After MLB pressures Cleveland Indians, Goodell sees no reason NFL will follow suit

AP

Major League Baseball has pressured the Cleveland Indians into retiring their Chief Wahoo logo, but the NFL has no plans to do the same with the Washington team and its controversial name.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said on ESPN Radio this morning that it remains up to team owner Dan Snyder, who has said repeatedly that he has no plans to change his team’s name.

“Dan Snyder has really worked in the Native American community to understand their perspective, and I think it’s really reflected in a Washington Post poll that showed that nine out of 10 Native Americans do not take that as disrespectful,” Goodell said. “I don’t see him changing that perspective.”

Goodell referenced a 2016 poll that asked Native Americans the question, “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive, or doesn’t it bother you?” The response was overwhelming: 90 percent said it does not bother them, 9 percent found it offensive, and 1 percent said they had no opinion on the matter.

That poll gave Snyder some cover at a time when the team’s name had become a major national controversy. The story seems to be getting less attention recently, and even if there’s more scrutiny on the NFL as a result of MLB’s actions, neither Snyder nor Goodell seems inclined to make a change.

68 responses to “After MLB pressures Cleveland Indians, Goodell sees no reason NFL will follow suit

  1. One is a cartoon carciture. One is a factual respectful image. Why would these 2 be in the same boat. How about the blackhawks logo? Why is Dan Snyder being singled out?

  2. I think everyone is offended and the name should be changed. The browns need to rebrand and change public opinion about their awful team.

  3. As you stated–the vast majority of Native Americans do not find it offensive. The Redskins also won their case in court. Where is the controversy here? Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

  4. One is a cartoon carciture. One is a factual respectful image. Why would these 2 be in the same boat. How about the blackhawks logo? Why is Dan Snyder being singled out?

    ______________________________

    I don’t think they’re upset with Washington’s logo as much as the name – something considered to be a racial slur. Just substitute any other racial slur for another race and ethnicity and see how that flies.

    And, the fact that its been that name for a long time is a weak argument. If something is wrong, the fact that you’ve been doing it for a long time is not a validation for continuing to do it.

  5. Just say Redskins and get over it. You not saying Redskins isn’t going to change anything, even if it makes you feel better.

  6. This one is so simple. The Cleveland Indians is just as inappropriate as the Anaheim Asians, and the Washington Redskins is just as off-putting as the New York Blackskins. Alternative names that would respect and hopefully celebrate aboriginal communities would be the Cleveland Tribe and the Washington Bravehearts. The logos can still maintain a cultural theme, but without the head shot. This is less about racism and being “offended” and more about consistency across identifiable people.

  7. He says this only because there are not any native American players trying to rile up social media and affect the NFL’s bottom line. Which is all they care about.

  8. I question the legitimacy of that poll. If you don’t, you’re an idiot. We all know who Dan Snyder is. But at the same time Native American communities face much bigger problems than the name of a football team, like our government stealing their land some 300 years after we originally stole their land & tried to kill them all off.

  9. kd75 says:

    January 30, 2018 at 10:02 am

    What about the drunken leprechaun looking for a fight that Notre Dame uses?
    ——————————————————————————-

    He’s white. Cant offend white people, its impossible.

  10. While I believe in political correctness to some extent, its become almost a disease in this country. People have become so thin skinned and race to be offended at almost anything. Its weakening the country rather than achieving what its supposed to.

    There has to be a middle ground somewhere. Pushing PC to the point of insanity helps no one.

  11. “That poll gave Snyder some cover at a time when the team’s name had become a major national controversy.”

    Cover? Uh, the guy did his due diligence and the only people crying are the media. My God, when will you people realize you are NOT the majority in this country? You have a website that is supposed to be about sports, which is the only reason I’m here. I just want updates on things I care about, you’re politics are not something I care about.

  12. I know PFT essentially started the whole name-change movement, but calling it a “major national controversy” is over-selling it a bit, don’t you think? It gained national attention, sure. But major national controversy?

    Just let it die, already. It was a valiant effort. This should be a lesson to whites everywhere that us minorities do not need you to tell us what to be offended by. K thx

  13. kd75 says:
    January 30, 2018 at 10:02 am
    What about the drunken leprechaun looking for a fight that Notre Dame uses?

    It might be because a lot of us who are (of at least Semi-Irish decent) are Proud to be depicted as drunken leprechauns.
    Joke Time:
    An Irishman walks past a bar…

    See? LOL!

  14. What about the drunken leprechaun looking for a fight that Notre Dame uses?

    ————————————————-

    Read this article about Nortre Dame. The answer is that the school has engaged Irish people from the get-go. The school’s history runs deep in Irish and Catholic tradition. You cannot say the same about the Cleveland Indians or Washington Redskins.

    https://scholastic.nd.edu/issues/is-fighting-irish-offensive/

    This isn’t about left or right, Dem or Rep, white or other. It’s about being consistent and consent. The California Caucasians is dumb; therefore, the Cleveland Indians is just as dumb. Not sure why that’s so hard to understand.

  15. “I don’t think they’re upset with Washington’s logo as much as the name – something considered to be a racial slur. Just substitute any other racial slur for another race and ethnicity and see how that flies.

    And, the fact that its been that name for a long time is a weak argument. If something is wrong, the fact that you’ve been doing it for a long time is not a validation for continuing to do it.”

    See that’s the thing, it’s NOT a racial slur. It was a term native American chiefs used in reference to members of their own tribes. Chiefs often publicly addressed their own people using the word, and also used it when speaking to white settlers and referring to their own tribes.

    It’s not a slur until someone uses it with malice in their heart. It’s a (fairly accurate) word.

    Please stop telling us what to be offended by.

  16. The left spends their entire lives seeing everything through race. That in and of itself is racist. People are sick of it and they will continue to lose because they have nothing left but to divide people.

  17. savethebs says:
    January 30, 2018 at 10:08 am
    I question the legitimacy of that poll. If you don’t, you’re an idiot. We all know who Dan Snyder is. But at the same time Native American communities face much bigger problems than the name of a football team, like our government stealing their land some 300 years after we originally stole their land & tried to kill them all off.

    ————————-
    IKR? We have treated them so shabbily that a sports team name or logo has gotta be way down the list. Its almost insulting to get all worked up about adressing the silly little things while ignoring the bigger ones.

  18. Liberals simply never admit when they lose. The next seven years are going to be blissfully painful for them.

  19. @ harrisonhits2

    Well said, political correctness is like a disease spreading all over this country, and it’s only getting worse…

  20. The Cleveland Indians logo was very disrespectful. The Redskins logo is more honorable. I dont think their logo needs to change, but their nickname needs to be changed. Name the team after a great Native American tribe or something. “Red-Skins” is terrible.

  21. I don’t think they’re upset with Washington’s logo as much as the name – something considered to be a racial slur. Just substitute any other racial slur for another race and ethnicity and see how that flies.

    And, the fact that its been that name for a long time is a weak argument. If something is wrong, the fact that you’ve been doing it for a long time is not a validation for continuing to do it.
    ———–
    You and a lot of commenters on here need to brush up on actual history. As a direct bloodline of the Cherokee tribe, a Redskin was a native american who wore warpaint. We are proud of heritage and our family. We are proud of the name Redskin as well. Sjws need to find something else to whine about.

  22. 49ersfury says:
    January 30, 2018 at 10:41 am
    The Cleveland Indians logo was very disrespectful. The Redskins logo is more honorable. I dont think their logo needs to change, but their nickname needs to be changed. Name the team after a great Native American tribe or something. “Red-Skins” is terrible.
    ————
    Redskins is not their nickname. Thats their name. “Skins”, “hogs” would be a nickname. Again, Redskin refers to warpaint. But here’s a tissue for you to dry your eyes.

  23. “It’s not a slur until someone uses it with malice in their heart. It’s a (fairly accurate) word.”

    For younger people I can understand that. As an older guy (59) who grew up watching Saturday westerns in the 1960s I was constantly exposed to the use of redskin as a racial slur in those shows / movies, along with quite a few other negative terms.

  24. harrisonhits2 says:
    January 30, 2018 at 10:19 am
    While I believe in political correctness to some extent, its become almost a disease in this country. People have become so thin skinned and race to be offended at almost anything. Its weakening the country rather than achieving what its supposed to.

    There has to be a middle ground somewhere. Pushing PC to the point of insanity helps no one.
    ________________________________

    The conspiracy side of me would say this is done on purpose. Keep the lower and middle classes divided so that they won’t combine forces and threaten the power of the ruling and corporate elite.

  25. The NFL has managed the rare feat of both being the most conservative and socially regressive of all American pro sports leagues, while also offending huge swaths of the most conservative and socially regressive elements of the population.

    Another feather in Goodell’s cap, I suppose. Yeah, they give raises for that now.

  26. Those that cry that political has taken over the country good, keep crying. I assure those that make those statements are white privileged people who have never experienced any oppression, racism, bigotry. Why should society continue to let you use those racist words?

  27. Not sure it’s an issue of Native Americans being offended as much as the media being offended that Native Americans aren’t offended after the media has told them they need to be offended

  28. I was on the side of “get over it…the Redskins name is not offensive” for a long time. I had my DNA tested and learned that I am 17% Native American. I remain not offended.

  29. Cleveland did not change their name and will only take a logo off their shirts (they will protect their trademark and continue sell goods with Chief Wahoo)- but not until they play 162 games (+ postseason?). Besides, I wonder who with Irish blood is offended by the Notre Dame’s fighting drunk as their logo,

  30. Notre Dame’s “Fighting Irish” nickname has historical ties to the Civil War as the Union Army’s Irish Brigade had a beloved chaplain, Fr. William Corby, who would later become President of Notre Dame University. At Fr. Corby’s funeral in 1897, his casket was carried and escorted in the funeral procession by veterans of the Irish Brigade. Spectators looking to view the casket remarked that the Fighting Irish was accompanying Fr. Corby’s casket and that was the beginning of the nickname being associated with a Catholic college with a French name.

  31. Sure the name redskins has been around forever — so has the “N” word to describe African Americans. I think the logo is respectful, but I fail to see how anyone can look at the name “redskins” from 10,000 feet and not see that it’s racist.

  32. savethebs says:
    .
    I question the legitimacy of that poll. If you don’t, you’re an idiot. We all know who Dan Snyder is. But at the same time Native American communities face much bigger problems than the name of a football team, like our government stealing their land some 300 years after we originally stole their land & tried to kill them all off.
    =======================================================

    Yet you choose to continue living on land you consider stolen.

  33. purpleguy says:

    Sure the name redskins has been around forever — so has the “N” word to describe African Americans. I think the logo is respectful, but I fail to see how anyone can look at the name “redskins” from 10,000 feet and not see that it’s racist.
    =======================================================

    Then why is the Red Mesa High team called the Redskins? That’s on a Navajo reservation.

  34. Wow, the ‘let’s do everything like 1913’ MLB is more progressive than the NFL. Which is funny because the NFL obviously learned nothing about the fall of the MLB as the #1 sport because they are acting just like they did before their fall. Refusing to change because they think the king of the mountain dictates to the people, not respond to them.

  35. I’m of the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe and was never polled to find out what I think of the name and I’ve never met anyone else who was asked about it either. In the years since I’ve asked hundred from here and other tribes and nobody was asked and nobody knew anyone that was asked. We all find it offensive, the name and not being asked.

    The 9 out of 10 statistic is a LIE.

  36. iamkillerfin says:
    January 30, 2018 at 9:46 am

    It has been the REDSKINS since 1952 LEAVE IT ALONE!!!
    _________________________________________________________________________

    I’m sure it’s just a typo, but it was 1932, not 1952.

  37. gauchosporlife says:
    January 30, 2018 at 11:20 am
    Those that cry that political has taken over the country good, keep crying. I assure those that make those statements are white privileged people who have never experienced any oppression, racism, bigotry. Why should society continue to let you use those racist words?

    3 29 Rate This
    ……………………
    I am happy to answer your question: Because we live in a free country. The Constitution gives us Freedom of Speech, which does protect (despite what some very uninformed people think) controversial and provocative speech. You do not have a right to not be offended, sorry…Any country that can make a multi billion dollar entity change their name because a small fraction of people pretend to take offense to it is a Communist country that will abuse it’s citizen’s rights arbitrarily and often. It really shows a lack of critical thinking that people advocate for speech to be policed; if they can change a team name because it might be offensive to some, imagine what else they can do?

  38. If we’re going to establish precedent, what is the % of individuals that have to claim to be offended in order to initiate change to a team name or logo?

    If we get enough people “offended” by the previous actions of Philip Francis Thomas (PFT) who gave money to the confederate army in the 19th century, maybe we can get PFT to change their name to another set of initials.

    I’m glad Dan has stood his ground, and fought to keep the Redskins name alive. If we’re going to make decisions based on how 9% of a group of people say they feel, then we are really going down a path of no return.

  39. I think the officials should not wear black & white stripes,
    they are giving the Zebras a bad name……..

  40. ee00ee says:
    January 30, 2018 at 1:13 pm

    “I’m of the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe and was never polled to find out what I think of the name and I’ve never met anyone else who was asked about it either. In the years since I’ve asked hundred from here and other tribes and nobody was asked and nobody knew anyone that was asked. We all find it offensive, the name and not being asked.

    The 9 out of 10 statistic is a LIE.”

    He said, she said. What about the logo/name of the football team perpetuates your social, economic environment?

  41. I find it offensive that people are so offended by the littlest thing that it invades my rights.
    I believe that there are real problems in the world that need real solutions.
    Besides, historical research dictates that this term was most likely to refer to the color of war paint used…

    Idk, maybe all African Americans should protest the term black, or whites can file grievances on behalf of being called white.

    Or we can focus on crap that matters to us

  42. I don’t think there’s much reason to raise a fuss about Indians, Braves, Chiefs, etc. if they are NOT accompanied by insulting caricatures. That’s no different than naming the Vikings or the 49ers. The names of individual tribes should be tribal property, used only under a licensing agreement that pays the tribe. This white guy can’t get used to “Redskins,” though. I agree the wishes of Native Americans should govern here, but a “redskin” to most settlers, pioneers, and soldiers meant a nuisance you shot, not a human being you respected.

  43. With no Chief Wahoo and Lebron leaving soon, the city of Cleveland will be left with….the Browns. Jeez, how much more can a city take? Factory of Sadness indeed…

  44. iamkillerfin says:
    January 30, 2018 at 9:46 am
    It has been the REDSKINS since 1952 LEAVE IT ALONE!!!
    *****************************************************
    Let’s see, what else was popular in 1952? Oh yea, WHITE ONLY drinking fountains. And people of a certain color being forced to ride in the back of the bus. And state colleges that wouldn’t allow some folks to get an education. Those were some good times back then for you. They were also racist. Good to see how equating 1952 values to an argument today fails. But a 3-1 ratio of folks here think that’s a good idea. Sad.

  45. My father was killed by agent orange…. schools like syracuse and tennessee offend me deeply and it makes me uncomfortable to walk down the street seeing people wear clothing supporting such institutions. Speaking for the millions of Americans affected by that horrible chapter in our history, i call for all colleges with orange as their predominant school color to immediately change to PINK
    So that I am not uncomfortable to walk the streets of Nashville (should i ever decide to vacation there)!!!!!!!!!

  46. jcashman23 says:

    I am happy to answer your question: Because we live in a free country. The Constitution gives us Freedom of Speech, which does protect (despite what some very uninformed people think) controversial and provocative speech. You do not have a right to not be offended, sorry…Any country that can make a multi billion dollar entity change their name because a small fraction of people pretend to take offense to it is a Communist country …
    ***************************************************************
    Here’s a person (jcashman23) who misunderstands the Constitution. To be clear, a private entity (the NFL) can tell it’s members to wear spinner hats and call each other Mr. Willy Worm if they want. If you refuse, you get kicked out. The First Amendment does not apply to private groups. Only the government is prevented from limiting your speech. Private groups can limit it all they want. That’s why they are private groups. Simply put, you don’t have a right to be a member if you aren’t willing to play be their rules.

  47. When are people going to claim the Patriots, Vikings, and Raiders have racist logos because they also portray groups of people in the past? Their skin color is not accurate either. White people aren’t literally white as snow.

  48. Rdog says:
    January 30, 2018 at 4:43 pm

    When are people going to claim the Patriots, Vikings, and Raiders have racist logos because they also portray groups of people in the past?
    —————

    Ummmmm, never. What does the time period have to do with anything?

Leave a Reply

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