Skip to content

RG3: Now’s not the time for me to speak on Redskins name


Sports stars rarely wade into divisive issues, and so it’s no surprise that Robert Griffin III wants to steer clear of the controversy surrounding his team’s name.

Griffin said on 106.7 The Fan that he’d rather not talk about his own feelings about the Redskins name controversy.

“When it comes to those conversations, it’s just not the time,” Griffin said. “And I understand, trust me, I’m African American, I’ve grown up being African American my entire life and I understand oppression and all the things that come with it. But for us, like I said, as players, we have to focus on what we can control right now, and right now that’s the football season.”

That’s not a surprising answer. Athletes usually calculate that if they speak out, they’re more likely to lose fans, lose endorsements and distract from their primary jobs than to effect social change.

When asked whether he would want to be the Muhammad Ali of his generation, a sports star who speaks his mind despite the consequences, Griffin said that’s not how he sees his role.

“If anything to that extent came up as a player, and you had an opportunity to be the Muhammad Ali of your generation, when it comes to oppression and just things being wrong — my parents grew up in that time, I’ve heard stories about it, I’ve watched movies about it, I understand that — and if it comes to that, then you make a decision at that time, but at this time particularly, we have to focus on what we can control,” Griffin said.

When the Redskins launched a Twitter campaign in defense of their name, some players joined in. Griffin did not, and he said the team didn’t ask him to.

“The team does those things and I don’t have any statement on what they do, and those situations, but they didn’t ask me to do that,” Griffin said.

Anyone asking Griffin to weigh in on the Redskins name is likely to come away unsatisfied: On that subject, Griffin is keeping his opinions to himself.

Permalink 109 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
109 Responses to “RG3: Now’s not the time for me to speak on Redskins name”
  1. wwwfella says: Jun 21, 2014 3:35 PM

    what was he supposed to say??

  2. caeser12 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:36 PM

    “Wait until they trade or cut me, then we’ll talk.

  3. fantom21 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:38 PM

    Give the kid a damn break!

  4. thestrategyexpert says: Jun 21, 2014 3:39 PM

    Boring and lousy attitude.

    That’s fine if you want to keep your opinions to yourself, but you should be considerate of the position you hold and what the topic is if most people feel like there should be some honest disclosure as to your true position on the issue.

  5. deerhuntinfool71 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:39 PM

    Redme 3 is what he wants to rename the team.

  6. Waxxx4321 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:42 PM

    As a member of the Piscataway Native American tribe and two other tribes, I say the Redskins name is a name that reflects the pride, strength and heritage of Native American History and life. I do not all believe its a Racist slur. I believe the media bridges that political propaganda to tribes to stir up emotions that are not held deep within most Native American circles Redskin for life

  7. PacificNWMark says: Jun 21, 2014 3:42 PM

    Profiles in courage. Not.

  8. truths4all says: Jun 21, 2014 3:45 PM

    Looks like he is maturing and that means he will be even more dangerous on the field – good for the Redskins and not so good for the Cowboys (which is a racial slur to the original Vaqueros, BTW)

  9. xjippyx says: Jun 21, 2014 3:51 PM

    Rg3 needs to realize he’s not African American, he’s American.

    On another note, if he had nothing to say now, he should have nothing to say at all moving forward. Money shouldn’t dictate if you should stand up for what’s right or not.

  10. kingpel says: Jun 21, 2014 3:53 PM

    I think he is finally learning. Nice work, RG3.

  11. tooz72 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:55 PM

    “Talking about the Redskins name right now would take the attention away from myself and I just can’t do that right now”..RGME

  12. guinsrule2 says: Jun 21, 2014 3:57 PM

    He can’t say he supports the name. The democrats will have the IRS after him if he opposes their view…

  13. edzo82270 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:02 PM

    Baaaaail on the Redskiiiins
    Ruuuuuun RG Threeeeee
    Get used to Saaaaaayin
    “PLEASE! Stop aaaaaaskin meeeeeeee!!!”

  14. bobzilla1001 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:03 PM

    Couldn’t care less what Griffin’s opinion is. Ditto for Harry Reid.
    The nickname was never intended to racially slur anyone. Not 80 years ago. And certainly not now. I have no dog in this fight, other than I’m tired of liberals telling me what’s right and what’s wrong.
    How I’d enjoy seeing the Redskins win the Super Bowl. Not seeing Obama do the traditional White House salute to the winning Super Bowl team, one from the city in which he resides, would be nothing short of SPECIAL.

  15. bobnelsonjr says: Jun 21, 2014 4:05 PM

    He says he was oppressed.

    How was he oppressed?

  16. courtjester1234 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:09 PM

    Well I want to keep getting my pay check. So, no I really don’t have anything to say about the issue. Check back with me in a few years when I’m available for free agency. I might or I might not have anything to add… Depending on my relationship with management

  17. 12brichandfamous says: Jun 21, 2014 4:14 PM

    I wish an athlete would just say:

    “I have a personal opinion and it will remain personal. Whether I come out for or against the name, I will be dragged into the press’ bonfire of the vanities. thank you, but I do not wish to participate in this discussion.”

  18. qdog112 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:16 PM

    Wisest thing he’s done since getting to the league. Don’t get caught out there on a limb. Damned if you and damned if you don’t.

    But the focus remains with Snyder. No one should take that away from him, the NFL and the owners. They are the “DECIDERS”.

  19. gmsalpha says: Jun 21, 2014 4:17 PM

    I’m more interested in the opinion of ex-Redskins players like Tim Hasselbeck, who are on a national stage and who are paid for their opinions. Joe Gibbs would be another I’d like to hear.

  20. pftthoughtpolicemostwanted says: Jun 21, 2014 4:18 PM

    Guys, this is getting to be almost as bad as BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) from a few years ago. Obsess much?

    Say, why don’t you ask Chris Cooley for his opinion? He used to get a lot of run on this site and he just stated his opinion on the matter. Why not post something about that, huh?

  21. borisbulldog says: Jun 21, 2014 4:25 PM

    He’ll have plenty of time to address that issue when he’s out of the league in 2 years!

  22. isphet71 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:26 PM

    Native Americans can’t even agree on deciding if the name is a slur or not.

    They should get a consensus first then let us non-Native Americans know what they decide.

  23. kwjsb says: Jun 21, 2014 4:28 PM

    The media is going to beat this up until they find someone else who is offended, Maybe a pacifist from Dublin who is offended by the fighting Irish, or an Atheist offended by the Saints

  24. walter0247 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:31 PM

    I think everybody on this comment board would agree that nobody here would ever stand up to this if it meant losing their job.


  25. craigkintexas says: Jun 21, 2014 4:36 PM

    RG3 is oppressed? America has become a nation of victims dispite the gazillions spent on the “oppressed”. BTW didn’t he recently marry a caucasion?

  26. realnflmaster says: Jun 21, 2014 4:36 PM

    This kid is a soft punk. If he were a JET he would be tough and speak his mind.

  27. teal379 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:39 PM

    If you don’t stand up for your beliefs or are afraid to articulate them – they’re not beliefs but hobbies.

  28. jayhawk6 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:43 PM

    Ali was the most famous person, let alone athlete, of his generation. And he told the Washington warmongers that he “…got no grudge against any Viet Cong”, shortly before he refused to be inducted into the army.

    Any spitting contest about RGIII’s sponsors and a team’s name pales by comparison.

  29. gtorlone says: Jun 21, 2014 4:44 PM

    Rob Parker couldn’t be reached for comment.

  30. djlexluger says: Jun 21, 2014 4:48 PM

    He never said he was oppressed he said he understood it, and the things that come with it. Did you all read or just skim through?

  31. blackqbwhiterb says: Jun 21, 2014 4:53 PM

    I thought he should have SUPPORTED AND STUCK UP FOR the name…. Without fear. He’s proud to take Snyder’s checks, why not have Snyder’s back? If not, maybe a real strong statement would be to refuse to play for them…… Now THAT would be courageous. My opinion is different but I would say that is taking a stand!

  32. scopolamine9 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:54 PM


  33. rrthomasxyz says: Jun 21, 2014 4:57 PM

    The term has always meant to be offensive. “Redskin” was first coined in 1699. It referred to the Native American. Savage is a synonym of the term. Merriam-Webster states, Learner’s definition of REDSKIN:
    [count] informal + offensive
    : native american
    ◊ The word redskin is very offensive and should be avoided.

    In 1899, my grandmother’s family was subject to an Indian raid. They had to hide in the cellar to escape harm. If she was alive she would tell you that the term “redskin” and “savage” have always been racial slurs meant to demean the Native American. It has never meant to be a term of endearment.

  34. mattw70 says: Jun 21, 2014 4:58 PM

    Where in the article does RG3 say he was oppressed?

  35. vikinghooper says: Jun 21, 2014 4:59 PM

    The whole Redskins argument is actually very simple. Too often we get caught up in conservative and liberal viewpoints.
    1. Native Americans were no match for Europeans who immigrated here and were eventually defeated militarily.
    2. For some strange reason, likely due to guilt, they were given special status and protection from their conquerors laws on reservations
    3. Native Americans have assimilated poorly with US society and have a higher substance abuse rate and lower per capita income.
    4. This means from a power perspective and a financial perspective, they are the weaker party in any discussion about policy

    With the above facts, non Native Americans should not make comments about whether the name Redskins is derogatory because they have no clue.
    Native Americans may feel ambivalent.
    So the story should just be that people with power are using this name and it has financial benefit, and they should just agree that it may cause some people to feel hurt but they don’t care because the money they collect from it is more important to them.
    That way the argument is honest on both sides.

  36. wooshelius says: Jun 21, 2014 5:06 PM

    This is such an annoying topic all together. Its bringing out idiots from both sides.

  37. floratiotime says: Jun 21, 2014 5:07 PM

    Bawk bawk bawk …

  38. bleedrangerblue says: Jun 21, 2014 5:10 PM

    Oppression? O please break your leg again….

  39. aceakking says: Jun 21, 2014 5:13 PM

    Redskin is a slur. Nothing will ever change that.

  40. nomoreseasontix says: Jun 21, 2014 5:13 PM

    “I’ll have plenty to say in a couple of years when I’m someplace else”…

    That’s the rest of it.

  41. footballfan14 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:18 PM


    Very true. I’m an independent but while I disagree with conservatives on several things, it is getting to the point where liberals basically say they want you to have choice… only if it agrees with them. If I was a famous person I would not say a word about anything. It’s his business and his choice if he wants to talk. Nobody has the right to make him talk. As an American, everyone should fully support his right to speak up or be quiet, it’s his right.

    Good for you RGIII!

  42. jzone954 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:26 PM

    Why don’t the Indian organization who are pushing for this AND HAVE MONEY help with spending money to help change the name? Honestly I mean if people are truly offended then obviously it is what it is, but it all comes down to money. And to say “we are offended” now spend millions to change it and deal with everything to change it. But rather offer to help financially with the change? I mean if it’s truly offensive wouldn’t you try to help? Just a though

  43. theanalyticalkid says: Jun 21, 2014 5:27 PM

    “But for us, like I said, as players, we have to focus on what we can control right now, and right now that’s the football season.”

    “… but at this time particularly, we have to focus on what we can control.”

    Nor is it his business. He has zero control over the outcome.

    Seems like some people (AHEM!!!), like a dog on someone’s pant leg, just want emotional and career devastation for anyone involved, directly or indirectly.

    Let’s see how this relates to all of the prominant politicians attending games there this fall. For some reason I don’t see this site calling them out nearly as staunchly. Or the beer company that services the facility, or any of the food, supply, service, or utility vendors. And again, I’m all for a name change.

  44. ronwsd says: Jun 21, 2014 5:30 PM

    When you cash your paychecks you don’t care what the name is on your check as long as its written out to you!!!

  45. FlashPatterson says: Jun 21, 2014 5:34 PM

    The time for me to make my opinion known is when a decision is made.. then I can agree with which ever side wins.

  46. jimmysee says: Jun 21, 2014 5:37 PM

    He’s just the hired help. This isn’t his issue. The boss is the one who should take the heat. And pay the price.

  47. Packernet says: Jun 21, 2014 5:37 PM


  48. eagleswin says: Jun 21, 2014 5:38 PM

    rrthomasxyz says:
    Jun 21, 2014 4:57 PM
    The term has always meant to be offensive. “Redskin” was first coined in 1699. It referred to the Native American. Savage is a synonym of the term. Merriam-Webster states, Learner’s definition of REDSKIN:
    [count] informal + offensive
    : native american
    ◊ The word redskin is very offensive and should be avoided.

    In 1899, my grandmother’s family was subject to an Indian raid. They had to hide in the cellar to escape harm. If she was alive she would tell you that the term “redskin” and “savage” have always been racial slurs meant to demean the Native American. It has never meant to be a term of endearment.


    Nice try. Your grandmother can use the word however she wants but that doesn’t change the origin of the word.

    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.

    When it first appeared as an English expression in the early 1800s, “it came in the most respectful context and at the highest level,” Goddard said in an interview. “These are white people and Indians talking together, with the white people trying to ingratiate themselves.”

    It was not until July 22, 1815, that “red skin” first appeared in print, he found — in a news story in the Missouri Gazette on talks between Midwestern Indian tribes and envoys sent by President James Madison to negotiate treaties after the War of 1812.

    The envoys had rebuked the tribes for their reluctance to yield territory claimed by the United States, but the Gazette report suggested that Meskwaki chief Black Thunder was unimpressed: “Restrain your feelings and hear calmly what I say,” he told the envoys. “I have never injured you, and innocence can feel no fear. I turn to all red skins and white skins, and challenge an accusation against me.”

  49. keltictim says: Jun 21, 2014 5:40 PM

    Ok do we know the name was not intended as a slur back in 1932 when the team was founded. There was also a lot of other words in 1932 that were not intended to be slurs but are now. There are def some issues now a days that are PC on steroids, I don’t think this is one of them. I was on the “never change the name” bandwagon for a long time, but the more I considered it, the more I realized there is no rational reason to keep the name. I don’t believe the government should have any hand in this, but decent Americans should all stand up and say. “It’s not right”. Also Snyder would make a fortune in new memorabilia sales if he did change the name. And who’s the guy claiming to be in multiple tribes , I thought the whole point to a tribe was undying loyalty to the one tribe. Pretty sure it’s Native American law that you pledge yourself to one tribe. Of course I could be wrong.

  50. jimmysee says: Jun 21, 2014 5:43 PM

    I’m an independent but the conservative point of view seems to be when you own something you can do whatever the heck you want to do with it. That’s not the case. The longer Snyder resists doing the right thing the steeper the price he will pay. The right thing is to respect the fact that the team name is a slur and it should be changed. The sooner the better.

  51. herman23934 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:44 PM

    If the name is racist surely you have laws that would be able to prosecute. In England we have racially aggravated offences. Wearing garments with racist words on them would result in a prison sentence.

  52. avenger9800 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:46 PM

    Take some lessons PFT! Or buy the team, then you can name the team anything you want.

  53. HailVictory says: Jun 21, 2014 5:47 PM

    If he made a comment, all the haters would call him “RGMe” and say he only cares about himself and his opinion and hes hurting the team.

    You trolls need to get your own lives and stop living through your keyboards.

  54. jlmd17 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:47 PM

    Oppression. Lol. What oppression?

  55. Packernet says: Jun 21, 2014 5:54 PM

    Could not have said it better avenger9800. Funny how it’s mostly white people that are offended.

  56. mdf53 says: Jun 21, 2014 5:59 PM

    I have been following this debate since it started and I have heard people say that the name is a slur and offensive to the American Indian people.

    How is it possible to get a conclusive and definitive sentiment of the American Indian people when this nation with all of its political pomp don’t even consider the gross offensive tactics that disenfranchised a whole nation, suddenly believes that a football team name even approaches degradation intentions much less oppression.

    There has not been one sentence that states the name in a derogatory way, but simple opinionated bullying busters thinking that they can use emotional nonsense to force their way.

    If you can show me one incident in history where this name was used I a derogatory way to oppress the American Indian people and I would be more likely to want the change because of it.

    What hasn’t that information been printed by the media that’s using the emotional hype to cloak their own hypocrisy. Here are the facts to lead this debate instead of all of the hyperbole.

    Show me the facts and then we talk about changing, otherwise shut up and move on to the next idiotic ploy of manipulation to have your own way.

    You’d be better off going to Burger King and see if they will let you have your own way changing their name.

    The Redskins name is nothing similar to the N-word which was a derogatory word from its origin and meant purely to demoralize anyone forced to to be identified by it.

    Red Mesa Redskins are the people who call themselves Redskins with the sentiment of pride and value.

    Go tell them that they should be ashamed of the name that they choose and see what they have to say.

  57. harrycanyon says: Jun 21, 2014 6:00 PM

    He will spill his guts on the subject soon enough. This kid doesn’t know the meaning of quiet.

    Truthfully his opinion means jack. If I were the Redskins owner, I would warn against biting the hand that feeds and make an example out of those who chime in on the subject.

  58. mf7krime says: Jun 21, 2014 6:06 PM

    Well yeah, Bob only talks about himself. He is his favorite subject.

  59. jzz1123 says: Jun 21, 2014 6:13 PM

    If Redskins is such a racist term, shouldn’t all of our posts that say it be removed for inappropriate content?

  60. jimcarnoven says: Jun 21, 2014 6:13 PM

    CNN Op-Ed Piece

    Why Redskins decision is wrong

    updated 2:36 PM EDT, Sat June 21, 2014

  61. jimcarnoven says: Jun 21, 2014 6:16 PM

    Have they asked the CEO of Chuck-E-Cheese what he thinks?

    We need a survey to tie into the Census. Anyone having no objection to the name will be blacklisted, incarcerated, and taxed.

  62. omniscientmoi says: Jun 21, 2014 6:17 PM

    That wishy-washy non-answer shows that Griffen is capable of being another stand-for-nothing-but-your-votes politician.

    But, analyzing this, it is clear that, if he did not believe the name is derogatory, it would have been easy for him to say so. Thus, he believes the name is derogatory, but is too cowardly or fearful of losing money or fans to say so.

  63. justinhili says: Jun 21, 2014 6:21 PM


  64. jimcarnoven says: Jun 21, 2014 6:23 PM

    Most people who say it’s a slur are just homer fans of rival teams who want to punk, prank, and harass the Redskins. The Redskins have roughly 1/32nd of the fan base and thus should file for minority protection.

  65. harrisonhits2 says: Jun 21, 2014 6:24 PM

    Seems a bit cowardly to me

    All the me me me talk the last couple years about anything and everything and now suddenly he shuts his mouth ?

    Lame. Cowardly and lame.

  66. 760raptor says: Jun 21, 2014 6:40 PM

    The NAACP and United Negro College must change their names too. The terms “Colored People” and “Negro” offend me deeply.

  67. purpleppleeaters says: Jun 21, 2014 6:40 PM

    Can’t anyone find a native American football player to ask their opinion about the name?
    RG3’s opinion would have no more bearing than Archie Bunker’s!!!!!!!!!
    Quit trying to stir the pot.

  68. purpleppleeaters says: Jun 21, 2014 6:41 PM

    Mark Rypien? What say you?

  69. psly2124 says: Jun 21, 2014 7:26 PM

    Show me rg111 where you have been oppressed. You received a scholarship to Baylor now your making millions of dollars in salary and endorsements. So where have you been oppressed again?

  70. realitycheckbaby says: Jun 21, 2014 7:35 PM

    I know Mark Rypien.

    He’s never been comfortable with the name and would rather have it changed.

    But he also understands what the team did for him and he’s not going to come out and make a stink – at least not now.

  71. purpleppleeaters says: Jun 21, 2014 7:47 PM

    You no more speak for Mark Rypien, or any Native American folks, than RG3 does. Sorry.

    Folks truly need to stop speaking FOR Native Americans, and let them speak for themselves.

    Who is anyone else to tell anyone else, what someone else things………..or should think?

  72. t500000t says: Jun 21, 2014 7:54 PM

    Great article, PFT. I, and many of my fellow NFL fans WANT to know what’s happening with name. I hope you keep the discussion going.

  73. brownsmakemecrazy says: Jun 21, 2014 8:10 PM

    Lets put this issue on the next Presidential ballot. If after a total count of the votes, 50.001% of America thinks the name is offensive, then change the name, when 1% of the country thinks its offensive, then the name stays the Redskins. End of discussion. And no political commercials are allowed on the issue. Straight, no influence vote. I will guarantee you most of the country has no issue with the name being the Redskins

  74. iamdinguskhan says: Jun 21, 2014 8:27 PM

    RGlll comeback player of the year 2014.

  75. 700levelvet says: Jun 21, 2014 8:42 PM

    The media pushing for a name change should really ask Jim Brown his opinion. The old man hates everything, ask him how he felt playing against them. This way they will get the answers they so desperately want.

  76. kst2074 says: Jun 21, 2014 8:44 PM

    Couldn’t care less what Griffin’s opinion is. Ditto for Harry Reid.
    The nickname was never intended to racially slur anyone. Not 80 years ago. And certainly not now. I have no dog in this fight, other than I’m tired of liberals telling me what’s right and what’s wrong.
    How I’d enjoy seeing the Redskins win the Super Bowl. Not seeing Obama do the traditional White House salute to the winning Super Bowl team, one from the city in which he resides, would be nothing short of SPECIAL

  77. dinodimes says: Jun 21, 2014 8:53 PM

    Please dont bring RG3 to my games. Sincerely donald sterlingl

  78. qdog112 says: Jun 21, 2014 8:55 PM

    Packernet says:
    Jun 21, 2014 5:54 PM
    Could not have said it better avenger9800. Funny how it’s mostly white people that are offended.
    Brilliant, since there are mostly white people in America – right? Guess what, there are mostly white people saying keep the name too. Not earth shattering news. What;s your point?
    I have it on good authority that the NAACP will change its name as soon as they are granted a franchise.

  79. blackqbwhiterb says: Jun 21, 2014 9:33 PM

    If you want to change the name, buy the team with your hard earned money & change the name. But you have no right to force someone else to do what YOU think they ought to do….. Getting the gov’t to pile on sets a dangerous legal precedent…..those of you cheering the move will one day regret the precedent being set

  80. neemdaddy13 says: Jun 21, 2014 10:24 PM

    Most overrated active player in the NFL. Who cares what he thinks about anything? Good luck in an offense that’s not designed specifically for you. That trade destroyed the skins whatever color they are..

  81. bigtimebrownie says: Jun 21, 2014 11:49 PM

    Not a fan, but think he handled it correctly. In the polarized times we’re in, any other answe makes him a villain and detracts from the few people who have an honest intellectual argument.

  82. farvefromover says: Jun 22, 2014 12:09 AM

    Go Redskins

  83. ydousuk says: Jun 22, 2014 12:33 AM

    tick tock
    tick tock

  84. gammynomnom says: Jun 22, 2014 5:13 AM

    If we live in a country where the oppressed get college scholarships, a chance to play games on national TV to showcase their talents and a multi million dollar contract for that questionable talent, we must live in a pretty great country!

  85. trollingforjustice says: Jun 22, 2014 5:16 AM

    most Native Americans don’t see a problem with the name..its the bleeding heart politically righteous people who think they need to speak for others have blown this way out of proportion

  86. bonniebengal says: Jun 22, 2014 6:21 AM

    He has every right to keep his opinion to himself. Most likely he disagrees with his owner and doesn’t want to bring it up. As for the discussion on here, I think politicians have duped us into thinking that if we are Democrat or Republican, we must always support that “team” and all of their thoughts and ideas. I see the liberals and conservatives fighting on here, but it seems that the politicians have managed to use “team” loyalty to take away our independent thought. Must you be on one side or the other just because of your political party? I am sure that the only thing the politicians care about for this issue is making a political point and any leverage that gets them with voters. Personally I wish they would just change the name and put this issue to bed.

  87. natelan says: Jun 22, 2014 7:39 AM

    His answer is clear cut if you have a brain. He obviously doesn’t support the name.

    Anyone who supports the name is racist, ignorant or both.

  88. kev86 says: Jun 22, 2014 8:34 AM

    Why can’t he express his opinion? Is he afraid? Is he a hypocrite? What gives??

  89. revren10 says: Jun 22, 2014 9:09 AM

    Redskins fans suffer from oppression more then anything RG Bust has. A one dimensional quarterback who will never be anything more then another mike vick wannabe

  90. bonniebengal says: Jun 22, 2014 10:10 AM

    Here’s another thought, Harry Reid has been in office since 1987. Why wait so long to bring this issue up? Because it’s politics he cares about, not Native Americans. This is coming up because six months or so ago, the NFL refused to promote Obamacare. This is part of the punishment.

    That being said, I support changing the name because it is offensive. I don’t support uncaring politicians who are trying to use this issue for their own gain.

  91. lambeauwest says: Jun 22, 2014 10:13 AM

    When’s the last time a high profile athlete, especially a minority athlete in the prime of his career stand against something controversial? Did Tiger Woods stand up against women not being allowed to be members at Augusta National? What did Michael Jordan ever stand for other than the ole might buck?

    Do I expect RGIII to cut his own throat? But as the philosopher John Rambo once said, “Live for Nothing or Die for Something”

  92. surigaostraits says: Jun 22, 2014 10:23 AM

    do u notice all the ones for name change r democrats ? and 90% of Indians polled r ok with Redskins name. 83% of general public is ok too with name. Democrats like to tell other people how to live and think

  93. easyeddie says: Jun 22, 2014 11:02 AM

    Interesting all the negative comments about RGIII from posters hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

  94. obamareallysucks says: Jun 22, 2014 11:40 AM

    People should worry more about that lying weasel in the White House than a stupid nfl thing

  95. @Cereal_22 says: Jun 22, 2014 11:47 AM

    Translation, he’s opposed to their racist team name.

  96. oldbyrd says: Jun 22, 2014 12:33 PM

    How about The Tomahawks

  97. purpleppleeaters says: Jun 22, 2014 12:40 PM

    You can easily pick out the extremists, on this topic. They’re the ones that want to:

    1) Force someone to publicize their opinion on this topic.
    2) Tell them what their opinion should be.
    3) Beat them down if their opinion does not match their own.

    What is this, Nazi Germany?

  98. skinsfan91 says: Jun 22, 2014 1:04 PM

    The season just needs to get here already. I’m sick of hearing from these trolls and their running mouths. But will they eat crow when RGIII plays wonderfully? No, you can pretty much guarantee they won’t.

  99. rosstuckershair says: Jun 22, 2014 2:37 PM

    Typical Liberal thinking…

    Find everyone close to Snyder, like the Fed Ex CEO, now RG3..Anyone they can try to discredit and ruin their career and lives for even entertaining the thought of supporting this obvious racial injustice.

    The concessions company and the construction firm that built the place, all must be ferreted out and never be allowed to work again.

    It’s a shame they cannot put this type of effort over a partisan issue as IRS harassment..

  100. politicallyincorrect says: Jun 22, 2014 2:56 PM

    Hail to the Redskins!

    To those feigning opposition to the name and honoring Native Americans, may the bird of paradise fly over your head………………… and take a huge sheeeet!

  101. skins1970 says: Jun 22, 2014 3:25 PM

    If someone is offended by name of a team they really need to get professional help because that isn’t normal

  102. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Jun 22, 2014 5:22 PM

    By not speaking out in support of the 80 year old mascot of the team he plays for, RG3 would appear to have an issue with it. Best he keeps quiet for sure.

  103. gofor2with3pointlead says: Jun 22, 2014 5:28 PM

    You don’t have to go far to find discrimination. It is a malignancy that will probably never completely be removed society. What I find difficult to understand is why so many are eager to champion it in 2014 A.D.

  104. 3yardsndust says: Jun 22, 2014 6:18 PM

    If he has an opinion but is afraid to tell us what it is, that’s moral and intellectual cowardice. He could articulate an opinion that is dignified and thoughtful and not abrasive in any way to the team that employs him.

    If he does not have an opinion, he’s kind of dim. This man is the star quarterback for a team in the crosshairs of a media firestorm about what constitutes racism. Has it never occurred to him that he might be asked his opinion?

    Which is it?

  105. imnotsorryisaidthat says: Jun 22, 2014 7:48 PM

    jim Thorpe didn’t have a issue with it

  106. NoRespect says: Jun 23, 2014 7:22 AM

    In reference to the CNN piece (o.s.) Marc Randazza says “I think it’s a pretty dumb thing to call a football team.” I guess if we had a low opinion of Native Americans, then we would consider it dumb too, but we don’t.

    He also states “If Native Americans believe that “redskin” is offensive to them, then it is. Most people agree that it is about as offensive as using any other ethnic slur. I respect their position and their argument.”

    Where is his proof? NO where is the answer because nothing supports these statements. He should feel free to share his opinion, but not try to spout statements as fact, unless he has something to back it up.

  107. snandyder says: Jun 23, 2014 10:22 AM

    In a land of freedom we are held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness ~ RG3……………….. He has already answered the question

  108. corvusrex96 says: Jun 23, 2014 4:51 PM

    Teams have typically been named for peoples or animals that are fierce , noble or strong,
    There is no way that the redskins football team were named to incur injury or humiliation to Indians

  109. gpete1962 says: Jun 25, 2014 4:00 PM

    Now, Bobby three stix has a problem with the name?

Leave a Reply

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