wonderbread Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Bravehearts is certainly an odd choice. But despite the current name that it's associated with, the logo they use now doesn't seem particularly harmful and might work well with this new name - even if it isn't a particularly good logo. I wonder if that was a deliberate thing on their part, changing the name to something less offensive without taking a massive risk with a completely new identity package.Why not go back to the original nickname of Braves?Because the Atlanta Braves might sue I'm actually a fan of returning to the Braves name. Granted, I too don't know if it would be considered offensive, but it's much less offensive than Redskins. I think that some Native American-themed teams like the Utah Utes and Atlanta Braves have done well in reducing direct Native American imagery, and the Redskins, by going to Braves or Warriors, could do the same with either placing a W in the drum and feathers logo or going with the spear.how is a name for a native american warrior offensive, if anything it's showing respect to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I wish there was a good way to convey that the Redskins term references the red war paint warriors wore on their faces during battle, that struck terror into their enemies. I heard that explanation but have never had it confirmed.Regardless, that explanation is one I'd run with if I were the Redskins brass. But Washington Red War Paint doesn't have the same ring. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadojoker Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I'm against Bravehearts...sounds like Atlanta braves (already mentioned)... I like Redtails after airplanes and movie however I could see this getting turned into a sensitive debate as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MellowTheMyth Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 If they were to rebrand, it should be Redhawks. Their nickname becomes a bird, they keep red at the beginning, and has a nice ring to it. Only thing is it would be weird because that was the name of a team in Blitz: The League. Probably wouldn't matter since Midway went bankrupt and I have no idea where the rights to that game are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midway Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Ummm I have a decent amount of money in the bank, geez...Anyway what about something more along the lines of the Redhogs if they wanna keep red in the name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC in Da House w/o a Doubt Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 The Redskins and Synder have already commented that the trademark registered has no affiliation with the team/organization so this won't be moving forward.El oh el at that reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seancarter Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I thought owner of redskins told everyone that he would never change name of his team so i'am hold my breath on this issue of redskins changing their name to something else, besides isn't TMZ tabloid news show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJAnfield Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 It just donned on me that Bravehearts would be a politically correct recognition of their original identity, the Braves. Or it seems that way anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Holmes Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Good luck to Goodell trying to sell Bravehearts' games in London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromatic Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 How about the 'Washington Bullets'?I think it has a nice ring to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerslionspistonshabs Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 How about the 'Washington Bullets'?I think it has a nice ring to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolfan13 Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Bravehearts is certainly an odd choice. But despite the current name that it's associated with, the logo they use now doesn't seem particularly harmful and might work well with this new name - even if it isn't a particularly good logo. I wonder if that was a deliberate thing on their part, changing the name to something less offensive without taking a massive risk with a completely new identity package.Why not go back to the original nickname of Braves?Because the Atlanta Braves might sue DIfferent sports...I don't see Kings, Jets, and Panthers suing each other.I can't believe CBS Sports would publish an article that using the phrase "Bravehearts is a sick name" and "What a freaking world we live in." This guy has no business writing articles.As far as the name, it's weird. I'd prefer Warriors, Redhawks, or something along those lines. But I'd be happy with anything besides the current name.Why not go back to the original nickname of Braves? Washington Braves would be a good option. But, have no idea if that's offensive or not. Warriors is good too.I agree. Braves and Warriors rolls off the tongue a lot better than Bravehearts (or is it Brave Hearts?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoknight Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Sounds like you're saying Washington Braverts.Like a braggart, but someone who is brave. 5th in NAT. TITLES | 2nd in CONF. TITLES | 5th in HEISMAN | 7th in DRAFTS | 8th in ALL-AMER | 7th in WINS | 4th in BOWLS | 1st in SELLOUTS | 1st GAMEDAY SIGN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.