Will they ever change the name?

Will the Harris Group change the name?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 68.8%

  • No

    Votes: 5 31.3%
  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
They aren't changing the name. Major sports teams don't change names and branding every few years unless the owner is a complete and utter idiot like Dan Snyder. Anyone with any marketing savvy won't change the name for at least five years, and by then we'll all be used it and there will be no point.

It's not going anywhere. I'm going to give Harris enough credit to assume he's not an idiot and he's not driven by emotion when it comes to making multi-million dollar decisions for a multi-billion dollar organization. We are the Commanders. It's time to let this go.

EDIT: I apologize if that came across as harsh. I realize we all WANT the name to be different, I just don't see any way that that happens in the real world. Frankly, the three points Boone listed in his very first post is all that needs to be said.
 
Last edited:
What major sports team that's stayed in the same city ever changed their name before?

The Indians?

That's all I can think of.
 
Henry said:
Dude ... the Wizards? :p
Click to expand...
Oh yeah... DC really sucks at pandering.


Ok, that's three. My point was that I don't think it's been done enough to say it doesn't happen or can't. I think this is fresh territory and could.

That's not saying Redskins is on the table, but something should be if we aren't making money or the fans hate it.
 
MikefromOH said:
Oh yeah... DC really sucks at pandering.


Ok, that's three. My point was that I don't think it's been done enough to say it doesn't happen or can't. I think this is fresh territory and could.

That's not saying Redskins is on the table, but something should be if we aren't making money or the fans hate it.
Click to expand...

If we're just spitballing here, I agree with you. I like going back to Football Team. It's unique and it will never have to be changed to reflect shifting cultural attitudes.

But it's not happening. The team isn't selling merch because the fans abandoned Dan Snyder. As it has been pointed out, bad teams still sell. Snyder drove fans away even before the name change. That they haven't yet returned after one 4-13 season is not a reflection of the popularity of the name. If Harris is even a halfway competent owner, fans will return, and they won't care what the name is.
 
I will add here that I hate hate HATE the current logo. It looks like it was designed by an 8th grader who just learned about the bold/outline feature in Powerpoint. That's something I do hope they figure out over the next few years.
 
When we talk logo what are we referencing? The W on the helmet, that patch that they fucked up the dates on?
 
Mostly the W.

The patch is fine I guess but every time I see it it reminds me of how they fucked up the dates. :)
 
Boone said:
He punted the question. And the team continues to punt the question. It’s time they answer the fucking question imho. A big portion of the fanbase wants to know. They know at this point if it’s their intent and fans deserve to know.
Click to expand...
Man do I feel ya, but I get the impression that by not giving a straight up answer, and even giving some a little hope of a return to the Redskins, it keeps people engaged. A portion of the fan base is gone because of the name change, so getting those folks looking and listening again is likely important to management. Even the fans that are still following the team that wish for a name change are kept engaged. Sometimes, no answer is the best answer to keep that level of engagement, while working on the actual team rebuild. Once we put out a consistent quality product on the field, so many things can happen...:unsure:
 
First of all, sports is an emotion-driven world. We should be well aware of this. It's fine to say 'don't make emotion-based decisions in business' - except that it ignores that nothing drives sport's franchise business like emotion. Passion for the team, hunger for wins, excitement about team identity and star players, hatred for arch enemy opponents. It's the biggest business factor in the sports world.

That's why the 'Commanders' have had bottom of the league game attendance and swag sales. If we want to put that all on the boogieman (Dan Snyder), okay. And of course, winning could greatly impact those things. But so could coming up with a name that fans are excited about and proud of. I challenge anyone here to show evidence that changing the name wouldn't be a savvy and profitable business move?

I take offense at the implication that fans who want a name change are irrational, not serious fans, or just need to accept it and shut up. Frankly - I heard the same nonsense when we were screaming for Dan Snyder to be removed. How'd that work out?
 
Boone, I don't think anyone would ever accuse you of not being a serious fan. I don't know where you got that from.

But if you are going to argue that Team Identity is a cornerstone of a team's business success, you can't change that identity three times in five years. You just can't do that. As Mike just pointed out, VERY few teams change names without changing cities. There's a reason for that. It drives away fans. It's a terrible business decision, so you only do it for a drastic reason. If changing a team's name was a jolt of fresh new energy that would bring in fans, shitty teams would change names all the time. But in all three cases that Mike and I could come up with, that decision was due to the fact that the old name was outdated/offensive/whatever and, for business reasons, had to be changed. That is not the case with 'The Commanders.' Is it a crap name? Sure. So is The Browns, or The Red Sox, or The Nuggets, Ducks, Hokies, or about fifty other sports mascots out there. Nobody give a crap. The name doesn't matter. Fans get used to it, it becomes that Identity, and we move on.

If you don't want to blame Snyder for how terrible fan enthusiasm is, fine. I disagree, but even so, I would also say that the name's constant state of flux is also a reason nobody is buying any swag. It's been five years since the team had a stable identity. Five years. It's really hard to buy stuff when the team doesn't even know who it is anymore. You want to extend that ambiguity? I think that's a terrible business decision, and I'm guessing Harris does too, which is why he's talking about frying bigger fish. What will make fans proud is winning games. That's it. And that's what Harris should be focussing on. As we've seen over the past 20 years, anything else is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I can tell you are very passionate about this particular subject and I'm sorry I disagree, but there it is.

EDIT: Also, I don't think fan outrage was the reason Snyder was removed. I think it was because he was breaking the law, losing money and alienating his fellow owners. Harris is not doing any of those things, and keeping the name will not cause Congress to investigate him or the owners to force him out.
 
Well, just speaking for myself - I don't like Commanders and want to see it changed. When I read that the average sports team takes 3 years and spends 'X' millions of dollars researching and completing due diligence on a new name I have to laugh because the Snyder/Rivera changes look as if they took about 3 days and $3.50 to complete work on.

That said, my #1 goal is to tilt the balance on the field and pull ourselves up from being down there with Arizona and Carolina, teams seemingly always rebuilding or deciding who to pick #1 in the draft.

It seems Harris and Co. are moving at good speed to accomplish this goal given NFL timeframes and limitations, etc.

So, in that regard I give them a pretty high mark for what I have seen 6 months into this adventure.

The only thing that irritates me about the new leadership to date is still seeing the two Martys walking around, seeming to have survived the roster dumpster fire they helped set.
 
No one in this thread has argued that winning isn't the #1 priority, nor has anyone argued that Harris and company aren't doing everything in their power to set us up to win. It's a red herring, as is the idea that the team can't do more than one thing at once. Before someone says 'how do you know they aren't working on a name change' - the answer is, they have told us so, as recently as this week.

To address a couple of Henry's points... first of all, the '3 names in 5 years' may be technically true, but in terms of impact it's sort of silly. They elected to change the name. Well, there goes 2 names in 5 years. Arguing that 'Washington Football Team' was a name, while technically true, is laughable. It was a placeholder. They told us it was a placeholder. And it was. 'Changing the name again would be terrible business'. Would it? Says who? Why? Yes - we can talk about the known expense of changing a franchise name. That's a given. But what about the huge spike in swag sales a new name would likely bring?

The other thing I'll say is that I cannot understand pointing out how despicable Snyder was (which is factual and universally recognized) but not being able to recognize that the fanbase hates the 'Commanders' moniker precisely because of being saddled with that stupid name by Snyder. It's a living breathing (possibly permanent) reminder of that SOB. Cleansing of that stench would be celebrated by a huge portion of this fanbase. And they WOULD embrace the new name, precisely because we know that NFL franchises almost never change names, and whatever is selected is going to be the team name in perpetuity.

Finally, my argument has not been that they have to change the name. They paid $6 billion plus dollars for the team. Harris and Company can do whatever they want and they will. But playing this coy game of 'we're not going to provide a direct answer to a direct question' and settle the matter publicly is bad form and, at least for me, insulting to fans. People like to say that they've said they are open to changing the name, but the truth is, they haven't even been that definitive. They've said that they are open to discussing whether a name change should occur. And stop telling everyone how much fans and what they think matters, while absolutely ignoring one of the issues they care most about.

If you are going to stick with the stupid name - that's your prerogative - just say so so that this fanbase can move on with their lives. I'll 'get over it' when the ownership group mans up and states what they are going to do.

I respect that I probably have one of the most intense opinions on this subject and I'm not mad at anyone who sees it differently.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the owners are going to stay with the name. That said, the reluctance to make a commitment one way or another at this stage is likely a strategy to avoid what would come next in case that answer in the positive is made - 100,000 people bombarding the team's offices and social media pressing for the selection of name X or Y, ditto for the national media.

The name would then be the lead issue for then entire offseason heading into the opener and a clock watch on 'when' the announcements of progress on same will be made.

I can see everyone from Peters and Quinn on down to the players don't want to have that kind of distraction hit this early into a new regime before one meaningful game has been played.
 
I could see that - but I still think there are ways to signal an intent without opening the floodgates. We are seeing what not answering the question is doing. And regardless of what they say and don't say, as some have pointed out in this thread (Mike in particular) the reason it's being loudly discussed right now is because it's the offseason and right after the draft when very little will be going on. Once the season starts, it doesn't matter what Harris has said or not said, the team and how they are playing are going to dominate the news cycle.
 
I think it’s a stall tactic. Turn the franchise over the next few years and by then people will have warmed up to the name.

For the record, I am not in this thread to debate whether or not I want the name changed. I only explaining my vote. Regardless of my opinion on the name, I don’t think they are changing it. Name changes are very very rare, and I think there are business reasons for that.
 
I agree with all of that Henry. Gutless approach imho but I think that’s right.
 
I'm going to take a deep breath and give this topic a rest. Henry - I am so glad to see you posting so please don't let my screaming take on this one topic run you off - you always have a smart take, even when it's wrong, it's smart :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top