ShareThis Page

Redskins playing the nickname game

| Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2013, 1:03 a.m.

This has been a tough season for Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder. Not only has his team hit bottom, he is dealing with opposition to its nickname. Many find “Redskins” offensive, calling it racially insensitive. Public pressure from Native American groups and others has increased.

Suppose it happens. Changing a nickname is harder than changing coaches, but suppose Snyder capitulates. What to call the team? There is no shortage of suggestions churning on the Internet. Some are far-fetched or plain silly: Gridlockers, Hogs and Washingtons (with a profile of George instead of an Indian as the logo), to name a few.

A branding company, Lexicon, was asked to re-name the Redskins. It came up with Metros, Leopards and DC Rocs, with logos to match. Recently, Snyder's neighbor trademarked “Washington Bravehearts,” adding intrigue to the story. Also getting attention is “Redtails,” the nickname of the famed Tuskegee Airmen. And it sort of sounds like Redskins.

Another name Lexicon suggested was Skins, which matches the team's alternate nickname, minus the apostrophe. The idea has gained some traction. Yet “Washington Skins” doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. Then there is the logo; one's imagination can have fun with that. Actually, a design firm came up with one, but no skin was involved.

Scant precedent exists for a similar name change. This is not the Houston Oilers moving to Tennessee and becoming the Titans, or the Cleveland Browns morphing into the Baltimore Ravens. This certainly isn't the Dallas Texans turning up as the Kansas City Chiefs. The last pro football team to change names while staying in the same city was the New York Titans of the old AFL. With new owners and big plans, they became the Jets in 1963.

The Titans had existed for only three drab seasons, with minimal fan support. Change was welcome. The Washington Redskins have been around since 1937, a fully entrenched identity, like it or not. The team following is large and loyal.

“Any kind of rebranding is difficult, whether it involves rebranding graphics or imagery or a wholesale name change,” said Jason Aiken, product manager for 99designs, an online graphics design marketplace.

“It can be even more difficult when it involves a sports team because people are very attached. It's not like the Redskins are a new team. They have a lot of history, a lot of fans.”

99designs staged a logo contest for a new Redskins nickname that attracted more than 1,700 graphic designers working with the prospective nicknames Warriors, Renegades and Griffins (which had nothing to do with the Redskins' quarterback).

The winning logo was for the hypothetical Washington Warriors, which Aiken called his favorite nickname even though the image and name “revolves around war and battle,” he said, which might not be suitable for a team representing the national's capital.

When and if the Redskins shop for a new label, such a decision would be monumental (so to speak). Those who work in the branding and naming business offered a few guidelines.

Lexicon founder David Placek said “distinctiveness” is the key to any name change.

“The strategy is all about choosing to be different,” he said. “You're looking at literally an ocean of sports teams. ‘How can we create something different?' But it also has to have a personality that people can relate to.”

Diane Prange, chief linguistics officer of the branding firm Strategic Name Development, said, “You really need to get away from anything negative or political. There have been the Senators, but you should probably walk away from anything perceived as directed at the political side of this.”

David Burd, owner of The Naming Company consulting firm, says he uses the “T-shirt test” to determine the viability of a nickname.

“If the name can be worn proudly on a T-shirt, it's a good name,” he said.

Winning also helps.

Bob Cohn is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter@BCohn_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.