In a halftime essay Bob Costas called the Redskins teamname an "insult" and a "slur"
The franchise has now been sued twice in an attempt to void the redskins trademark - http://m.inc.com/?incid=47380
There is also a bill before the house which if passed would ban the name - http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/03/21/house-lawmakers-introduce-bill-ban-redskins-trademark-148286
The president is even chiming in on the issue - http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_268750/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=HWKbQYYx
So my question to everyone of AM, what do you think? Is the name innocent and should stay? Or should they change it?
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who once defended the use of the name to congress, is now speaking up against the use of the nameObjections to names like Braves, Chiefs, Warriors and the like, strike many of us as political correctness run amuck. These nicknames honor, rather than demean. They're pretty much the same as Vikings, Patriots, or even Cowboys. And names like Blackhawks, Seminoles and Chippewas, while potentially problematic, can still be okay provided the symbols are appropriately respectful. Which is where the Cleveland Indians, with the combination of their name and Chief Wahoo logo, have sometimes run into trouble.
A number of teams, mostly in the college ranks, have changed their names in response to objections. The Stanford Cardinal and the Dartmouth Big Green were each once the Indians. The St. John's Redmen are now the Red Storm. And the Miami of Ohio Redskins—that's right Redskins—are now the RedHawks.
Still, the NFL franchise that represents the nation's capital has maintained its name. But think for a moment about the term "Redskins," and how it truly differs from all the others. Ask yourself what the equivalent would be if directed towards African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, or any other ethnic group. When considered that way, "Redskins" can't possibly honor a heritage or noble character trait, nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term. It's an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present day intent
The mayor of Washington D.C is avoiding using the team name and instead referring to them simply as football team - http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2013/02/07/D-C-Mayor-Refuses-to-Say-Redskins-in-State-of-District-AddressWe have to do everything that’s necessary to make sure that we’re representing the franchise in a positive way . . . and that if we are offending one person, we need to be listening and making sure that we’re doing the right things to try to address that.”
The franchise has now been sued twice in an attempt to void the redskins trademark - http://m.inc.com/?incid=47380
There is also a bill before the house which if passed would ban the name - http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/03/21/house-lawmakers-introduce-bill-ban-redskins-trademark-148286
The president is even chiming in on the issue - http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_268750/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=HWKbQYYx
So my question to everyone of AM, what do you think? Is the name innocent and should stay? Or should they change it?