Skip to content

Effort to change Redskins name gains steam

Redskins Getty Images

A day before a symposium convenes in Washington regarding the Redskins name and a day after President Barack Obama said owner Daniel Snyder should think about changing it, the organized effort to push for change has pushed its efforts forward.

The “Let’s Change the Name Campaign” has announced the results of a poll that counters an Associated Press suggesting broad support (or, perhaps more accurately, limited opposition) to the name.  The new poll presented questions regarding opposition to broadcasters ceasing to use the name (63 percent would not be opposed), support for the team if the name is changed (84 percent would continue to support the team), willingness to buy memorabilia if a new name is introduced (61 percent would).

The poll included only 100 Washingtonians; the AP poll from earlier this year included 1,004.  Still, the effort shows that opposition to the name is real and increasingly organized.

The group also has lobbied the FCC to convene a meeting of broadcasters aimed at discussing whether the name should continue to be used on the public airwaves.

At some point, it makes sense to start identifying possible alternatives.  The survey specifically mentions terms like “‘Skins” and “Senators.”  The team’s current logo potentially could be maintained if the new name reflects the name of a specific tribe — and if the name is used with the tribe’s express endorsement.

Of course, none of it matters unless owner Daniel Snyder reverses a course that earlier this year prompted him to say he’d “never” change the name.  Nothing he or the organization have done points to any willingness to do anything other than disagree with those who believe the name should change.

Permalink 46 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Washington Redskins
46 Responses to “Effort to change Redskins name gains steam”
  1. 619sdfan4life says: Oct 6, 2013 3:54 PM

    Ok the entire country is ok with the “Atlanta Braves”. So let’s just go with the “Washington Braves”. I don’t think they should change the name at all but I think the braves would work.

  2. mantastic54 says: Oct 6, 2013 3:58 PM

    I find the term Yankee derogatory and offensive, I think it’s time the NY baseball team changes it’s name

  3. bills399 says: Oct 6, 2013 4:00 PM

    It gains steam lol. Why do u think u can force your politics on people? A MAJORITY of the people don’t want it changed and Snyder doesn’t want it change. All of u ACLU card carriers can cry all u want

  4. shaggeez says: Oct 6, 2013 4:01 PM

    I know you’re desperate to continue to give this story life, but 63% not being opposed to a name change is hardly a ringing endorsement for your cause.

    I don’t think the name should be changed, and the more stories you post about it reinforces that, but if you asked me in a survey if I would not be opposed to a name change, I might just fall into that 63% too depending on how it’s asked.

    Again, grasping at straws bro.

  5. hay1111 says: Oct 6, 2013 4:03 PM

    Only 100 people questioned for the survey??? And you’re really putting this out there as evidence of support??? Clueless.

  6. doctorrustbelt says: Oct 6, 2013 4:04 PM

    New name….. the Washington Wizards.

  7. shaggeez says: Oct 6, 2013 4:04 PM

    And to add to my previous comment, the fact that 16% of the fanbase would cease to support the team if they changed the name suggests that they should keep the name as it is.

  8. jakec4 says: Oct 6, 2013 4:10 PM

    Yeah, that survey sounds like real ammunition. A bunch of eggheads brainstormed and came up with changing “Redskins” to “Skins”. It’s easy to complain without offering any real solution.

  9. conormacleod says: Oct 6, 2013 4:10 PM

    Dumb. If they sell out games, then the “tribe” has spoken.

  10. crabcakesfootball says: Oct 6, 2013 4:15 PM

    Anytime the name is mentioned, you should also bring up the well-known Racist George Marshall, the owner who owned the Skins at the time and named them. The owner who kept black players off the team longer than anyone in the NFL so he could keep his fanbase in the south.

    This is a vile racist owner who named the team. There is no debate about Marshall on this point. End his legacy.

  11. halbert53 says: Oct 6, 2013 4:20 PM

    A poll of 100 people is scientifically invalid. The effort by “unbiased” media to force a name change is obnoxious whether a name change is warranted or not. WGRA!!!

  12. firegoodell says: Oct 6, 2013 4:22 PM

    I think the name should be changed but not to “Senators” – Good grief that isn’t any better seeing dysfunctional Congress is – most would find that name offensive as well.

  13. Dogsweat says: Oct 6, 2013 4:25 PM

    Reddogs…………………Coming in 2015!!!

  14. seahawkgoat says: Oct 6, 2013 4:31 PM

    How about the Washington Engines?

  15. halbert53 says: Oct 6, 2013 4:32 PM

    The next time a supporter of a name change cuts a smelly one, it will be reported that the movement for a name change has “gained steam.”

  16. grumpyoleman says: Oct 6, 2013 4:36 PM

    They could call them the Lawyers but 100 percent of the people would find that to be a derogatory name and profession

  17. kingpel says: Oct 6, 2013 4:40 PM

    Gains steam? More like lets out a fart! Who cares? The name stays!

  18. realitycheckbaby says: Oct 6, 2013 4:43 PM

    doctorrustbelt says: Oct 6, 2013 4:04 PM

    New name….. the Washington Wizards.
    =============================

    I like Washington Bullets.

  19. realitycheckbaby says: Oct 6, 2013 4:46 PM

    How about the Washington Cardinals. Not birds but a color; like Stanford.

    You can use a tree as a mascot.

  20. Pun of a Kind says: Oct 6, 2013 4:52 PM

    “Said corporation shall never use, contribute or apply its money or property for any purpose which supports or employs the principle of racial integration in any form . . .”

    That is in the will of the original owner of the Redskins, George Preston Marshall. He is the one who named the team and he despised people of color. Do you honestly believe the name wasn’t coined with racist intent?

    But honestly, I think it’s sad that so many people value the name of a team in a game over the thoughts and feelings of other people.

  21. octom says: Oct 6, 2013 5:02 PM

    Enough of this- let’s turn our attention to the Saints. How can we continue to offend the atheists in America with bluntly religious reference. Also, Braves must be offensive to feminists – where are the Squaws?

  22. mungman69 says: Oct 6, 2013 5:20 PM

    That Washington team has a lot of black fans. The team name doesn’t seen to bother them.

  23. gmvalentine says: Oct 6, 2013 5:44 PM

    “Gains steam?” Don’t make me laugh. A couple more people got upset, that’s all.
    BTW, the responses to the alternative poll questions don’t really mean anything.

  24. charger383 says: Oct 6, 2013 6:11 PM

    If the name change is forced, then all records of Redskins must be removed. Anybody who ever played for Redskins must be removed from Hall of Fame, all jerseys, hats and flags, ect in the public hands must be turned in. If you are going to do it, you can’t just change the name

  25. icematrix69 says: Oct 6, 2013 6:18 PM

    When does it end? People are offended everyday for a variety of things. All this PC BS needs to end. If we changed everything that offended someone nobody would have any freedoms. Quit crying and suck it up!

  26. frankiesweep says: Oct 6, 2013 6:18 PM

    How about calling them the Indian Casinos.

  27. eagles512 says: Oct 6, 2013 6:42 PM

    Seriously, this needs to stop. You’re using a great site to push a personal agenda. And it’s one thing on a Tuesday afternoon, but during a Sunday afternoon?

  28. yetimonster says: Oct 6, 2013 7:04 PM

    How about focusing on something important? This is media driven, not socially driven.

  29. ytownjoe says: Oct 6, 2013 7:13 PM

    Redskins forever. A great name for proud warriors.

  30. guppies66 says: Oct 6, 2013 8:03 PM

    All the PC haters here are ignorant of the law. Race is a protected class. Not Vikings or Patriots or any other irrelevant team name that the non-3rd grade passing idiots want to mention.
    I am also against PC going wild, but no matter the tradition, it is unjust (and will ultimately be determined illegal) to use a derogatory racial name, even if you are the ignorant owner of the team.

  31. seahawkgoat says: Oct 6, 2013 8:38 PM

    Finally – snaked one by ya ;)

  32. seahawkgoat says: Oct 6, 2013 9:00 PM

    guppies –

    Nothing you just said is true. Race is not a protected class. Race discrimination is illegal, but making racial, or even racist, statements is not illegal in any capacity. First Amendment was covered in 2nd grade, so that’s how I learned that.

  33. dawnkeebals says: Oct 6, 2013 9:59 PM

    I’m so glad we are concerned about changing the name of an NFL football team, instead of getting this country back in order. Our government is shut down and we are talking about NFL “nicknames”?? Gimme a freaking break!! BTW, HTTR!!!!

  34. cuda1234 says: Oct 6, 2013 10:01 PM

    And the relentless media smear campaign against Dan Snyder and the NFL continues. I hope the idiots in DC complain so much that Synder moves the team. Richmond Redskins has a nice ring to it.

  35. guppies66 says: Oct 6, 2013 10:14 PM

    seahawkgoat, thanks for entertaining my point. Agreed that Snyder is not doing anything illegal. But since discrimination is prohibited by Federal Law, against Protected Classes, of which Race is the top of the list; my point is that by stubbornly maintaining a racially derogatory name, Snyder is perpetrating an injustice against a minority, the same for which he would sue over on his own behalf.

  36. johnnyoclock says: Oct 6, 2013 10:42 PM

    It’s not a racially derogatory name.

    You don’t decide something is a racially derogatory name simply out of fear of not saying it’s racially derogatory. You don’t decide something is racially derogatory because you’re scared or don’t feel right in telling the truth because it makes you feel uncomfortable. You don’t decide something is racially derogatatory because because you feel you must give in to ill-logic because it’s your social duty.

    Part of this fight, is fighting the idea that once something is complained about, people feel uncomfortable fighting it, feel uncomfortable fighting for simple logic and truth. Most complaints of this name don’t come from truth, they come from those looking to create themselves in a position of social power to feed their ego; not actual truth. This is a VERY important aspect here.

    Most of those supporting the notion this is racially derogatory are doing so because they’re scared inside not to, and that fear says it’s their duty to do so.

    This is NOT how we as a society make social decisions.

    Logic and truth are never motivated by fear or uncomfortable awkwardness. This Redskin argument is not driven by logic and truth.

    This is why it’s where it is.

  37. onebucplace says: Oct 6, 2013 11:21 PM

    Buccaneers were known as criminals and rapists, I demand we change the name here in Tampa. The Tampa Oranges is a nice, family friend and most importantly inoffensive name.

    Wait, that name might remind people of the horrible racists in Syracuse, the Orangemen.

    How about the Tampa Bay Beaches. Everyone likes the beach and it can also work to drive tourism!

    Wait, that might offend the global warming people that say the beaches are vanishing due to rising ocean levels.

    I’m out of ideas.

  38. onebucplace says: Oct 6, 2013 11:24 PM

    Oh, I’ll bring this up again since it’s never acknowledged.

    The term Redskin is not racist – early American settlers encountered Indians who used to cover their body in a red clay – thus the term Redskins. Not that history, facts or truth matter when you’re having a discussion about political correctness.

  39. charger383 says: Oct 6, 2013 11:56 PM

    I support a name change to Virginia Redskins

  40. tillihawk says: Oct 7, 2013 12:08 AM

    If all you morons that oppose the name would look into the teams history , the team got the name from Owner Preston Marshall AND his native American coach and players in 1933. IT was not just Preston Marshall. He asked for the coaches and players input. They were the Boston Braves at the time and the Native Americans disliked the name “Braves” and wanted the name changed to the Redskins to honor their heritage. This is an honor to the Native American race.. not a disgrace !!! Let it go already … keep the name. It’s history, it’s honor.. it’s NOT RACISM.

  41. mrmidevil says: Oct 7, 2013 3:37 AM

    No one is trying to change the braves, indians, blakhawks, ect…. Just washington. Mind your own business and grow thiker skin!!!!

  42. rasta028 says: Oct 7, 2013 5:05 AM

    The name’s jot changing so get over it…

  43. thuilen says: Oct 7, 2013 7:09 AM

    Right after the Redskins change their name the NFL is going into all the libraries and book stores in the country to remove Huckleberry Finn from the shelves because the “N” word is used over 150 times in that book. We could call Washington “The Boys” but players there might be insulted because they are men and not boys. Let’s strike “boys” from the dictionary. I searched but could not find under the freedom of speech part of the Constitution the part that said it is unconstitutional to use words that offend someone. Best idea is for The Redskins to move to LA and then change their name. See how many people are offended by that in Washington.

  44. diyhandymantony says: Oct 7, 2013 8:48 AM

    • As someone that’s grown up in the Washington DC area and still lives here today, I feel more strongly about this issue than I probably would otherwise.
    First, let me say that I honestly did not know that the term was a racial slur until this debate gained momentum. Has this term been used past the 18th century? I certainly haven’t heard anyone use it to refer to anything other than the football team. I think I would feel differently if it was still being perpetrated, but I’ve yet to hear anyone make that argument.
    I also don’t think the Redskins franchise encourages use of the term or makes light of any Native American tradition. Has the term experienced a sudden revival since the team was founded? Does the team create cheers, merchandise or collateral that trivializes any group? Did they not change the fight song lyrics years ago?
    Shouldn’t we be more focused on changing behaviors like the Tomahawk Chop? Or Florida State’s pregame ritual of a person dressed in full Native American garb riding in on a horse and planting a flaming spear in the ground? I mean…really?
    Why isn’t more time and energy being focused on use of the n-word in popular music?

  45. bearshaterseverywhere says: Oct 7, 2013 11:20 AM

    Why???? How come now and not 10 years ago? What makes it such an issue now? Don’t involve stupid politics that belong with the congress vacationers. This is football.

  46. the3taveren says: Oct 7, 2013 2:37 PM

    If they changed it to Washington Red People would that be better? If that isn’t acceptable someone needs to lobby to change the name of the state of Oklahoma because that is what it means.

    Redskins is not a racial slur. It was first used by native to refer to themselve. Why would someone use a racial slur to refer to their people.

    By the way, the Redskins changed from Braves to Redskins when they moved from the MLB Boston Braves homefield to Fenway park. Is it a coincidence that Redskins and Redsox are very similar.

Leave a Reply

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