I think the odds are low of a name change, but given the current state of affairs it's a non-zero possibility. And if we don't have input, the name will end up being some trite adjective in front of the word Hawks, which has happened with pretty much every other sports name change in America. Green Hawks, Fighting Hawks, Screeching Hawks, whatever. We don't want that.
I suspect that some members of Chiefs management read this site occasionally to get our takes on who should be starting at left guard or how they should handle a particular contract, so this is our chance to have input into the process. (Oh, and hi, Clark. Nice work last year, my friend. PM me about getting together for dinner next time you're in Denver.)
So we'll have a renaming tournament. In this thread, you may propose up to three names, and I'll structure everyone's suggestions into heats. Using the Chiefsplanet brain trust, we'll give Clark and his team valuable input into what the Chiefs should become if we eventually delete our homage to indigenous plains cultures. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MGRS13:
Clark,the Hunts, need to hire someone who’s sole purpose is to acknowledge this issue and take it on. Not a PR person. He needs to hire someone connected and respected in the Native American community who also understands business and publicity in the current corporate environment. This person would need to spend time with leaders of the Native American community and figure out what kind of out reach they can do with the media. This isn’t rocket science. There is an issue of name and imagery Used by the chiefs. Ignoring it now is the absolute worse thing you can do. If and when this issue reaches a boiling point Clark would be in a good position to roll out the head of this new department and allow him or her to speak to what the chiefs are doing. If your not two steps ahead you’ve all ready list the race. Clark can afford millions if that’s what it takes to build a bridge between him the Native American community and the media.
No. Actually he doesn't. Clark doesn't need to spend a dime helping you get over your white guilt. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RodeoPants2:
I see where you’re coming from; I think I would defer to native Americans as to whether or not the name Chiefs is offensive - wouldn’t you?
Why?
Taking offense is the easiest, least objective, way to assert oneself anywhere.
I don't defer to fundamentalists who are offended by 'blasphemy' and 'obcenity' on the airwaves or in the movie theaters.
I don't defer to 'Karens'
Comedians don't and shouldn't defer to hecklers.
If there is evidence that a name or action was instituted due to malice or disparagement, those who instituted the name or action would be well-served to exercise introspection regarding their actions.
But if there is no malicious intent, automatic deferral to the offended just breeds an industry of offense-taking. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BDj23:
No. Actually he doesn't. Clark doesn't need to spend a dime helping you get over your white guilt.
Washington will change the name of their football team within two years. Hunt would be wise to get out in front of this, regardless of your opinion on my opinion. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MGRS13:
Washington will change the name of their football team within two years. Hunt would be wise to get out in front of this, regardless of your opinion on my opinion.
Okay, I'll start compiling the names. Through Post 50, I'm seeing these. I'm trying to winnow out the obvious joke names, but I'll be charitable if I can't tell.
Repeat: This is only through Post 50. I'll keep working through them as I find time
Blues
Catfish
Chameleons
Champs
Champions
Crop Dusters
Destroyers
Ermines
Fire Chiefs
Grays
Hitmen
Jazz
Kings
Knights
Pitch
Sauce
Saucers
Savages
Scouts
Smoke [Reply]