At the NFL combine today, Sam Bradford, who is 1/16 Cherokee, was asked if he would prefer the quarterback-bereft Redskins not draft him.
(If Bradford was full-blooded Cherokee and embraced the culture, would it be?)
Bradford replied, “no.” Earlier the same day he had said, “I’m not going to address that issue,” when the subject was broached.
Doug Farrar of FootballOutsiders.com tweeted that the query was the, “Official dumbest question of the Combine.”
Mark Maske of the WASHINGTON POST also noted the questions, reporting that, “some Native Americans have been critical of the team’s nickname, calling it derogatory, and have challenged it in legal proceedings.”
I actually don’t think the question was inappropriate.
I’m far from a politically-correct person and don’t have a problem with most Native American sports teams nicknames. But Redskins is one of the few, if only, that is wildly offensive and only continues to exist because of the millions in merch dollars it means to NFL Washington Redskins Owner Dan Snyder.
Snyder and most Redskins fans aren’t racist or deliberately trying to cause harm to the Native American population, but there’s no denying that the team’s nickname is a slur. Though the reality of our culture is that if a brand is long-established, it will be allowed to fly in the face of present-day social mores.
Another example of that is the SPORTS ILLUSTRATED swimsuit issue. The magazine features fully nude women in body paint and implied nudity is the norm, not the exception. But because SI is a venerable institution in our society, it can get away with displaying those images in school libraries and convenience store counters.
Additionally, the NEW YORK DAILY NEWS recently ran a large photo of New York Jets coach Rex Ryan giving an obscene gesture. Because the Daily News is a long-established brand, there was very little reaction to what on its face was an outrageous editorial decision.
If Bradford was full-blooded Cherokee and intimately involved in that culture, I would think that what took place today at the combine wouldn’t termed as “stupid.” There will probably come a day when a full-blooded Native American is once again presented with that dilemma, and I looked forward to it.
10:55 pm on February 27th, 2010
No… still a stupid question. It’s like asking Tiger Woods if Margaret Cho’s standup offends him. It’s like asking Mariah Carey’s opinion of Hugo Chavez.
Yes, no one would say it was a stupid question if Bradford was even half Cherokee.
But he’s not so it is.
10:56 pm on February 27th, 2010
If they called the team the Whiteyskins, everyone would see that it is offensive.
11:52 pm on February 27th, 2010
Whiteyskins? What in the sam hell are you talking about? In your case, dumbassyskins would be more appropriate. Good article Brooks, interesting thoughts.
12:12 am on February 28th, 2010
Poll after poll show that the vast majority of Native Americans dont have a problem with the name Redskins.
This comes down to a small group of people trying to tell other people that they’re too stupid to know they’re being insulted.
2:37 am on February 28th, 2010
i know a white guy who has a problem with the red sox…an ancestor was killed by a gutless communist coward…he doesn’t like the term red
7:29 am on February 28th, 2010
Ex-Redskin Mark May’s father is 100% Native American and said he had no problem with it whatsoever….
9:02 am on February 28th, 2010
If you knew anything about the subject you would know the term Redskin was created by Native Americans to distinguish themselves from the white colonialists. Brooks again spouting off about things he knows nothing about, which seems to be a lot.
10:33 am on February 28th, 2010
Here is the thing that gets missed in the analysis of this.
1) The phrase “Redskins” didn’t start as a pejorative (in fact, in the team’s official information there is an origin listed, at least there used to be)
2) It isn’t used NOW as a pejorative (in fact, the only association most people have with it is from the football team)
3) The logo and team merchandise are overtly respectful and not cartoonish (say, like Cleveland)
What this is, i believe, is an effective issue to bring a spotlight on Native American activists and advocates who certainly have more important things to discuss than a sports team nickname
10:44 am on February 28th, 2010
I too have Cherokee ancestors who were par of the ‘Trail of Tears’. On behalf of all of my ancestors, we are not offended by the Redskins nickname.
10:45 am on February 28th, 2010
Non-issue and you are a lame for bringing it up.
10:48 am on February 28th, 2010
Redskin is not racist. It denotes a race but it is not racist. Stupid question with a great response. Bradford is the best QB in the draft IMO and dumps on Tebow and Colt. He’s an unbelievable natural athlete where as Tebow is great at running through walls.
11:52 am on February 28th, 2010
Bradford’s a good kid, I hope he does well, but that shoulder may be his undoing. Surgically repaired or not, it probably will not hold up long in the NFL. That choad Stoops should have gently pushed Sam out the door and told him to get that money two years ago while he could. He didn’t and the rest is history, or soon shall be.
1:05 pm on February 28th, 2010
only thing offensive with the Redskins, is their owner, piece of crap toilet bowl stadium, terrible team and dumb fans who continue to pay to be abused by their terrible owner and weak squads for the past 10 years!
remember vinny cerrato was half cherokee but he was 100% dumb therefore not offended.
1:29 pm on February 28th, 2010
Well said Chris. Since it is clear Brooks isn’t capable of reading a history book or actually talking to the Cherokee community, nice of you to help him out.
I have never heard the term Redskin used towards any native. They actually sold Redskins merchandise at the last Pow Wow I attended. Think about that the next time your white self wants to tell me what offends my people.
3:27 pm on February 28th, 2010
They could be nicknamed the Teepee Sleepin Alcoholic Injuns and Bradford would not mind beins drafted by them if they had won the past two Super Bowls. What is dums is that his Pseudo Indian ass cannot answer the question intelligently.
3:30 pm on February 28th, 2010
do u think my southern racist ass would care if i was drafted by the Yankees despite relatives fightin for the South way back and my family today still attending war reenactments dressed in alabama garb?
6:24 pm on February 28th, 2010
Hell no its not a stupid question. It’s very valid and I posed the same question to a few of my sport loving friends. Of course at first glance, they looked at me like I was an alien.
But after thinking about it a little more, and after I expertly gave them an example using African American examples, they saw my point.
The ultimate answer to the question of course is Bradford. Even though he is 1 part Cherokee, he may not have been raised in an American Indian household with no connection to the culture. But if he had been, I’m sure he would have reservations (no pun intended) about being drafted by the Skins. Would he say so to an NFL rep, that’s interviewing him for a possible multi million dollar job? I don’t think so. But then again, this goes back to his strong connection to the culture.
Not a stupid question at all!
6:36 pm on February 28th, 2010
I think the Redskin thing started as a gripe over the exploitation and commercialization of a culture, not really racism per se. White people are so scared of being called racist that we way overcompensate.
2:27 am on March 1st, 2010
There is nothing offensive about the term “redskin” unless you choose to be offended.
3:55 am on March 1st, 2010
i love it when there is a simple right answer to a controversial issue; are any of the people involved in the Redskins organization Native American? No. Are any players? No. Most of their fans? No. Ok, that means that there just has to be a significant minority of Native Americans who are offended by the nickname in order for the organization to pick a new name for the team. And there is. They should change it ASAP.
6:34 am on March 1st, 2010
http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/index.html
7:27 am on March 1st, 2010
As stated before, most Native American individuals do not have a problem with it and therefore do not create organizations publicizing this fact. In other words, “Native American group not bothered by name.” is not a good story headline.
9:40 am on March 1st, 2010
There are many native americans that dont have a problem with the name. The few that do seem to be only 1/16 or even 1/8 native american and would probably bitch and moan about anything they could. My wife is 1/4 native american, from the tidewater va area, and loves the Washington Redskins. The few people who stand against the name are usually white, get worked up by the slightest perceived injustice( whether real or not) and are not speaking for the majority of the native americans in the area. Maybe some of these white people should feel bad about the injustices done to them a long time ago, not the fact that they are being honored by a pro sports team.
11:12 am on March 1st, 2010
I can’t pretend to know how Native American’s feel about the term Redskins, but it was kind of a stupid question to ask Bradford. He’s 1/16th, thats great-great grandfather or grandmother. Unless Bradford has a history of “embracing his Native American ancestry” its kind of unfair to put the issue on him.
11:13 am on March 1st, 2010
“There is nothing offensive about the term “redskin” unless you choose to be offended.”
Using that line of reasoning, there is nothing offensive as ni**er and wetback, spic, (insert your own perjorative), unless you choose to be offended.
11:46 am on March 1st, 2010
After the recent Kornheiser bashing, here’s one of his best ideas: just put a potato on the side of the helmet
2:06 pm on March 1st, 2010
Why would any decent QB prospect want to go to an organization that changes offensive coordinators and head coaches so much that they should wear velcro name tags on their coach gear?
I get that the paycheck is the paycheck, and Bradford won’t rock the boat. But if he really wants to go there under that owner, I think he just failed the Wunderlic.
3:14 pm on March 1st, 2010
So I guess I can call my team Blackskins, or Yellowmen, or White Devils. Or hell why not just come out and call a team Coons, or Ni–ers?? No one should be offended, right?? If they are, its their fault??? The name IS offensive to native Americans!! Want to know how?? Find a Native American on the street. Go up to him and call him a Savage, Chief, RedSkin, Squaw, or any other name the dictionary itself calls a racial slur, and see his reaction! I am A real Native American, not just some one who knows one or works with one, but a honest to God INDIAN!! And WE DO FIND IT RACIST!!!! You may “Honor” your team called the Redskins, but the other team fans will degrade my people with chants of “Massacre the redskins” or some other outrages filth!!! That is not honor!!!
6:51 pm on March 1st, 2010
I agree with you NDN….the term is racist and should have been changed already…for some to imply that the term isn’t offensive unless someone “chooses” to be offended is the height of blissful ignorance. The fact that so many people with so many backgrounds have weighed in on the matter gives merit to the topic being discussed….not everyone has to or should have to agree on this issue, but that’s okay…not everyone agreed on civil or women’s rights, or slavery….nonetheless things change and those who don’t like it…too F-ing bad.
7:07 pm on March 1st, 2010
Stop,its only racist if its ment to be taken that way.The Washington Redskins have gone out of their way to make sure its not taken as such.I happen to be half Cherokee/Blackfoot and have season tickets with The Washington Redskins.I live in the no.Va. area and have followed the team for almost 50 years.Anyone knowing the history of the team,would know they were named by a full blooded American Indian.Native American is probably more offensive.We prefer the term First Nation or American Indian.Everybody else has to stop telling us how we should feel.
9:06 pm on March 1st, 2010
We could have the “Blackskins” and have buckwheat on the helmet…..
11:19 pm on March 1st, 2010
Look, Iam from a long line of medicine people from Northern California. We still practice our culture and sing the soongs of our ancestors, and I only know of a FEW people from here who can stomach the idea of a team being named Redskin. Just becasue there are some people who come on here and say “I’m native and this is fine..” bull, a true native who knows who they are, would not think this is a “honor.” All the people who say they are native and it’s fine are from the DC area (virginia, baltimore, etc.) coincidence? i think not. Its time to change the name (Senators?)
11:28 pm on March 1st, 2010
if a native american shouldn’t play for the redkins, I guess that means african americans shouldn’t buy rap music
2:51 pm on March 2nd, 2010
Rap music IS made by Black people. What tribes own the Redskins?? Redskins have “not” gone out of their way to do anything about the situation!! Its all about money to the owners. They have done nothing to help Native Tribes, they do not care little Indian children get mocked and teased about the redskin name, Read some of the racists posts here!! Is that the way You HONOR Native Americans?? If you know the history of the NFL, than you know the story about the owner of the redskins who did not want Blacks to play for him!! Outright racism..and calling my people redskins is outright racist to!
2:56 pm on March 2nd, 2010
white folks just can’t seem to understand..if the wasington wizards can dump bullits…the the clevland indians, redskins braves and any othther native american named team can switched names, wait until the iraq’s have some team called invaders or occupiers..
5:50 pm on March 2nd, 2010
When you use Native American symbols (like tomahawks and feathered flint arrowheads…hear that, Braves and Chiefs?)…and caricatures of Native warriors as your logos and then claim that using the term “redskin” is not racist and purely insulting to a group of people who have been robbed of their culture and land, you are apparently completely out of touch with anything but your own social chauvinism.
2:45 am on March 3rd, 2010
Redskins is racist.
4:09 pm on March 7th, 2010
Interesting topic, true we have no teams named blackskins, or brownies, or honkies dressed in white sheets for mascots. And I would never claim to know how it feels or what is right other to say, I can understand how native americans can be offended by this name. However, it is not Sam Bradfords cross to take up at this time. Sam never threw his hat into the politically correct race, just the NFL race. Yes, if picked to play for Washington, he will have to address it, but let him get picked first. Sam was in a damned if you do and damned if you don’t answer that question correctly, i thought he handled it as best he could. He just wants to play football first. Guy is bright, he will handle it if he needs to.
10:38 pm on March 7th, 2010
All I can say is that if Sam does play for the redskins he will be a disappointment to many of the young Native athlete that have looked up to him over the past years. I am a full blood Cherokee and I hope that he makes the decision that will make his people. I know how many of our young Cherokee athletes especially look up to him in admiration for his accomplishments. He is a role model for our Native youth, and I hope he remembers that when he makes a decision.
3:42 pm on March 29th, 2010
It’s a legit question. Everyone is so thin skinned that you can’t ask anything or make any comment without someone having a tizzy. Let’s be clear: the origin of the term redskin is not known but it has been used in a variety of ways, most of them negative. American Indians (the proper and preferred term for most ‘natives’ including me) have a variety of opinions about the name. Bradford may only be 1/16 Cherokee but he is on the rolls and a citizen of Cherokee nation so he better have an opinion.