Who knew that all it would take for the Washington football team to change its name would be for the title sponsor of its field not to suggest it so gently, threatening the loss of millions of dollars and an accelerated sprint of companies fleeing the franchise?
* Freehand *
Of course, it was always a question of money! Who does things more by the goodness of their hearts? And now that the national consciousness has shifted to Daniel Snyder’s football club, there is real and absolute pressure on the owner to hire a branded team, bring together discussion groups, engulf designers and artists and produce a new look for his soccer team. Or, as I might suggest, just play Washington in 2020, while you give your fans a chance to weigh in on meaningful or attractive options.
Either way, the momentum is going down. On Friday, the team announced their intention to “thoroughly review” the name of the club, which they said was in preparation long before financial pressure from a key sponsor. A statement from the franchise also included a quote from head coach Ron Rivera, who said the matter was “of personal importance to him” just days after declaring on a radio show that he was was a “discussion for another time”. Apparently, it’s time!
So what could a name change look like? Here are five options that might make sense for a quick turnaround, but let me be clear that the best option would be to take the year off and not have a nickname. It is a deeply sensitive issue and by taking the time to do homework, Washington could spend the year imbued with a more accurate representation of our history, possibly resurfacing with something that could honor a legacy that has gone on for so long. to be sensitive or offended. , by name.
None of these suggestions is a particular endorsement, but is a combination of insights and analysis based on what the team could be inclined to do …
• Americans / Warriors:
I think either of these names does something important for Snyder; something he undoubtedly worries about during this process. By leaning excessively American theme, with the ability to check the names of the military, drape a new set of uniforms in red, white and blue and reuse the American flag for design purposes (or another way to borrow from the Trumpian aesthetic), it takes criticism away from the people who will be the most indignant and liveliest of change.
• Red tails / red clouds
The Red Tails was a finalist in a brand change contest a few years ago and refers to the legendary Airmen from Tuskegee. Although there was a stronger geographic connection to Alabama, the airmen represented something truly incredible and stoic: a diverse unit of African American, Caribbean, Haitian and Dominican pilots who fought and served the country despite the existence of Jim Crow era segregation and rampant discrimination. Using the name change to highlight a piece of American history neglected by crime could be an effective counterbalance to years of searching for a nickname that so many people deemed race-insensitive.
Red Clouds was suggested in a Washington Post column, handing over the team name to a Native American hero. Of Publish Bob Drury and Thomas Calvin’s column:
The so-called Red Cloud War officially began in 1866 when Chief Sioux could no longer bear the incessant incursions, including the construction of American army forts, into the territory of his people. The culmination of the war occurred when he and his commander on the Crazy Horse field wiped out an army troop of 81 men. The stunned administration of President Andrew Johnson sued for peace. In November 1868, Red Cloud signed a treaty to end the fighting – only after burning down army forts on the ground.
Less than two years later, Red Cloud was in the nation’s capital. “He became incredibly famous,” wrote historian R. Eli Paul. “The newspapers reported his every word and deed, and large crowds of spectators gathered at each public sighting.”
Drury and Calvin point out that it would involve little change in the fight song or logo. The aesthetics could remain the same while honoring instead of offending a group of people.
• Pigs / Battle pigs / War pigs / Swamp pigs
Especially given the recent death of Joe Bugel, the legendary coach of the offensive team, the use of the name change to honor the legacy of The Hogs would be welcomed. Washington fans dress up like pigs. It’s a comfortably nestled secondary mascot and pays homage to the franchise’s glory years when Bugel-led Joe Jacoby, Mark May, Russ Grimm, Jeff Bostic, George Starke and Fred Dean formed the foundation for the glory days of club in the late 1980s. and early 1990s.
• Senators / Presidents / Federals / Founders
One of them would be fairly easy, although incredibly boring and somewhat risky given the polarized nature of our American political system at the moment. I am sure that some fans of certain years would not care to support certain presidents – or senators! – depending on the balance of power.
• Give up the nickname completely
I have seen this suggested in several places. Maybe Washington simply adopts the Washington Football Club or a vague and bureaucratic title like the Department of Defense and Department of Offense (sorry Department of Special Teams). I think there is something to the idea that many professional franchises do not have popular nicknames. Across futbol culture, the teams are widely known in their region, with something like FC or United, which would appease fans who don’t want to see a new name at all.
.
