FedEx asks Redskins to change name

[comochiefsfan]

JUST IN: @FedEx has asked the Washington @Redskins to change its name. Here is the statement:

“We have communicated to the team in Washington our request that they change the team name.“

— ABC 7 News - WJLA (@ABC7News) July 2, 2020

Here we go. I think part of the reason we’ve been safe from this kind of stuff is because the Redskins have always been a bigger target. Now that there’s pressure from sponsors Snyder is going to feel the heat like never before.

If they go down, make no mistake, the mob will come for us next.

[displacedinMN]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The point I was attempting to make is that the name Chiefs isn't offensive in and of itself. Anyone that has an issue with it is being silly.

But, if the mascot Chiefs is accompanied by arrowheads, headdresses, a woman in a headdress riding a horse named Warpaint while the crowd is simulating scalping and decapitation, then it's a completely different ballgame.

Same with the Cleveland Indians. There's nothing wrong inherently with Indians as a mascot, unless you're making fun of Native Americans and using derogatory imagery.

As I mentioned in a related thread, no one would have issue with the name the Cleveland Indians if they changed their mascot to Ghandi or a similar image.

Cleveland Ghandi's......hmmmmm

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHeaven

****. Chiefs are next...book it.

I doubt it. There is no shitty some would call offensive logo for the Chiefs. The Chiefs logo is a KC.

[stevieray]

Political correctness is fascism disguised as manners.

/George Carlin

I'm offended, therefore I must be right.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by displacedinMN

If they go that route.....puke. Hawks and Eagles in same division.

NFL going to the birds...

NTTAWWT

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I do find it interesting, though, that we'll have idle discussions on this very board about changes to the uniforms and logo.

I would be really bummed out if the Chiefs change their uniform and color scheme. Those, to me anyway, are far more indicative of the team than the arrowhead logo or even the name of the stadium.

If the choice was between the name and imagery and their various uniform colors, I'd take the latter 24/7/365. Keep all of their colors, the KC on the helmet (inside of something other than an arrowhead) and call them Kansas City FC.

But messing with the color scheme is off-limits, IMO.

[comochiefsfan]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

while the crowd is simulating scalping and decapitation

WTF?

I don't know which game you've gone to, but i've yet to see that one at Arrowhead.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by displacedinMN

Cleveland Ghandi's......hmmmmm

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan

WTF?

I don't know which game you've gone to, but i've yet to see that one at Arrowhead.

What is the chop representing, in your opinion?

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan

WTF?

I don't know which game you've gone to, but i've yet to see that one at Arrowhead.

Uhh you need to re-read what he said...

[Dartgod]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I don't think that "Chiefs" is derogatory at all.

What's considered "derogatory" is the use of the Arrowhead on their helmet, the name of the stadium, Warpaint and the Chop.

I get the chop and Warpaint, but how is an arrowhead derogatory?

EDIT: Never mind, I see you answered that already. I just disagree.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I would be really bummed out if the Chiefs change their uniform and color scheme. Those, to me anyway, are far more indicative of the team than the arrowhead logo or even the name of the stadium.

If the choice was between the name and imagery and their various uniform colors, I'd take the latter 24/7/365. Keep all of their colors, the KC on the helmet (inside of something other than an arrowhead) and call them Kansas City FC.

But messing with the color scheme is off-limits, IMO.

Agreed. Whenever there's been talk of a player's strike or a holdout, we often agree on the board that our loyalty is to the uniform and helmet. Players come and go and we may love them while they're here, but the long-term continuity is the uniform and logo. I think that's why this is a hard conversation.

[comochiefsfan]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

What is the chop representing, in your opinion?

Swinging or throwing a tomahawk.

Beheading is a serious stretch. Scalping? Please.

To be clear, I think the tomahawk chop is far and away the most "problematic" thing about the Chiefs' brand. But I vehemently disagree with the notion that it represents beheading or scalping.

[Deberg_1990]

What about the Chiefs drum deck thing? Is that insensitive?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Dartgod

I get the chop and Warpaint, but how is an arrowhead derogatory?

EDIT: Never mind, I see you answered that already. I just disagree.

For the record, I don't think it's derogatory, whatsoever, I'm just repeating what some Native Americans have said about it.

I think it's cool. I used to find arrowheads all the time in Missouri and there were no negative connotations in my mind.

But as we're all learning, it doesn't matter what we think of the imagery, it's what they think of it, hence my post.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Agreed. Whenever there's been talk of a player's strike or a holdout, we often agree on the board that our loyalty is to the uniform and helmet. Players come and go and we may love them while they're here, but the long-term continuity is the uniform and logo. I think that's why this is a hard conversation.

Keeping the colors and design is 99% of it for me, even if the arrowhead around KC was something different, or even something as simple as a circle.

The Chiefs are like the Raiders and Steelers and 49ers and Cowboys and Broncos and Dolphins and Saints in that regard.

Once I see those colors, I know who they are and what city they represent so if the Chiefs ever changed their colors, my connection to the team just wouldn't be the same.