Students Weigh In on Washington Controversy

As part of Povich Center director George Solomon’s JOUR328B class, students are required to write blog entries on current sports topics in and around the area. The class was recently asked to write about the controversy surrounding the Redskins’ team name. Below is a selection of those blog entries.

To read all of the entries, click here. 

The Name Game

The biggest change head coach Mike Shanahan and owner Dan Snyder are considering this season is not quarterbacks after RGIII’s lackluster start to the season, or even their defensive line who has given up over 1,000 yards in just two games, but the team’s name and mascot.  In an era of heightened racial sensitivity and awareness, this comes as no surprise as many consider Redskins to be a derogatory name.

Those in favor of changing the name have vocally expressed their opinions unequivocally comparing the name to any more common racial slur.  However, recently the opinions of those opposed to the change often have been drowned by accusations of being insensitive, or worse, a racist.  As with any issue, both sides should be considered before conclusions or judgements are made.

The history of the Redskins’ name dates back to the 1930s, when owner George Marshall changed the name from the Boston Braves after the team moved from the stadium they shared with the Boston Braves baseball team.  Many believe that Marshall chose the name “redskin” to honor head coach, William Henry “Lone Star” Dietz, who claimed to be of Native American descent and brought several Native Americans he coached previously into the franchise.

The term “redskin” was not originally a derogatory term, but likely originated with a tribe in Newfoundland who would paint themselves red before heading into battle, much like RGIII and his colleagues today.  It was only used in a condescending manner during a brief time in the late 19th century and early 20th century.  It is now primarily referenced on ESPN and rarely used to negatively describe those of Native American descent.

Personally, I am not offended by this name, nor am I a Redskins fan.  I was not even aware that this name was considered derogatory until recently (forgive my ignorance when it comes to the Redskins, I have only paid attention to them when they are on the field with the Falcons).  Granted, I am several generations removed from my Native American heritage, and I am a diehard fan of another Native American-named team: the Braves, though I do empathize with the traditionalists who argue to keep the name simply for that reason.  As someone not personally affected by this issue of nomenclature, I defer to those, arguably the only ones, whose opinion matters, the Native Americans.  If the name does not truly celebrate bravery, honor and fortitude, as Redskins proponents claim, then it should be changed.  But if the Native Americans themselves are not even offended, I think Snyder and Shanahan should be concerned with living up to that heritage and winning a game.

–Lindsay Simpson

 

Should the Redskins change their name? 

This is a topic that I did not have much of an opinion on before being asked to write this post.

Mostly because I could see where both sides were coming from.

The last thing I ever want to do is offend someone, so if there is even the smallest percentage of people who find the name offensive I think a strong case can be made for changing it.

But then, there is a part of me that does believe in tradition and that some people should not be so uptight about certain subjects.

Which brought me to the Internet where I could read the opinions of other sports journalist whom I respect.

I came across a USA TODAY article from a couple of days ago by Christine Brennan about this very subject.

She wrote about how she has probably used the term Redskins thousands of times in her career but it never seemed wrong until recently.

Brennan wasn’t exactly sure why she had the sudden change of heart but she thinks it could be because of all the great reporting there has been over past year that has really brought the racism of the term to surface.

I can’t say I disagree. And as Brennan put so eloquently, if even only some Native Americans find the term racist, it’s racist.

So for a league that continues to grow into one of the biggest corporations in the world, I do not think it’s a good idea to have a team associate itself with a racist term, let alone identify themselves that way.

I also gave some thought to the word ‘change’ and why there was a traditional side of me who ever thought that keeping the name would be alright.

Change was the slogan of the most recently elected president. Change allows us to reconcile the mistakes of our past. Change is something that happens with time and that time has come for the Washington Redskins.

I understand fans won’t be too happy at first. But they’ll get over it. If there are fans out there that only support a team because of their name then they aren’t really worth calling fans anyway.

The Redskins will be doing Native Americans, the NFL, and our country a huge favor and will allow us to finally move on from this topic that has been of interest for way too long now.

– Patrick Donohue

 

What should we call them?

Growing up in the shadows of the New York sports scene, my interaction with the Washington Redskins was minimal. I had no affinity or connection to the team and still don’t, which is why up until a few weeks ago I was quite conflicted on how I felt about the changing of the teams name.

The name, clearly a racial slur, is quite offensive and should be changed as a sign of respect towards those whom it offends, but at the same time, changing the name, brand and marketing of a major NFL team would cost not only the team, but the league and sponsors millions upon millions of dollars in revenue. Initially, I was indifferent to the name, as many others were, due to the fact that I was not personally affected or offended by the name, but over the past couple of weeks, I have become more aware of the insensitivity of the slur and believe it should be changed.

By continuing to keep the name of the team, it almost glorifies using the derogatory slur in your everyday vocabulary. Though the term is racially insensitive, people associate it with the NFL rather than associating it with Native Americans and therefore use the terms without discretion or consequence. Changing the name would not only show respect towards those whom it offends, but it would also acknowledge to the public that being racially insensitive is never okay.

Making this name change could cost both Washington’s football team as well as the NFL millions of dollars, but at the same time allows the league and Dan Snyder the chance for a clean slate. Similarly to the Washington Nationals, changing the name would allow the team an opportunity to rebuild their brand, and make it more D.C. related like the Nationals and Capitals.

The concept of changing a sports team’s name is not a foreign idea in the U.S. Up until 1997, Miami University of Ohio used the Redskin as their mascot. In attempts to eliminate the ethnic stereotyping that the name implicates, the school became the Miami University Red Hawks.

The pressure to change the name has been gaining steam over the past few months. High profile journalists like Peter King and Christine Brennan have boycotted using the name and the Washington Post and Outside The Lines have published scathing editorials of the name. NFL Commissioner Rodger Goodell has even changed his stance saying that he would be open to a change.

With all the outside pressure mounting I truly believe that the days of the Washington Redskins are numbered, and who knows, maybe they will finally have some success on the field with a new name.

–Melissa Katz

 

Despite love for Redskins the name will be changed

I have grown up a Redskins fan.

My father was sitting at the 50-yard line when Lawrence Taylor broke Joe Theissman’s leg like a twig. It’s one of my dad’s favorite stories to tell, describing how the whole stadium heard his leg break and the silence that came after. One thing my dad never told me about was the origin of the Redskins’ name. Not like I ever asked about it, but my dad never told me the true meaning of the word redskin.

With all this talk (again) about the possibility of changing the Redskins name, I was selfishly sad. My mind went straight to how I grew up a fan of the Redskins, not the Warriors or the Washington franchise, but the Redskins. I was naive to what the Redskins name truly means. While I have grown to accept the name is a deragatory term, it really hit me how terrible the name is when I saw someone holding a sign before the Green Bay game on Sunday.

Here is the sign:

As a Redskins fan, one of the hardest things is to grasp the true understanding of the term redskin. It’s not an acceptable term to be used in everyday language, much like the N word. But I personally have not seen a single person who is directly offended by the term. Until I saw this fan on TV on Sunday. That person is directly offended as it refers to the scalps of his ancestors. Obviously around Washington D.C. there are so few Native Americans. But does that mean the name is not offensive to people outside of the DMV? Absolutely not. There is no getting around what the term redskin means to those of Native American decent.

While I am still ignorant to the entirety of the Redskins name and how widespread the hatred toward the name is, I understand the uproar. Dan Synder has to also, and I doubt he has not had any conversations inside the organization about what ultimately the right thing to do is for the Washington football team.

Ultimately, I believe 20 years from now, the Redskins name will have been long replaced.

By Tim Schwartz