Redskins No More?

Photo credit to ProFootballMock

The topic of Washington’s nickname has arrived on the national stage this offseason for the first time in recent memory. At the very least, it is the first time I have seen articles about it regularly appear on NFL.com. I decided to do a project about it for one of my journalism courses but when I sat down to write my script I found myself writing it more like a blog and having to undo that. Still, I want to get some of my thoughts out there.

For starters, know that I don’t really care what the outcome of all this is. If the Redskins do change their nickname, I will still root for them just the same. All I really hope is that they choose a better name than the Pelicans. The Pelicans?!? Seriously, New Orleans?

The Redskins’ franchise began in 1932 up in Boston. Their nickname for that first season was the Braves, but they changed the nickname to the Redskins in 1933. I could not find a definitive answer on why, but my guess is to distinguish itself from the Boston Braves baseball team.

The nickname, at least in my opinion, is meant to be a tribute to American history. Think about where the franchise began, in Boston, not far from Plymouth. Jamestown came first, but when history classes teach about Native Americans and newcomers working together for the first time, they tell the story of the Pilgrims and Squanto at Plymouth.

I remember vividly a field trip I took when I was seven or eight. I went to Plymouth and we went to a historical site where there were Native Americans in what looked like a typical Native American village from the time of the Pilgrims. I remember asking a question and using the term ‘Indian’ while asking the question. The man who replied was very upset and I still remember that and am very careful not to refer to Native Americans as Indians. Indians are from India; Native Americans are the original inhabitants of the New World.

Yet the same issues have never been brought up concerning the Cleveland Indians’ nickname, at least not on a national stage. In both situations, that of the Redskins and that of Cleveland’s baseball team, the intention was never to offend anyone. Why would a professional sports team intentionally offend a race of people?

Perhaps a name change is a much-too-small price to pay for the racism that was inherent in the franchise when George Preston Marshall was the owner. But that is a completely different issue and I tend to tune out those who bring this argument into the mix.

The Redskins have not been consistently good in two decades. There have been countless opportunities to make derogatory comments about Native Americans and ‘Redskins’ out of frustration from the team’s lack of success. Yet I have never heard of such comments being made. Nobody looks at the team name and immediately thinks of Native Americans. The team’s logo, I can’t say the same for. Maybe the Skins should go back to an old logo, like the one to the left.

As for surveys, who knows what those results mean. The most recent surveys show that only as many as 9% of Native American’s find Washington’s nickname offensive. But those results could be skewed by people claiming to have Native American blood even though they don’t. As unfortunate as it is, that does happen.

In any case, my support of the team will not change in any way whether the nickname changes or not. But in an age when we are trying to move past race, it would be a shame to change a sports team’s nickname because people are focusing on its racial significance rather than its historical significance.

‘Like’ my blog’s Facebook page and follow me on Twitter, @cpuffnfl, to keep up with new blog posts as I publish them throughout the offseason. If there is a topic having to do with the NFL that you would like me to write a blog post about, don’t hesitate to bring it to my attention and I will try to write something up.