(John McDonnell/The Washington Post) Think back to the 2012 opener. Its likely etched in your memory because it was Robert Griffin IIIs very successful debut, as well as the beginning of a new era of Washington football. I dont think Im overstating it by saying the Redskins, after one game, had hope again hope theyd have a winner, that the Mike Shanahan plan would work, that a Super Bowl might again be in the cards. It didnt happen immediately, but the way it happened, the way the Redskins took New Orleans by storm , scoring 10 points in each quarter, leading Drew Brees and the we-thought-they-were-mighty Saints 30-14 at one point en route to a 40-32 win. Fans in the Superdome praise RGIII after his debut. (John McDonnell/Washington Post) One of the anecdotes from the game is Redskins fans in the Superdome singing Hail to the Redskins. One of the memorable photos, besides Griffin on the ground with his arms raised in triumph after the touchdown pass to Pierre Garcon, is fans holding an image of Griffin. In the opponents building. All that doesnt seem so weird now Griffin being a star, the league being enthralled with the Redskins. But this time last year it was but a dream for Redskins fans. Look at this years opener.
Rolo: Should the Washington Redskins change their name? Yes
Fan devotion and profits were not lost due to the name change. In the past two decades, colleges and high schools all across the country have dumped offensive Native American names and mascots. In 2005, the NCAA banned use of Native American mascots in post-season basketball play. They deemed 18 colleges guilty of using “hostile or abusive” Native mascots schools such as the University of Illinois with its “Chief Illini.” The University of Illinois dropped the mascot two years later. The University of North Dakota (“Fighting Sioux”) challenged the NCAA ban in court, but lost. After failing to gain tribal support, the North Dakota state legislature asked voters to decide on the use of the name and mascot. In 2012, a referendum to do away with the “Fighting Sioux” was passed.
Redskins name defender not chief, probably not Native American
A press release put out after the taping described Dodson as “a full-blooded American Inuit chief originally from the Aleutian Tribes of Alaska” that “represents more than 700 remaining tribe members.” Dodson defended the Redskins mascot and said that he and his people were “honored” by the name. “Being a full-blooded Indian with my whole family behind me, we had a big problem with some of the things that were coming out [in the name debate],” he said. “I think they were basically saying that we were offended, our people were offended, and they were misrepresenting the Native American nation. We don’t have a problem with it at all — in fact we’re honored. We’re quite honored.” “It’s actually a term of endearment that we would refer to each other as,” Dodson said. “When we were on the reservation, we’d call each other, ‘Hey, what’s up, redskin?’ We’d nickname it and call each other ‘Skins.’ We respected each other with that term.” But recent reports show that Dodson, whose real name is Stephen D. Dodson, is not really a chief. In fact, only person that calls Dodson “Chief” is Dodson himself, and anybody that reads “Chief Dodson” embroidered on the chest of his Charley’s Crane Service shirt.
Washington Redskins: Silly Team Name Debate Continues
Lets review: Sam Huff, the Hall of Fame linebacker and longtime analyst on Redskins radio game broadcasts, announced his retirement from the teams radio network after 38 years. Huff, 78, worked a reduced schedule last season due to his deteriorating health. His voice always will be associated with the Redskins dominance in the 1980s and early 1990s. The radio trio of Hall of Fame quarterback Sonny Jurgensen, play-by-play man Frank Herzog and Huff is almost as iconic as the Hogs. Huffs departure leaves only Jurgensen still on the air. How or if the Redskins Radio Network will replace Huff is not certain.
Redskins weekend rewind: Sam Huff, RG3 & Charlotte TV
Specifically, McCartney took to task those who in a recent poll said they would never use the term Redskin, to refer to a Native American,yetwere also in favor of the team name not changing. To McCartney, such people arehypocrites. He even does his readers the favor of citing the dictionary as though they would not know the definitions, noting a hypocrite is one possessing some pretense of a false virtuous character. Essentially, McCartney is saying the factfans are willing to embrace it as their team name, but not as a term for a Native American makes them guilty of hypocrisy. So, if I have this correct, by McCartneys logic I would be absolved from the charge of hypocrisy, if I were willing to address a Native American as Redskin? And it probably figures that the same person who rants and raves about such people being hypocrites admits in the same article he supports the team financially as a season ticket-holder. I suppose McCartney was at least a little more creative in attempting to keep this fabricated controversy alive than ESPNs Jemele Hill, whoutilized an incredibly original tactic: the race card. Citing the fact that former Redskins owner George Preston Marshall was a racist, Hill claims Marshalls legacy is one NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell chose to protect. Goodell, of course sent a letter to the Native American Congressional Caucus earlier this month suggesting the name would not change, something addressed. Now, lets be clear on something: Marshall was a racist; a nasty, vile, ill-tempered bigot, whos public statements and policies towards African-Americans were in fact, despicable. His tenure as owner was a sad and regrettable chapter in the history of the franchise. The Redskins were the last team to integrate and Marshall famously noted the Redskins would start signing Negroes, when the Harlem Globetrotters start signing whites. But Hill is way off base in linking Goodell to Marshall.