Baseball

brush

(57,568 posts) Sat Dec 19, 2020, 01:39 PM Dec 2020

The Cleveland baseball team has decided to get rid of the name...

"Indians", but wasn't the Chief Wahoo logo really what was so offensive? The word "Indians" seems neutral to me. I guess the association with the Wahoo logo was too hard to overcome.

Opinions anyone?

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Cleveland baseball team has decided to get rid of the name... (Original Post) brush Dec 2020 OP

I'd understood that the name Indians was okay underpants Dec 2020 #1

That's what I thought too but the organizations has decided... brush Dec 2020 #2

I would think that the logo would go as well once they have a new name unblock Dec 2020 #3

They got rid of the logo three or four years ago. brush Dec 2020 #4

Good for Cleveland ownership. DeeDeeNY Dec 2020 #5

The logo was definitely offensive but is the name "Indians"? brush Dec 2020 #6

Agreed DeeDeeNY Dec 2020 #7

It was my understanding that the original team in the 1890's was the Spiders. broiles Dec 2020 #8

I've heard that too. IMO that's not an appealing name though. brush Dec 2020 #9

No. Spiders was another team in Cleveland. Auggie Dec 2020 #10

As a Clevlander I applaud the move. Perhaps Spiders, Guardians, Blues. Capt. America Dec 2020 #11

underpants

(186,681 posts)

1. I'd understood that the name Indians was okay

Reply to brush (Original post)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 01:40 PM

Dec 2020

from First Americans. Who knows?

brush

(57,568 posts)

2. That's what I thought too but the organizations has decided...

Reply to underpants (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 01:46 PM

Dec 2020

to break with it entirely. I do agree the logo had to go.

unblock

(54,157 posts)

3. I would think that the logo would go as well once they have a new name

Reply to brush (Original post)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 01:47 PM

Dec 2020

brush

(57,568 posts)

4. They got rid of the logo three or four years ago.

Reply to unblock (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 01:50 PM

Dec 2020

But I guess the association with the logo was still there.

DeeDeeNY

(3,491 posts)

5. Good for Cleveland ownership.

Reply to brush (Original post)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 02:01 PM

Dec 2020

Evidently Atlanta has no problem with their name.

brush

(57,568 posts)

6. The logo was definitely offensive but is the name "Indians"?

Reply to DeeDeeNY (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 02:04 PM

Dec 2020

DeeDeeNY

(3,491 posts)

7. Agreed

Reply to brush (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 02:07 PM

Dec 2020

There is more of a problem with the Tomahawk Chop.

broiles

(1,401 posts)

8. It was my understanding that the original team in the 1890's was the Spiders.

Reply to brush (Original post)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 02:18 PM

Dec 2020

brush

(57,568 posts)

9. I've heard that too. IMO that's not an appealing name though.

Reply to broiles (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 02:23 PM

Dec 2020

No wonder they changed it.

Auggie

(31,802 posts)

10. No. Spiders was another team in Cleveland.

Reply to broiles (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 19, 2020, 06:59 PM

Dec 2020

The Cleveland Lake Shores, who we now know as the Indians, were a charter member of the American League. The name was changed to Bluebirds and later shortened to Blues.

Capt. America

(2,482 posts)

11. As a Clevlander I applaud the move. Perhaps Spiders, Guardians, Blues.

Reply to brush (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 12:28 AM

Dec 2020

Reply to this discussion