Latest news with #WashingtonRedskins
Forbes
2 days ago
- Politics
- Forbes
Should The ‘Indians' And ‘Redskins' Names Return To Sports? As Stadium Vote Looms, Trump Believes So
"Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA)!" President Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. Is this statement by the President a contrarian view? Or is it a reflection of a changing public sentiment? CHICAGO - APRIL 30: Washington Redskins NFL football helmet is on display in Pioneer Court to ... More commemorate the NFL Draft 2015 in Chicago on April 30, 2015 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo By) As the NFL's Washington Commanders seek approval to develop the RFK stadium campus and build out a new football stadium, they are set to hold public hearings on August 1st to hear the feedback of the community. With 520 people already slated to speak on Day 1, Mayor Muriel Bowser is urging D.C. residents to speak up in support of the project, which also includes commercial and residential development. For residents who currently live in the neighborhood, there are two sides. While proponents lean into the positive and say D.C. will bring in just under $1 Billion a year in new business. Opponents are looking at the negative cost impact to the tax payers, and the need for even more housing and community investment. Beyond those two sides of the coin, President Trump has another thought on his mind. The team's name. More specifically, bringing back the former name of the team, The Washington Redskins, which the team held from 1933 to 2020, as part of the approval deal. Today, they are known as the Washington Commanders. 'I may put a restriction on them if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,'' President Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'I won't make a deal for them to build a stadium in Washington.' While the President technically doesn't have a say, due to the land being transferred over to D.C. prior to his inauguration, (Congress passed a bill giving the District of Columbia more control over the 190-acre riverfront plot.) he does have a hand in both the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and U.S. Commission on Fine Arts (CFA) — two federal advisory bodies that weigh in on all design matters in the city. They will have a big role in deciding what the stadium actually looks like. And with that, they have the potential to make the Commanders life very hard if the Presidents asks the appointees to stand tall. Trump's social post continued "The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone. Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians.' Washington Redskins logo displayed on a phone screen and photo of Donald Trump taken on June 25 in ... More The Hague displayed on a laptop screen in the background are seen in this illustration photo taken in Poland on July 21, 2025. (Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images) Those comments from the President were follow-ups to his previous Truth Social post, "The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team. There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams, with a storied past. Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. This type of language from the President, is the polar opposite of the social climate of 2020, when society was very vocal about pushing back on the Redkins and Indians names, deeming them 'culturally insensitive and inappropriate'. But this vote, and the Presidents post, has brought the topic of the Redskins and Indians back to light. Why were the Redskins and Indians Names Replaced? Only five years ago, the United States had a very different social perspective. In the wake of the murder of George Floyd, a nationwide empathy-fueled movement took hold of America. Alongside the COVID-19 pandemic, consumers and corporations en masse began reevaluating, and revisiting everything within their control to see if they could be fairer and more empathetic. For large-scale corporations, this moment presented an opportunity to review their moral compass as an organization. For two industries in particular, it meant examining the long-standing ethnic brand symbols on their products and evaluating them under a new lens. Pennant promotes the Cleveland Indians baseball team (from the American League), Cleveland, Ohio, ... More 1950s. It features an image of the team's mascot 'Chief Wahoo.' (Photo by) In sports, teams have had a long-standing practice of naming their mascots after Native Americans. Adorned on some of the country's most recognizable food brands are historically insensitive characters, known as 'food mascots'. For them, 2020 would become the year of the 'great rebrand'. In total, eleven college teams, two professional franchises and over a half a dozen food companies announced they were making changes to evolve or retire their culturally insensitive branding. Across the grocery isles…. AUNT PHOTOGRAPH. Across University Athletic departments from Midwestern State University to Quinnipiac University, mascots shifted. The Indians became the Mustangs, the Braves to Bobcats. All of this leads me to the NFL's Washington Redskins and MLB's Cleveland Indians - the two most visible sports rebrands of this period. The Washington Redskins, who were using the name and likeness of a Native American since 1933, became the Washington Football Team in 2020, before eventually landing on the name Washington Commanders soon thereafter. The ownership group, up until then, had stated the team would "never" change its name, and argued that Redskins name honored Native Americans. But due to the climate in 2020, corporate sponsors, from FedEx to others, began being vocal about not wanting to associate their brands with the culturally insensitive name. The Cleveland Indians changed their name to the Cleveland Guardians in November 2021. After decades of criticism regarding the team's previous name and mascot, Chief Wahoo, which depicted the face of Native Americans. In 2018, the Indians retired use of Chief Wahoo on their jerseys and hats. The new name, Guardians, was a reference to the "Guardians of Traffic" statues on the city's Hope Memorial Bridge. Should There Be A Push To Revert The Names Back? The name changes have sparked lively debate of fairness and sensitivity well beyond sports fans. Did it not go far enough? The Kansas City Chiefs and Atlanta Braves weren't pressured enough to change their names, even though they are both native American references. Or, did the pressure of the time push the agenda too far, too fast only causing people to regret it later? Cleveland fans, by and large would like the Indians names back. In a recent poll conducted in the city shows that fans overwhelmingly want the Indians name back, and the return of their mascot, Chief Wahoo. In Washington, last year's winning ways for the franchise pushed their QB Jayden Daniels to have the #1 selling jersey in all of sports and Commanders merchandise skyrocketed 463% from 2023 to 2024. Once the playoffs began, the spike reached over 4000%. This success changed the sentiment with fans, pushing those who like it or love it to 50% warming up to the name. LANDOVER, MARYLAND - DECEMBER 01: Jayden Daniels #5 of the Washington Commanders looks on prior to a ... More game against the Tennessee Titans at Northwest Stadium on December 01, 2024 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by) Among Native American communities, the reactions are too mixed. Groups such as Native American Guardians Assocaition, of fittingly abbreviated NAGA, have spoken out, the 'Redskins / Redmen is a Native American iconic name and is revered by the vast majority of Native Americans and general public alike. Redskins / Redmen represents honor, respect and pride for Native American culture. Redskins / Redmen is and has been a self-identifying term for Natives since the early 1800s.' according to thier website. While on the other side, groups such as 500 Years of Dignity and Resistance which became a key organizer of the Indians name change and a leader in the ongoing protests of Native American mascots, had been long active in the continuous support of Indigenous Rights. Moving forward, it's clear that consensus is still hard to find - and no one decision will make all happy. The court of public opinion holds power in this ongoing battle of what is right and what is not - it just depends on how society defines those terms at the time.
Fox News
7 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
NFL star Von Miller mistakenly calls Commanders by former name as Trump threatens stadium deal
NFL veteran Von Miller referenced his new team by their former name after President Donald Trump threatened to block federal support for the Commanders' new stadium project in Washington D.C. over his desire to reinstate the Redskins name. Speaking to the media after training camp on Thursday, Miller expressed the motivation behind his desire to return to the gridiron. "My 15th year in the league, it never gets old – especially being out of work for four months, perspective kind of changes a little bit. You know, back when you were young it was like, 'Man why do we gotta go to OTAs? Man, I wish I was home.' And then you're sitting on the couch for four months, and it's like, 'Man, I wish I was at OTAs.'" But in his message to the media, Miller referenced the team as the Redskins. "It's good dropping the kids off, and it's good picking the kids up from school, but I wanna go to work. The Washington Redskins called me a month and a half ago and started talking, and agreed to come here to Washington about a week and a day ago, and here I am. Excited to be here." The slip-up comes as President Trump has called on the team to revert to its former name, which was dropped in 2020. "My statement on the Washington Redskins has totally blown up, but only in a very positive way," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. "I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington. The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone." Commanders general manager Adam Peters said earlier this week that issues like the stadium rights "don't really make it to us." "We're just trying to focus on what's going on here and getting ready for the season." A vote on the deal that would allow the Commanders to return to their former home at RFK Stadium is set to take place on Aug. 1. The deal includes a $3.7 billion redevelopment project featuring a new stadium, housing units, retail space and parkland. The plan to move back to D.C. from the Maryland suburbs is estimated to be around 2030 – that is, if the legislation is approved. The White House has made it clear that the president's comments on the NFL team are legitimate. "The president was serious," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday. "Sports is one of the many passions of this president, and he wants to see the name of that team changed."
CBS News
25-07-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Despite Trump's threat to block new Washington Commanders' stadium, D.C. council announces deal
The Washington, D.C., city council chairman announced Thursday that a deal has been reached between the city and the Washington Commanders on an amended stadium agreement, despite threats earlier this week from President Trump to block any deal. The NFL team is in negotiations with the district over their plans to build a new stadium at the RFK Stadium site in D.C. 30 years after decamping to Maryland, but the proposal faces myriad challenges up ahead. Mr. Trump said on July 20 that if the Commanders "don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington." The team changed their name from the "Washington Redskins" five years ago, as the term is widely considered a racist slur against Native Americans, but Mr. Trump has recently revamped calls for a return to the old name. "I think that everyone has been perplexed by the President's comments, and in that sense, they certainly have not been helpful. I don't know where they go. And I have actually characterized him as a distraction, in the many senses of that word," D.C. Council chairman Phil Mendelson said of Mr. Trump's comments at a press conference Thursday. The council is set to vote on the proposal on Aug. 1, with a second vote set for Sept. 17, according to Mendelson. Mendelson said he is "confident that we will have the votes necessary" to pass the agreement next week. In addition to the looming threats from the president, the D.C. Council and the Commanders also face the technical difficulties surrounding the transfer of control over the RFK Stadium property. While the stadium is located on federal land, the city was given permission by Congress in January to control the property for 99 years, which would allow for its redevelopment. The agreement reached today signals a step towards receiving approval from city councilors over the redevelopment plan, but the real test will come with the Aug. 1 vote. Regardless of the forthcoming roadblocks, the proposal seems to have widespread support, both from district politicians and residents. "Bringing the Commanders home is about more than a stadium. It's about creating jobs, attracting revenue, and driving investment to Ward 7—and it's coming at [a] time when we need it the most," D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser said Thursday. The deal, as of its latest amendments, includes $950 million in revenue benefits for D.C., and is estimated to save district taxpayers $55 million, according Mendelson. "A lot of the reaction that we got from residents, at least, that I heard, and I think my colleagues would agree, was that the deal could be better for the district. And I mean, I heard from many people, 'I support the team. I want the team in a district, but I think it could be a better deal.' And so I think the Commanders heard that," Mendelson said. The negotiations will likely continue, with possible additional amendments to be made later on, but while Mendelson said "there's still a lot that has to be worked out in terms of legal documents," the current deal represents the "basic framework" of the agreement. Mendelson, who previously raised concerns over the proposal due to its costs, said he "[put] aside my own view" on the deal due to support from D.C. residents and his fellow council members, and has since been satisfied with the progress. "[T]he Commanders have been very positive, constructive in our negotiations," Mendelson said. "I have no complaint."
The Hill
22-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Just 25 percent approve of Trump stadium threat over Commanders name change: Survey
A new poll found 25 percent of Americans approve of President Trump's threat to nix a stadium deal in Washington over the name of the local football team. 'I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington,' Trump said on Sunday. 'The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone. Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians,' he added. Fifty-eight percent of respondents in the YouGov Monday poll said they disapproved of the president's comments regarding a name reversal for the Washington Commanders NFL franchise, and 16 percent of people were unsure of their feelings. Under the agreement, the football franchise would return from playing gamedays in Maryland to a renovated multi-billion-dollar stadium in Washington by 2030. The Commanders franchise has pledged to invest $2.7 billion in the project, marking the single largest private investment in D.C.'s history. A majority, 65 percent of participants from the country's Northeastern and Southern regions, said it was unacceptable for the U.S. president to tell a professional sports team to change its name. Fifteen percent disagreed and 21 percent were unsure. The poll found that only 34 percent of Americans approved of the 2022 decision to rename the Washington Redskins, the Commanders. Forty-three percent of people disapproved of the move, while 23 percent were unsure how they felt.
Boston Globe
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trump likes renaming people, places and things. He's not the first to deploy that perk of power.
Related : Advertisement A name, after all, defines identity and even reality because it is connected to the verb 'to be,' says one brand strategist. Get Love Letters: The Newsletter A weekly dispatch with all the best relationship content and commentary – plus exclusive content for fans of Love Letters, Dinner With Cupid, weddings, therapy talk, and more. Enter Email Sign Up 'A parent naming a child, a founder naming a company, a president naming a place ... in each example, we can see the relationship of power,' Shannon Murphy, who runs Nameistry, a naming agency that works with companies and entrepreneurs to develop brand identities, said in an email. 'Naming gives you control.' Trump reignited a debate on football and American identity In Trump's case, reviving the debate over the Washington football team's name had the added effect of distraction. 'My statement on the Washington Redskins has totally blown up, but only in a very positive way,' he wrote on his social media platform, adding a threat to derail the team's deal for a new stadium if it resisted. Advertisement In this 2019 photo, the then Washington Redskins logo is seen on FedEx Field prior to an NFL football game between the New York Giants and the Redskins in Landover, Md. The team has since been rebranded as the Washington Commanders. Mark Tenally/Associated Press In fact, part of the reaction came from people noting that Trump's proposed renaming came as he struggled to move past a rebellion among his supporters over the administration's refusal to release much-hyped records in Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking investigation. Over about two weeks, Trump had cycled through many tactics — downplaying the issue, blaming others, scolding a reporter, insulting his own supporters, suing the Wall Street Journal and finally authorizing the Justice Department to try to unseal grand jury transcripts. Trump's demand that the NFL and the District of Columbia change the team's name back to a dictionary definition of a slur against Native Americans reignited a brawl in miniature over race, history and the American identity. Trump's reelection itself can be seen as a response to the nation's reckoning with its racial history after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd. That year, Americans elected Democratic President Joe Biden, who championed diversity. During his term, Washington's football team became first the Washington Football Team, then the Commanders, at a widely estimated cost in the tens of millions of dollars. And in 2021, The Cleveland Indians became the Cleveland Guardians. In 2025, Trump has ordered a halt to diversity, equity and inclusion programs through the federal government, universities and schools, despite legal challenges. And he wants the Commanders' name changed back, though it's unclear if he has the authority to restrict the nearly $4 billion project. Is Trump's 'Redskins' push a distraction or a power play? What's clear is that names carry great power where business, national identity, race, history and culture intersect. Trump has had great success for decades branding everything from buildings he named after himself to the Gulf between Mexico, Cuba and the United States to his political opponents and people he simply doesn't like. Exhibit A: Florida's governor, dubbed by Trump 'Meatball Ron' DeSantis, who challenged him for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination. Advertisement And Trump is not the first leader to use monikers and nicknames — branding, really — to try to define reality and the people who populate it. Naming was a key tool of colonization that modern-day countries are still trying to dislodge. 'Naming,' notes one expert, 'is never neutral.' 'To name is to collapse infinite complexity into a manageable symbol, and in that compression, whole worlds are won or lost,' linguist Norazha Paiman wrote last month on Medium. 'When the British renamed places throughout India or Africa, they weren't just updating maps," Paiman wrote. 'They were restructuring the conceptual frameworks through which people could relate to their own territories.' This is not Trump's first rebranding push Trump's order to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America is perhaps the best-known result of Executive Order 14172, titled 'Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness.' The renaming sent mapmakers, search engines and others into a flurry over whether to change the name. And it set off a legal dispute with The Associated Press over First Amendment freedoms that is still winding through the courts. The news outlet's access to events in the Oval Office and Air Force One was cut back starting in February after the AP said it would continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its copy, while noting Trump's wishes that it instead be renamed the Gulf of America. President Donald Trump holds up a signed proclamation declaring Feb. 9 Gulf of America Day, as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum watches aboard Air Force One as Trump travels from West Palm Beach, Fla. to New Orleans, Feb. 9, 2025. Ben Curtis/Associated Press It's unclear if Trump's name will stick universally — or go the way of 'freedom fries,' a brief attempt by some in the George W. Bush-era GOP to rebrand french fries after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Advertisement But there's evidence that at least for business in some places, the 'Gulf of America' terminology has staying power. Chevron's earnings statements of late have referred to the Gulf of America, because 'that's the position of the U.S. government now,' CEO Mike Wirth said during a Jan. 31 call with investors. And along the Gulf Coast in Republican Louisiana, leaders of the state's seafood industry call the body of water the Gulf of America, in part, because putting that slogan on local products might help beat back the influx of foreign shrimp flooding American markets, the Louisiana Illuminator news outlet reported. Renaming is a bipartisan endeavor The racial reckoning inspired by Floyd's killing rippled across the cultural landscape. Quaker retired the Aunt Jemima brand after it had been served up at America's breakfast tables for 131 years, saying it recognized that the character's origins were 'based on a racial stereotype.' Eskimo Pies became Edy's. The Grammy-winning country band Lady Antebellum changed its name to Lady A, saying they were regretful and embarrassed that their former moniker was associated with slavery. And Trump didn't start the fight over football. Democratic President Barack Obama, in fact, told The Associated Press in 2013 that he would 'think about changing' the name of the Washington Redskins if he owned the team. Trump soon after posted to Twitter: 'President should not be telling the Washington Redskins to change their name-our country has far bigger problems! FOCUS on them, not nonsense.' Fast-forward to July 20, 2025, when Trump posted that the Washington Commanders should change their name back to the Redskins. 'Times,' the president wrote, 'are different now.' Advertisement
