Skip to content

Fred Davis sees why Redskins name “could be kind of offensive”

Redskins AP

It was inevitable that a member of the Washington Redskins football team would offer an opinion regarding whether the team should keep its name.

It was inevitable even though quarterback Robert Griffin III said last month that players were advised not to talk about the issue, before amending his comments to indicate that they hadn’t been told not to talk about it.  (Which possibly means he was advised to say they weren’t advised to not say anything.)

The most likely player on the roster to break ranks (if ranks even exist) was tight end Fred Davis.  And so it was Davis who addressed the issue on Tuesday, in an appearance with LaVar Arrington and Chad Dukes of 106.7 The Fan in D.C.

“[A]t the end of the day, it doesn’t matter,” Davis said.  “I mean, you give us a name or not, we’re going to go out there with some new cool jerseys and play football.

“So at the end of the day, it depends.  Whatever they do, I can’t really have a say in it, and I could see how it could be kind of offensive.  But you know, at the end of the day, I don’t have control of that.  All I do is put a jersey on and play football.  If they call it Washington Redskins, Fredskins, I mean whatever you want to call it.”

That’s a far cry from a party line that staunchly defends the honor and tradition of the name, questioning the motives and/or sanity of anyone who would see the name as anything other than an acknowledgement of the rich heritage of the people from whom the English stole the country.  (Hey, we Italians were lured over here by promises of streets paved with gold — and then told to descend into the bowels of the planet to remove its coal.)

It’ll be interesting to see whether other members of the team decide to chime in on the issue, and whether the issue ever will become as polarizing in the locker room as the debate is becoming outside it.

Permalink 83 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
83 Responses to “Fred Davis sees why Redskins name “could be kind of offensive””
  1. redfield11 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:08 PM

    Redskins is insulting because it would be the same as calling your team the negro’s or chinamen. That being said, I’m sick of hearing about this.

  2. mediacowards says: Oct 8, 2013 9:09 PM

    Dear Dan Snyder – Change the name and move the team out of Washington…that would be awesome!

  3. bennyb82 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:11 PM

    Dan Snyder just told the GM to restructure Fred’s contract…

  4. thestrategyexpert says: Oct 8, 2013 9:12 PM

    Whew close call. Glad to know it’s in the category of offensive things that those offended shouldn’t worry about it because it’s not quite a big enough deal for the majority to empathize with. Some day society should establish a clearer definition of exactly where that line is that way things like this can’t be an issue.

    So if you are still offended, then Fred Davis says go away and come back when you have a big enough case. Or when this case grows to qualified size.

  5. cowboysspurs88 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:13 PM

    LMAO at Fredskins. Please change their name to that.

  6. skinsrock says: Oct 8, 2013 9:14 PM

    Paging Mike Shanahan… Please tell your players not to comment on this subject.

  7. andrejohnsonforpresident says: Oct 8, 2013 9:17 PM

    I’m sticking with what I said from the beginning. I think it’s a PR stunt to keep fans. It will be over this off season as all the coaches get fired as well. Further proving that John Elway Made Shanny. I hope he gets a superbowl. It would be ironic to see him hosting a trophy while the ex-redskins coaches are all at home.

  8. Stiller43 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:19 PM

    Words are what you make of them.

    If youre raised around what are known as “bad words” (what makes a certain sequence of letters worse than others?), you dont think of them as “bad,” you think of them as normal and recognize others may be offended by them, or theyre not appropriate in certain situations.

    I wouldnt care if a team was named the whiteskins, the honkeys, or the crackers, but thats because they have no meaning to me…

    If a good chunk of native americans have a problem and view the term “redskin” as offensive, the team should change it.

    They could keep the color scheme and call themselves the warriors, or something else related to the history of DC VERY easily.

    “Tradition” is no reason to keep an offensive name.

  9. officialgame says: Oct 8, 2013 9:20 PM

    As long as Chief Little Short Man Danny Boy is in charge there is no shot the name gets changed.

  10. gb4mn0 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:20 PM

    Fact, both my sets of great-grandparents came from Norway. I’m offended that the Minnysoda Vikqueens are historically horrible losers in comparison to the legacy of the true Nordic giants. To use your argument that if just one person is offended they should change the name.

    I think they should be forced to change their name to something like the “lavender Larrys.”

  11. logicalvoycesays says: Oct 8, 2013 9:20 PM

    They should change the name and move to LA

    #Redskinsateamwithnohome

  12. rexranius says: Oct 8, 2013 9:24 PM

    Glad to see that he uses “Fredskin” instead of “Brownskin” or “Blackskin” to emphasize his point because “Fredskin” is only kind of offensive while the later two would actually be offensive. The dude has a future in politics.

  13. siggtacular says: Oct 8, 2013 9:25 PM

    Washington Warriors

  14. cinfante54 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:25 PM

    I recently saw an article that featured sample names and logos that people designed for the Redskins should they change their name. One of the suggestions was “Washington Griffins”.

    Obviously it would be the Griffin animal…but can you imagine the comments logical would have over that?

    “GOD’S TEAM NAMED AFTER THE SAVIOR”

    “RGIII IS WASHINGTON”

    “#thewashingtongriffinsareledbytheirnamesakeandheiseverything”

  15. coltzfan166 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:26 PM

    I am so tired of hearing about the Redskins name. The NFL isn’t using it to offend anyone. It’s simply a team name. Just like the North Carolina Tarheels.

  16. stormcrow44 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:26 PM

    And I’m wondering if you realize how condescending you are. Why do you have to mock everyone who doesn’t share your view. Even if someone agrees with you, it’s a huge turnoff.

  17. superboys5x says: Oct 8, 2013 9:28 PM

    As a Cowboys fan I find the Redskins very offensive! RGIII your killing my fantasy team, pick it up.

  18. primenumber19 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:29 PM

    According to the logic displayed by most of the people who comment on this site, he must be a liberal pc idiot and all that is wrong with America.

  19. ducknichols50 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:30 PM

    Who is Fred Davis?

  20. allday420ap says: Oct 8, 2013 9:31 PM

    only a moron couldnt see how its offfensive

  21. walker615 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:34 PM

    I apologize for my grammatical errors (typed that on my phone). I think the point still stands, though.

  22. moerawn says: Oct 8, 2013 9:34 PM

    Amazing how this debate has flared up again now. I know WHY, but it’s still intriguing.

  23. bagadeez04 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:41 PM

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

  24. artvan15 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:43 PM

    This site must print every stupid remark that is made by a football player!!

  25. douglasdfresh says: Oct 8, 2013 9:46 PM

    The sad thing is, IF the name ever gets changed, people like King and Florio will think they did something positive for Native American Indians (is that OK?). Unfortunately, they will have done nothing but waste time and effort, while problems like poverty, social integration, substance abuse, lack of healthcare, lack of education/avenues towards higher education, lack of housing, etc, will all remain.

  26. ravenmuscle says: Oct 8, 2013 9:49 PM

    Their is no question the pioneers heading west and the U.S. Cavalry always referred to the Indians as savages OR Redskins in a very derogatory fashion.
    They were definitely making them out to be as “sub white” in intelligence and needed to be done away with as a culture.

  27. maddogcraig77 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:50 PM

    REDSKINS REDSKINS REDSKINS!!!!!!

  28. njskins says: Oct 8, 2013 9:50 PM

    Give it up Florio. The name’s not changing.

  29. huskersrock1 says: Oct 8, 2013 9:53 PM

    The word Oklahoma comes from the two Choctaw words “Ukla” meaning “red” and “Homa” meaning “people”. The two were put together and used by a missionary when dealing with the natives.

    If the Redskins are forced to change their name then why wouldn’t Oklahoma be forced to change its name eventually?

    When does this PC crap stop?

  30. rico004 says: Oct 8, 2013 10:00 PM

    Time to cut this man

  31. woody1351 says: Oct 8, 2013 10:02 PM

    The offensive part of the name is washington

  32. dannyreneau says: Oct 8, 2013 10:04 PM

    That’s about the best response you could hope for from a player. He said all the right things. I know this opinion isn’t a popular one around here, but this isn’t about those that aren’t offended by the name, it’s about those that are, and there I more than a handful of them.

  33. crabcakesfootball says: Oct 8, 2013 10:09 PM

    Nice to see some honesty from a player instead of the robot response we get from most nowadays.

    I think pre-NFL RG3 may have had a problem with the name, but now he is Snyders stooge. Going to parties and premieres with Snyder, just like Clinton Portis did (howd that work out).

    George Marshall named the team and was a huge racist who was forced to let blacks on his team. He wanted to keep the Redskins brand in the South- which still has remnants today in North Carolina.

    The name is Marshalls legacy- end it.

    Good for Fredskins. Hes probably on the way out anyway.

    I dont see how any Redskins fan would have a problem with the Americans. Nothing should change but the name.

  34. hailvictory says: Oct 8, 2013 10:10 PM

    Please stop this campaign against the Redskins. If the name is changed, report that story. Otherwisee we don’t need to be constantly hit over the head with your personal opinions.

  35. ytownjoe says: Oct 8, 2013 10:24 PM

    Maybe you’re on to something here Mike. England stole the entire country from the Indians. It’s only right they we give it back or pay a fair purchase price.

    That way, they could re-name whatever they want. They would own it, just like Dan Snyder owns it now.

  36. themagicfanguy says: Oct 8, 2013 10:29 PM

    There is no debate. The majority of both native Americans and people in general don’t find the name offensive at all. If it wasn’t for media clowns pushing the issue it wouldn’t have even gotten this far. Go ahead an delete this comment too.

  37. pack4gop says: Oct 8, 2013 10:31 PM

    And the majority (90% in this poll) don’t think it’s offensive. Quit pushing your agenda on everyone!!

    http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/

  38. greymares says: Oct 8, 2013 10:35 PM

    I find Redskins very offensive, but not as offensive as Giants and Cowboys. lol.

  39. isithockeyseasonyet says: Oct 8, 2013 10:39 PM

    Amidst all this, I have yet to hear from someone who has a proper perspective as to whether the name should change or not- members of the Native American community. How can anyone else make presumptions on how politically incorrect or downright racist it is? Does anyone involved in this issue really care who it is offending? Or do they just care about the perception they are given while representing that name?

  40. sveltegodzilla says: Oct 8, 2013 10:40 PM

    No lie, if they renamed themselves the Fredskins I’d renounce my team and order the Morris jersey on the spot.

    #HTTF

  41. 69finfan says: Oct 8, 2013 10:44 PM

    I am on the edge of my seat waiting to see what kind of illogical comment logical has to say about this. Riveting I tell you.

  42. justsomerandomguy24 says: Oct 8, 2013 10:48 PM

    That actually seems like a pretty reasonable response for a player: “I can see how that could be offensive, but I’m just worried about going out and playing.”

  43. 1mommicked1 says: Oct 8, 2013 10:49 PM

    there could be more offensive names: the ‘washington politicians’ or the ‘washington press corp’ for example

  44. tapochau says: Oct 8, 2013 10:50 PM

    if a team was called Whiteskins, it would not bother me at all (I’m white but have a nice tan). Actually, I would be kinda flattered.

  45. defiantgiant66 says: Oct 8, 2013 11:02 PM

    Know what’s really offensive ?

    The fact that there’s 4 Presidents carved into Mt. Rushmore.
    Why?

    It was once known as the Six Grandfathers, and was the spiritual home of the Sioux. The US conquered the Planes Tribes in 50 years of genocidal warfare, imprisoned the survivors on reservations and carved the image of 4 white men into one of the most sacred places imaginable to a Native American.

    Compared to this, naming a football team the ‘ Redskins ‘ is a joke.

    Get some perspective and learn your history, before you get offended over a team name. Or didn’t you take that in college Mr. Davis ?

  46. raaz227httr says: Oct 8, 2013 11:03 PM

    Instead of talking Fred, get on the field and make some plays!

  47. redskins82 says: Oct 8, 2013 11:06 PM

    You mean the same Fred Davis who got suspended for marijuana? The guy who assaulted an escort at a club? Yeah, he’s a super smart guy.

  48. slick3 says: Oct 8, 2013 11:08 PM

    Meanwhile, in other related news, the Washington Redskins are desperately scouring the waiver wires for tight ends after suddenly and inexplicably releasing…

  49. philyeagles5 says: Oct 8, 2013 11:12 PM

    Fred Davis’ play is what’s offensive.

  50. brianjoates says: Oct 8, 2013 11:21 PM

    Someone is heading to the waiver wire.

  51. raidermark says: Oct 8, 2013 11:23 PM

    Come on Florio. Get off this PC kick. Stick to sports. By a margin of 4 of 5 Americans don’t want it changed. Get over it. It ain’t gonna happen and nobody can legally force a change without getting their clocks cleaned in court.

  52. tillihawk says: Oct 8, 2013 11:37 PM

    Fred has to do something to get his name out there… he’s definitely not doing it on the field.

  53. skinsfan91 says: Oct 8, 2013 11:44 PM

    Davis knows he’s being phased out by Reed. So now he’s chiming in knowing it’ll create drama. Dude is gone after this year.

  54. bdawkhit says: Oct 8, 2013 11:53 PM

    Perhaps they should change their name to the Washington Politically Corrects. Of course that might be too long. Maybe the Washington Polrects would be better. If they shortened it to “Washington Skins” would that shut these people up?

    Who’s next, the Atlanta Braves, and will they have to stop the Tomahawk Chop?

    Or the Cleveland Indians?

  55. garity says: Oct 9, 2013 12:01 AM

    The really offensive name is Washington DC.

  56. monkeyhateclean says: Oct 9, 2013 12:03 AM

    Amazing. Its almost like Davis doesn’t realize that 70 years ago, white people in blackface was the normal way to depict his race.

    And PFT’s lunatic fringe have clearly established that anything that was accepted 70 years ago is still perfectly acceptable today. Blackface, Racial Epithets for NFL team names, suffrage, all the same the average PFT voter, who will prove me right by their moronic downvotes! DOWNVOTE ME TO PROVE I AM RIGHT!

    They are not unlike the lunatic fringe controlling the House Fundies so terrified about getting primaried by Teahadists that they cannot govern.

    There aren’t any “gods”, but best of luck in the 2016 nationals, Fundiecons.

  57. northstarnic says: Oct 9, 2013 12:10 AM

    Nice job, Mr. Davis.
    On the other hand, it says a lot about RGKnee that he is willing to take a stand for something as important as fashion by constantly bucking uniform rules. However, when it comes to truly meaningful topics as the name and being muzzled by his bosses on this difficult issue, he toes the line. What a flake.

  58. bdnnbd says: Oct 9, 2013 12:36 AM

    Your characterization of the plight of Italian Americans as in any way comparable to that of Native Americans is is offensive.

  59. truthserum4u says: Oct 9, 2013 2:23 AM

    As predicted, my comments weren’t posted. Perhaps because they included facts? Why so afraid to post this?

    Funny how we never see articles solely focusing on people being fine with the name. And this despite the fact that every pole done with Native Americans shows less than 20% are bothered by the name, and most actually like it.

    Of course ignoring the origin of the name helps fuel all of the vitriol. The first known use of the word was by Native Americans to describe themselves. Some say it described the paint used on their faces; some say it was from the red ocher some tribes used to protect their skin from the sun and repel mosquitos.

    The negative connotation of the word existed for a relatively short period of time, as compared to the n-word, from the late 1800s to the early 1900s. The term hasn’t been commonly used in a negative light in more than a half century. I would care to venture there’s only a small percentage of people who, when hearing the term “Redskin”, think of anything other than the football team.

    There are plenty of words that have had their connotations change over of the years. When’s the last time someone used it in a derogatory fashion? Besides, it’s the intention, meaning or feelings behind the use of the word, not the actual word itself that matters.

    “There are no bad words. Bad thoughts. Bad intentions, and wooooords.” – George Carlin

  60. asublimeday says: Oct 9, 2013 2:25 AM

    Anybody else just glad Logical has finally shut up!?

  61. jakkispeed says: Oct 9, 2013 2:26 AM

    I have a strong feeling that Davis will be able to play for any team other team in the league next season if they’ll have him. He’s done in DC.

  62. seattlenative57 says: Oct 9, 2013 2:50 AM

    Your lack of knowledge of American history is staggering. Nothing was “stolen” from anyone. Unless you consider every human must stay in the place of their ancestry, the entire world has been stolen by emmigrants. Even so-called Native Americans are traced to parts of Asia and Russia.

  63. harrycanyon says: Oct 9, 2013 3:47 AM

    As soon as they cowar and change the name, the eternally offened folks will move on the next thing to complain about. It’s what they do. It will never end. But of course the NFL will force a name change sooner than later.

  64. slimglynn says: Oct 9, 2013 4:29 AM

    Okay, I’m coming around. “Washington Warriors”
    Sale more jerseys, get should kind of subsidy from Obama. And finally, Lets move on…

  65. kokomike says: Oct 9, 2013 5:26 AM

    Ok, Washington Clowns. Give them the first pick to do it. And, with the first pick, the Clowns take Clowney.

  66. jpmelon says: Oct 9, 2013 6:24 AM

    It is odd that the name was not a problem for so many years. Natives gave the team the OK for decades, but now there are many who want to take back the name. I wish I could think of a phrase that would describe a group of people who are known for giving something away and then taking it back.

  67. wheeln69 says: Oct 9, 2013 7:02 AM

    When is the trading deadline?

  68. audient says: Oct 9, 2013 7:11 AM

    Since there are so many haters on here who don’t care about offending Native Americans, let me offer you a mean non-PC argument to change the name.

    Indians are losers! White Europeans came to their land, swindled them out of it, killed them in battles of it, gave them diseases, gave them alcohol, killed off most of them. Anyone who was left was displaced onto reservations, where most of them live in poverty, except for a handful in recent years who’ve gotten in on some casino action. The rest? Abject poverty, and little opportunity.

    You want to name your team after this sad and pathetic group? Oh yeah, they look tough in their war paint and feathers and swinging their axes and shooting arrows, till the cavalry comes in and shoots them all dead.

    Its a wonder any team with an Indian name ever won anything. If it weren’t for Mark Rypien, it’d just be that upset over Custer.

  69. jag8r904 says: Oct 9, 2013 7:22 AM

    How many “at the end of the days” do you think Fred will have used by the end of the day?

  70. boyshole25 says: Oct 9, 2013 7:32 AM

    Says the second string te

  71. phillyahole says: Oct 9, 2013 7:54 AM

    It’s simple you can keep the jerseys and logo the same. Washington Natives boom. Roger Goodell is a racist idiot move the kicks back enough with all the pink every October its a joke my mom is a survivor of breast cancer and agrees. There are way more deadlier forms of cancer what about childhood cancer? Skin cancer? Prostate? Testicular? It should change every year this game is being ruined more and more every year! Sorry went on a little tangent there all better now…

  72. oldbyrd says: Oct 9, 2013 8:23 AM

    Im an Eagle Fan but, I am so sick of this bleeding heart,leftist, commie liberalism. I just hope the little big man sticks to his guns and tells these smackos to shove it.

  73. speedback says: Oct 9, 2013 9:19 AM

    Fred Davis smokes pot and cant work an alarm clock! Easy to see why all the politically correct hippies are using this as fuel to make an issue out of something that isnt. If Fred (or any other player) had real issue with it, they wouldnt have signed a contract with the Redskins in the first place. Why isnt Florio quipping “If Fred Davis was really offended, he wouldnt be playing for the Washington Team so maybe he is just being politically correct” at the end of the column? Maddening subject!

  74. 1bigtex says: Oct 9, 2013 9:42 AM

    Remember back when our buddy, the logical one, swore up and down about how Fred was one of the greatest TEs in the NFL and a “match up nightmare”?

    Four games
    Three Catches
    Twenty five yards
    Zero TDs

    Whose nightmare?

  75. dbfan4ever says: Oct 9, 2013 9:47 AM

    Let’s see we have President Obama, Fred Davis and the Packers GM that are offended by the name. I haven’t heard any actual Native Americans that are offended by it!

  76. painsyndicate says: Oct 9, 2013 9:52 AM

    Move the team to Virginia. The “Virginia Rebels” has a nice ring to it.

    Leave the PC whiners and the corrupt DC market behind.

  77. clemenza58 says: Oct 9, 2013 9:56 AM

    I still struggle with the fact that the Redskins name has been in place for 80 years and somehow it is considered more offensive now than it ever was in the past.

    It’s clear that there is an agenda here, not only politically but by the people running this site. Until they can force the Redskins to change their name, expect the propaganda to continue relentlessly (especially here). If your neighbor’s baby sister has an opinion on the Redskins name, it’ll end up on this site.

  78. burnzido says: Oct 9, 2013 10:11 AM

    I hope Snyder changes the name to the “The Washington Engines”. That would be priceless. Use a locomotive for the Logo with smoke signals coming out of the exhaust and a feather hanging off the side. Everyone will know what it really means and we can still keep the fight song. “Hail to the Engines” …it even kind of rhymes.

  79. burnzido says: Oct 9, 2013 10:12 AM

    Ask Sam Bradford what he and his family think about the name and if he is so offended that he wants it replaced.

  80. phillyahole says: Oct 9, 2013 10:17 AM

    For all of you who think it’s OK what if LA got a new team called the black skins would that be OK?

  81. steaderic says: Oct 9, 2013 12:09 PM

    For those of you really interested in this topic, find “I am a Red Skin”: The Adoption of a Native American Expression (1769-1826) by Senior Smithsonian linguist Ives Goddard.

    The most interesting part for me is how the pro-name change folks have submitted documents in support of their arguement that have been proven false or forgeries over the years. Even though it is common knowledge now that those docs are fake, they still refer to them today in their quest to get the name changed. But hey, I guess facts don’t matter much when you “know” you’re right.

    Don’t you agree Mr. Rather. I mean Mr. Florio.

  82. NoHomeTeam says: Oct 9, 2013 12:37 PM

    bdawkhit says:
    Who’s next, the Atlanta Braves, and will they have to stop the Tomahawk Chop?

    Or the Cleveland Indians?

    ************************
    Yes.

    And yes.

  83. bobsnygiants says: Oct 9, 2013 12:38 PM

    owner of the redskins should not change there names, if force to by Roger G., change it to the Republicans. that’s it. the Washington Republicans shove it up Rogers ass

Leave a Reply

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