Skip to content

Miami (Ohio) chimes in on Washington name issue

Miami Getty Images

Often overlooked in the ongoing debate regarding the name of the Washington NFL team is that plenty of other programs at lower levels of football and other sports have changed names containing terms relating to Native Americans.

Miami University of Ohio once had the same name.  In 1997, after the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma withdrew its support for the name, the school changed it to RedHawks.

On Tuesday, after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office canceled the trademark protection associated with the name, the RedHawks sent a message.

“Hey , if you need help finding a new name just let us know,” the school said via the Miami Athletics Twitter account.

While RedHawks likely wouldn’t be used by the Washington NFL team, the point is that changing the name of a team isn’t nearly as traumatic as some make it out to be.  Done the right way, it can be a positive.

And then, after it’s done, the team can twist the tail of any other sports programs that fail to realize or accept the need for change.

Permalink 52 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Washington Redskins
52 Responses to “Miami (Ohio) chimes in on Washington name issue”
  1. jamin67 says: Jun 19, 2014 1:55 PM

    #Nothankswewillkeepwhatwehave

    #Ifyoudontlikeitdontwatch

  2. jjb0811 says: Jun 19, 2014 1:57 PM

    My bloodlines have some origin from Ireland. I’m not a drunk nor brawler. So I demand the name ‘fighting Irish’ be changed. Besides how the church preach peace and have a university use the term fighting in their name, shameful.

  3. buckeye044 says: Jun 19, 2014 1:59 PM

    Many alums are still not happy with the name change.

  4. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:00 PM

    Dan Snyder should admit the name Redskin is a slur.

  5. cleminem757 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:06 PM

    Hmmmm. So the tribe that the school was named after pulled its support from the school why??? Makes you wonder if the school refused monetary payments to the tribe or something else.

  6. thejabronisayz says: Jun 19, 2014 2:07 PM

    Just so we’re all on the same page, the “Washington team name” is the REDSKINS.

  7. meleecyrus says: Jun 19, 2014 2:07 PM

    I don’t get it. Snyder is a man about profit. Wouldn’t there be a lot of merchandise profit to be made if they changed their name/logo/uniform?

  8. thestrategyexpert says: Jun 19, 2014 2:09 PM

    And done the best way possible would be more profitable than Snyder could possibly imagine.

  9. jimmyjamm03 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:09 PM

    The owner hasn’t run the numbers to see how much money can be made on the name change due to new merchandise sales. If he had, this would be a done deal.

  10. dvnelson72 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:12 PM

    Washington Warriors. Same logo.

    done

  11. tjacks7 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:18 PM

    All publicity is good publicity. Snyder must be loving this.

  12. censorshipstinks says: Jun 19, 2014 2:18 PM

    A Navajo reservation has a High School with the mascot of Redskins. The reservation had to vote on what they wanted the mascot to be. They have not tried to change it. Outsiders have just started asking them to change it. I guess it only offends people looking for 15 minutes of fame or money.

  13. ctiggs says: Jun 19, 2014 2:18 PM

    My co workers that are Alumni of the U of Ohio liked the old name better.

  14. skinsfan91 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:18 PM

    I think the name means more to Snyder than a few extra million you guys think he can make off a new name. What’s $20 million to a billionaire?

  15. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:21 PM

    To those who are defending the name – a slur is a slur is a slur whichever way you want to spin it.

  16. dcapettini says: Jun 19, 2014 2:21 PM

    Why are so many fans so worked up about this? It is a slur; maybe not as bad as some but a slur nonetheless. We wouldn’t permit a team named the Pittsburgh Polocks or the Youngstown Yids, so why are we defending this name? Because it is old? Slavery was around for thousands of years but no one would defend that. Antisemitism has ancient roots, but we all condemn it.

    If any group in America has a gripe with our government and nation it is the Native Americans. They were the victims of extreme ethnic cleansing for hundreds of years. They were cheated out of their lands. They were systematically starved. The government did not allow them to manage the few worthless patches of land we allowed them and now cannot account for millions of dollars in royalties and rents. They weren’t even considered citizens of the land where they and their ancestors were born and were not permitted to vote, although they were expected to pay taxes and serve in the military. If they don’t want to be mascots, why can’t we allow them this minor concession?

  17. bassplucker says: Jun 19, 2014 2:23 PM

    10 years from now any team in America still currently calling themselves the Chiefs, Warriors, Braves, Arrows — or the name of any Native American tribe past or present — will have changed their name. Like it or not, but that’s where this is heading.

    Bank on it, and buy stock in uniform companies now because they are going to be getting very busy before too much longer.

  18. unfkwthabl says: Jun 19, 2014 2:27 PM

    tjacks7- “All publicity is good publicity. Snyder must be loving this.”

    ask donald sterling about that

  19. skinsfan91 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:29 PM

    The state of Oklahoma needs to change its name. The term “Red People” is offensive.

  20. snoqualmkanem says: Jun 19, 2014 2:34 PM

    What the word Oklahoma means is irrelevant.
    No NFL team exists named the Oklahomans.

  21. imcornholious says: Jun 19, 2014 2:34 PM

    R
    E
    D
    S
    K
    I
    N
    S
    !

  22. timmons94 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:36 PM

    Harry Reid won’t attend games till they change the name..

    one reason for keeping the name…never bothered him before, typical liberal, country gone to hell under their watch so let’s get involved in meaningless activities like the Redskins name…
    so people won’t discuss are incompetence….

  23. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:37 PM

    The term “Red People” isn’t a slur.

  24. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:38 PM

    Oklahoma isn’t a slur.

  25. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:39 PM

    Chiefs, Warriors, Braves, Arrows aren’t slurs.

  26. rodaday says: Jun 19, 2014 2:39 PM

    dvnelson72 says:Jun 19, 2014 2:12 PM

    Washington Warriors. Same logo.

    done

    The group driving this has already stated that Warriors is also derogatory because it depicts them as savages.

    Maybe you can submit a list of names to them to make sure they approve first, then come back and post the acceptable options.

    ps – They’ve also said Chiefs, Braves etc need to go. See their 1972 filing. If the Redskins cave on this, it will be only the beginning.

  27. aceakking says: Jun 19, 2014 2:41 PM

    Reskins IS a SLUR!

  28. trollhammer20 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:44 PM

    I don’t care what you call them, as long as they keep losing to Seattle in the playoffs.

  29. coondabye says: Jun 19, 2014 2:49 PM

    Washington Bullets

  30. omegalh says: Jun 19, 2014 2:54 PM

    skinsfan91 says:
    Jun 19, 2014 2:18 PM

    I think the name means more to Snyder than a few extra million you guys think he can make off a new name. What’s $20 million to a billionaire?

    ——

    Rich guys like money more than anything else. Take that to the bank.

  31. just2040 says: Jun 19, 2014 2:56 PM

    We should eliminate every sports name that references native Americans. In fact, we should change every name in this country city, state, mountain, park that has its origin with native Americans. If one is offensive, all is offensive.

  32. kd75 says: Jun 19, 2014 3:08 PM

    St. John’s went from the Redmen to the Red Storm to the Johnnies.

    Rapper Redman disagrees.

  33. pwcis says: Jun 19, 2014 3:11 PM

    If the change happens, then people of European descent may no longer be referred to as “white.” It refers to skin color, and anything that refers to a people’s skin color is most definitely racist. If it’s racist, it must be derogatory and a slur.

  34. dobe420 says: Jun 19, 2014 3:14 PM

    People are too senitive these days.

  35. brownsmakemecrazy says: Jun 19, 2014 3:36 PM

    Miami of Ohio not only was better as the Redskins, their logo was great as well. It’s a shame that they caved into pressure to change the name to the Red Hawks.

    I can’t stand Daniel Snyder but I hope he doesn’t cave in on the name issue. I agree with him 100 percent. Don’t cave in Danny Boy. If Goodell tells you to change it, tell him to hit the bricks

  36. icebowler says: Jun 19, 2014 3:49 PM

    The Washington Gridlocks!

    Or is that a hair color?…never mind.

  37. seahawkboymike says: Jun 19, 2014 4:01 PM

    Or maybe the liberals should just mind their own business and let the owner of the Washington NFL team call it whatever he wants to. Just a thought.

  38. rgwhodey says: Jun 19, 2014 4:06 PM

    I think at this point the fight is based on principle… the name has been around for years and now they want to change it due to being PC… this country is getting soft and having the govt worry about an NFL team name rather than bigger issues is ridiculous and the fact these clowns keep getting reelected (Harry Reid) is mind blowing.. I believe in the past “Raiders” raped and murdered people for fun, that’s pretty offensive, do they need to change their name too? where does this end?

  39. bigjdve says: Jun 19, 2014 4:15 PM

    I think that this is a matter of context.

    If this is being used to describe a people, and they are offended by it, then that would be a racist term. Would I go up to an Indian and call them a Redskin, no I wouldn’t, not because I think it is racist, but because I don’t attribute the word to Indians.

    However, in this case, it is being used to describe a football team, players, employees, and fans. Would I go up to a member of the Redskins and call them a Redskin, by all means.

    There are many words out there, that taken out of context can be really offensive. We can’t remove all of them or we would be getting rid of 1/2 of the language. That sounds over the top, but in today’s world – people are offended by almost everything.

    Should such a word be used in such a way, absolutely not. However, in this case it isn’t.

    The comparisons to Donald Sterling are laughable because of that distinction. Sterling in his infinite wisdom, was in fact degrading a people with what he was saying. Snyder is doing the exact opposite.

    Something to think about.

  40. walter0247 says: Jun 19, 2014 4:44 PM

    The word Redskins origin has been traced back by the Smithsonian.

    Smithsonian Institution senior linguist Ives Goddard spent seven months researching its history and concluded that “redskin” was first used by Native Americans in the 18th century to distinguish themselves from the white “other” encroaching on their lands and culture.

    Have fun being on the wrong side of history.

  41. albanyhawker says: Jun 19, 2014 4:46 PM

    Oilers changed to Titans and nobody threw themselves off bridges and/or tall buildings.

    Browns changed to Ravens and won a super bowl.

    The only thing holding up the “right” thing to do is stubbornness of the owner not wanting to be bullied into doing something he doesn’t want to do.

    Given their location, how about the Washington RedTapes?

  42. tspringer1 says: Jun 19, 2014 5:07 PM

    They should keep the name “Redskins” and change their logo instead.

    Replace the current Indian head with an image of several small red skinned potatoes.

    Problem solved. Unless there are some potato heads out there who are offended.

    The upside of this is that it is great to see that Native Americans no longer have any major problems as a group. I mean if this “issue” is the big thing to be focused on – then you really don’t have any real problems. So it is a good thing.

  43. rextraordinaire says: Jun 19, 2014 6:28 PM

    At this rate its going to happen so perhaps they should change the name to that of a specific mid-atlantic indian tribe. That way they can keep the logo, which has hardly been criticized at all.

    After all, you never hear anyone gripe about the names of the Chicago Blackhawks, or Illinois Fighting Illini, or Florida State Seminoles.

  44. walter0247 says: Jun 19, 2014 8:14 PM

    The Washington Cherokee

  45. goodtogo28 says: Jun 19, 2014 9:28 PM

    79% of people are for the name washington redskins
    11% are against it
    and the other 10% have no opinion
    this is political and media driven issue run by people with an agenda at hand. fortunately the “vast” majority of people can see through this none sense.

  46. decon49 says: Jun 19, 2014 10:55 PM

    Isn’t their little motto hail to the redskins?
    Seems like they are celebrating the name

  47. haytammy says: Jun 20, 2014 1:24 AM

    Even sitting bull referred to his people as the red men. Term came from natives themselves. Lighten up.

  48. Savage Lizard says: Jun 20, 2014 3:47 AM

    My favorite part of this debate is always the “don’t we have bigger fish to fry” argument. As if this is a one issue at a time world, and nothing is allowed to be discussed if there is something more serious out there.

  49. davidtmp says: Jun 20, 2014 9:52 AM

    What we have in this country is a problem of the minorities trying to get everything changed to suit them while the majority has no say. If 2% of your population is griping about something as petty as the name of a sports team, then it’s about time the 55% majority start to scream about what offends them……lets get rid of all N words in Hip Hop music, all the profanity from songs so my kids don’t have to hear all that crap from the car next to us, etc.
    Hey Harry Reid, why don’t you do the work you were elected for, get this country back to being the greatest country on Earth, and not the Third World Country you guys seem to want to make it.

  50. thirdistheworrd says: Jun 20, 2014 11:05 AM

    Here’s the biggest logjam in the whole process: the snag no one seems to be discussing. Snyder and the NFL posit that the name is OK because it’s not intended to offend anyone–there is no active, targeted bigotry. If the name is changed, it means Snyder and the NFL were lying: the name is intentionally racist, and specifically designed to demean the Native community.

    The fact is, no matter what the new name would be, we would know they are really the Washington “Redskins”; our children will know they were the Washington “Redskins”; and our grandchildren will know they are in actuality the “Redskins”.

    Essentially, until the end of time, the Washington franchise would be crippled by the stigma of being that racist, evil “team formerly known as the Redskins”.

    Don’t just thumbs down– discuss–If anyone, on either side, can think of a solution to this issue, please post it below.

  51. politicallyincorrect says: Jun 20, 2014 11:11 AM

    Schools like Miami and St. Johns were cowards…. lost a lot of respect.. but I do understand how they were forced/blackmailed into changing the name… Washington Redskins, however, are a private business and don’t need to kiss azzz like the schools…

  52. bigbeefyd says: Jun 23, 2014 10:35 AM

    The term “redskin” appears to have been coined by Indians, and was used in one form or another by many Indian tribes. Ives Goddard, Curator and Senior Linguist at the Smithsonian, published this article in the European Review of native American Studies in 2005…read it and then tell me that this is a legitimate argument: http://www.anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf

Leave a Reply

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