No more offensive Cleveland logo

[Nine of twelve]

Various news sources report that the Cleveland franchise of MLB is removing the American Indian caricature logo from caps and uniforms after the 2018 season.

I don't know why it's not being done immediately, and I think it's time for the team name to be changed as well, but I guess some progress is better than none.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm more ambivalent about the name.....but the mascot is offensive. 

[Squirrel]

 

I'm more ambivalent about the name.....but the mascot is offensive. 

Yeah, even among Native Americans you'll see a lot of split and indifference/ambivalence toward the name 'Indians.' At least from what articles I've read about it. 

[Respy]

This is the correct move and I don't think any teams need to carry offensive logos.  Logos and branding are so fluid, it should not be that hard.  The Chief Wahoo logo is quite dated anyways.  Hopefully they move in a completely different direction, or just go with the simple 'C.'  

 

Teams names are a much harder thing to change on the other hand.  While eventually they should probably not be the Indians, it is a much larger franchise disruption to rename a historical team.

 

When change is hard, baby steps are better than nothing.

[NapoleonComplex]

Very glad this is finally happening. If you want a peak at the ugly underbelly of society, go on Twitter and read replies to sports journalists that tweet their support of the change. Holy cow!

[snap4birds]

The story I read said they need to continue using/selling the image, or they lose their copyright on it, then anyone could use it.  It would probably be more widespread in that case, as anyone could produce it and nostalgic fans might want to still display it.  Kind of a tricky situation......I'd assume the Washington DC football team faces the same problem.

[Shaitan]

It's about time.

[Nine of twelve]

The story I read said they need to continue using/selling the image, or they lose their copyright on it, then anyone could use it.  It would probably be more widespread in that case, as anyone could produce it and nostalgic fans might want to still display it.  Kind of a tricky situation......I'd assume the Washington DC football team faces the same problem.

Interesting, and I can see how they would lose $$$ on sales of retro gear after the copyright expires. But I think they'd make up a huge chunk of that selling merchandise with the new name and logo.

[Nine of twelve]

Yeah, even among Native Americans you'll see a lot of split and indifference/ambivalence toward the name 'Indians.' At least from what articles I've read about it.

So if only 49% of Native Americans are offended it's OK? (I'm being devil's advocate here.) What percentage would need to find it offensive for you to feel the name should be changed?

[Squirrel]

So if only 49% of Native Americans are offended it's OK? (I'm being devil's advocate here.) What percentage would need to find it offensive for you to feel the name should be changed?

I don’t think it’s something you can quantify like that. But if we changed everything because someone is offended, that also becomes problematic. I don’t know where the neutral zone is on any of these issues.

 

And just to be clear, the logo absolutely was offensive. It's the generic 'Indians' that is more difficult as there is widespread disagreement to that in the Native American community.

[3balls2strikes]

People name their son "Charles" after a grandfather as an honor.

People name a bridge "Veterans Memorial Bridge" as an honor.

People name a road "Walter Mondale Drive" as an honor. 

People name a Metrodome "Hubert H. Humphrey" as an honor.

People name a school "Martin Luther King" as an honor. 

People name a NFL team "Vikings" as an honor. 

 

People name a MLB team "Indians" as an honor. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Interesting, and I can see how they would lose $$$ on sales of retro gear after the copyright expires. But I think they'd make up a huge chunk of that selling merchandise with the new name and logo.

 

it's more they need to keep control over the old stuff, otherwise anyone can use the logo for anything.......this will help limit the logos use.

[3balls2strikes]

 

People name their son "Charles" after a grandfather as an honor.

People name a bridge "Veterans Memorial Bridge" as an honor.

People name a road "Walter Mondale Drive" as an honor. 

People name a Metrodome "Hubert H. Humphrey" as an honor.

People name a school "Martin Luther King" as an honor. 

People name a NFL team "Vikings" as an honor. 

 

People name a MLB team "Indians" as an honor. 

The point, for those who may struggle with logic, is that nobody names something as an insult. Naming a baseball team "Indians" is a great honor to Indians. It's showing them utmost respect to name something after them. 

 

For every person complaining about the name Indians, they better be equally complaining about the name Vikings and the crowd chant celebrating drinking out of a murdered opponent's skull (skol). You want offensive? That is offensive.

[Mike Sixel]

 

The point, for those who may struggle with logic, is that nobody names something as an insult. Naming a baseball team "Indians" is a great honor to Indians. It's showing them utmost respect to name something after them. 

 

For every person complaining about the name Indians, they better be equally complaining about the name Vikings and the crowd chant celebrating drinking out of a murdered opponent's skull (skol). You want offensive? That is offensive.

 

really? Are you actually offended by it? 

 

So, naming a team Redskins is, um, an honor?

 

what I don't get is why people care that the logo is going away. Do people root for logos?

[Nine of twelve]

People name their son "Charles" after a grandfather as an honor.

People name a bridge "Veterans Memorial Bridge" as an honor.

People name a road "Walter Mondale Drive" as an honor. 

People name a Metrodome "Hubert H. Humphrey" as an honor.

People name a school "Martin Luther King" as an honor. 

People name a NFL team "Vikings" as an honor. 

 

People name a MLB team "Indians" as an honor.

I agree with all but one of the above. I think there's one case where it was not done as an honor.

[Winston Smith]

I have a hard time thinking the Cleveland owner, back when they picked the nickname, was doing it to honor Native Americans.

[Nine of twelve]

The point, for those who may struggle with logic, is that nobody names something as an insult. Naming a baseball team "Indians" is a great honor to Indians. It's showing them utmost respect to name something after them. 

 

For every person complaining about the name Indians, they better be equally complaining about the name Vikings and the crowd chant celebrating drinking out of a murdered opponent's skull (skol). You want offensive? That is offensive.

Your claim of the origin of the word "skol" is not supported by the Oxford English dictionary etymology.

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/skol

[slash129]

Having a chuckle reading some of the die-hards' comments on those various articles. "I've been expecting this, so I've been stocking up on Wahoo gear for years." Or,"I will continue to wear Wahoo, my children will wear Wahoo, and my grandchildren will wear Wahoo." I've never been much attached to logos and the like, so I'm possibly lacking perspective, but those just seem like unnecessary priorities.

[slash129]

Your claim of the origin of the word "skol" is not supported by the Oxford English dictionary etymology.

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/skol

FWIW ... https://www.dailynorseman.com/2010/6/27/1540257/what-does-skol-mean

[Old Twins Cap]

I've always thought the Cleveland logo, if you look at it, is more about a caricature of African-Americans than American Indians.

 

The lips, the teeth, the big smile, these are not the traits of Native peoples in North America.  Which tribe actually, even at the caricature level, look like that?

 

NONE.

 

But, you can find caricatures of black people that look very much like Chief Wahoo.

 

For Cleveland then, Chief Wahoo -- and what a name! no connection at all to anything Native -- it has always kind of been a two-fer:  you get the "Indians" in there, and you get a caricature of a Jim Crow-era black man. 

 

Always been horrific.  Surprised it lasted this long.  Good riddance.

 

There was no honoring of any race with Chief Wahoo.

[Shane Wahl]

Obvious move for all human beings. Now if that degenerate NFL team could follow suit.

[Circus Boy]

 

Yeah, even among Native Americans you'll see a lot of split and indifference/ambivalence toward the name 'Indians.' At least from what articles I've read about it. 

In a poll re the Washington Indigenous Natives football club, I believe 80% of tribal members liked the Redskins name. Wouldn't doubt that percentage would hold for the Cleveland baseball club, as well.

[Taildragger8791]

It's time for Cleveland to give the people what they want and change their name to the Cleveland Wild Things, featuring a Ricky Vaughn mascot.

[wavedog]

Attaching a link where Joe Posnaski addresses the origin of the Indians name 

 

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/cleveland-indians-nickname-sockalexis/

 

It is more than past time that the Chief Wahoo logo went away like maybe by 60 years.    As for the Indians name - I am not Indian,  but I don't have a negative connotation with the name Indians, however I'll bring forward this example.   When my daughters were in Elementary school we joined the YMCA Indian Princess program - where we were assigned tribes and learned about the culture of that tribe - for us the Comanches.   Everyone treated that respectfully for the most part - but I know they have changed the YMCA program now away from Indian tribes out of respect from complaints brought forward from Native Americans that their culture was being misrepresented.      

 

Maybe since Cleveland is home to the Rock and Roll HoF - they can change their name to the Cleveland Rockers - We will, We will  Rock you!   

 

[spanman2]

 

It's time for Cleveland to give the people what they want and change their name to the Cleveland Wild Things, featuring a Ricky Vaughn mascot.

IALTO

[TheLeviathan]

It's one thing to name yourself after a sub-culture (Vikings, Spartans, Yankees), and it's quite another to name yourself after a race of people.  

 

The name should change in time as well.

[slash129]

Maybe since Cleveland is home to the Rock and Roll HoF - they can change their name to the Cleveland Rockers - We will, We will Rock you!

SMH ... So cliche

 

[Thrylos]

 

It's one thing to name yourself after a sub-culture (Vikings, Spartans, Yankees), and it's quite another to name yourself after a race of people.  

 

The name should change in time as well.

 

Spartans are actual people.  Not that most modern Spartans know or care about the football team. So are:

 

Scots (Alma College & Macalester College) and Fighting Scots (Edinboro University of PA, Gordon College, Ohio Valley U, Wooster), Swedes (Bethany College), Dutch (Central College) & Flying Dutchmen (Hope College & Lebanon Valley College), Chippewas (Central Michigan), Hustlin' Quakers (Earlham), Fighting Quakers (Wilmington College), and Quakers (U Penn), Tejanos (El Paso Community College), Seminoles (FL State), Fighting Illini (Illinois), Ragin' Cajuns (Louisiana Lafayette),  Highlanders (MacMurray College, NJIT, Radford U), Choctaws (Miss. State), Pygmies (NM Minning & Tech), Fighting Irish (Notre Dame),  Texans (Tarleton State U), Tribe (William & Mary)

 

and I am not including names such as Mountaineeers, Pioneers, Cowboys, Majors, Senators, Colonels, Packers, Lumberjacks 49ers, Vikings, Trojans, Rebels etc that refer to specific groups of people albeit some historic and some occupations.

 

To me "Indian" as a mascot or nickname is about as offensive as "Scot" or "Quaker".  Same thing.  Pygmies is probably more offensive than all three...

 

 

 

[Taildragger8791]

 

It's one thing to name yourself after a sub-culture (Vikings, Spartans, Yankees), and it's quite another to name yourself after a race of people.  

 

The name should change in time as well.

 

It's not just about race vs sub-culture, it's about respect. You could offensively represent any group of people if you tried. Depicting Vikings and Spartans as warmongering mascots is accepted because their descendants don't have a connection to their history, having long since assimilated into the world around them (usually after being conquered). Yankee is just an informal term for American and isn't used in a derogatory sense (unless it's by a Southerner still carrying a grudge against the North).

 

Chief Wahoo needs to go because it's a cartoonishly ridiculous way to depict a Native American. The name...I see a good argument to change it because there isn't a credible history of it honoring or respecting anyone. Same with "Redskins", a word with a complicated history but that was still strongly used as a slur for a period and isn't honoring anyone. But it seems counterproductive to remove all Native American references from sports and other areas just because they're tied to a particular race.

[jimmer]

The Fighting Hawks...ugh...