rjrrzube

Washington NFL Franchise Retires Name and Logo

Recommended Posts

How did schools like Arkansas State, North Dakota, and Louisiana-Monroe handle this situation? Like their fans wearing gear? Seems like whatever policy they had at Ark State was laxed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

Another advantage of going Redtails: potentially getting some sort of secondary logo with a P-51. 

 

I would hope the P-51 would be the primary logo, using it on the helmet in a similar fashion to the spear.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, burgundy said:

 

I would hope the P-51 would be the primary logo, using it on the helmet in a similar fashion to the spear.

 

Pay the Barnstormers for some goggles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chakfu said:

Do you think they'll just remove the logo from the helmets this year and do a full revamp in a year or.two?  Maybe a simple R if the new name starts with R?

If this team were smart they would have had a team name and logo ready to go in the event that a name change was necessary. This team isn't smart so it's no surprise they're caught with their pants down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

How did schools like Arkansas State, North Dakota, and Louisiana-Monroe handle this situation? Like their fans wearing gear? Seems like whatever policy they had at Ark State was laxed.

 

North Dakota has no such rules prohibiting Fighting Sioux gear, and the stands are filled with the stuff. I was back in town last November on a hockey night, and the sports bar where I was eating dinner was filled with people in Sioux jerseys who were headed to Engelstad Arena. 

 

The UND situation could be an outlier; it adopted a moniker that was safe and generic and easy to ignore (almost by design, it seems.) f the Redskins come out with something unique and strong, it won't easily replace Redskins to most fans, but it might help the old name fade away a bit more quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tz1IrmB.png

 

I would not put it below Snyder to do this.

 

1 hour ago, goalieboy82 said:

anyway, wouldn't surprise me if they had something in the pipeline already to go in case they needed to change there name at a moment's notice.  

The fact that Internet Sleuths haven't found any names trademarked by Snyder and the fact that he has been vehemently denied even considering a change leads me to believe the answer is no.

 

58 minutes ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

 

On that point, I know that the University of Utah will not allow you to wear anything with feathers, or a head dress, or anything Native American related or you will be kicked out of the stadium. Would't Washington need a similar policy? Because it seems to me that if you keep the colors and history, only remove Redskins, and allow fans to keep wearing Redskins gear... then what are we talking about? I'm defiantly on the side that Redskins needs to go, but it would seem that there are a lot of opportunities for "fans" to protest the name change and continue to wear Redskins gear and I would think there needs to be a policy to prevent that. 

Newsflash: NFL gear is expensive. If they went this route I think they would have to have some sort of trade-in policy, like someone mentioned earlier.

 

26 minutes ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

How did schools like Arkansas State, North Dakota, and Louisiana-Monroe handle this situation? Like their fans wearing gear? Seems like whatever policy they had at Ark State was laxed.

I can't speak for the others, but I definitely see a lot of Fighting Sioux gear and now that I think of it, I don't think I've ever seen anyone wearing a Fighting Hawks one. Granted I've never to a game in Grand Forks, but I still see them at Wild and occasionally Gopher games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

Washington Pigskins

 

Football. Check. 

Hog related. Check. 

Unique. Check. 

Tons of logo and mascot options. Check. 

Still the skins? Yes. 

 

As cheekily-but-wisely proposed by Washington City Paper all the way back in 2012. Also the first outlet that I think banned the actual name as a matter of house style, which leads me to

 

1 hour ago, the admiral said:

Washington Deadspins in honor of the bloggers who were too precious to type out that nasty old name.

 

Considering how many writers and outlets joined them in the past year, unofficially or officially, this is probably not the "but what about cancel culture" hill to die on, in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see it already detracting into the "what constitutes as a viable Native American mascot name" which is how these get so off topic that threads get shut down.

 

Should really try to keep it on the possible names rather than other teams, the "why" and other things that lead to those conversations.

 

As far as name speculation so far, I do like Warriors even if it's generic/basic/simple/expected.  Redtails just doesn't seem to work for me.  I think Americans could work but you run into the issues bring up about the Nationals existing, why Seattle won't choose Metropolitans, etc. Redwolves is certainly a hot runner that seems to have come out of knowwhere.  It'd be great if they could resurrect Federals.  But being a USFL team, you know there'd be bad blood there due to the lawsuit. Generals would be good and I recall hearing that the Globetrotters would be willing to sell it. But literally being the identity of a team designed to lose, as funny as it'd be, I doubt the NFL team would want that history.

 

Another thought as far as DC-related could be Monuments or Representatives (Reps). As much as Potomacs sounds great, it still leads to Native American territory and they should be as far away from that as possible.

 

It's going to be exciting speculation to see what they come up with!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goalieboy82 said:

like the Golden State Warriors:

last time they had Native American imagery was 1969:

 

 

I tried to sneak this into a previous topic before the mods broke up the party, so I'll say it again here. I don't think Washington will get the pass that Golden State did, for this exact reason. For a non-zero faction of the "change the name" crowd, that name is still going to represent a wink-wink callback to the mascotization of indigenous peoples at this point. If they want the controversy to go away they need to not use a name that can sound Native, even if it's a well-intentioned one.

 

The NBA Warriors skirted the issue since nobody really cared in 1969, especially not for a basketball team and one that was essentially nomadic at that point. Better yet, the pivot to the cable-car and bridge-centric hyperlocal branding ended up being the most successful brand in franchise history, so they have permanent plausible deniability on the generic-Warriors front that Washington won't get. (The flipside is, I get the sense that Golden State doesn't seem to be linked in the public mind with the franchise history in Philadelphia, including Wilt's 100 point game and the first-ever NBA championship. How much of that is due to moving and how much is due to burying the Yahoo-esque racist logo, who knows.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

I tried to sneak this into a previous topic before the mods broke up the party, so I'll say it again here. I don't think Washington will get the pass that Golden State did, for this exact reason. For a non-zero faction of the "change the name" crowd, that name is still going to represent a wink-wink callback to the mascotization of indigenous peoples at this point. If they want the controversy to go away they need to not use a name that can sound Native, even if it's a well-intentioned one.

 

Yeah, Washington Warriors is a terrible idea.

 

12 minutes ago, Digby said:

The NBA Warriors skirted the issue since nobody really cared in 1969, especially not for a basketball team and one that was essentially nomadic at that point. Better yet, the pivot to the cable-car and bridge-centric hyperlocal branding ended up being the most successful brand in franchise history, so they have permanent plausible deniability on the generic-Warriors front that Washington won't get.

 

Marquette also realized that they wouldn't get plausible deniability with keeping "Warriors," hence the "Golden Eagles" and that weird stint with "Gold" that we like to ignore.

 

12 minutes ago, Digby said:

(The flipside is, I get the sense that Golden State doesn't seem to be linked in the public mind with the franchise history in Philadelphia, including Wilt's 100 point game and the first-ever NBA championship. How much of that is due to moving and how much is due to burying the Yahoo-esque racist logo, who knows.)

 

Most of that is moving, Wilt barely playing the Bay Area, and the team being irrelevant for most of the David Stern era.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FroBroStudio said:

Reps (Represenatives)

 

Hey, this is a great one!  It goes thematically with Washington as well as Federals does, and has the advantage of beginning with R.  I don't like Red Wolves or Redtails at all; but I really like Reps.

They could use this helmet:

Vince Lombardi put in a request for a helmet change with the NFL ...

 

...but without the feathers, which are hidden in this angle.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said:

Washington Union.

 

Interesting.  This works as a direct rebuke to the apologists for the Confederacy.

But, if they are going to use a singular name, I'd favour Washington Republic, as it has the R.  Still, I wouldn't want to see a singular name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Pharos04 said:

I can see it already detracting into the "what constitutes as a viable Native American mascot name" which is how these get so off topic that threads get shut down.

 

Should really try to keep it on the possible names rather than other teams, the "why" and other things that lead to those conversations.

 

As far as name speculation so far, I do like Warriors even if it's generic/basic/simple/expected.  Redtails just doesn't seem to work for me.  I think Americans could work but you run into the issues bring up about the Nationals existing, why Seattle won't choose Metropolitans, etc. Redwolves is certainly a hot runner that seems to have come out of knowwhere.  It'd be great if they could resurrect Federals.  But being a USFL team, you know there'd be bad blood there due to the lawsuit. Generals would be good and I recall hearing that the Globetrotters would be willing to sell it. But literally being the identity of a team designed to lose, as funny as it'd be, I doubt the NFL team would want that history.

 

Another thought as far as DC-related could be Monuments or Representatives (Reps). As much as Potomacs sounds great, it still leads to Native American territory and they should be as far away from that as possible.

 

It's going to be exciting speculation to see what they come up with!

 

I don't think anybody with the league, at this point, really cares about a 35-year-old lawsuit. I'd be more offended by the fact that the Washington Federals were terrible: 7-29 during their two seasons of existence in Washington, before shuffling off to Orlando, where they were only slightly better for one season (5-13).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

How did schools like Arkansas State, North Dakota, and Louisiana-Monroe handle this situation? Like their fans wearing gear? Seems like whatever policy they had at Ark State was laxed.

With a college, I think it might be easier.  1) crowds at those schools are not as big.  Secondly, I would assume their fans attending games are most likely to be current students and alumni?  So, the current students turn over every 4 years.  Freshmen come in and buy their school sweatshirts/t-shirts etc. I would think alumni who are attending games are more likely to be the type who would support the school in what it decides in terms of the name, so is less likely to protest by continuing to wear the old logos/names. 

 

I have lived in the NY Metro area my whole life.  I was in HS when St Johns changed from the Redmen to the Red Storm.  I'm 44 now and cant remember the last time I saw any St Johns Redmen stuff although their following is not all that big.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Interesting.  This works as a direct rebuke to the apologists for the Confederacy.

But, if they are going to use a singular name, I'd favour Washington Republic, as it has the R.  Still, I wouldn't want to see a singular name.

I like the sound of it, too, though it would become instantly co-opted by Republicans, which would lead to half of America hating the team. 

 

But it would certainly represent present-day America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

I tried to sneak this into a previous topic before the mods broke up the party, so I'll say it again here. I don't think Washington will get the pass that Golden State did, for this exact reason. For a non-zero faction of the "change the name" crowd, that name is still going to represent a wink-wink callback to the mascotization of indigenous peoples at this point. If they want the controversy to go away they need to not use a name that can sound Native, even if it's a well-intentioned one.

 

The NBA Warriors skirted the issue since nobody really cared in 1969, especially not for a basketball team and one that was essentially nomadic at that point. Better yet, the pivot to the cable-car and bridge-centric hyperlocal branding ended up being the most successful brand in franchise history, so they have permanent plausible deniability on the generic-Warriors front that Washington won't get. (The flipside is, I get the sense that Golden State doesn't seem to be linked in the public mind with the franchise history in Philadelphia, including Wilt's 100 point game and the first-ever NBA championship. How much of that is due to moving and how much is due to burying the Yahoo-esque racist logo, who knows.)

I agree.  The Redskins need a name without any connection to Native Americans, they do not have the "lee-way" that the Warriors did.  If the Blackhawks were every pressured, they could change the logo and keep the name, I think it way beyond the point of no return for the Redskins.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

I like the sound of it, too, though it would become instantly co-opted by Republicans, which would lead to half of America hating the team. 

 

But it would certainly represent present-day America.

The Washington Democratic Republicans. Ironic because George Washington was basically a Federalist while being nominally non-partisan. Also it would be a :censored: name which is what Dan Snyder deserves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.