Should The ‘Indians' And ‘Redskins' Names Return To Sports? As Stadium Vote Looms, Trump Believes So
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 JEMIMA.UNDATED 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What a weaker dollar means for inflation
The US dollar ( has fallen this year, and that can have big implications for inflation. RSM chief economist Joe Brusuelas talks about that connection and when the impact of tariffs may start to show in the US economy. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime. turning out to the dollar index, it's seen many swings we know amid economic uncertainty. Joe, you highlight what the moves in the currency mean for inflation? Walk us through that. All right. When you get a sustained 10% decline in the value of the dollar, typically, you should expect to see a 1/2 of 1% increase in inflation over the next 6 to 12 months. We clearly are at that point, even though we had a nice rebound. I think it was 3.3% for the month of July, strongest month for the greenback this year, but nevertheless, the policy mix out of the administration, all points towards a weaker dollar, and I think that's what we're going to get. Moreover, when you take a look at import prices, especially import prices ex petroleum, it tells the tale. We're going to see more inflation and a weaker dollar going forward. Does Trump want a strong dollar? I would think he does, and I think, well, I think like all politicians, he wants to have his cake and eat it, too. He doesn't want de-dollarization, clearly, but he wants a weaker dollar because A, it really tends to juice the tech sector, and B, it will provide relief to the beleaguered manufacturing sector that's been in an effective recession for the past couple of years. Is it too soon to say the kind of impact the softer dollars had during this earnings season, particularly what it's meant for the multinationals? It's way too early to jump on that bandwagon. I think we're really going to be talking in the fourth quarter earnings, and then next year. Moreover, a lot of those firms that he wants to help are actually having real problems with the tariff issue because, you know, 45% of everything we import goes into domestic manufacturing. So policies at a cross purposes, a good portion of the time this year, which is why that economy slowed to 1.2% growth in the first half of the year, and we think it's not going to do much better. Our forecast for this year is 1.1%. Can I ask you when we talk about these tariff policies? We've been talking about them all show. There's the near to intermediate impact, but how long do we have to wait to see what the long-term impact is? Meaning, do I have to wait till does it have to be August 2026, and Joe and Josh are back on set for me to really know, okay, it's really boosted manufacturing job. It's really opened up all these new markets for American business. It's really raised this much revenue. It's a little worse, actually. So as of midnight last night, on once we get to October 5th, we're going to have an effective 18.3% tariff. The real problem is we won't really understand what any of this means, not till October 5th, 2026, but more like October 5th, 2027. Why? Why do you say that, Joe? Because it takes so long to pass through the tariff costs. You know, there are four points along the chain. You've got your retail, you've got your consumers, you've got your importers, and you've got your exporters. At each point of the supply chain, you're going to see a bit of it absorbed, a bit of it eaten. When we went through this in 2018, for example, we didn't see the full price of the increase in the price of washing machines, dryers, and dishwashers caused by tariffs show up on consumers' balance sheets until about two years later. Turned out 90% of that cost was eaten entirely by consumers. So when we talk about whether where the cost falls falls on the value chain, and there was this big debate, maybe it's really the key debate inside the Fed. Tell me if I'm wrong, but this debate about whether the the the tariff induced inflation is one time or transitory persistent. Even if it's one time, it could go on for some time. Is that part of the point? Well, that's right, and that's why they've been counseling patients because you just don't know. Right now, for all of the noise, right? The tariff rate that's showing up, which is causing revenues to rise, right? And from the Trump administration's point of view, that's an absolutely good thing. It's about 8.85%. It's not 30, it's not 50, it's not 15. But as we get into mid-October, it'll be closer to 20 is my sense because we're still not done with Mexico, and we're still not done with China, and then USMCA has to be renegotiated next year. So this is going to be a variable target. It's going to be a moving target, but nevertheless, if you cause the average price of goods imported in the United States to rise by 18.3%, that's going to be eaten. And here's why we say that. There's a lot of talk that, well, foreign exporters are just eating the price. You know, they're going to engage in invoice pricing. If that was the case, import prices would be falling significantly. They're not. They're actually rising. So that's just not happening. So that means it's not the exporter, it's going to be the importer, the retail, or the consumer. Those points on the chain where those are going to be eaten. Joe, I can honestly say that given the news flow today, you were the perfect guy to be sitting in that chair. That's very kind of you to say. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you so much, Joe.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NFL Commanders win key vote in quest for new stadium
Washington DC City Council members voted 9-3 on Friday to approve a $1.1 billion funding bill, a major step in the Washington Commanders' quest for a proposed $3.8 billion NFL stadium. The plan would also include housing, shops and parking at the site of the team's former home, RFK Stadium. Mayor Muriel Bowser backed the plan but council chair Phil Mendelson sought changes that led to the NFL club offering a better deal in the end, one that needed at least a two-thirds vote from the 12-member panel and had more than enough for approval. A second vote must be taken in September for final approval, but that is expected to be a copy of the first. The new venue is expected to open in 2030. The team has played in nearby Maryland since leaving RFK after the 1996 NFL season. "We will bring our team home and deliver a state-of-the-art, Super Bowl-ready stadium for our Commanders, more than 6,000 new homes for DC residents, a SportsPlex for our kids, parks and recreation space for the community and so much more," Bowser said in a statement. "With the Commanders as our partner, we will deliver jobs and opportunity when our city needs them most." js/bb
Fox News
17 minutes ago
- Fox News
Commanders' DC stadium hopes take step forward amid Trump's nickname pressure
The Washington Commanders' pursuit of a playing field at the old RFK Stadium site in D.C. took a major step forward on Friday as President Donald Trump put pressure on the organization over its team nickname. The D.C. Council approved the bill by a vote of 9-3. But the legislation must be approved a second time by the council before being sent to Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser, who helped the Commanders execute the plan earlier this year. The second vote will come on Sept. 17. Bowser, team owner Josh Harris and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell announced it reached an agreement with D.C. officials on the old RFK Stadium site back in April. The three then joined Trump in the Oval Office for a celebration after that. The approved proposal would support a $3.7 billion redevelopment project, featuring the new stadium, 6,000 housing units a retail space and parkland. The nation's capital will also host an upcoming NFL Draft on the National Mall in 2027. "Today's approval by the Council is transformational for D.C. and brings the Commanders back to our spiritual home, Harris said in a statement. "Like many fans, RFK was the site of memories that fueled my love for this team and this city. Now we're closer than ever to reigniting that energy for a new generation. "This is a historic moment. This project is about more than delivering a world-class stadium worthy of our players, fans and the region. It's about revitalizing a critical part of our city, creating thousands of jobs and unlocking long-term economic benefits for the district. We look forward to working with our fans, residents, community leaders and elected officials to deliver on this vision." RFK Now!, an organization that rallied support for the Commanders to get clearance for the stadium, expressed its happiness with the council for its vote. "We are pleased that the Council listened to DC residents and advanced a great deal for our city," Malcom Fox, the executive director of Opportunity DC and organizer of RFK Now!, said in a news release. "Just a few years ago, bringing the Commanders home seemed impossible. With today's vote, we're on track to secure the largest private investment in DC history. This is an enormous win that will generate opportunity in Ward 7 and across the District for decades to come." A wrench was thrown into the vote in July when Trump took issue with the Commanders for refusing to revert to their Redskins name. "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," he wrote on Truth Social. Trump on Thursday expressed his displeasure with the name as he announced the re-establishment of the Presidential Fitness Test. "I don't even know what the hell their last name is," Trump said. "It's Commanders or something? Is it Commanders? Commanders, it's not a good name." Harris has maintained that the Commanders' name is here to stay.
