Why would anyone be upset about the Washington Redskins name change?

Pro sports teams change their names all the time and for lots of reasons. Heck, the Washington franchise began in Boston with the name Braves before then-owner George Preston Marshall changed the name to Redskins a year after he established the franchise in 1932.

He did it to honor his Native American head coach, but that story is suspect and a pretty interesting one in of itself.  Washington Post’s Richard Leiby wrote about it in 2013, and it’s worth the read.

Marshall deciding to change his team’s name without moving to a new city was rare but not unprecedented. The Chicago Staleys became the Chicago Bears in 1922, the Pittsburgh Pirates became the Steelers in 1940, the New York Titans changed their name to the Jets in 1963 and the Tennessee Oilers switched their name to the Titans in 1999, two years after the franchise moved from Houston.

Those name changes took place because of either new ownership or as a jolt for a milquetoast team, but really, who cares why they happened? The bottom line was money, how to eliminate the waste of it and how to make more of it through the marketability of the team’s name.

That was the case then, and that’s the case now with Washington. The franchise was losing sponsors – big ones. Without adequate sponsorship, an already middling NFL team with another franchise set up for success in the next decade only 38 miles down the road (cough-cough, Baltimore) will look ripe for a change in scenery.

What else could the team do?

With that being said, a name change for this particular franchise was inevitable. For whatever reason, people care more about this controversial Native American-derived team name than other ones, such as the Kansas City Chiefs, Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, Florida State Seminoles or Chicago Blackhawks.

I wrote a column in 2014, noting an ESPN “Outside the Lines” report that found 71 percent of people polled believed Washington’s team name should not be changed. That figure was down from the 83 percent who agreed in a poll the previous year, reflective of the wave of public opinion that you could feel was shifting at that time. I wrote in that column, “The team name is going to change. It’s going to happen. Anyone who doesn’t think so is living in a fantasy world … Regardless of whether or not the word ‘Redskins’ is racist or disrespectful to Native Americans, this change is happening. Maybe not this year, or next, but soon.”

Maybe changes in Washington aren’t over either. Maybe owner Dan Snyder decides in a week or two that, with COVID-19 creating so much uncertainty and a bad taste left in his mouth from the name change, he wants to sell the franchise. Maybe a relocation wouldn’t be the worst idea.

The Portsmouth Spartans became the Detroit Lions in 1932 and enjoyed their first winning record in almost a decade. The Boston Redskins moved to D.C. in 1937 and won a championship that season. The Dallas Texans became the Kansas City Chiefs in 1966 after being unable to fill seats in Texas and wound up winning Super Bowl IV in 1970. The Cleveland Browns became the Baltimore Ravens in 1996 and reinvigorated the franchise to a Super Bowl victory five years later.

Washington hasn’t had a winning season since 2016 and has a combined 62-97 (.389) record over the last decade.

(Send comments or questions to zack@thenewstimes.com or follow him on Twitter @zacknally)