Quote:
Originally Posted by Alvin Walton
Why does it need to be an Indian name?
|
Identity. You gotta understand that not everybody on this board is a resident of the D.C. area, surrounding areas, or has been at some point. For me, I grew up 5 hours away from D.C. That isn't exactly being a part of the area, even though most of all Virginia is a Redskins state. So for me, I identified with the team by their name, logos, and color of uniforms. I don't have that hometown attachment to the team. So, if the team moved out west and still called themselves the Redskins, I'd still root for that team even if a new team moved into the D.C. area.
Having said that, I feel that most fans could embrace a name change if the change wasn't a complete and total change away from what the team is now. A name that could still embrace the old identity, colors, even the logo - if not for a transitional period. And then, once fans are used to calling the team the new name, then other changes (main colors if need be, logo, etc...) could gradually be mixed in. Over time, the change and transition isn't quite as harsh.
I understand the thoughts of some to just change the name completely, get rid of everything Washington Redskins, and just move on so that we're not having to hear about people like Susan Harjo or Amanda Blackhorse. But the truth is, that would be a very polarizing change. The hometown fans would embrace whatever, but the admirers from far away would be left feeling as if we got robbed.