Skip to content

Bruce Allen claims “we’re fine” after Redskins lose trademark case


Washington Redskins President Bruce Allen is claiming that all is well after the team lost its trademark in a ruling handed down today by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Asked whether the Redskins can continue to use their name, Allen told Mark Maske of the Washington Post, “We’re fine. We’re fine.”

As a legal matter, Allen is correct: The trademark issue does not compel the Redskins to change their name or logo. It just says they no longer have the right to federal trademark protection on their name and logo.

But as a practical matter, this could turn out to be the tipping point on this issue: If the Redskins lose their appeal of this ruling and therefore lose their trademark for good, anyone can sell cheap “Redskins” gear without paying to license the products. That would mean all those Redskins shirts and hats and other officially licensed gear would no longer need to be officially licensed. It could be sold anywhere, by anyone. And losing the exclusive right to sell Redskins shirts and hats and other gear would be costly.

Could Redskins owner Dan Snyder, who insists that he will never change the name, afford to lose that money? Yes. But even if Snyder is so devoted to the Redskins name that he’s willing to lose money over it, losing the ability to trademark the name wouldn’t just cost Snyder money. It would also cost the other teams, and the NFL’s merchandising partners, money. Snyder’s fellow owners aren’t going to stand for that.

Ultimately, the Redskins are “fine” only in the sense that they haven’t immediately lost their battle to keep their name. Where the Redskins aren’t fine is that in the long run, this ruling represents the biggest challenge yet to Snyder. And even if Snyder is willing to keep fighting, the time is likely to come when his fellow owners and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell sit him down and tell him that the fight isn’t just about the Redskins logo. It’s also about the NFL Shield that Goodell cares so much about. And if Snyder’s stubbornness is hurting the league as a whole, he’s going to be forced to change, whether that change comes from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or not.

Permalink 182 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
182 Responses to “Bruce Allen claims “we’re fine” after Redskins lose trademark case”
  1. matt4477 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM

    Over his dead body. Name not changing.

  2. trytobnimble says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM

    Cue the mouth breathers defending the name.

  3. thefootballgodssay says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM


  4. daltonsdumptruck says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM

    Are redskin potatoes still ok?

  5. floratiotime says: Jun 18, 2014 11:18 AM

    Good to know that a spoiled rich kid is fine. I thought he might be.

  6. 202folife says: Jun 18, 2014 11:20 AM

    He’s fine until he sees me and everyone else on the side of the road selling -racial slur- team merchandise.

  7. RavenzGunnerz says: Jun 18, 2014 11:20 AM

    This is just the beginning Bruce…

  8. mezter says: Jun 18, 2014 11:20 AM

    They need to change their racist name.

  9. codiablo says: Jun 18, 2014 11:21 AM

    Should change their name to the Bullets

  10. justsomerandomguy24 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:21 AM

    All you people complaining about “government over-reach” and “the country isn’t free anymore” need to realize: Snyder is still COMPLETELY free to make and sell all the Redsk!ns gear that he wants… but now, EVERYONE ELSE is free to do the same.

    See, MORE FREEDOM for everyone! If Snyder really cares about tradition and freedom, he will keep the name the same. If he changes it now, it proves he really just cared about money…

  11. scrp2 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:22 AM

    After they change their name, there also needs to be a zero tolerance policy against the old jerseys being worn at home games.

  12. beavertonsteve says: Jun 18, 2014 11:22 AM

    We will not be denied. Fighting Irish and Yankees we are coming for you next.

  13. dietrich43 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:22 AM

    Over his dead body the name isn’t changing? I’m sure there are plenty of suffering fans who hope that is a promise.

    Snyder has attempted to get every nickel he can out of his fans. He won’t stand for someone else doing it. Whenever the legal appeals are exhausted (considering it took 12 years to get a ruling, I would guess it’s at least another 5 years), Snyder will do something to keep the cash flowing in. And he’s so greedy, he will probably jack up ticket prices to cover his legal bills.

  14. dscol715 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:23 AM

    I still don’t get why Goodell has gotten a pass on this for so long. He fines people and suspends them for anything and everything and yet on this issue he sticks his head in the sand and Snyder gets all of the heat. By not forcing Washington to change their name Goodell is endorsing it.

  15. kerzondax says: Jun 18, 2014 11:23 AM

    daltonsdumptruck says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM

    Are redskin potatoes still ok?


    Oh look. A racial joke in the 21st Century. How edgy. Sadly, while I would bet you know this, I am not 100% sure (not a compliment). It’s red skin. Notice the difference? Probably not.

  16. excedrin1997 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:23 AM

    The other owners should have thought about that when ruling to hit the Skins with the salary cap penalties. Now they’re going to lose money unless Snyder changes name. Keep fighting, let it hurt thier wallets for a long time. Priceless.

  17. azarkhan says: Jun 18, 2014 11:25 AM

    OMG! Horrible!

  18. floreskins says: Jun 18, 2014 11:25 AM

    I hope they change the name now. I’ll make a fortune selling Washington Redskins gear using the REAL name.

  19. politicallyincorrect says: Jun 18, 2014 11:25 AM

    Hail to the Redskins!

    I call on all Native Americans, not the casino guys in bed with the libs, to become Redskins fans and demand congress do something real to help them…

    This is a call to arms… let’s actively and forcefully attack the libs for what they are… the true enemies of America

    Hail to the Redskins!

  20. joenash72 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:26 AM

    The article I just read in my local paper says the patent office ruling affects only the name, and not the logo.

  21. politicallyincorrect says: Jun 18, 2014 11:28 AM

    and if one of these libs works for you… fire his lame azzz (even if it means he can join his buddies living off the gov)

  22. haterade999 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:28 AM

    Thanks US gov. Another move that shows you have us citizens as top priority in ensuring life, liberty and the pursuit of personal politics.

    I for one, am very glad to live in a nation where an NFL trademark ruling takes priority over small business and well, just about anything else useful.

  23. jpaq68 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:29 AM

    Political Correctness run amok.

  24. dprouse says: Jun 18, 2014 11:29 AM

    This ruling is about the name, but my understanding is that the trademarks, i.e. the logo(s), are unaffected. Therefore, I could sell a t-shirt with “REDSKINS” in plain block lettering, but I still can’t sell a shirt with that trademarked logo without being charged.

    Still, this is about the other 31 League partners. Merchandise sales are shared equally, so if one partner becomes a drag on sales, you can bet that the others will want it addressed. As the NBA just proved, partners will act ruthlessly to protect their value if they believe it is threatened from within. The question now becomes, how many NFL owners feel that way about the Redskins? I don’t think they are there yet, but it could come soon.

  25. notan9ner says: Jun 18, 2014 11:29 AM


  26. hailskins75 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:31 AM

    NFL merchandise money is split equally 32 ways. If this is held up the Redskins will lose about 3% of their revenue just like everybody else.

  27. randomcommenter says: Jun 18, 2014 11:31 AM

    I don’t care where you stand on the name, you should find this decision scary.

    We are a nation of laws. Elected officials make laws and now we are seeing that unelected government bureaucrats now have the power to change laws. Just wait until your electric bill goes up because of the EPA.

    Just to recap. A very small minority claims this is offensive. A minority of Native Americans say it is offensive. Now that is enough to put a stop to it.

    As i said. Scary road this country is headed down when the will of the majority is so easily thrown away. The key word there is EASILY.

    It should be very difficult to disregard the majority in a democracy or democratic republic, or any truly free society.

    It should take more than a guy with a pen to vacate the will of the people.

  28. therealtrenches says: Jun 18, 2014 11:31 AM

    Snyder will appeal this ruling. But will he take it all the way to the Supreme Court?

  29. blindmansaidwhat says: Jun 18, 2014 11:31 AM

    I’m sorry but it’s been confirmed that most Native Americans aren’t offended by the name so why force the issue? Snyder SHOULD fight any change in team name.

    If NFL teams went around bowing to every group’s demands they would all be changing their names. What’s next obese people will claim the name Giants is offensive? Illegal aliens will find the name Patriots to be exclusionary?

    We’ve become a country of hypersensitive babies. Many Native Americans still refer to Caucasians as “the white man” and I have no problem with it…move onto more important issues than a football team name.

  30. unfkwthabl says: Jun 18, 2014 11:31 AM

    first of all for you anti-gov people.

    They are not taking anything away from him.. the team is still his. All this says is that his trademark is no longer PROTECTED by the government you so hate.

    You want gov out of your lives? well here you go… the gov will no longer interfere nor PROTECT his investment.

    No more FBI investigations on people counterfeiting his logo, no more courts to get involved when he sues people…

    here is what you wanted… less government oversight… enjoy it lmao

    Why should his tax exempt entity enjoy government brand protection in the first place?

  31. gaadr says: Jun 18, 2014 11:32 AM

    Does the ruling apply just to the name, or does it extend to the logo/colors/player names, etc? If it is just the name, it seems that the team still would have marketable merchandise. I just can’t tell from the stories I have read.

  32. bearshaterseverywhere says: Jun 18, 2014 11:32 AM

    Local Bears in California were rallying and protesting today off the freeways in anger and frustration against the Chicago Bears organization due the offensive use of their name. They don’t play football, don’t appreciate human beings being refereed to a one of their own and have become very upset over it….They also demand and immediate name change OUT OF NO WHERE!!!!

  33. raidersownyou says: Jun 18, 2014 11:32 AM

    Why hasn’t it been a big deal until now?

  34. guachosporlife says: Jun 18, 2014 11:33 AM

    There’s your cue Snyder. Might as well change the name and get those trademark dollars with the new name because after all…it’s all about the money.

  35. brianc34 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:33 AM

    What about the cleveland indians? And what in the world is a “mouth breather”?

  36. enkay85 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:34 AM

    Counterfeit and knock-off gear exists for every team in the NFL. Hell it’s online, in the parking lot and at the tailgate. The reason people shelf over a few extra bucks is for the officially licensed NFL gear and the quality, not because a knock off jersey from another party isn’t available.

  37. glac1 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:34 AM

    the tribes just want to be bought off like they did with the NCAA teams… Maybe Snyder should ask the tribes to pay him instead to change the name.

  38. thraiderskin says: Jun 18, 2014 11:34 AM

    The weaklings are out in force today…

  39. snakecage says: Jun 18, 2014 11:35 AM

    Rename them the Washington Bullets…. not sure if the basketball team still has the rights to that, but it would right two wrongs. Plus, it’s an awesome team name.

  40. Sal Tynuts says: Jun 18, 2014 11:35 AM

    Hail to the Redskins.

    Where are all the Native Americans that are outraged? Why do I not see Native Americans on the news being interviewed and telling us how offended they are? Why? Where are they?

  41. vtopa says: Jun 18, 2014 11:35 AM

    Sorry Snyder. Your racist team name needs to go bye-bye. And all you idiots saying “Redskin” isn’t offense should say it to the face of a native american and see if you keep your teeth.

  42. niftyplifty says: Jun 18, 2014 11:37 AM

    true the tipping point are the other 30 owners calling Daniel for cutting them out of more money (Jerry Jones is the only safe one — man, Texas knows how to make a loophole for football! Just not how to make winners anymore).

  43. hilamonster says: Jun 18, 2014 11:37 AM

    I can see the day where there won’t be any team nicknames.

    It will be the team from Dallas playing the team from Washington…

    The helmets will be bare of logos. The jerseys plain with number and name only.

    Like those crappy throwback uniforms they wear.

  44. computojon says: Jun 18, 2014 11:38 AM

    Snyder could use an in-your-face strategy and change the name to the “Washington Politically-Correcteds”

  45. broncosaddict says: Jun 18, 2014 11:39 AM

    I believe this only affects the merchendise with NAME, not the logo nor the team colors.

    Regardless this stupid. Not ONE poll shows a majority or even close to a majority offended or otherwise care about this. EVERY poll shows the majority by a very large margin like the name or are NOT offended.

    This is politics of the worst kind. I hate politics. The world would be a much better and peaceful place with out all this political crap.

  46. davidblanket says: Jun 18, 2014 11:39 AM

    The trademark s still protected by State laws.

  47. deafcone says: Jun 18, 2014 11:39 AM

    change the name to the Washington Reservations

  48. dcviking says: Jun 18, 2014 11:39 AM

    Remain calm….all is well!

    – Kevin Bacon
    Animal House

  49. phelbin says: Jun 18, 2014 11:41 AM

    Well that does it. Today I’m going to the store in the mall that sells the ridiculously overpriced sports gear, and I’m going to buy a Redskins jersey. I don’t like the team, but I support those who stand against government intrusion.

    The name may be racially insensitive, it may not be. Either way, this is not the government’s business!

  50. therealtrenches says: Jun 18, 2014 11:41 AM

    For those of you who claim that this is “suddenly” a problem, and that there aren’t enough outraged native americans, here’s the judge’s ruling, which addresses your (misguided) claims.

    “The recognition that this racial designation based on skin color is disparaging to Native Americans is also demonstrated by the near complete drop-off in usage of “redskins” as a reference to Native Americans beginning in the 1960’s.

    The record establishes that, at a minimum, approximately thirty percent of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS used in connection with respondent’s services to be disparaging at all times including 1967, 1972, 1974, 1978 and 1990. Section 2(a) prohibits registration of matter that disparages a substantial composite, which need not be a majority, of the referenced group. Thirty percent is without doubt a substantial composite. To determine otherwise means it is acceptable to subject to disparagement 1 out of every 3 individuals, or as in this case approximately 626,095 out of 1,878,285 in 1990. There is nothing in the Trademark Act, which expressly prohibits registration of disparaging terms, or in its legislative history, to permit that level of disparagement of a group and, therefore, we find this showing of thirty percent to be more than substantial.

    Respondent has introduced evidence that some in the Native American community do not find the term “Redskin” disparaging when it is used in connection with professional football. While this may reveal differing opinions within the community, it does not negate the opinions of those who find it disparaging. The ultimate decision is based on whether the evidence shows that a substantial composite of the Native American population found the term “Redskins” to be disparaging when the respective registrations issued. Therefore, once a substantial composite has been found, the mere existence of differing opinions cannot change the conclusion.

    In view of the above, petitioners have shown by a preponderance of the evidence that a substantial composite of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS to be disparaging in connection with respondent’s services during the relevant time frame of 1967-1990. Accordingly, the six registrations must be cancelled as required under Sections 2(a) and 14(3) of the Trademark Act.”

  51. dennis2488 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:41 AM

    indians isnt a derogatory term. there are indian people. plus it was named after a native american as a tribute to him, connotations mean a lot.

  52. 6250claimer says: Jun 18, 2014 11:42 AM

    This is about to get interesting. The NFL won’t stand for this. And what of the KC Chiefs? How is “Chiefs”, with arrowhead logo and clearly referring to Indians, not offensive if this is? So why is their trademark not being cancelled too? It’s all left wing big government white guilt BS and it’s completely out of control. This won’t stand without a fight, and my money is on the Redskins hanging onto their trademark.

  53. Ed Bandell says: Jun 18, 2014 11:43 AM

    Wouldn’t this same standard apply to ALL NFL teams if they lost their trademark protection?

    Wouldn’t the NFL have a problem if a bunch of their teams lost their rights to their names and anybody could just make knock off gear cheaper instead of going to the absurdly expensive NFL store?

    What good would changing the name of the team do if that new name was not trademarked?

    Seems to me the NFL and the other owners might want to support Snyder because this same thing could happen to their team if they lost the trademark protection.

    And what was the legal reasoning behind the rejection of supporting the trademark?

  54. ufanforreal says: Jun 18, 2014 11:43 AM

    vtopa says: Jun 18, 2014 11:35 AM

    Sorry Snyder. Your racist team name needs to go bye-bye. And all you idiots saying “Redskin” isn’t offense should say it to the face of a native american and see if you keep your teeth.
    You made the point of the team and most of the posters on here. the name REDSKINS is used for the team NOT a race.

  55. csbanter says: Jun 18, 2014 11:43 AM

    So when will the first lawsuits pop up from WWF saying the Bears team name is offensive to the beasts that dwell in caves. This is going to go away with the next administration that you can bank on.

  56. bearshaterseverywhere says: Jun 18, 2014 11:44 AM

    Local Bears in California were rallying and protesting today off the freeways in anger and frustration against the Chicago Bears organization due the offensive use of their name. They don’t play football, don’t appreciate human beings being refereed to a one of their own and have become very upset over it….They also demand and immediate name change OUT OF NO WHERE!!!!

  57. zatoichi7 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:45 AM

    The case involves six registered trademarks that involve the use of the word Redskins, but it does not apply to the team’s logo.

  58. buffobeel42 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:46 AM

    How about after years of bad pub, Snyder does something positive for Race Relations in the US.
    The Washington Red Tails….honouring the Tuskegee Airmen of the 2nd world war. Keep the colours, change in name, Lots of potential for logos, slogans etc.
    Cue the haters!

  59. longdrive2011 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:46 AM

    A large percentage of native Americans remain mired in poverty and yet the elitist spend millions fighting a name. Classic!

  60. gammynomnom says: Jun 18, 2014 11:46 AM

    Goodell and Snyder only care about one thing. MONEY. And this is the only way they will ever consider giving the slightest care about the name.Now if they do change it of course, they will make a public spectacle about how they are changing it because they care about racism.

  61. zatoichi7 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:47 AM

    @ed bandell The new case was launched in 2006 by a younger group of Native Americans, and was heard by the board in March of last year.

    The group argued that the Redskins should lose their federal trademark protection based on a law that prohibits registered names that are disparaging, scandalous, contemptuous or disreputable.

  62. gammynomnom says: Jun 18, 2014 11:47 AM

    and people who think a few million won’t matter to Snyder forgets this is the man who sold stale peanuts from a defunct airline at Washington home games.

  63. Ed Bandell says: Jun 18, 2014 11:48 AM

    vtopa says: Jun 18, 2014 11:35 AM

    “Sorry Snyder. Your racist team name needs to go bye-bye. And all you idiots saying “Redskin” isn’t offense should say it to the face of a native american and see if you keep your teeth.”

    Yes, because violence is the answer to everything and I am sure every single Native American responds to everything with punching people in the face.

    Now, I like how you call people idiots and then you state, “…And all you idiots saying “Redskin” isn’t offense should…”

    Granted the Redskins may not have a great offense, but I think you are looking for the word offensive.

  64. murphytenn says: Jun 18, 2014 11:49 AM

    This will continue to other leagues soon, if or when the ruling is upheld.

    The main surveys concluded a range from 10-30%, of the Native Americans believing, “redskins”to be offensive. A non majority outcome.

    This could be the starting point for the Chiefs, Braves, Indians, Seminoles, etc. to be forced to change their name in the near future.

  65. socalmaverick says: Jun 18, 2014 11:49 AM

    Perhaps change the name to Washington Savages?

  66. kirburnicus says: Jun 18, 2014 11:49 AM

    What this does is forces the NFL’s hand and not Dan Snyder’s. The thought of just 1 unlicensed NFL product being sold is nauseating to Roger Goodell. Taking away the trademark will make Roger have to wear adult diapers.

  67. ravenmadnky says: Jun 18, 2014 11:50 AM

    Snyder should change the team name to Deadskins. Only a two letters difference and much more descriptive of their level of play.

  68. getyourownname says: Jun 18, 2014 11:51 AM

    The name closest to Little Danny’s heart is the “Washington $$.” And, it fits the city.

    Go for it.

  69. habsfanatic says: Jun 18, 2014 11:51 AM

    I’m sure Dan doesn’t want to change the name simply because no good alternatives have been proposed! C’mon PFT planet and all you Skins fans out there, let’s hear some good ideas of new names for Washington’s team and then I’m sure Danny boy will have a change of heart and switch things up!

  70. logicalvoicescowboybrother says: Jun 18, 2014 11:52 AM


  71. comeonnowguys says: Jun 18, 2014 11:52 AM

    It’s not a new issue; it is just too loud for you to ignore.

    This is not about a cartoon depiction of a Native American. It is not simply a Native American-based name or logo. It is not a Native American chant or mascot.

    It is about using a slur as the official brand of your business.

  72. REDSKINSFOREVER says: Jun 18, 2014 11:53 AM

    Dang straight your fine. Don’t let the fascists win.

    Stand strong Snyder!!! Never change!!!

  73. restonraven says: Jun 18, 2014 11:53 AM

    Bruce Allen? You mean some middle aged WHITE guy says everything is fine. You mean the same guy whose brother George, Jr. got kicked out of his US Senate Seat for calling another kind of Indian-American “maccaca.” Adhering to old racial slurs seems to run in the family.

  74. bigbwoy000 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:54 AM

    The league will force him to change it now for the “greater good of the NFL”. They will pay Snyder a nice hefty sum to “share” the burden of having to change the name. This is exactly what Snyder has been waiting for, the excuse to change it as he’s fought publicly & vehemently to defend but being a smart businessman , he know what was coming. He will make a bushel load of cash in compensation from the NFL to change the name so the NFL can once again enjoy it Trademark & licensing royalties, it always comes down to profit vs loss. It will behoove the NFL to compensate Daniel & have him change the name. Snyder knows exactly what he’s doing…

  75. thinredline69 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:54 AM

    For those who are clueless, en-Be~see has mandated that all of their employees cease to use the name “Redskins” in print or to even say the name on thee air…or else lose their jobs.

    So even if an individual wants to roll their eyes at this network’s stupid agenda, they have to respect where their bread is buttered and “pretend” to be offended all of a sudden.

    Hail to the REDSKINS! (and I don’t even like the Redskins)

  76. guitarfreak21 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:55 AM

    This is DISGUSTING! Shame on that d!@# office. 10 bucks says a fat white guy with precious little actual experience with any Native American culture decided it would be a neat thing to do.

  77. b3nz0z says: Jun 18, 2014 11:57 AM

    you say it’s not offensive but people are offended.
    you say it doesn’t have a history as a slur but there are historical documents showing it used that way.
    so when you say it isn’t going to change . . . .

  78. draftazoid says: Jun 18, 2014 11:57 AM

    He hasn’t lost yet.
    There is still the appeal WHICH HE WILL WIN!
    Then I will laugh, and laugh and laugh.

  79. thinredline69 says: Jun 18, 2014 11:59 AM

    If our government were as passionate about protecting our borders as they were with having the Redskins change their name, things would be much different.

  80. onlinetoughguy says: Jun 18, 2014 12:00 PM

    Whether you’re for it or against it, the name is going to eventually change. Money is a game changer.

  81. dutchkindelberger says: Jun 18, 2014 12:00 PM

    Much ado about nothing.

    If the market gets flooded with unofficial stuff and it sells enough to hurt the team/league financially, then the “change the name” proponents have already lost in the court of public opinion for the name is still very popular with the masses. Eventually this will go away when the “change the name” proponents get tired of their message falling upon deaf ears and go look for something else to be outraged about. The team/league will adjust to a small reduction in overall revenue.

    If the market gets flooded with unofficial stuff and nobody buys it but continues to buy officially licensed stuff, then the only ones hurt financially are the ones making the unofficial stuff. They will go out of business, the team/league is not hurt and once again the “change the name” proponents have already lost in the court of public opinion.

    If the market gets flooded with unofficial stuff and it sells briskly, but does not cut into sales of officially licensed stuff, who cares? Once again the “change the name” proponents have already lost in the court of public opinion.

    There is no way this will force the team to change the name.

    The only way I can see would be if the networks refused to broadcast Redskins game. I don’t see that happening: too much money involved.

    As this is directly in opposition to this site, I suspect this post will be removed very quickly.

  82. mdpgc says: Jun 18, 2014 12:01 PM

    Native Americans are about to start selling fake Redskins apparel

  83. missingjimmyjohnsonsince1994 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:02 PM

    Naturally, the team can be expected to appeal the decision, as it did in the late 1990s when the trademark office made a similar ruling, and that may be a lengthy process. As USA Today wrote last month, though, “If the team were applying for federal trademark protection for its “Redskins” name today, it would almost certainly be denied: At least 12 times since 1992 the USPTO has refused to register such marks on disparagement grounds, including seven applications from the Washington team (for terms such as “Redskins Fanatics” and “Redskins Rooters”) and one from NFL Properties (for “Boston Redskins”).”

  84. lookout1234 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:02 PM rather.

  85. dickshotdogs says: Jun 18, 2014 12:05 PM

    Blazing Saddles! Best movie of all time!!!

  86. flannlv says: Jun 18, 2014 12:05 PM

    “It’s only a flesh wound”

  87. sambaughslingers says: Jun 18, 2014 12:08 PM

    Redskins and NFL will appeal first, if they lose that case! Then we’re going to have a conversation about maybe changing the name

  88. denverdude7 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:10 PM

    brianc34 says:
    Jun 18, 2014 11:33 AM
    What about the cleveland indians? And what in the world is a “mouth breather”?

    The Cleveland Indians are named after the motorcycle. I thought everyone knew that.

  89. bobbyhoying says: Jun 18, 2014 12:11 PM

    Hail to the Palefaces!

  90. craigkintexas says: Jun 18, 2014 12:12 PM

    Now let’s go after the NAACP for the racial slur in their name ——-> National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People. How degrading to allow them to not change their name!

  91. xbam1 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:12 PM

    Bruce…it’s not fine…embrace change brutha…its coming…it might be after your fired for hiring lame coaches and assembling bad teams but it’s coming! Also you would think Danny Boy would choose his words a litle more carefully…well maybe not he is a little troll…

  92. fwippel says: Jun 18, 2014 12:13 PM

    Wake up people. What this means is that the name Redskins can now more freely be used by other organizations. It only makes the name easier to use, not harder. Stupid move on the part of the government.

    Snyder will take this to court. The other 31 owners will be silently rooting for him to win for one reason: they don’t want to be next.

  93. joejacks says: Jun 18, 2014 12:13 PM

    Change the name to the lobbyists and gang members than run our govt. what a joke this country has turned into

  94. tall4myage2013 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:13 PM

    Change the name to the Washington Mighty Whiteys. White people would love it, and as we’ve been told, it doesn’t matter if an overwhelming majority of other ethnic groups dont see it as offensive, it only matters if the group the team is named after is offended by it. Merchandise would go through the roof, as any white person would want their own Mighty Whitey t-shirt. Everything would be perfect, right?

    Except then the standard would magically reverse then, and it would only matter that all the groups that the team wasn’t named after were offended.

  95. isphet71 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:14 PM

    Last time this happened, the redskins and the NFL jointly fought the trademark ruling in the court of appeals and won.

    The big question is if the NFL is willing to join the fight again. There’s a very real possibility that the NFL simply refuses to fight this new ruling, and if so I don’t think the Redskins on their own can win an appeal.

    It’s basically up to the NFL at this point to either fight for the Redskins name or let the government force a name change.

  96. cfballfan1 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:14 PM

    This from a government under an administration that won’t even follow or enforce the laws of this country.

    No hypocrisy to see here……move along….

  97. jayniner says: Jun 18, 2014 12:15 PM

    I say change the name that actually honors their heritage.

    Once we start removing Indian and Native American references from everything, they will fall into oblivion and everyone will forget about them.

    Then they can go back to being honored by Casinos and firewater.

    Cutting off your nose to spite your face Native Americans…

  98. skins1970 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:16 PM

    Keep the name change the logo problem solved. It’s the logo that everyone is upset about.

  99. r8rsfan says: Jun 18, 2014 12:17 PM

    mdpgc says:
    Jun 18, 2014 12:01 PM
    Native Americans are about to start selling fake Redskins apparel

    That will probably change the tone of those who are offended. Money fixes everything in the U$A.

  100. kstreetdawg says: Jun 18, 2014 12:19 PM

    Can someone who supports a name change answer me this one question, is the term Redskin presently used as a derogatory term?

    I know that people point to it being historically a racial slur, but is it currently being used as one. The Washington Redskins are certainly not using the name with any racial intent. And I truly have never heard the term being used as anything other than a football team. So are there accounts of its use in the last 20, 30, 40 years of rampant use of the term as a racial slur?

    It seems that this ‘controversy’ has actually revived the term’s past racial use. Hasn’t the Washington Redskins made any racial connotation obsolete?

    If anyone can point me to any contemporary articles, news stories, etc. that show Redskins being used in a non-football and racially motivated context, please do so. However, until then, I will think that the Washington Redskins name should not be changed without actual contemporary evidence of it being used as such.

  101. missingjimmyjohnsonsince1994 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:19 PM

    Even Miami University who had to change their name from Redskins to Redhawks is trolling the Washington Team on Twitter today.

    Snyder is an embarrassment to professional sports

  102. gofor2with3pointlead says: Jun 18, 2014 12:20 PM

    Get in line for the buffet boys. Generous helpings of crow being served. As a person of Native American decent I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who recognized the defamation the racial epithet represented, as well as their efforts to right the injustice of the indignation. I suppose no small thanks should also be given to those who supported the degradation of my ancestors. Because of their petty, self righteous, indignity, this change was forced to come much more rapidly than I could have possibly hoped for. Congratulations to all. Now can we get down to some football?

  103. randomcommenter says: Jun 18, 2014 12:22 PM

    No major apparel maker will start making unlicensed redskin gear because they don’t want to anger the rest of the NFL.

    There is already cheap knockoffs of every team. This decision won’t change much.

    I wonder what dishonest tactic will be used next to try to force them to change.

  104. NoRespect says: Jun 18, 2014 12:22 PM

    You say “represents the biggest challenge yet to Snyder”. Incorrect, as usual. He has faced this exact challenge twice before, and won each time.

  105. jimd571 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:25 PM

    If you see no difference between Redskins and Seminoles, I don’t know where to begin with you.

  106. footballfan77 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:25 PM

    Honestly if I’m him, I’m ticked.So what the hell, let’s actually change the name to a real racist remark and then let’s see what happens.

  107. jimd571 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:27 PM

    Yes, jayniner. Because native Americans are in the forefront of our thoughts constantly. Only because of this football teams name, though.

  108. sdo4540 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:29 PM

    Keep the logo,change the name from Redskins to Thinskins.Problem solved.

  109. thenewguy12 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:32 PM

    I hope the name never changes, this politically correct nonsense has gone too far. As someone who regularly does work on a reservation, I can tell you that the folks there care about better healthcare for themselves and their families, they care about better economic opportunities and better education for their kids, the people I talk to could care less about a football team stocked with millionaires. This seems to be more a case of guilt plagued white yuppies patronizingly feeling sorry for people that they dont even associate or interact with.

  110. nosleeptilsb says: Jun 18, 2014 12:33 PM

    The Washington Fire Waters!

  111. justsomerandomguy24 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:37 PM

    Again, people, this ruling actually means less government interference in the market. And if a billionaire in an organization protected by a rare tax-exempt status, who sells his product from a publicly funded building cannot survive in this market, I don’t feel too bad for him…

  112. chuckleberry1974 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:58 PM

    Moat of the references to the accepted use of the word “redskin”, both by white people and native Americans, appeared in historical documents presented by people stating the case that the phrase is acceptable. They say ‘even Indians used the term Redskin in correspondence, etc’. Well, Black people also used to be ok with, as was society, the terms Negro and Colored. There is no way that a team originally named the Negroes from back in the early 20th century would remain today still being called the Negroes, no matter how many people, then or now, were “OK” with it. Remember, to have the right to do something doesn’t always mean it’s right to do it. It’s simply time for a change.

    And to those who will counter with the argument that Redskin was not used as a pejorative, nor Negro, nor Colored, you are sadly mistaken. Redskin most definitely was used negatively. However, being an oppressed minority in a great land that used to belong to them, there was little they could do to not be called Redskin. Same with Negro and Colored. Those words were for identification and segregation…not the best historical usage. Why, when the origin of Redskin was borne out of the same context, should it be allowed to stand? If we are so egalitarian, free, and the world’s moral compass, then how can the freedom of speech/slippery slope argument be used to continue using such a terrible word? Our freedoms are about guaranteeing equal protection under the law, not your right to discriminate.

  113. skinsfan2013 says: Jun 18, 2014 12:58 PM

    As a Skins fan I do not want the name to be changed but if it does I won’t stop being a fan, with that said, I’d like to know just how folks feel about the name of one of our states, Oklahoma………………….Oklahoma is a state located in the South Central United States. Oklahoma is the 20th most extensive and the 28th most populous of the 50 United States. The state’s name is derived from the Choctaw words okla and humma, meaning “red people”.

  114. pourman says: Jun 18, 2014 12:59 PM

    As an Eagles fan this concerns me. If this is enough to distract Snyder from meddling in football affairs the Skins could become good again.

  115. clydemcnutt says: Jun 18, 2014 1:01 PM

    Why not the Washington White Pride? That way, you get to drop the offensive name, but keep the racism.

  116. factman1000 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:14 PM

    The Wayans Brothers came out with a movie a few years ago called “White chicks”. Where was the outrage?

  117. easyeddie says: Jun 18, 2014 1:19 PM

    Cheap, strongarm tactic. More BS speech police BS.

  118. NoRespect says: Jun 18, 2014 1:20 PM

    So, what that means is that racists can now make T-Shirts and other apparel disparaging Native Americans without fear of being shut down by the organization that honors them.

  119. getyourownname says: Jun 18, 2014 1:21 PM

    The more Allen is quoted, the more he starts to sound like Vinny 2.0.

  120. ashure71 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:24 PM

    What will Redskins fans do if the nickname changes!?!?!?!?

    Those of us that are true fans will still root for the team because it’s OUR team.

    Don’t get me wrong, this is more of a case where politically correct convenience has won out but I will NOT be rushing out to buy new merch.

  121. patriots87 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:25 PM

    You see the new Lone Ranger movie? it was horrible. but in that movie you see not only the genocide of Native Americans, but they also use the term “Redskings” as a slur in the film. it came out last year.

    Just change the name.

  122. georgegsmiller says: Jun 18, 2014 1:26 PM

    This ruling sets a dangerous precedent for any “name” out there. It means the Government has the right to enter your Private Domain. It means if I do not like the name “NBC Sports” because I find it offensive I can sue and most likely win. This strips EVERYONE of their privacy and gives the government to rule in any favor they like. This does not settle anything but this country is going down the toilet faster than yesterday’s news…

    What exactly will change if the PC get there way? You think they (PC) will stop there? The Seminoles, Fighting Irish, Cowboys, 49ers names will be next. The whole Government is out of control.

  123. thetruthcampaign says: Jun 18, 2014 1:29 PM

    Maybe the team could become the Redskin Potatos.

  124. kevpft says: Jun 18, 2014 1:34 PM

    Well, it’s obviously going to change. So maybe we should switch our focus to what the best new name will be?

    Washington Warriors, anyone?

    Any other good ideas? Any other name that could actually be a respectful nod to Native Americans, as opposed to the fake one Snyder keeps insisting on?

  125. DawgPound83 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:36 PM

    New England will now be forced to change their name to the Socialists, since the idea of patriotism may create a social uprising.

  126. immafubared says: Jun 18, 2014 1:43 PM

    I’m with him. Only for the reason that this is all political. Notice dem senators only got letter to sign to have trademark changed. They did not let any repub get on the bandwagon. Why, they want the native americans to clearly understand they are there guys and vote early vote often.

    I mean who the hell can be upset over a name that existed 50 years or more. It if was so awful it would have been changed in the 60’s.

    I’m just tired of kids wearing burkas to school but put a cross around your neck or wear and American flag t shirt and your in deep trouble. Tired of it.
    Keep the dam name and tell everyone to go to hell.

  127. gjdodger2 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:45 PM

    Ummmm….does this also mean that any joker can mass produce items that RIDICULE the Redskins’ logo and other totems, and Snyder had no legal recourse?

  128. lanman11 says: Jun 18, 2014 1:47 PM

    The majority of people do not believe this is racist or the name should change. Even on this site it runs about 2/3 in favor of keeping the name, and of the 1/3 in favor of the change, it is largely Eagles, Giants, and Cowboy fans, with a few Raven fans sprinkled in for good measure. YET, we see the power of (numeric) minorities to manipulate government agencies to financially attack those that have opposing viewpoints, in an effort to force them into acceptance and compliance with their own views. It is not enough to exist under the existing legal structure and any penalties that go along with breaking the law. It is now fashionable to attempt to destroy people financially, above and beyond the law. This is what passes for freedom in the U.S. today. Government coercion is at an all time high.

  129. deezenucks says: Jun 18, 2014 1:50 PM

    This is setting a dangerous precedent. Every Tom, Dick and Sally can cry about something and see it changed.
    I don’t care what century it is, this has world gone soft.
    Appeals will take another 4 years again and like last time, and they will win.
    Cue the mouth breathers jumping on the bandwagon

  130. omegalh says: Jun 18, 2014 1:51 PM

    Change to Washington Pigskins. Done.

  131. vtopa says: Jun 18, 2014 2:03 PM

    NEW WASHINGTON TEAM NAME: “Washington Warriors.” GET OVER IT. Its coming. Quit being attached to a racist name.

  132. enzasman says: Jun 18, 2014 2:10 PM

    You can’t fight the government, remember this moment when they come for your own personal property ie; guns, land, ect. and you have no power to stop them.

  133. patriottony says: Jun 18, 2014 2:10 PM

    DO any of you learned folks who scream redskins is racist..KNOW that the Choctaw (indian) word for RED PEOPLE is OKLAHOMA? So WHEN ARE WE going to force OKLAHOMA to rename themselves?
    How about that racist team in South Bend? Or BEST YET…OBAMA’s FAVORITE TEAM….THE BLACKHAWKS?

  134. officialgame says: Jun 18, 2014 2:12 PM

    Couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow then Lil Danny Boy Snyder. And if he loses his trademark I will be the first to make exact replica jerseys which I will sell on the Internet at half off.

  135. virgiltab says: Jun 18, 2014 2:13 PM

    I like how people try to justify the term redskin by saying, “Well most native Americans aren’t offended”

    HAHA. That is ridiculous. If one person is offended, then it should be changed.

    That’s like saying not all black people are offended by the “N” word, so it’s ok to keep using it.

    Racist terms are racist terms, period.

    Oh and someoen mentioned the following:

    Braves: This is not a derogatory term. It is a term of dignity of the native american spirit

    Indians: ummm, that’s what they are, nothing derogatory. It’s just like someone being scottish, Irish, Afican, Asian

    Seminoles: This is the name of a tribe, not derogatory.

    Chiefs: The highest regard of a native american elder who is in charge

    I’m native american and i am offended by the term.

  136. juliusanonymous says: Jun 18, 2014 2:20 PM

    Nothing more hilarious than ignorant conservatives whining about how our government is going rogue, and activist judges overriding the will of the people being somehow a detriment to democracy.

    The judicial branch was explicitly intended, by our Founding Fathers, to act as a counterbalance to the executive and legislative branches of government which are elected representatives. Our Founding Fathers were smart enough to realize that unscrupulous forces can buy an election, just as happened in Rome. So they created oversights that allow the judicial branch to override the “will of the people” for just this reason – to protect the people from their own corruption. Our founding fathers never intended for any single party to control government, including the voting public. That is why we call this system a system of “checks and balances”. America is not also a pure democracy, nor was Rome. A pure democracy would be impossible today. We live in a democractic Republic – meaning the will of the people is represented by publicly elected officials. There has never been, in the history of this nation, any requirement that the judicial branch represent the will of the people. It is the job of the judicial branch to represent the will of the Law. It’s really quite sad that so many Americans are ignorant of this basic concept that has been a key component of American civics since the foundation of the USA.

  137. weepingjebus says: Jun 18, 2014 2:32 PM

    What about ticket scalpers?

  138. bigmike7914 says: Jun 18, 2014 2:37 PM

    They say that Redskins is as offensive as the “N” word, yet they say Redskins and only say the “N” word, has anyone noticed this but me, and I have been a football fan my entire life and im 32 yrs old, I dont remember all of this opposition to the name when I was 12 yrs old and they had Chief Zee walking around, if its offensive now then it was offensive then, but why attack the name now?, I mean you have Red man chewing tobacco, the state Oklahoma when translated means red(okla) people(homa/humma), check the whole spectrum of things out before you single out one thing, if it is said that Redskins is offensive then no one should be using colors to recognize a race of people….

  139. bonniebengal says: Jun 18, 2014 2:51 PM

    Just change the name. Why drag this out? Team names have changed before. That is part of history too.

  140. politicallyincorrect says: Jun 18, 2014 2:51 PM

    funny how I remember Tip O’Neil being a proud Redskins fan… and many other dems… this new breed of Dem is disgusting in it’s alignment with the libs

    Harry Reid… 🙂

    All 50 Dem senators signing petition should be impeached!

  141. mightymorgan18 says: Jun 18, 2014 2:51 PM

    (1) take it to the Supreme Court

    (2) the nfl logo is still protected so any “authentic” merchandise is still a money maker

    (3) so much for America being a free market–if people are against the name then don’t buy the goods…the logo and name are his business property

    (4) shaking my head at the issue- what in the heck is the big deal.

  142. PriorKnowledge says: Jun 18, 2014 2:56 PM

    Just for the sake of accuracy, Washington’s field was privately funded. Except for some infrastructure (like roads, water, sewage, etc., which is provided by governments for all new business enterprises) Jack Kent Cooke financed the current stadium with his/team’s money.

  143. texansdan says: Jun 18, 2014 3:01 PM

    What’s with all the fascism and “they’re coming for your guns next” talk? All this was was the gov’t saying that the name should not be protected by the US. All you anti-gov’t people should applaud this–let the free market decide who prints the best jerseys and merchandise and all that. Why are you calling the government not extending protection to a word fascism? Have you looked up what fascism is? Read a book people, jut b/c the government isn’t going to protect a word (so that only one person can profit from it) doesn’t mean that the black helicopters are coming for your guns.

  144. corvusrex96 says: Jun 18, 2014 3:03 PM

    If you think redskins is offensive then never use white to describe Caucasians again

  145. ninjahawk says: Jun 18, 2014 3:05 PM

    Jesus, reading through one of these Redskins name threads is like taking a Disney ride through “It’s a racist world after all”. The name is going away, get used to it. Just like that joke of a team was forced to finally accept Black players against their will, they’ll now be forced to drop their racial-slur moniker and join the rest of us in the 21st century.

    If you want to find yourself on the wrong side of history, feel free. You can join the masses who tried to keep women from voting, fought to keep segregation alive, etc. I can tell you this…in fifty years when we look back, no one will believe that they kept the name as long as they did.

    By the way, while Dan Snyder is talking big with his “over my dead body” nonsense, HE’S ALREADY PICKED A NEW NAME. He trademarked the Washington Warriors years ago, he’s been hedging his bets all along.

  146. revelation123 says: Jun 18, 2014 3:06 PM

    This trademark ruling wont hold up in court without a corrupt judge. There are several native american schools which have named themselves the “Redskins”.

    If it’s a putdown of native americans, why would native americans choose the name for themselves? Case closed.

  147. moeman79 says: Jun 18, 2014 3:07 PM

    Screw then move the Team, Richmond Rebels, Oklahoma Cherokee

  148. huskywolverine says: Jun 18, 2014 3:14 PM

    Bruce Allen and Dan Snyder are starting to sound like Baghdad Bob, i.e, Iraq’s Minister of Propaganda. “Nothing to see here, we have the infidels right where we want them! Our victory is close at hand!!”

    Completely delusional and embarrassing. In 30 years, people will look back at their statements and say, “what were they thinking??”

  149. callbr549 says: Jun 18, 2014 3:16 PM

    They should also remove the other detestable name “Washington” for all the hypocrite politicians in Washington from the President on down through the local government officials.

  150. NoRespect says: Jun 18, 2014 3:22 PM

    The name “Washington Warriors” was trademarked several years ago for an arena/indoor league team that never happened. Your side is great at misdirection and hyperbole

  151. romosrevenge says: Jun 18, 2014 3:27 PM

    If and when a logo change occurs, ALL teams will share in the LOSS of revenue from such change.
    The new logo/name will only slowly reach acceptance/purchase levels currently being experienced by team and Redskin fans. Goodell’s future gig as a Senator is going to be expensive for the owners he currently represents.

  152. coachbeck says: Jun 18, 2014 3:38 PM

    Forcing this name change will open a door that swings both ways.

  153. richndc says: Jun 18, 2014 3:40 PM

    Arm the militias, take our country back…omg…I hope this message board really is not a sample of working, thinking, educated Americans with jobs. So much energy wasted on ignorant opinions, lies and assumption. It would be a scary place to be if any one of you had any single idea what you are talking about, at all. However, just like on all these message boards, if you ever had to be truly accountable, even once for the nonsense you spew each day–it would end forever right there. That power you feel is as false as the ideas behind them kids.

  154. bleedsoe9mm says: Jun 18, 2014 3:45 PM

    Just rename the team , the Washington Social Justice Warriors and be done with it

  155. bealwithit says: Jun 18, 2014 3:45 PM

    Washington Warthogs with a burgundy Warthogs like Pumba from Lion King.

    Team used to be called the Hogs anyways.

  156. trmpspd3 says: Jun 18, 2014 3:50 PM

    This is not going away guys, it just isn’t…Wait ’til season starts it’s gunna get worse…It’s not what we want but it’s going to happen

  157. b3nz0z says: Jun 18, 2014 3:59 PM

    just for the sake of accuracy, the residents of richmond, virginia are paying for redskins training camp facilities at the expense of the school system.

  158. markelsoft says: Jun 18, 2014 4:25 PM

    This has happened before and the ruling was overturned. It will be overturned again. Think most of the uproar is just bandwagon uninformed people. Should they stop selling ‘redskin potatoes’? Let’s look at every team and product.

  159. dan39564 says: Jun 18, 2014 4:27 PM

    It is apparent to me the Snyder hasn’t donate to the Reid re-election fund or the Dems coffers!

  160. lengai says: Jun 18, 2014 5:35 PM

    The new name will be the Washington Grumpy Cats and all will quake in fear.

  161. trollingforjustice says: Jun 18, 2014 5:52 PM

    If they move the team to London they can keep the name……

  162. jimcarnoven says: Jun 18, 2014 6:20 PM

    As an Italian American from Jersey, I was acutely aware of a grassroots movement to lobby HBO to cancel the Sopranos. (I personally was also offended by Jersey Shore and Real Housewives of New Jersey but I’m an individual whose identity is not wholly bound up with where my ancestors come from). It’s the same thing. The issue never got pushed as far, but I think people would respond differently in that situation because the program is so popular. The Redskins only have a 1/32nd share of the fan base in the NFL (and fans of rival teams just feign indignation to harass, punk, and prank the Skins fan base). The team should file for minority protection.

  163. petericca says: Jun 18, 2014 6:21 PM

    Let’s look at this realistically, knock off hats and jerseys are already being sold for every team. This won’t have much of an effect at all.

  164. skins26portis says: Jun 18, 2014 6:42 PM

    If we need to change the name then so be it. Why we are changing the name lets change our uniforms while we are at it. This is not the Joe Gibbs or George Allen Era anymore it’s time to move on and start a new identity with this team . Let’s stop living off the glory years and past Super B

  165. jjm18 says: Jun 18, 2014 6:42 PM

    I think that Danny Boy has already trademarked the Washington Warriors, that was going to be used for a arena football team. If so that is what the name is going to be.

  166. zukny1 says: Jun 18, 2014 6:50 PM

    The overwhelming majority in this country no longer matters. Sad, true.. disgusting.

  167. skins26portis says: Jun 18, 2014 6:50 PM

    If we need to change the name then so be it. Why we are changing the name lets change our uniforms while we are at it. This is not the Joe Gibbs or George Allen Era anymore it’s time to move on and start a new identity with this team . Let’s stop living off the glory years and past Super Bowls.

    We have had just as many coaches as the Oakland Raiders over the years. We made the playoffs with Joe Gibbs returning and 1 time with Shanny. The Redskins Franchise has been under .500 percentage for most of the season the past 10 years. I’m still a Redskins fan now matter how poor out team has played over the past 42 years . I will always bleed Burgundy and Gold . Hail

  168. qdog112 says: Jun 18, 2014 6:53 PM

    This guy’s brother, George (Maca) Allen Jr. kept a life size rebel flag on the wall of his office.

    Huff said.

  169. qdog112 says: Jun 18, 2014 6:53 PM

    This guy’s brother, George (Maca) Allen Jr. kept a life size rebel flag on the wall of his office.

    Nuff said.

  170. defscottyb says: Jun 18, 2014 8:47 PM

    Nothing will change. Dan has brilliant attorneys all over this.

  171. raiders4ever says: Jun 18, 2014 8:56 PM

    you would think it would be up to the NFL if hey need to change the name..what if he sold the team then its up to the new owner and the owner after that ..the way it could be going is Snyder dont change it…scenario he sells the team owner changes the name to owner changes name back to redskins..thats why i think the NFL should be in charge of there own product…do you get my drift ..see what im saying ?

  172. mysonzdad says: Jun 18, 2014 11:24 PM

    Landover Redskins

  173. defscottyb says: Jun 19, 2014 3:53 AM

    Dan should do the same thing as Jerry Jones did with the Cowboys. Break away from the shared NFL merchandising deal and go on his own. Just like the Cowboys. Problem solved.

  174. lambojoe says: Jun 19, 2014 12:33 PM

    I think all NFL merchandising money is collectively pooled and distributed evenly over the 32 teams. This will not have much financial impact on the Redskins as much as they think it will.

  175. macjeffva says: Jun 19, 2014 1:20 PM

    Its only racism if you mean it to be. African Americans call each other the N word and its fine.

    Even President Obama refers to African Americans as BLACKS. So whats so bad about Red’s.

    Many US documents refer to Red as Indian, Black as Native American, Yellow as Asian, and Caucasian as Whites. Thats not racist so why is Redskin?

    There are even cities and schools in the US named Redskin. So they all have too change too?

    And last- The Cleveland Browns are named after Joe Louis, who was known as the “Brown Bomber.”

    Ok so we can call a black guy brown but not an Indian Red.

    Case Dismissed. Go fight for something that is worth your time.

  176. elteneleven says: Jun 20, 2014 11:46 AM

    Th NFL should cease to exist. We can’t get along so we all need to separate. It’s gone on long enough. All the people with hurt feelings can go take a nap, the pain will be over soon.

  177. pillowporkers says: Jun 20, 2014 7:07 PM

    Has anyone been to an atlanta braves game? Well, say goodbye to the tomahawk chop. I’m sure that will be next.

  178. kst2074 says: Jun 21, 2014 12:24 PM

    Liberalism is a mental disorder

  179. brucealmty says: Jun 21, 2014 8:48 PM

    Bullying is alive and well and practiced regularly in the liberal media.
    Hail to the Redskins

  180. jacksprat57 says: Jun 24, 2014 7:31 PM

    kerzondax says: Jun 18, 2014 11:23 AM

    daltonsdumptruck says: Jun 18, 2014 11:16 AM

    Are redskin potatoes still ok?


    Oh look. A racial joke in the 21st Century. How edgy. Sadly, while I would bet you know this, I am not 100% sure (not a compliment). It’s red skin. Notice the difference? Probably not.


    True, but…

    it’s “redskin peanuts”.

    Thank you for playing, though.

  181. gohawks7 says: Jun 25, 2014 10:48 AM

    The whole Patent thing is an issue for NFL Licensing….not so much for the Redskins.

  182. fmc651 says: Jun 25, 2014 4:54 PM

    Rodger Goodell is good at telling players to “protect the shield” He needs to protect the shield himself and tell Danny boy to change the racist nickname for Washington.

Leave a Reply

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