rjrrzube

Washington NFL Franchise Retires Name and Logo

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

<snip>

 

Let's keep it focused on the Washington NFL franchise, everyone. We can discuss the Cleveland MLB team when they actually, officially make some kind of change. 

 

Also, close-up pictures of spiders give me the heebie-jeebies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

ProFootballTalk had a great article on a Trademark squatter that could make some of this more intere$ting. Certain names already "belong" to someone else, including Warriors that Snyder let lapse a few years ago.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/07/12/washington-trademark-squatter-adds-to-his-portfolio/

 

2 hours ago, DNAsports said:

Since new name suggestions have popped up that are just “Red[insert noun]”, I’ve felt each one is lazy, a cop out, and lacks overall creativity. I get the  basic reasoning behind them, but c’mon...

 

Theres also this:

 

 

 

42 minutes ago, lbj273 said:

2. The realtor that trademarked the various names is a genius and I hope he makes some money from Snyder to sell the trademark.


The trademark system in the United States is use-based, as opposed to purely registration-based. Registration of a trademark grants the registrant certain benefits - priority within the country's borders and notifying others that you've laid claim to said trademark - but it is not technically required. Under the American trademark system, you could use a mark without ever having registered it and still be deemed said mark's legal and valid owner... provided that you'd been using it in commerce. Which is undoubtedly why Mr. Macaulay has gone through the motions of not only registering his trademarks, but listing t-shirts, caps, mugs, and other merchandise for sale via his website.

That said, I've read interviews with Macaulay in which he's conceded that the action he's engaged in - let's call it what it is, domestic trademark-squatting - is a "long-shot" form of "high-risk investment" in which he eventually hopes that Daniel Snyder and/or the National Football League will pay him for one of the team names that he's preemptively trademarked. What little merchandise he's managed to sell amounts to a trickle of commercial activity. I have no doubt that attorneys for Snyder and the NFL are going to counter that Macaulay's "high-risk investment" amounts to a shakedown. When Macaulay's legal representation attempts to argue that their client truly trademarked the speculative Washington football team names with the aim of selling merchandise, they're going to wish that they didn't have to contend with such Macaulay utterances as:

"The only way I'll turn a profit is if the Washington Redskins or the NFL needs to buy one of my trademarks. [I'm] not really interested in making money selling products."

That's a pretty clear-cut concession on Mr. Macaulay's part that the form of "commerce" he's engaged in with his Washington football trademarks is intellectual property-related extortion. Hardly a "genius" move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


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


I just had one thought pop into my head, and I doubt anyone considers it, but what about the Washington Redhogs, given the often-used association used by fans? Either that, or something else pig-related?

Share this post


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

One suggestion that I read and liked was to not choose a new name immediately - let this breathe for awhile and let people get over the Redskins name being gone - and go nameless, logo-less for 1-2 years.  

In theory, this sounds practical.  In reality, it won't make a difference. 

 

North Dakota operated for a few years without a name in the spirit of putting the extra time into finding a permanent replacement. They still picked something almost everybody hated. At that point, it doesn't really matter.  

 

The fans who are dead set against this decision will be unmoved by any replacement moniker. My guess is, they'd be more likely to accept alternate names for their own children than for a beloved sports franchise.

 

It's true that time will help people get over a sports nickname change, but it'll take a lot more than one or two years. It'll take an entire generation.

 

It's an impossible task to expect any replacement to placate those opposed to change. But they still need to do it.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Washington's NFL team needs a name that...

 

1) Completely breaks from their former name and imagery depicting Native Americans.

 

2) Can retain the unique burgundy & gold color scheme the team has.

 

3) Will be popular with fans, sponsors, and communities, in a very divided nation where everything can be viewed as offensive.

 

4) Will re-establish strong corporate ties, perhaps bringing in new sponsorship opportunities

 

5) Fits well into the lyrics of the beloved "Hail to the Redskins" song.

 

There can be only one choice that can do all this.   I present to you the new Washington franchise in the NFL:

 

spacer.png

 

Hail to the WheatThins!!!!   (Hey, it is still better than the Ottawa RedBlacks.)

Share this post


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

(I hope this doesn't veer too much into the political side, but) I find it funny, but not entirely unsurprising, that after the product this team has put out on the field and everything Dan Snyder has done, the name change is where some people are drawing the line on not being a fan of the team anymore.

 

---

 

I do wonder how much of a slapdash rebranding we are going to immediately get because they didn't announce a new name. Training Camps are supposed to start at the end of month, so that's not a lot of time to change many things. They can remove the helmet decals, put a patch over the "Redskins" wordmark on the jerseys and just paint "Washington" in the endzones, but there's going to still be a lot of inherited branding still for this season.

 

I honestly think this upcoming season will probably still be the "Washington Redskins" in everything but name.

  

 

At least they don't appear to be considering "(adjective or verb) Hawks", which appears to have been the default change for a lot of Indigenous sports branding across all levels.

 

OTOH, maybe that's the default because it's a good solution.  It keeps a cohesive identity and retains the acceptable part of the tradition. I've been appalled by the Redskins name for over 30 years but I'd be fine with Redtails, an R logo, and otherwise the same.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incredibly, I’m surprised no potential names have popped up that reference the Potomac River.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, officeglenn said:

 

Let's keep it focused on the Washington NFL franchise, everyone. We can discuss the Cleveland MLB team when they actually, officially make some kind of change. 

 

Also, close-up pictures of spiders give me the heebie-jeebies.

 

Well, Washington Spiders sounds like a fun time. Heck, it kind of sounds like Snyders! It'd be funny if ol' Dan named the team after himself or used a noun close to his name.

 

Washington Snyders would be a step too far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redtails is the best choice, and it's not even close. It sounds great, it honors a great group of people, makes for cool imagery, and strokes Snyder and Rivera's military boners.

 

Warriors is generic and stupid, and completely alters the flow of the name.

 

Red Wolves is dumb and amateur.

 

 

As for changing colors, hell no. I'm glad they seem to be sticking with burgundy and gold. The colors are my most important connection to the team as a fan that has no connection to Washington DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WideRight said:

spacer.png

 

Hail to the WheatThins!!!!   (Hey, it is still better than the Ottawa RedBlacks.)

Cheez-its was sitting right there for you...

Share this post


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

Cheez-its was sitting right there for you...

 

But then the wheat-feather would make no sense.

 

But I could definitely get behind the Washington Cheez-its.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably best to change to a military theme, as I can't recall any instances where the military did anything offensive to Native Americans.

Share this post


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

In theory, this sounds practical.  In reality, it won't make a difference. 

 

North Dakota operated for a few years without a name in the spirit of putting the extra time into finding a permanent replacement. They still picked something almost everybody hated. At that point, it doesn't really matter.  

 

The fans who are dead set against this decision will be unmoved by any replacement moniker. My guess is, they'd be more likely to accept alternate names for their own children than for a beloved sports franchise.

 

It's true that time will help people get over a sports nickname change, but it'll take a lot more than one or two years. It'll take an entire generation.

 

It's an impossible task to expect any replacement to placate those opposed to change. But they still need to do it.  

 

I tend to agree.  If they have to go one year as "Washington" it makes sense but if they keep doing it, it'll almost seem like the organization is doing it as a protest to the fact that they were forced to change the name.


I think, again at the risk of crossing the line, that they'll have to be careful not to to appear to do an "FU" to the world.  Something like "Redhogs" (suggested above, probably as a nod to the fans) might even be seen as a way to keep part of the name alive. Certainly with Warriors.  Maybe even with anything that starts with "Red."  No, Red Tails is not a bad name but there's going to be a ton of nuance into how people respond to the name and how they read the motivation behind the selection.

Regarding the military, I could deal with something like Generals (in theory, without the existence of the Globetrotter punching bags) but I'd hope they don't try to pick a name that emulates the all the military theatrics that are being carried out prior to games.

 

The team is in a really difficult position.  Some of its hard core fan base is upset (a few will probably be relieved).  They'll also have to walk the tightrope of avoiding too similar, too different, too boring, too "out there" or "modern," too college, too minor league, etc.  As much as I don't like the name and it's time for it to go, I really don't want to see the team go teal and purple and be called the DC Express or something.  I want the fact that they've been around since the 1930s (?) to play a role...keep the colors and find a name that's got some dignity.  Red Tails is one of the better solutions I've heard thus far.

 

I'd be curious to hear from any fans of the team here...does this impact your fandom?  Is any team fan particularly happy or unhappy about this (I hope answer that question without getting into more is OK)?  I know we have had a couple of Indians fans who were glad to see Wahoo go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RedGolds is the new name count on it! I have registered a trademark on it just in case. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, for those old enough to remember the CFL expansion in the 1990's... Washington CFL Colts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine the DMVs in the DC region will require car owners to return their Redskins license plates for either the new Washington Football Club vanity license plates or switch to something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

"The only way I'll turn a profit is if the Washington Redskins or the NFL needs to buy one of my trademarks. [I'm] not really interested in making money selling products."
 

 

If I were litigating this, I'd figure out a way to include that quote in every single motion or brief I filed, regardless of the issue the brief addresses. And at trial, that quote would be blown up and put on a huge poster board for the jury to see.

 

I'm guessing any action would not get past summary judgment in favor of the Washington Football Club, so in the it depends on whether Washington and the NFL are willing to assert their rights or if they are willing to proverbially "negotiate with terrorists" and just pay a nuisance-level royalty while avoiding litigation.

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.