Daniel Snyder doth protest too much
Posted October 10, 2013
Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder wrote a letter addressed to season-ticket holders discussing the ongoing controversy over the organization's name. Of course, the letter was made available to everyone else because it's nothing more than another public relationships salvo against those who insist "Redskins" is offensive and should be changed.
Let's give Snyder some credit. At least the letter was more eloquent than the last time he spoke on the matter, where he proclaimed the name of his team would "NEVER" be changed. Yes, Snyder said to use all caps. And hey, it wasn't in comic sans font.
But that's all the credit Snyder deserves. The rest of his letter recycles worn out talking points and takes a condescending tone when arguing the name Redskins should be considered a "badge of honor." Snyder also does his best to use the lovely haze of nostalgia to his advantage.
"That tradition -- the song, the cheer -- it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation," Snyder said. "Our past isn’t just where we came from -- it’s who we are."
Sorry, lost consciousness after laughing uncontrollably at Snyder's sappy attempt to sound relatable.
For the record, I'm agnostic on the Washington Redskins name controversy. Whether Snyder puts a potato on the side of a helmet or leaves everything unchanged, I can't help but shrug my shoulders over the topic. I'm not here to tell you "Redskins" is offensive or argue the nickname is far removed from it's insensitive origins for it to even matter in 2013.
However, I am curious as to why the Washington Redskins are the center of this controversy while other franchises avoid scrutiny. There is no national discourse over the Cleveland Indians and their use of "Chief Wahoo" as a logo. The Atlanta Braves can chop to their heart's content. President Barack Obama isn't asked about the Chicago Blackhawks possibly being offensive, he's asked if the team can win another Stanley Cup.
So why is everyone picking on the Redskins? Why does NFL commissioner Roger Goodell have to meet with tribal leaders over a specific franchise while the Kansas City Chiefs are allowed to go about their business without much fuss? Why have a handful of media outlets proudly announced their refusal use the nickname when referring to the football team based in Washington?
Because none of the other franchises have Daniel Snyder as an owner.