I've always thought the name Warriors was kind of cool (particularly with the Washington alliteration). I know Snyder bought the rights to the name to coincide with the possible expansion of an Arena team to the DC area (latest on that by the way:
Proposed Arena Could Bring Football Team to D.C. Region « CBS DC) but the rights to the team and name did expire from what I understand and I'm not sure he renewed them (most likely he did though).
But anyhow, I think it would bother me if those who opposed the name because it depicts NAs as savages, or warriors, would be ok with the name Warriors. I mean how is one ok, and the other not? I asked Mike Wise this specific question when he suggested Warriors. He said as long as they're was no deragotoray logo. So I asked him if it's the Redskins name or logo that bothers him. He said both. But still I found it a bit odd for him to say Redskins bothers him because of what it depicts, but then suggests using one of those adjectives in description as one of the new names.