(Sponsored by 3 Spoons Yogurt)
Chris: One little, two little, three little congressmen. Four little, five little, six little congressmen. Seven little, eight little, nine little congressmen. Ten little congressmen think Washington D.C.’s football team’s mascot is a swear word. Granted, Chief Zee can be annoying, but the congressmen actually want him eliminated. And in order to avoid receiving an unpleasant subpoena, I will refer to the team henceforth as the Washington @#$%&*.
Ralphie: I don't think the Washington Redskins should have to change their name because there is nothing disrespectful about naming a team after a group of people. It's sort of like a way to honor the Indians.
Joe: I do not think the Redskins should change their name. The Redskins name has past the test of time and is synonymous with football in the capital city.
Brad: I can see why some people could be taking offense to the name, but I really don't think it should matter. It's just a football team. Why does it have to be seen as negative? Why can't it be viewed as maybe a tribute to how strong Indians are, for example?
Chris: Finding an inoffensive, replacement name could prove to be difficult. The Washington Hogs would be offensive to people who enjoy all-you-can-eat buffets. The Washington Monuments would be insensitive to immobile objects. The Washington Congressmen would be naming the team after those who only recently decided that its name was derogatory, even though the team has had the same name since 1933.
Ralphie: I think it's ridiculous that they're worrying about that because they should be thinking about other problems our country is facing right now.
Joe: I think they should focus on ways to spend less of our money by cutting the deficit spending, which is a slur to all races and citizens.
Brad: I think there are more important things that congress could be dealing with than a football team name.
Chris: Fans should be thankful that neither Commissar Goodell or @#$%&* owner Daniel Synder are wanting to change the name. Hopefully, the FCC does not get involved. I would not enjoy tuning in to hear Joe Buck say, “Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to a key NFC East battle at FedExField between the Washington (BLEEEEEP) and the Dallas Cowboys.”
Joe: I think some people would rather give in than stand up for what they believe. It is easier to cave in than defend a position.
Brad: I really have never thought about it that way until now. Now thinking about it I could see how a sensitive person could be offended. But I don't think any of the teams or mascots were intended to be offensive. I think they are all done in tribute.
Chris: The NCAA forced 19 colleges to change their nicknames in 2005, without ever issuing guidelines to alumni on how to appropriately answer when questioned what their school’s mascot is. I graduated an Indian, and my school’s mascot is now a Mustang. Though should I refrain from saying “Indian”? A safe proposition may be to indicate that I graduated from a university that used a racial slur for its name, whereas now they are known by an animal ridden by the racial slur.
Ralphie: I think they shouldn't have been forced to change. Somebody should have spoken up about it.
Brad: If you make one change, then you will have to make them all change. The Braves, the Chiefs, etc. What would that lead to? The Titans are offensive because they're Greek Gods? It would never end, because someone would always be offended by something.
Joe: The Atlanta Braves and Cleveland Indians are brands that I believe the Native Americans should be proud of.
Ralphie: I don't think it's disrespectful. They're not being mean about Indians, and they don't say anything really bad about them.
Try on a new pair of Sports Briefs with the Gab Four every Friday. Find out more about Joe, Chris, Brad and Ralphie, and read their solo columns on their individual pages.