Originally Posted by infantrycak
Which means zilch to whether a mascot name is derogatory.
Fundamental fact - mascots are chosen out of RESPECT not derision.
They are chosen to sell jerseys. That's why there is a team called the Nads. It's not out of respect for Nads.
George Marshall bought the Boston Braves and changed the team name to the more offensive term of "Redskins" out of respect? Come on -- at BEST it's a draw as to which name is more inflammatory, and I'm pretty sure on a scale of 1-10 Redskin falls way further down than Braves.
BTW George Marshall was the last guy in football to integrate his team, even when they were a disaster through the 1950's. There's evidence that he was a major force behind the NFL's sudden resegregation in 1933, the year after he bought the Braves. He expressly ordered in his will that his foundation not spend any money on “any purpose which supports or employs the principle of racial integration in any form." He made his "respected" coach dress up in Indian war dress for games
. You think Belichek would tolerate that?