(New Poll) The Washington Commanders Brand 2.0: Beer Drinkers and Hail Raisers

How do you feel about the Commanders Brand 2.0?

  • Vastly improved, if this is THE brand moving forward Iā€™m satisfied.

  • I like the direction, but I still feel more to do. I will/have specified in thread.

  • I donā€™t like this new direction. I didnā€™t like the old either. They canā€™t make this work for me.

Results are only viewable after voting.
Unfortunately.........................

1787399137080.jpeg
 
There is no question what we all would choose if we could. The problem is we created a world where the only opinion that truly matters is the woman in the car who stated something to effect of ā€œitā€™s kind of racistā€

I would always choose Redskins if we could go back to the time when nobody was really complaining about it.
 
Al Galdi on his podcast yesterday did a very interesting segment on this. I recommend it for those of you who are interested in the name/brand saga. In it he went through the slow methodical trickle of Redskin related branding thatā€™s been inched out little by little the last few yearsā€¦including the spear, the old style unis, de-emphasis of the C-name in branding, removing the C-name from the unis altogether, the fight song now mentioning ā€˜braves on the warpathā€™ again, etc. And now the latestā€”they are actually selling Redskins merch at the stadium.

So his bottom line question to all, regardless of how you feel about the name issue, is thisā€¦if itā€™s ok to sell redskins merch at the team store, isnā€™t it ok to just be redskins? Good question. If the name were truly offensive would this be happening? Maybe the problem is the NFL getting pressure from the sponsors as many have suggested. If so, those entities can be swayed. Minds change as times change.

And look, Iā€™ve heard all the just get over it, itā€™s never coming back lectures. And Iā€™ve begrudgingly bought into that to where Iā€™ve said repeatedly I am ok moving on from that name. Instead Iā€™ve advocated for ditching the cursed Snyder name and going to something new like Redwolves. Iā€™ve criticized ownership a lot for seemingly taking the easy way out by not doing this. But what if there is a method to their madnessā€¦

What if they are in fact trying to slowly push the envelope, possibly culminating in the return of the name with the opening of the new stadium? Keeping the highly unpopular C-name actually makes that easier, while changing it again would have surely buried Redskins forever.

So yeah, I know this is all conspiracy theory-ish and nonsense to some of you. And of course it would be a longshot to work even if it was their intention. But itā€™s enough to move me out of the NEVER coming back camp and into the you never know crazier shit has happened camp.
 
I have been theorizing for a while that the name changes in 2030 when the new stadium opens up. I also donā€™t wanna go all in on that because I donā€™t wanna be disappointed. There is no better time to do this then then.

I still donā€™t think theyā€™re going to go back to Redskins as the full-time name but I do think it could be something the fans will like better.
 
HTTR said:
Al Galdi on his podcast yesterday did a very interesting segment on this. I recommend it for those of you who are interested in the name/brand saga. In it he went through the slow methodical trickle of Redskin related branding thatā€™s been inched out little by little the last few yearsā€¦including the spear, the old style unis, de-emphasis of the C-name in branding, removing the C-name from the unis altogether, the fight song now mentioning ā€˜braves on the warpathā€™ again, etc. And now the latestā€”they are actually selling Redskins merch at the stadium.

So his bottom line question to all, regardless of how you feel about the name issue, is thisā€¦if itā€™s ok to sell redskins merch at the team store, isnā€™t it ok to just be redskins? Good question. If the name were truly offensive would this be happening? Maybe the problem is the NFL getting pressure from the sponsors as many have suggested. If so, those entities can be swayed. Minds change as times change.

And look, Iā€™ve heard all the just get over it, itā€™s never coming back lectures. And Iā€™ve begrudgingly bought into that to where Iā€™ve said repeatedly I am ok moving on from that name. Instead Iā€™ve advocated for ditching the cursed Snyder name and going to something new like Redwolves. Iā€™ve criticized ownership a lot for seemingly taking the easy way out by not doing this. But what if there is a method to their madnessā€¦

What if they are in fact trying to slowly push the envelope, possibly culminating in the return of the name with the opening of the new stadium? Keeping the highly unpopular C-name actually makes that easier, while changing it again would have surely buried Redskins forever.

So yeah, I know this is all conspiracy theory-ish and nonsense to some of you. And of course it would be a longshot to work even if it was their intention. But itā€™s enough to move me out of the NEVER coming back camp and into the you never know crazier shit has happened camp.
Click to expand...
It was a great listen. And a good summary by you.

If anybody has a chance to go listen to it, I'd recommend it. Depending on your podcast platform of choice, it starts at about the 27 minute mark.
 
HTTR said:
his bottom line question to all, regardless of how you feel about the name issue, is thisā€¦if itā€™s ok to sell redskins merch at the team store, isnā€™t it ok to just be redskins? Good question. If the name were truly offensive would this be happening? Maybe the problem is the NFL getting pressure from the sponsors as many have suggested. If so, those entities can be swayed. Minds change as times change.
Click to expand...

I've been wondering this myself, but I'm thinking more along the lines of just the logo itself. If you can have it on merchandise in the team store, why not on the side of the helmet.
But then, we're still tied down by this f****** name, and the two don't really go together.
There was word coming from Steve Danes top staffers a while back saying that the team sponsors, with more of them learning about it's origins, wouldnt have any problem with the logo being used again ( and that would appease a lot of fans ), and with the logo being on team merchandise, apparently there is some truth to that.
I dont expect Redskins to come back, but the logo being used again would be a huge win.
But again, how do you square that with the name ( ? )
 
Chris said:
Hey HTTR - who is producing that Redskins gear?
Click to expand...
No idea. But itā€™s been verified that it was for sale in the team store at the stadium. If anyone is complaining about it, I havenā€™t heard it. But I donā€™t really do social media so maybe there is significant blowback Iā€™m not seeing.

Like several other things theyā€™ve done, this seems like a test to see what they can get away with. Corporate sponsors change their stance on things all the time the minute they sense a change in revenue projections or an easing of public scrutiny.
 
Spearfeather said:
I've been wondering this myself, but I'm thinking more along the lines of just the logo itself. If you can have it on merchandise in the team store, why not on the side of the helmet.
But then, we're still tied down by this f****** name, and the two don't really go together.
There was word coming from Steve Danes top staffers a while back saying that the team sponsors, with more of them learning about it's origins, wouldnt have any problem with the logo being used again ( and that would appease a lot of fans ), and with the logo being on team merchandise, apparently there is some truth to that.
I dont expect Redskins to come back, but the logo being used again would be a huge win.
But again, how do you square that with the name ( ? )
Click to expand...
My guess is itā€™s coming. Not yet, though It will be one of the last dominoes to fall if this theory is correct. Of course it doesnā€™t square with the name, but I would imagine it would come out on a throwback uni at first. The fact that those sponsors are now saying theyā€™d be OK with the logo does go to my point about corporations. I agree it would be a huge win if we get the logo back.

Anyway, Iā€™m gonna keep the door of hope cracked open on the name and the logo, at least until the new stadium opens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 4, Members: 0, Guests: 4)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 86) Show all

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top