...Red Scouts.
I think I've picked my favorite "new" name for the Washington NFL franchise. I'm not sure it's 100% kosher, though, so I'll lay out the pros and cons and see what everyone thinks.
Why I like it:
– It's not, and has never been, a racial slur.
– It's not a major change from the current name, and so should not be too traumatic for the team's die-hard fans.
– The team would be able to keep its logo and excellent current uniform set, and continue to use its historical uniforms as throwbacks.
– It kind of sounds like “Redskins”; same number of syllables, most of the same consonant sounds, so again, not a major trauma for the fans.
– It starts with “R”, so things like the R-emblazoned sideline caps, and the Lombardi-era throwback helmets (if they’re ever allowed again), can still be used.
– The fight song, “Hail to the Redskins,” could continue to be sung with only a minor change to the lyric.
– “Scouts” is an Indian designation, like “Braves” and “Chiefs.”
– They can be called the “Scouts” for short, instead of the “‘Skins.”
– “Scouts” has been used in major pro sports before, albeit very briefly (the Kansas City Scouts in the NHL).
– It would be the first two-word nickname in the modern NFL, making it unique and noteworthy. (That's unless you count "Forty-Niners," which I don't.)
Why it may not be acceptable:
– The word “Red.” I’m not sure that retaining the word “Red” and using it as a modifier while also retaining the Indian motif and logo would completely excise the racist connotations of the current name, viz., they’d be the “Red-Skinned Scouts.” It might thus be considered a step in the right direction but an unacceptable “compromise.” (By comparison, when St. John’s University changed its sports nickname from “Redmen” to “Red Storm,” the new name did not retain the Indian motif at all. And, as it happens, I wasn’t even aware at the time that “Redmen” meant Indians.)
– It may be too close or too similar to “Chiefs.” And, I think, and I could be mistaken about this, chiefs outrank scouts in Indian hierarchy, so the team and fans might not like that especially when they play Kansas City.
– Some might consider two-word (modifier-noun) nicknames amateurish, appropriate for high school or college or other sports but not the NFL.
– It does not acknowledge or advance the argument/cause that Indian names, motifs and images are altogether inappropriate for sports franchises.
All in all, I think the pros outweigh the cons, although actual Indians and actual fans of the Washington team will certainly have a different view.
I would appreciate it, though, if everyone would read the second set of bullet points before racing to the comment thread to express your outrage that anyone would dare to suggest that anything other than the feelings of American Indians should ever be taken into consideration when discussing or attempting to resolve this issue. Thanks.