The Redskins - One Step Closer To A New Name?

Earlier today, the Washington Redskins were stripped of their trademark registrations for their team name. This comes after an extended pissing contest between name-change advocates and the team's owner, Dan Snyder. When this issue surfaced in the past, Snyder vowed that he would never change the team name. However, with this latest strong-arm tactic by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, he might not have much of a choice.

This recent ruling is the result of a petition filed by five American Indians including Amanda Blackhorse, a Navajo activist. In Blackhorse vs, Pro-Football, Inc (the Washington Redskins legal name), the request was made to remove federal trademark protection from the Redskins on the grounds that the name is disparaging to American Indians. Today, a 2-1 ruling was delivered in favor of removing the trademark.

So, what does this now mean for Dan Snyder and his controversial team name? At the very least, it will create even more pressure for him to change the name. Advocates of the name change will certainly get a boost from today's ruling. And without the trademark protection, it will now be possible for anyone to use the team name and/or mascot without official permission or approval from the team.

But politics aside, is this really such a bad thing for Snyder? Think about it...Actually now, he's in a pretty good position. Although he previously vowed to never change the name, he can now legitimately claim that the government is forcing his hand and that he really has no choice. A change in team name and mascot will inevitably result in a dramatic increase in merchandise sales. As a result, Snyder can appease the race hustlers while saving face with the traditionalists. And as an added bonus, he will line his pockets with even more money. Cha-ching! Yeah, I think we see where this one is going.....

A bit of related trivia....The Redskins originated as the Boston Braves in 1932. When the team moved to Boston's Fenway Park the following year, the name was changed to the Redskins. In 1937, the Redskins moved to Washington.

Switching back to today's Board decision, I found it a bit odd that it was based a 2-1 vote. Two people can change 80 years of tradition by one simple vote? Why didn't they just flip a coin?

Aside from all of this, isn't it ironic that a person named Blackhorse is filing a claim against the Redskins for having a racially offensive name? I'll bet horses all over the world find her name highly offensive!

This latest story comes on the heels of infamous LA Clippers owner, Donald Sterling being stripped of his team due to racial remarks he made to his girlfriend. Whether through a private conversation or 80 years of tradition, anything that is deemed racist can have serious consequences for a sports team owner.

I'm not even a fan of the Washington Redskins, but I think this whole thing is a bunch of bullshit. The Redskins have been in existence since 1932 and now, all of a sudden, the name is offensive? Give me a break. What's next? Can we expect the Vatican to file a petition against the Saints?

While there are legitimate race issues worth fighting for, I don't think the Washington Redskins name is one of them. I see this as just another shakedown in the name of political correctness.....

kw

More Offensive NFL Teams

The controversy regarding the Redskins "offensive" name is still alive and well. But as I was thinking about it tonight, I realized that people might have it all wrong. If any team should be offensive to Indians, shouldn't it be the Cowboys? I mean, who was giving the Indians the most grief in the old westerns? It wasn't a burgundy and gold football team. It was the freggin' cowboys! And when we were kids, we didn't play football and Indians. No, indeed. We played Cowboys and Indians. So, instead of the Oneida Indian Nation putting pressure on Dan Snyder, maybe then should head to Dallas and have a talk with Jerry Jones.

Aside from the Redskins controversy, I also thought about how some of the other teams could be deemed offensive. For instance, what about the Giants? Couldn't their cockiness be considered just a bit insensitive to short people? Didn't they already suffer enough emotional abuse from Randy Newman?

And what about the Saints? Should the Vatican take offense? After all, this was the "saintly" team who put out bounties on opposing players. That sure doesn't very saint-like to me. I think the Pope should head to New Orleans and have a sit-down with the team.

Let's look at the St. Louis Rams. I'm sure there's a group of pissed-off mountain goats out there somewhere who don't want their name associated with a big city. By the way, has anyone ever seen a ram in St. Louis?

Why does Buffalo get away with calling their team the Bills? There's probably at least one guy named Bill who doesn't take too kindly to Buffalo using his name. He should petition the team to change their name to the Steves, Johns, Joes or Bobs.

The San Francisco 49ers.....why not give some love to a few of the other numbers? 

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers..... I wonder how those Somali pirates feel about this?

The Green Bay Packers? I'm not going to touch this one.

And regarding the Jaguars, there's probably a group of promiscuous, old women who have a problem with the name. Oops, sorry, I was thinking about cougars. Nevermind....

kw