NFL reiterates “respect” for opposition to Redskins name

AP

In the wake of President Barack Obama’s suggestion that the name of the Washington NFL team should change and the team’s response via statement from an outside lawyer, the NFL has reiterated the position Commissioner Roger Goodell raised recently.

“We respect that people have differing views,” the league tells PFT via statement in response to Saturday’s events.  “It is important that we listen to all perspectives.”
The league’s attitude of inclusion and open-mindedness contrasts sharply with the approach that the team and supporters have employed of shouting down dissenters.
The next question is whether the league will do anything more than listen.  We may have an answer on that later today.

19 responses to “NFL reiterates “respect” for opposition to Redskins name

  1. Chiefs, Braves, Seminoles, whatever, that’s fine.

    But the Racistskins name (not the logo though) is a slur. coined by an avowed racist – it’s like having a team called the (N words). It’s that simple.

  2. I don’t like the name, and i think it should be changed, but in the end it’s Snyders team and Snyder isn’t changing it anytime soon. He has the right to name it whatever he wants and i don’t believe any amount of opposition is gonna make him change his mind. Hell, if it was me, i’d probably keep it just to spite the media

  3. The opposition to the Redskins’ name is growing. There are literally dozens of white folks offended by the name. And now they have a token black guy on their side too!

  4. The name isn’t offensive. Wearing the Chief head dress at a Chiefs game is offensive. You earn those feathers. That’s disrespecting the natives. Also, might as well rename the state of Oklahoma. Oklahoma means the land of the red people. Wake up America

  5. I don’t think the team and supporters have actually “shouted down” dissenters; their responses actually seem to be far more reserved from my perspective than those who are demanding that they change the name.

    It seems to me that the political correctness gestapo is the driving force behind this poor excuse for social activism; it’s getting on my nerves and I’m not even a Redskins fan!

    This fabricated controversy will receive a backlash; not only will the appeals of the political correctness gestapo fall on deaf ears, but they will be laughed at and ridiculed if they continue to peddle this nonsense.

  6. Really? Poverty, lack of education/avenues towards higher education, social integration, substance abuse, lack of healthcare, lack of housing… All REAL problems facing Native Americans. How about contributing money/time/resources to one of the many charities helping these REAL issues as opposed to shaking your fists at a mascot. Might make a REAL difference.

  7. At least the league acknowledges the merit of the position taken by the opponents to the name. That’s a whole lot more than the author of this article is willing to do. That individual has relegated himself to simply making fun of all those who don’t agree with him on the issue. It’s almost as if the author is ghostwriting for Peter Ginsberg.

  8. Obama answered a question that was asked of him. His answer was non-committal. So he wasn’t jumping on any band wagon.

    The term was not coined by the initial owner of the Redskins. It was coined by Native American Indians and initially used by them as both a descriptor of some of their warriors and as a way to distinguish themselves from the hated white men.

    Marshall was a racist, however the choosing of the name wasn’t. Think about it, why would a known and admitted racist give praise or credit to a group that he despised? Doesn’t make sense.

    Let’s not forget that “racially offensive names” typically are initially created by the people doing the hating. So the comparing of Redskins to the “N-word” or any other isn’t a correct comparison.

    More to the point, any native american Indian offended by a word that they created really isn’t paying attention to the heritage that they say is so important to them.

  9. As I said before, the problems facing native Americans living on reservations is so much greater than the name of a football team, but please continue to make sure they aren’t offended by a name.

  10. Redskins: term originated by native Americans.

    Logo: changed from “R” logo at request of Native American group who wanted an Indian on the helmet.

    Redskins used in negative context by: white people.

  11. Washington is the ultimate copycat city.

    Redskins and Obama will both ride this debate to the grave to distract from their poor performance and horrible record

    Bob Griffin III should name change to Herschel Walker II

  12. 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?

Leave a Reply

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