A lot of people probably haven't noticed that the Redskins, who had high expectations after winning the NFC East last season, have underachieved so far in 2013. Robert Griffin III was injured at the start of the season, and they still haven't really found their groove. But all of that has been ignored because of the controversy surrounding the team's name. Those that don't like the name "Redskins" have taken it upon themselves to say how offended they are in an attempt to pressure the team into changing its name.
While I have no problem with the name "Redskins," I understand that some people are offended by it. That's their right. Who am I to tell them they should change their minds? But where I take issue with the existence of this controversy is the reason it exists at all. Those that are offended by the name decided they were speaking for everybody and created the controversy themselves. You can forgive Dan Snyder for not giving into them just because.
I'm not saying I agree with Dan Snyder, either, but he's made some pretty valid points in defense of the name, which he has vowed to never change as long as he owns the team. The Washington Redskins have a history dating back 80 years. They've become a part of the city's identity. Teams changing their nickname isn't unheard of. Just this year, the New Orleans Hornets became the "Pelicans," and the "Hornets" name will revert back to Charlotte next year when the Bobcats change their name. Even in Washington itself, the "Bullets" were rechristened the "Wizards" in the late 90s. But none of those teams have the history of the Washington Redskins. Asking them to change their name is like asking the Chicago Bears to change theirs.
Plenty of college teams have moved away from Native American mascots in recent years, and the NCAA has passed legislation trying to force others to do the same. Teams have to change their logo/mascot or they can't host NCAA Championship events. This includes the University of Utah and the University of Illinois, whose nicknames are the name of the tribe that their respective states are named after! This is also why the University of North Dakota was forced to stop using the best name and logo in all of college sports, the Fighting Sioux. Even though it was in the state constitution! They're not allowed to rename the teams until next year, so they're simply the "University of North Dakota" this season.
In my opinion, the NCAA overreached with its legislation regarding Native American names and imagery. Not to sound insensitive, but some of those names are truly meant to honor those tribes. And it's really not any of the NCAA's business what a school wants to call its athletic teams. If a school takes it upon itself to rebrand with a new name or logo, that's their choice. They shouldn't be forced to by the NCAA.
Those groups that are trying to pressure the NFL into doing something about the Redskins' name are doing the exact same thing. This wasn't an issue until they brought it up. Rick Reilly did an excellent piece a few weeks ago where he basically called out these outspoken groups. I obviously have no idea if he was simply making a generalization or not, but Reilly determined that white people decided they were going to be offended for Native Americans. Again, I have no idea whether that's true or not, but the point is that this is a drummed-up controversy. The term can be used a racial epithet. How many people actually knew that? I might be oversimplifying it, but when I hear "Redskin," I think of a football player. And I bet a vast majority of people would think the same thing.
The issue has gotten enough traction that a letter was sent to Roger Goodell and the other 31 teams owners urging them to encourage Dan Snyder to change the name. There was a meeting last week at the NFL headquarters with Redskins ownership and leaders of the Oneida Nation, where the Oneida tribe decried the name as offensive. President Obama has even weighed in, saying he would be in favor of a name change. Then there are the sportswriters, the ones who created this "controversy" and refuse to let it die. There's a guy in the Washington Post who called it the "most offensive name in the history of professional sports." Others refuse to use it in their columns about the team.
Is this really what this nation has come to? Why is this issue such a hot-button topic that people refuse to let die? Is there nothing else that's more pressing? It should be a moot point. Snyder's not changing the name. Like it or not, they're going to be the "Washington Redskins," at least as long as he's the owner (which, by all indications, will be a while).
My biggest problem with this "controversy," though, is that it seems like the Redskins are being absolutely singled-out. Why isn't anybody offended by the Kansas City Chiefs and their headdress-wearing fans? What about the Atlanta Braves and the tomahawk chop? Or the Chicago Blackhawks, whose Indian-head logo is one of the best in all of sports? The only other team that's taken any sort of heat about its name is the Cleveland Indians. Although, people seem to have less of a problem with the name than they do with the Chief Wahoo logo.
Frankly, I don't care what Washington's football team is called. As long as they lose to the Giants twice a year, they can call themselves whatever they want.
No comments:
Post a Comment