Breaking News - Cleveland Indians
 

ugh.......

Bring back the NAPS.

I really didn't wanna have to start doing an Old Judge run yet but if Spiders wins I guess I'm obligated

This will do nothing for anyone. Just a total cave to the sjw movement. 105 years. Hope they never see the WS again. Are the Braves next?

It doesn't hurt anyone either. Why are you so angry about this? SMH

Not angry at all. I just hate to see pointless concessions made to try to appease. It never works. I am also a history buff and with all the expansion and teams moving etc it’s sad to see one of the oldest teams in the league change their name. Why do you care enough to quote me and attempt to interpret my motives and emotions?

And how long until the Buffalo Bills name has to be changed because it's so sexist??!! Maybe they should be called the Western NY Non-Gender Specific Team???

It will be fun to see what new name the franchise comes up with. What is lost in tradition, mainly to older fans, will be replaced with a nickname of greater excitement and relevance to younger generations.

From what I can tell nothing permanently bad came of renaming other franchises in the past. It will be something to get used to and then have bigger things to worry about.

Names and traditions matter.

In 50 years it will be ancient history, but would you rather be a New York Yankee or a Cleveland Drum Stick....or whatever they are going to come up with.

I know people get fired up about these things, especially with regard to Native Americans, and I certainly don't want to start a fight, but the question must be asked. When the snowball starts rolling downhill, when is it ever going to stop? And who is going to decide where it stops? Some snowflake who thinks 'Yankees' is offensive, because she's a southerner? A dog lover who finds 'Panthers,' 'Lions' and 'Jaguars' hateful to his sensibilities? My last name is Irish. Should I be p*ssed off to hell at Notre Dame or the Boston Celtics? No freakin' way!!! You can take each and every name in sports and find some pathetic reason to call it offensive. When will it ever stop??? Of course, there will be those of you who say anything referencing Indians is just on a whole different level, but is it really? Watch the floodgates open.

I'm sure that most members of the indigenous community would not object if properly aware of/informed of the meaning behind the team name, and they should definitely have the final say in the matter. Was it not originally meant in the club's spirit of solidarity behind their Native teammate? Who is raising the bigger stink--I'm thinking it's more the PC crowd than anything else.

I totally understand abolishing "Redskins". That is offensive. While the term "Indians" is assuredly outdated, it's not the end of the world. First Nations people still use the term to refer to themselves. It's an incorrect term (we all know how it came to be), but it was never applied with racist intent from the inception of its use.

The Cleveland Sockalexii just doesn't have the same ring to it...

Cleveland disappointments. Straight and accurate.

It never stops at a reasonable time. One thing that is certain about human nature: whenever a major societal issue is fixed, people will go way too far the other direction (as the herd mentality and social pressures to jump on that snowball are too much to stop)

I find it curious....
 

That they are doing it in a year where they are going to have a big salary dump. They are not going to be competiteve and I think some of the timing is to take attention away from the product they will be putting on the field.

Angyale

Pretty much agree with you on this. One of the reasons I left the US and only make occasional trips back to attend MLB games or sports collector shows. Im on the other side of the world now, manage a team that consists of 6 different religions, 8 different ethnicities, and we all celebrate each others holidays etc and we all get along. Try doing that in the US.

new Mascot
 

In a nod to the age of the internet the new mascot will be called Chief Yahoo (with a Fire Chiefs hat to avoid problems)

I completely understand abandoning the Redskins name, and any mascot that depicts Native Americans in a bad light. However, I don’t understand the Indian aspect. It is just a name that Columbus coined, because he thought he landed in the Indies. He didn’t mean it in a derogatory way. Is the term Indian now unacceptable and political incorrect in every sense of its use? I’m not being flippant; I really don’t understand.

The last I heard, something like 90% of Native Americans were not offended by the names of the Indians, Braves, etc., even without necessarily knowing about Sockalexis. Who exactly are the owners of the Indians appeasing? I think it's more virtue signaling.

All of my Native friends and many others I happen to encounter can be heard using the term "Indian". Perhaps there are Native people who are offended by it, but I've never met a single person who was. Again, it's an incorrect term, not a racist one. Just a silly error from centuries ago, as you pointed out.

By all means, sentence the old mascot to the gallows, but strangely enough, the term "Indians" was in this instance one of unity between races, was it not?! Unfortunately, there's no way to convince the other side to take their blinders off.

One question is why are some people so attached to Cleveland keeping the name Indians. It's pretty much of a nothing, generic beyond generic name. There's nothing particularly special or specific or regional about it.

My complaint about teams names like the Tigers, Bears and Lions is they are so generic and unimaginitive, and Tigers and Lions have nothing to do with Detroit or Michigan. Maybe they had a bear come within 200 miles of Chicago 90 years ago, but it would have been pretty puny and 200 miles would place it in Wisconsin.

The announcement is anticlimactic. The movement and support for this change developed over decades. It was just a matter of timing.

The whole thing is dumb. But if they are going to change the name, why not Cleveland Native Americans? Montreal Canadians is okay, isn't it?

I'm in Minnesota and wonder why teams can be called Vikings, or Celtics, or Irish, but not Indians. It actually seems a bit racist to eliminate Indians from the league, after 100 years. I mean, are Indians offensive to anybody?

Makes no intellectual sense. Some people just like to tell others what to do (or they will claim to be victimized and offended.)

David--Surely you're familiar with why the team was originally named the Indians?! If more people knew the story, there would be a fight to keep the name, but that's not going to happen.

MLB will make out like bandits. Those who want the old jerseys, hats, etc will be grabbing them up for sentimental reasons while the new team-name jerseys, hats, etc will fly off the shelves for obvious reasons as well.

Rob M

MLB is being wokeafied.

It will never stop. They'll always find something to be offended by.

Next are the Chiefs, I'm guessing. Then the Braves. Then the Reds. Then the Yankees. Then the Metropolitans. Then the Cardinals (because Catholic Bishops have feelings too).

Woke MLB will lose more fans, and have no idea why.

I'm not sure anyone understands it.

This is from the National Museum of the American Indian:
"What is the correct terminology: American Indian, Indian, Native American, or Native?
All of these terms are acceptable. The consensus, however, is that whenever possible, Native people prefer to be called by their specific tribal name. In the United States, Native American has been widely used but is falling out of favor with some groups, and the terms American Indian or indigenous American are preferred by many Native people."

Years back, I believed Indian was the acceptable terminology and was later lead to believe Native American was more appropriate. I think I remember reading a poll awhile ago that many people that identify with this group find the term Native American more offensive than just Indian. My memory could be foggy on that though. I never mean to offend anyone, but it's hard to tell which one is preferred. I guess like anything, when you're dealing with people someone will complain.

I'm sure at some point team names like Yankees, Vikings, Celtics, etc will be forced to change as well. Once the animal rights advocates get going the animal names will vanish too.

Stanford used to use Indian as their name back in the day and changed their name to just a color, Cardinal. Their mascot is now a tree. Maybe some sort of plant or tree could be used for Cleveland. I think Buckeyes is taken.

No. I'd be offended.

My vote is for the Cleveland Steamers, especially since they’ll be taking a dump... in salary, this year if they trade Lindor.

My father is a life long 80 year old Tribe fan from Sharon Pennsylvania. He quit wearing his Chief Wahoo coat last year. I asked him why? I asked him if he thought the team name and Chief Wahoo were racist symbols. He answered, “I don’t know, and it’s not my place to tell Native Americans what they should or should not find racially offensive or insensitive. It’s just coat, I’ll survive” He is a very smooth old guy. My mother always described him as James Dean mixed with a Miles Davis sense of cool. My mother was right. I have spent 57 years trying to measure up to him and have always fallen woefully short.

I know about Sockalexis, but don't know that the Sockalexes story behind the name is entirely true. That itself may be a bit of myth.

Woke and PC culture annoy me as much as it annoys anyone, but the general fair standard is it's should be up to the people if it's acceptable that a team use them as a mascot. The Scandanavian Minnesotans (I'm a Scandinavian descendant of Vikings via my dad who was from Minnesotans) chose the Vikings moniker. The team founders included Ole Haugsrud and H. P. Skoglund, which are about as Norwegian of names as you can find. I don't know, but I assume Irish-Americans in Boston are find with the name being called the Celtics. The co-namer of the Celtics was Irish-American, and the other, Walter A. Brown, may have been as well. Not sure what Walter A Brown was, but he was from metro-Boston (Irish-American central) and Brown is a British or Irish surname.

If the name offends Indians than that's the determiner. Though if the name does not then it does not. One cannot merely assume it offends them, and activists often don't represent the views of the majority of the demographic they represent. I don't know what is the polling on Indians on the issue

Beat me to it. Several years ago the Washington Post pushed hard to get the Redskins to change their name, but they finally gave up after a poll found very few Natives were offended by the term. Of course flash forward to last year and they started up again, and were successful this time.

Personally I don't care strongly one way or another, names change over time. But we should at least be honest about who we're really appeasing...it's largely white progressives.

While I agree that the name “Indians” is not in of itself racist, that is not the full history of the nickname. The problem is really Chief Wahoo and that cannot be totally undone by simply dropping the logo. Let’s stop pretending that the name was an honor for the last 100 years. If the name was meant to be an honor they would not have picked an incredibly racist image to wear on their sleeves. The logo was dehumanizing and mean. It was based on stereotype.

I think that many people also have never been taught the actual history of what the county did to native Americans. I am not talking about treaties in the 1830’s or the trail of tears. I am talking about taking children from their parents without consent and either sending them to schools or adoptive white parents to “take the Indian out of them.” This is a practice that continued until the 1970’s. This is practice that is easier to justify when the common culture mocks what it means to be Indian.

Finally I am not saying that all Native names have to be changed. They can be an honor. Look at the Florida Seminoles. For all of that programs other problems they have done a great job working with the Seminole tribe to have actual historical context and celebration of the culture.

If it gets rid of the tomahawk chop, that would be a good thing.

Cleveland's nickname is dumb. An Indian is a person from India, not a Native American. Also, the team wasn't named to honor a former player. That myth has been debunked.

Columbus may have failed at Math, but why should we perpetuate his ignorance? The Greeks had proven the Earth was round by the 6th century BC. They had discovered the Earth's circumference by the 2nd century BC. If the Italian's were so enlightened, why wasn't this well known in Italy in the 15th century AD?

Cleveland Americans?

Actually that story is a bit of a myth. Sockalexis played for a National league team based in Cleveland, and entirely different franchise that went belly up in 1899. He was 2 years dead by the time the AL team changed their name from the Naps. Many baseball history buffs think the name had more to do with the Boston Braves being a hot team at the time and Native American themed nicknames being popular in general.

The Cleveland Baseball Team.

Perfect summation. This is also the group that is never satisfied and only get more emboldened by these concessions.

The Cleveland Grovers.

Great tribute to your father. I'm going to start trying to measure up to him as well.

This is true. You want to go by what the demographic (Indians, Black, other) wants, but vocal activists often don't represent the views of the demographic. In fact, I'd wager that they rarely do. And one must not assume what they want, or do "what's good for them irrelevant to what they want," as activists often do.

A prime example is the activists in Minneapolis wanted to "defund the police," and the city council and Mayor went along with that. However, when they polled Blacks in Minneapolis, the majority didn't support that. The city council and Mayor made the common mistake of thinking the vocal activists were a proxy of Blacks in general. Nationally, polling has shown that the majority of Blacks in the United States don't support defund the police, and want more the same or more police in their neighborhoods. The majority want better (reform) policing where they live not less.

The University of Minnesota got it right. The Golden Gophers. Who could complain about a gopher with a cape?

People with buck teeth?

This is incorrect, I would say all of the older franchise names have deeper meaning (many from their original locations of origin). The Detroit Tigers were named as a tribute to the Civil War Brigade for Detroit, "The Tigers". The original name of the Wolverines was never official. The Portmouth Spartans were relocated to Detroit and were renamed the Lions as a tribute to the popular sports team in the city...The Tigers. It was a theme.

The Bears were again a young franchise named to reflect the popularity of the other popular team of the city and continue a theme as well...The Cubs. They were previously the Decatur Staleys and named after a starch company that owned them. Not exactly a catchy name.

If you study Sockalexis, it is 100% not a myth and completely true, but you have to understand the context to get how the timeline works. It had nothing to do with honoring his death and it drives me crazy when people say "he died in 1913 and the team changed names in 1915, therefore its a myth."

In a short summation, the Cleveland franchise had a buzz when Sockalexis came up that is impossible to understand today. The story of how he got to Cleveland is even better but I wont go there. It was a Lebron in high school thing, or Jeremy "Linsanity" on a national level, but MORE because baseball was the only sport people cared about. Every team wanted him, everyone knew he was the most talented player in the nation (college or pro at the time) and when Cleveland got him, it was a HUGE national event. For that summer of 1896, Cleveland was the center of the baseball world and it was EXCITING. Reporters came from Europe to do stories on him and his exploits were front page news. The team became known as the "Indians" unofficially the entire year. They sold out to packed stadiums with crowds outside trying to "scalp" tickets!

Fast forward twenty years later, they were the "Naps" and then their leader jumped to the Federal League. Cleveland was in a bad spot and wanted to regain something to be proud of, recapture some sort of buzz about the team again. It was at this time they decided to harken back to the "Indians", back when it was fun and exciting to be a Cleveland baseball fan. It was a nod to Sockalexis' time in Cleveland, but not a direct naming of the franchise after him, which is where people get misguided.

Well, the city already has the Cleveland Browns so that actually makes perfect sense.

Not sure how valid the 90% figure is...

https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/0...redskins-name/

The term Indian is not offensive at all - funny story, I tell my 12yo daughter she is an Indian, she tells me she's Native American.

This shit is offensive, and I'm glad it'll be gone. Call me woke or a social justice warrior, but no Native should ever have to look at this and think in their minds, "Is this what an Indian is? Is this how people see me?" There are many Native kids struggling everyday with their identities, and this needs to stop on all levels. The lack of humanity and empathy is staggering to me in the sake of the inconvenience of changing a sports team mascot.

After killing most of these people off, and then relegating the remaining ones to horrible reservations, I think we've earned the right to use cartoon images of them as mascots for sports teams. They should probably be honored. Just like all the other races that are reflected on sport teams' uniforms and hats.

Cleveland Wild Things

Cleveland Mistake by the Lake

Brian