Redskins 80th Anniversary Highlight Video “Raising Hell” is Must See TV

I'm a redskins fan also guys. I still think it should be changed.

Washington REDSKINS!!!!! Wooooooo!!!!! Adam, opinions are not a solid basis for an 80 year old sports team name change, AT ALL. I'm offended every time I hear Cowboys, but I'm not pressing for a name change. I'm proud of the Redskins name, and our franchise's history. Leave our name alone. I guess every dude named Dick should change his name because it offends someone. Come on man!! Get over it and Hail to the Redskins!!!!!!! :-D

That argument about the Washington N-words is not a good one..."niggers" was meant to be a derogatory term there are also facts that support that the term...redskins..was used by native Americans...

But Adam we aren't describing an American Indian!!! We are describing a Football Team!!! Hey, we are keeping the NAME, GET OVER IT PEOPLE!!!!

Loved this video! It was AWESOME!! I could watch it over and over!! Thanks!

I think if something is offensive to any group of people no matter large or small, it should be changed. I'm not hanging my position on that. Who cares if it happened a hundred or two hundred years ago. I'm sure if I started a team and nick names them the n- word, I'd have all kinds of uproar from African Americans to change it and media and most of society. I mean if you're not Native American I really don't think you have any basis for saying the name shouldn't be changed. If some native Americans want it changed, their wishes should be granted.

Adam, First problem is Suzan Harjo. " The term originates from the bounty-hunting days, when colonies and companies would pay settlers for dead American Indians. Scalps, called “redskins,” were used as trophies and proof because it was too difficult to carry the entire body, says Suzan Harjo " Sounds good except her opinion that is now being presented as fact is wrong according to facts. 2012 North Dakota Law Reveiw- BEFORE THE REDSKINS WERE THE REDSKINS: THE USE OF NATIVE AMERICAN TEAM NAMES IN THE FORMATIVE ERA OF AMERICAN SPORTS, 1857-1933 http://valhalla.law.und.nodak.edu/LawReview/issues/web_assets/pdf/86/86-4/86NDLR879.pdf Harjo wrote... the term Redskins has despicable origins in the days of Indian bounty hunting in the 1600s and 1700s. Bounties under a dollar were paid for Indian children, women, and men, dead or alive. For ease of commerce, few live Indians were delivered to the marketplace, and trade in dead bodies flourished. It quickly became too cumbersome for bounty hunters to transport wagon loads of bodies and gunny sacks of heads, and too bothersome for bounty hunters to dispose of them. Thus began the practice of paying bounties for the bloody red skins and scalps as evidence of Indian kill. Law Review- Harjo made these assertions without offering any specific historical evidence or scholarly support, and none of those who have embraced the story have provided compelling support.......In the digest, Russell mentions Indian bounties but in no way connects the practice with the term “Redskins.” GEORGE RUSSELL, THE AMERICAN INDIAN DIGEST 11 (2d 1993), available at http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED368516.pdf. Russell reproduced a 1755 proclamation from Massachusetts colonial governor William Shirley which did authorize the payment of bounties for killing or capturing members of several Native American tribes. Id. What Russell did not appreciate, however, is that this proclamation was a consequence of the beginning of the French and Indian War. Id. The bounties were available only to soldiers in the colonial army and applied only to members of tribes supporting the French. Id. Tribes loyal to the English, like the Penobscotts, were specifically excluded, which presents a different story than the claims of Harjo. Read through the first 9 pages and you will learn she doesn't have a lot of support. Ives Goddard report which you are probably familiar with already. http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf Harjo's response to Goddard was basically you can't trust him because he's white. http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002961.html The name is not changing.

Hail to the Redskins!!!!!! 2013 is gonna be awesome. Just watch. ;-)

There's no reason to change the name. Anyone whining about it has too much time on their hands. Hail to the Redskins!!!! I do not care why people waaaaaaaaay back in history's past created the name Redskins, at all. So what. That was then, and this is now. Get out of the past please.

"'Redskin' is the most derogatory word you can use to describe a Native American," says Bill Means, founder of the International Indian Treaty Council. The term originates from the bounty-hunting days, when colonies and companies would pay settlers for dead American Indians. Scalps, called "redskins," were used as trophies and proof because it was too difficult to carry the entire body, says Suzan Harjo, one of the plaintiffs in the suit. "In some cases male scalps could be bought for 80 cents, women for 60 [cents], and children for even less. This term describes a heinous act," Harjo adds. http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/10/04/skin-tone.html IMO, the name should be changed. Make it the warriors and we should get to keep the decal but the rest should go. Washington Warriors makes sense to me. Then Snyder will be happy, he can make more $ of new merchandise.

Sick video. Name change won't happen so we shouldn't entertain it any more. HTTR.