Is It Really Just A Name?

Washington Redskins.

The NFL says that the name is not a slur. The team obviously sees nothing wrong with it as they have had the name since 1933. They are both wrong. Since I discovered team sports as a child, I've always found the mascot of a team to be source of honor. It was always a strong and proud figure. Even a banana slug has it's merits. A Viking. A Patriot. A Giant. A Bear. History never really found Vikings to be a particularly nice group of people but they were certainly a fearsome one. Pirates too. Still, I always figured that if you were a descendant of a Viking or a Bear, you could be proud to have a school or professional team use your name to symbolize their strength. I felt the same way about the use of Native American tribes to represent the same strength and pride. The Utes. The Illini. The Seminoles. The Braves. Even as a small, naive child I felt that something was a bit off with the name "Redskins." I never felt that it could ignite some pride among the many Native Americans spread around the country. There was something sinister about the name. Something wrong. It sounded very much like a slur. I felt this and I was about 9 years old. A little later, I learned some of the history of the Washington Redskins and their racist owner George Preston Marshall. The "unofficial" ban on colored football players in the NFL got it's start at about the time that Marshall stepped into league circles. Coincidence? He did a lot of great things for the game but acceptance certainly wasn't one of them. His was the last team to integrate and that was only done so because of a strong "suggestion" from the JFK Administration. I think that's all you really need to know about the Redskins original owner and the source of the team's name.

Roger "the Goods" Goodell has always maintained that everyone involved with the NFL must represent "the Shield" well. It's all about "the Shield." The debate over the Redskins name doesn't shine a bright light on "the Shield." On all other matters, "the Goods" seems so concerned over the slightest blemish on the league's sterling image. The Redskins name isn't a slight blemish. It's a great big scar. If something offends a few people, it should be questioned. If something offends large segments of a diverse population, it should be changed. The Redskins name is very offensive to many Native Americans. It's origin is from the mind of a known racist. That should be a huge concern to "the Goods." The Redskins were initially called the Braves. Go back to that. There's tradition there. There's history. The Braves. That's a strong, proud name.