Some Alt Redskins Logos To Go With Some Alt Redskins Names

Dan Snyder trademarked the name “Warriors” in 2000* and has squatted on the name ever since. Now, thanks to design firm 99 Designs, here’s what the Washington Warriors could look like:

I don’t know why the mil-bro is so damn, well, red-faced, but he does look pretty bad-ass. As does this paler version, so long as you steer clear of the gold helmet:

Click through to FTW for additional versions of the “Renegades” and “Griffins” logos, even if those names are not advised. And there are many, many more at 99 Designs.

* Reader Matt Brown emails to clarify this Warriors trademark business:

“You can’t squat on a trademark for decades on end and not do anything with [it]. After a period of time, the US Patent & Trademark Office will consider the trademark ‘abandoned’ and throw it back into the free market. The Redskins’ 2000 submission for Washington Warriors expired in 2004. The Arena Football League submitted a claim for Washington Warriors in 2007, and that mark expired in 2009.

There is a claim for just ‘Warriors’ that the Redskins own related to football entertainment and merchandise, but without ‘Washington’ attached to it. That was submitted in 2007, and the claim on the mark is still alive. They tried to trademark ‘Skins’ in 1997 but lost that within the year. They tried again in 1999 but that was abandoned in 2005.”

68 thoughts on “Some Alt Redskins Logos To Go With Some Alt Redskins Names”

  1. Since the “Mighty Ducks” did it I vote for a Harry Potter tie in. “Washington Hogwarts!” Can you imagine the announcers? When a player is ejected, “Expelliarmus!” Player gets a dumb penalty, “Stupify!” Touchdown, “Expecto Patronum!”

    (I am entirely kidding by the way)

  2. Red Kings or Dead Kings… It is time for Snyder to sell to a Gibbs ownership group, move the team back to DC, and build a statue of Sean Taylor out front. HTTR!

  3. Id call them the “The Washington Dream Catchers”. Two different logo types… Washington for the font with a picture of a dream catcher on it. “DC” font for a different logo with the same native picture just change the font on the letters “DC”

  4. Jamie, you’ve seemed like a cool dude the few times we’ve met but on this issue you have been duped by a few profit-seeking activists. You are lucky you don’t live in dc/attend Redskins games anymore. If you did, you’d be laughed right out of any tailgate with your extremist views on this issue.

    I dare you to say the name Redskins is promoting racism to the chiefs of Virginia’s Patawomeck Tribe, the Pamunkey Tribe, and the Rappahannock Tribe—all of whom have come out in support of the name Washington Redskins. I dare you to go to the Red Mesa High School Redskins, who are made up of 99.3 Native Americans, and tell them their school is promoting racism against their own people. Same with Wellpinit High School Redskins, where the student body is 91.2 percent Native American. Or another majority Native American high school, the Kingston High School Redskins, who’ve worn their Redskins name for the last 104 years. I dare you to go to these places and lecture them on how racist Redskins is. You’re views are completely out of touch with mainstream Native Americans and are only shared by a few radicals–who seeks to benefit from this issue through direct mail campaigns and the fame and notoriety they have achieved in the press–and the PC crowd that has happily taken up their laughable cause.

  5. Barno, you sound like Larry Michael.

    I’m sure there are some American Indians who are fine w/ the name. Just like I’m sure there are some who are not. That’s all.

    Pretty radical, I know.

  6. There is a huge difference between race-based nicknames and any other name that you claim that your “PC Police” could find offensive. Race-based nicknames, especially an off-color nickname such as Redskins, have no place in today’s world.

    Stop crying foul over other names you imagine as offensive for whatever reason. We aren’t talking about every possible offensive nickname under the sun, and ways they might offend all sorts of people. We aren’t talking about Angels offending atheists, Warriors offending pacifists, and Huskies offending PETA. We are only talking about race-based nicknames, which deserve scrutiny because of the way that they affects real people with real life ancestors who were persecuted, subjucated, relocated, and exterminated. You need to justify using a racial slur as a nickname. The burden of proof for these type of nicknames is on the team to prove that it’s acceptable, not for us to prove it’s not.

    I’m not picking on just the Redskins. The Cleveland Indians’ Chief Wahoo is offensive. The Atlanta Braves’ tomahawk chop is offensive. People who have no Native American ancestry or connection dressing in feathers and warpaint is offensive. All race-based nicknames and traditions deserve scrutiny, especially when it comes to an underclass of people that were basically wiped from this continent.

    Don’t try to throw “Fighting Irish” back in my face, because that is a nickname that a university with an Catholic-Irish history bestowed upon themselves. That’s also why majority Native American High Schools are allowed to call themselves that, and why North Dakota’s Fighting Sioux is offensive. Central Michigan’s Chippewas do Native American education and outreach in conjunction with CMU athletes and faculty. The FSU Seminoles are a local Tribe and their logo depicts a real human being, not a caricature. The Illinois Illini are a fictional tribe, and their tradition of dressing a student in red-face as a mascot is offensive.

    I know tradition and nostalgia are powerful forces, but try to blind yourself from that inertia. If you were naming a team today, and had no attachments to the past would you want it called a race-based slur?

  7. mathewbrown. Do you PERSONALLY find these nicknames offensive, or are you trying to make a point by defending other people? The term redskins had been in the American vocabulary for quite awhile, and at one point in our history it may have been derogatory. Today, to the best of my knowledge, redskin is meant to mean someone of Native American ancestry, period. I don’t see how that can be a racial “slur”. I am Italian, and am not offended if someone calls me a dago. I AM Italian, and cannot change that, so I have learned to accept it. Even if it did offend me, what else can I do about it? Trying to get other people to not call me dago is futile, so I learn to ignore it, laugh about it, or ignore those people. That’s what my parents taught me, and it seems to work for me. Try it sometime.

  8. Mike: I find the name offensive. The Oneida Nation and many, many other Native Americans (including one serving in congress) consider “redskin” a slur. I take them at their word. I wouldn’t presume to tell them to ignore it or laugh it off.

  9. Political correctness is here, is corruptive, as well as insulting. a few want to change things such as names to gain their 15 minutes of fame and feel good within themselves. Once done, they will move on to another topic, sport, name. Never really caring about the fight they just concocted.

    Leave the Washington Redskins as is and get on with reality!

  10. Is it too late to throw in a submission, do you know? I still think Cascades is aggressive enough, yet family/politically friendly and locally relevant. If there’s still somewhere to send it I’ll do some layouts by tonight.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>