media love to run with for page hits, added viewers (increased ad profits) and reporting on “issues” that fall in-line with their agendas. The name is fully respectful, done tastefully and in no way meant to degrade or demean the great native people. Actually it pays homage to them and paints them in a glorious and respectful light and honors them. “Red” in Redskins is a re: to Red War Paint worn in battle NOT skin color so… how is Redskins a derogatory term??? Again, fake outrage by pc, liberal media or “white indians” (as real natives call them) that want to “feel native” by bringing up this name “issue” instead of focusing on the real issues on reservations. Read up on all of this, I am not making this up. Yes, they are facts. Good day sir.

  210. shavager says: Aug 13, 2013 10:20 PM

    People, C’MON–those with the biggest complaints are NOT Redskins or Indians–they’re a bunch of leftists who HATE being American and anything about America. Do YOU realize: “Detroit” as in Michigan recognizes an Indian tribe? Or “Pontiac” acknowledges an INDIAN CHIEF, how ’bout OCALA, as in Fla–named after an INDIAN CHIEF? C’MON, the Winnebago motor home is named after an INDIAN TRIBE! “Oklahoma” means Land of RED PEOPLE-meaning INDIANS! GET OVER all this PC crap, the name Redskins is no more derogatory to most people than “blacks”, “whites” or even “latino”.

  211. irishnativeson says: Aug 14, 2013 1:17 PM

    Seems to me you so called “real Natives” don’t have the cojones to stand up for your own culture. So who is placating White culture by endorsing the term? Hell, they even have you packing their water and you don’t even realize it. Tone deaf, ignorant and myopic is no way to go through life defscottyb.

  212. jsbgroup1 says: Aug 14, 2013 3:06 PM

    Savager, you are ‘right on’!! Everywhere you look, all across our nation, you see Indian terms (as in the ‘Redskins’), names for towns, lakes, rivers, etc. It is idiotic that this discussion is going on about the names being derogatory to the Indian people…. though folks like irishnativeson says that it is. Totally amazing! Being from Florida, I am very familiar with the city of Ocala. We also have a number of other towns and lakes and rivers bearing Indian names.

    To have the attitude that everyone of them is derogatory (if just one is that way then ALL should be equally the same, whatever or whoever it might be named for), is pure stupidity!! Not a single one of them — whether it was a football team or a town or a lake or a river — was named as it was to cast them in a negative light! The intent, instead, was to honor them…. to hold them up in high esteem by our generation of people. Yes, back in those days there certainly were some awful things that did occur, but, by George (that’s a figure of speech, irishnativeson, and no ill intent is meant for anyone, and I pray your simple mind will understand that, sir!!), many, many generations of us after those of that era have absolutely NO problems holding up and honoring a fine and glorious group of people…. the Indian people of our land.

    And since you made it so clear, irishnativeson, that you were more Indian than my 1/16th, then you ought to be more proud of your heritage than even I am, ‘brother!’ Yet here you are trying to do away with the uplifting of the wonderful memory of our ancestors. I will admit that you are a piece of cake, that is for sure! (For your information, that’s another figure of speech, sir, as it is a trip trying to figure out you and your negativity).

    But, Savager, you are ‘right on’ and it is so true that everywhere we look, Indian names are here with us. Many of us respect that, and, in turn, we are appreciative that so many of us Americans share the respect and admiration of our Indian fore-parents. God Bless One and All!

  213. xxchaos32xx says: Aug 14, 2013 4:31 PM

    I don’t understand all the hate torward Mark Murphy. The guy was asked a question during an interview and gave an honest answer. The media does this on purpose, they ask a question that can potentially have a controversial answer, and when they get that answer they make it seem as if the person just spoke out on the issue, making it seem as if they are not minding their own business when in reality they are simply answering a question.

    The fact is Mark Murphy was asked for his opinion and he was honest when he answered, and whether you guys like it or not, he is entitled to his opinion.

  214. irishnativeson says: Aug 15, 2013 12:46 PM

    What’s idiotic jsbgroup1, is your assertion that I, or anyone else for that matter, has implied that, to use your nomenclature, “Indian terms, names for towns, lakes, rivers, etc.” are all derogatory to all Natives. It just ain’t so chief and either your delusional, inebriated or score in the single digits on a Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test. Obviously you have trouble with reading comprehension so I’ll try to break it down even further for you brother, If the director of the department of redundancy department were an elected position, you’d have my vote. You’ve qualified statements with backhanded apologies “(that’s a figure of speech, irishnativeson, and no ill intent is meant for anyone, and I pray your simple mind will understand that, sir!!)” and yet you felt compelled to attempt to insult and condescend to me, not to mention your butchering metaphors ” I will admit that you are a piece of cake, that is for sure!” I believe you meant “a piece of work”. Obviously your out of your depth jsbgroup1 and I can prove that you and nativesupport don’t have the courage of your conviction. From now on whenever I refer to either of you I’ll address you as squaw. Since you’ve both professed that ” Not a single one of them — whether it was a football team or a town or a lake or a river — was named as it was to cast them in a negative light!” you should be proud I’ve bestowed such a noble honor upon you. See ya in the funny papers.

  215. defscottyb says: Aug 16, 2013 2:56 AM

    irishnativeson says: Aug 14, 2013 1:17 PM

    Seems to me you so called “real Natives” don’t have the cojones to stand up for your own culture. So who is placating White culture by endorsing the term? Hell, they even have you packing their water and you don’t even realize it. Tone deaf, ignorant and myopic is no way to go through life defscottyb.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    irishnativeson: I apologize if I offended you sir, didn’t mean to esp as a fellow brother of native heritage. So, please accept my apology. It’s just I am heated over this non-issue re: my and my Grandmother’s beloved Washington Redskins name. The name is neither offensive or racist in any way, shape or form. Read up on the origin of the name and who named the team (a Native American). “Red” in Redskins is a re: to Red War Paint worn in battle and NOT SKIN COLOR… hence: it is not offensive or racist. The point I was trying to make is my 100% Cherokee Indian Grandmother felt very proud to cheer for her team The Redskins as a full blooded native woman who was active in native activities. U and I are not 100% full blooded natives but we both share some native blood but that doesn’t make us NOT real indians, so for that I do apologize. All I am saying is “Real” … what I said meaning 100% or close to it are mostly in support of the name. Those natives are the ones who call people like us “white indians” as I have read in several major publications. They say “those who have a problem with the name Redskins are white indians who don’t live on reservations who are desperately trying to feel more indian by opposing such trivial issues as the Redskins name. We don’t care about the name of a ballteam, it’s not an issue for us. We care about the real issues on reservations, the ones that really matter”. Please read up on this. Again, not offense my brother. I’m sorry I don’t agree with your views but that’s why America is such a great country. We are all entitled to our own opinions. HTTR, hail victory, braves on the warpath, fight for ole DC!

  216. irishnativeson says: Aug 16, 2013 3:33 PM

    While I’ve explained before, I take no personal offense to any direct, indirect, intended or unintended aspersions cast by any individual at me, I suppose I just don’t hold anyone in that high a regard, I’ll grudgingly accept your apology. Bear with me I’ll explain the grudgingly. As you should well know, considering your engagement in this forum, people often find themselves in circumstances that compel them to offer an apology. That being said, there are any number of reasons the apologist might offer contrition, from sincerely felt regret to acrimonious mockery. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt while reserving the right to no obligation to do so, with this qualification. America isn’t great because “we are all entitled to our own opinions” America is the greatest because of the ideals expressed in our founding documents such as The Declaration of Independence. Although it isn’t the law or codified, you should read it sometime, it may change your perspective on the issue. There isn’t anything anyone can say to make me more or less “Indian” however, trivializing a racial epithet only serves to perpetuate the injustices done to Natives, thereby exacerbating those issues you profess “really matter”. You might say the truth of it is self evident. Finding no correlation between such a pejorative term and how society perceives it’s intended target is willful ignorance in an attempt at revisionist history. Opinions are varied, that doesn’t endow them to convention, accuracy or any relation to reality. The relatively nouveau dogma that since some Natives accept or even embrace the term, has no bearing on it’s quintessence no matter who endeavors it’s justification as so.

  217. defscottyb says: Aug 16, 2013 4:06 PM

    @irishnativeson: No, was def not a mockery and meant it. You are correct about the USA and what a great country we live in. I meant freedom to have one’s own opinion is only one of the reasons why the USA is such a great country, one of the many of course. I get pretty heated when I discuss my beloved Redskins team name so nothing personal. I’m over all this name stuff and can’t wait for week one when we crush the Eagles at home (I have my tickets). Moving on from this “issue”… HTTR and have a good day man, Go Skins!

  218. irishnativeson says: Aug 16, 2013 8:06 PM

    I hope the kids knee holds up. Better for everyone except when Washington hangs an L on them.

Leave a Reply

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