Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WFT Branding Study (Part 2)


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, DCF said:

 

My enemy is the WFT, which I fully believe will be the name of this team due to Snyder. I'll work with all of the names besides that absolutely atrocious one.

It absolutely does not satisfy both camps. It satisfies literally one camp, the ones that like WFT. Not even all the people that want as much tradition as possible want that name to stay. It's the farthest thing from a clean break, it's a forever placeholder.

THIS, and your join date suggest you are here to troll ES. Just leave.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Die Hard said:

This was always about appeasing sponsors $$$$.

Funny thing, it wasn't even that--it was about Fred Smith trying to coax Snyder to sell! He took advantage of the milieu, and tried to push Snyder out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FootballZombie said:

Many of us don't need to act like we are hiding behind an endangered animal to use the name Redwolves. There are a metric ton of other reasons to justify the name, your just focusing on one and acting like we will use it as a shield to justify the use of "Red" like we are lying to ourselves and everyone around us. 

You imply the opposite in that anyone that chooses anything other than that name isn't being as charitable, which is the part I find laughable because that name is only going to be a name because of the Red connotation not because it's charitable.

 

I already said I would work with the name Redwolves and howl with my kid. I'm focusing on the aspect I don't like because it's a forum and that's what we do. I see the marketability aspect, and the fun in it (though I disagree that you can't get most of what you can from just Wolves). I don't get this "let them be" list, as if this is about inappropriately attacking a group. Are you being attacked? It's not my first choice, I spelled out why. I want to move on from the "red" in the name for various reasons, some people don't, but we should let them be and not the ones that do want to move on? Redskins is gone, there's no rules here anymore saying who we are and what we keep, this is an even playing field outside the burgundy and gold that we all want to stay. For me I would feel like we're using the redwolf a little bit to serve our purpose of a red name, but in the end I suppose the recognition would only help its cause so it would be beneficial.

 

Using my "purposeful misrepresentation" line in a mocking way isn't serving anything, but carry on. It's literally just talking about one aspect of the name I don't like and why, and you're being overtly defensive over the Redwolves name. To your point about my comments though, I still think your multitude of reasons all pale in comparison to the one big main reason, and that's the Red in it. Which I've already explained is something myself and some others would personally like to move on from, hence my criticisms.

 

9 minutes ago, mudhog said:

THIS, and your join date suggest you are here to troll ES. Just leave.

Why because you like it and I hate it? So what if I just joined. I've been a fan all my life and hate the name WTF, deal with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DCF said:

 

It only greatly influenced your choice to pick one of the same thing over the other though. That's what I mean, there are 2 different things at play.

  • You can justifiably feel good about helping Redwolves, even if it has it's origins and most of its weight behind a parallel coinciding choice
  • There are negative connotations with trying to use too much of the Redwolf animal history as a way to convince people as to why you chose it,  when everyone knows why you were buying that car either way (as you explained with your douchebag example).

I'm curious, do you think you might also like the Redwolf history and feel good story, because it helps counter the negative weight behind keeping "Red" in the name?

 

 

Sorry, I'm doing my best not to write a doctoral thesis on this issue, but it's probably too late for that.

 

Sure, of course there can be "negative connotations" trying to overuse the Redwolf animal issue as a way to "sell" your choice of that name, but I'm not doing that. Also, there can be "negative connotations" to just about anything these days, so in the end, as long as I know I'm being honest, that's all that matters to me, and I couldn't care less if that elicits "eye rolls" in anyone else. **** 'em. All I can do is lay out my honest thought process for a new name/brand and what I personally want. The only requirements I had that were non-negotiable for me to really connect with a new name/brand were the following:

 

1. Must have NA association/tie-in that's generally protest-proof (because nothing is purely protest proof these days). 

2. Must retain our color scheme. 

 

Those are my only two must-haves. Note that "must have red or sound like redskins" isn't on that list. 

 

So we know #2 is a check. That's set in stone at this point. Only other name that could have a NA theme to it that I've heard bandied about would be "Warriors," but it's too overt and isn't going to happen, at least not with any accompanying NA imagery or connection. "Bravehearts" isn't happening either. It's even more overt. There is ZERO option for a new name that could be referred back to NAs as PEOPLE. That levels the playing field quite a bit.

 

So what's left to satisfy #1 for me? RedHawks? Hawks played a role in NA lore, so that could work, but I don't like "RedHawks" coexisting with "Seahawks." Also, is there such a thing as a "Redhawk"? I don't think there is. If not, then that name is out. I don't want a fictitious red thing. THAT would definitely be an example of forcing "red" where it doesn't belong. Eagles are taken. So are buffalo and bears. What about wolves? I like wolves. They have a deep connection to NA culture and it's nothing that any sane person is going to protest. It's also not in use with any other team. That's promising. I could go for that. Wait ... you're telling me there's something called a "Redwolf" that used to exist in large numbers in our general area? That's even BETTER. And us choosing them as our name could actually help save their species from extinction? Better still. That's the one for me. 

 

"But isn't that too close to 'Redskins'"? 

 

"Yeah? So? That's another bonus for me." 

 

So that's my thought process on landing with "Redwolves." Bringing up the environmental impact it could have going by the above hardly equates to something that's disingenuous or some attempt to hide my "true desire" to have something that sounds like "Redskins." Hopefully that's clear at this point.

 

As to the last question, absolutely not. I have no personal guilt or "negative weight" for the previous name at all. After all, there are many NAs (and I know some of them) who love "Redskins" and have no problem whatsoever with it. I believed the name should change once I simply and honestly asked myself if I'd feel comfortable referring to a NA as a "redskin." The answer was no, and that's when I knew where I stood on the issue. Simple. I evolved based on new info and based on carefully considering other people's realities vs. solely my own, but that didn't leave me feeling "guilty" for ever having sung "Hail to the Redskins." 

 

It's simple: Redwolves checks every conceivable box for me as far as what I'd want in a new name AND it checks boxes I wasn't even expecting to be checked (the similarity to "Redskins" in the name itself). I couldn't imagine a more perfect name choice FOR ME based on the options available. 

Edited by Dissident2
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

It's simple: Redwolves checks every conceivable box for me as far as what I'd want in a new name AND it checks boxes I wasn't even expecting to be checked (the similarity to "Redskins" in the name itself). I couldn't imagine a more perfect name choice FOR ME based on the options available. 

It's a well written response and I respect the way you came to your decision. I am not sure the majority that like redwolves would follow your same conclusions, as I believe the name became popular almost entirely due to the "red" aspect in it, but I think you said it well. I'm going to refer you to DCdangerous's last post because that summed up the "Red" aspect of this better than I could.

 

I think there are some people that have the opposite of your #1, where they want to leave all NA and start fresh. I'm not sure exactly where I fall with that, but it's more towards fresh (while keeping the colors). So to see the perspective of that crowd, they come to different conclusions when seeing the word "Red" carrying over. Some of the "eye rollers" you don't care about are in this fanbase too. Now I'm not rolling eyes, but I see that name and say to myself, well that clearly is Redskins carrying over. Whereas you find it great and look for more reasons (NA traditions, endangered, etc) to bring it towards you, others see that in a different light. So like I was saying before I think the challenge in all of this is that we have fans at opposite ends of this spectrum when it comes to what they want to do with this rebrand.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DCF said:

I already said I would work with the name Redwolves and howl with my kid. I'm focusing on the aspect I don't like because it's a forum and that's what we do. I see the marketability aspect, and the fun in it (though I disagree that you can't get most of what you can from just Wolves). I don't get this "let them be" list, as if this is about inappropriately attacking a group. Are you being attacked?

 

You came in here and planted a flag that read Wolves is pretty great and I'd be cool w/ Redwolves, but anyone that supports the name Redwolves is lying to themselves and just trying to hide behind an endangered species so they can continue to use the Red naming convention and grasp at straws of the past.

 

Yeah, that is pretty disrespectful and condescending to those of us who value everything around the Redwolves name. Especially when there are pages upon pages of content pointing to other directions.

 

All you did was come in here and throw a massive backhanded complement.

 

 

 

If hiding behind an endangered species is your truth behind your personal support of Redwolves, so be it. Your feels are yours bro and I can not change them. Just don't think everyone is on that same page and that you can paint a whole community with your own brush because that is how you see it. You might be, but I'm not here just for Red.

 

https://i.redd.it/3uq4c91haauz.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

General question about the dislike of Washington Football Team. Why are soccer teams not embarrassed just having city name FC? Perhaps we are just trailblazing in the NFL just being Washington FT. 
 

Having no nickname is a paradigm shift for sure. However, our identity is our past. That’s the burgundy and gold. Football Team or even Football Club is our identity with the colors. It’s also a reminder that we were pressured by a vocal minority who werent Native Americans.

 

 

Edited by #httr1979
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dissident2 said:

I believed the name should change once I simply and honestly asked myself if I'd feel comfortable referring to a NA as a "redskin." The answer was no, and that's when I knew where I stood on the issue.

 

Four out of five said they would be cool with that. An extra 10 percent understood it on context alone.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My somewhat contradictory experience has been... 

 

1. Calling something a lazy copout is itself a lazy copout.

2. Lazy copouts aren’t necessarily bad things if they produce good results.

3. Intentionally spitting into the wind, on a dare, is both a test of manhood and insecurity.

 

 

Edited by TrancesWithWolves
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, #httr1979 said:

General question about the dislike of Washington Football Team. Why are soccer teams not embarrassed just having city name FC? Perhaps we are just trailblazing in the NFL just being Washington FT. 
 

Having no nickname is a paradigm shift for sure. However, our identity is our past. That’s the burgundy and gold. Football Team or even Football Club is our identity with the colors. It’s also a reminder that we were pressured by a vocal minority who werent Native Americans.

 

 

Well, that is multi-pronged

 

For starters it is as you said, a reminder. Looking at the Golden State Warriors and Clev Indians case studies, it is clear that pressure remains when shifts to either non-de script imagery, or even no imagery at all occur. The lack of adopting a new identity leaves a link to the past. That pisses off a lot of people, people who have already proven influential enough to change your name. The only thing holding them back now is the temp status. There are multiple examples in history that show us if we move WFT or something similar to full status, you should expect to face monumental blowback and possibly enough to force us to change our name again. We saw some of that when we announced WFT in the first place.

 

We hold no authority here. Its not what we say goes. If we piss off enough people, we will be changing our name again. You can not expect to slap those very people who already have established their influence in the face w/ virtual non-action and expect to get away scott free.

 

 

the rest I'll keep brief. These are more personal opinions

 

-For me it is very awkward

-Inconvenience - It is much more difficult and time consuming to talk about the team ever since we picked up WFT

-Paradigm Shift - Change is scary, and that is a BIG change. Breaks all NFL naming conventions

-Branding nightmare. limited upside

-Being reminded about what you don't have every time you see Team X vs... the Washington Football Team!

-Problematic for tickers and breaking news when we are only refereed to as Football Team

-Annoying for various markets where soccer is big as FCs are associated with Soccer teams

-Since method is heavily associated with soccer, has a very soccer feel to it. Almost like naming a football team the fastballs.

 

 

I can put up with all that in the short term, but that really is only b/c I know it is a temp status and it will be replaced. No use crying over spilled milk scenario.

Edited by FootballZombie
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

3. Intentionally spitting into the wind, on a dare, is both a test of manhood and insecurity.

 

 

Sounds like a test in stupidity to me.

 

Look, there's four things you gotta know:

 

1. You don't tug on Superman's cape.

2. You don't spit into the wind.

3. You don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger.

4. You don't mess around with Jim.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Spearfeather
  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

 

 

Well, that is multi-pronged

 

For starters it is as you said, a reminder. Looking at the Golden State Warriors and Clev Indians case studies, it is clear that pressure remains when shifts to either non-de script imagery, or even no imagery at all occur. The lack of adopting a new identity leaves a link to the past. That pisses off a lot of people, people who have already proven influential enough to change your name. The only thing holding them back now is the temp status. There are multiple examples in history that show us if we move WFT or something similar to full status, you should expect to face monumental blowback and possibly enough to force us to change our name again. We saw some of that when we announced WFT in the first place.

 

We hold no authority here. Its not what we say goes. If we piss off enough people, we will be changing our name again.


That will make them look completely unreasonable. We changed the nickname. I can’t help that things remind these very miserable people about something. I’m sure there’s a lot of things that remind us of something we dislike but we don’t nitpick everything into oblivion.

If Nike tries to not sell our merchandise again, Dan should sue them for breach of contract. It’s something that should’ve been done in 2020 and more directly the NFL should’ve had the integrity to do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really dont see the problem with using Red due to that being in the old name, and in the first part of the old name. This obviously would make transitioning to a new name easier, regardless of what follows it. I like the fact that the Red Wolf is at least a real animal. But I have to admit even if it was fictitious like a Seahawk I would be ok with it. 

My personal list is:

1. Warriors

2. Redwolves

3. Sentinels

 I was born in DC proper but raised in Ft. Worth, TX since I was 7. I am 53 and raised both of my boys as Redskins fans. We are all sad with the name change but not a hill worth dying on. 

Reading through ALL of the previous posts has been entertaining, educational and frustrating. We are all not going to be happy with the new name. That is not possible. But it has sounded like many have become very angry / emotional over what the "correct" name should be. Take a second and realize, it is just a name. And as much I would severely dislike the name to be WFT as it is now it would not end me. And I honestly cant say that I could change teams if is stayed WFT no matter how much it frustrated me.

It has been mentioned that the team colors are not even Red anyway so why keep red for reds sake. Correct, the colors are Burgundy and Gold. I prefer the 60's throwback colors with darker burgundy and a true'er gold color. But I find it interesting that the Red Wolf is not really red either. It's just kind of a descriptor, not literal. 

The argument regarding Red Wolves not being fierce or as large as Gray Wolves while accurate I don't think will deter from the fierceness conjured up by having wolf in the name Redwolves. Most people dont realize how large a gray wolf is anyway. There a huge. I imagine most people think of wolves in general as mean German Shepherd size animals. 

There you go. That is what I think anyway. I am excited and nervous to see what they unveil. 

HTTR

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Sounds like a test in stupidity to me.

 

Look, there's four things you gotta know:

 

1. You don't tug on Superman's cape.

2. You don't spit into the wind.

3. You don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger.

4. You don't mess around with Jim.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Believe it or not, in my original version I actually chose stupidity to contrast with manhood. 

 

However, after thinking about it I changed it to insecurity because I decided that thematically, insecurity  was a more fitting and less judgmental word. Now I’m not so sure.

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, #httr1979 said:

That will make them look completely unreasonable

 

Tell that to the people who still protest the Warriors, Indians, Chiefs, Blackhawks ect. I don't see any reason to expect a different result for a similar action. Especially after they have been galvanized and empowered.

 

 

23 minutes ago, #httr1979 said:

If Nike tries to not sell our merchandise again, Dan should sue them for breach of contract. It’s something that should’ve been done in 2020 and more directly the NFL should’ve had the integrity to do.

 

Dan can't do squat. Nike's contract is with the NFL, not Washington. Furthermore the League probably isn't too interested in pissing off a wide swath of sponsors. As we have all seen the NFL is all about saving face and little else.

 

While I don't have the contract in front of me, I can all but guarantee that :

 

A. A massive company holding one of the most lucrative licenses possible would not jeopardize their own financial situation unless they were comfortable with the legal situation surrounding it

 

and

 

B. After fiascos such as the Mike Vick and Ray Rice situations, creators have would have worked in the ability to remove problematic merchandise at their own will if it already did not exist.

 

 

We will not win a fight against sponsors. The second they step in, were done. People did not force us to change our name. They were fighting for decades. Took sponsors about 2 days

Edited by FootballZombie
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, #httr1979 said:

General question about the dislike of Washington Football Team. Why are soccer teams not embarrassed just having city name FC? Perhaps we are just trailblazing in the NFL just being Washington FT. 
 

Having no nickname is a paradigm shift for sure. However, our identity is our past. That’s the burgundy and gold. Football Team or even Football Club is our identity with the colors. It’s also a reminder that we were pressured by a vocal minority who werent Native Americans.

 

 

 

All soccer teams do have nicknames, they're just not usually referred to when using the location name. There's even an EPL team whose nickname is Wolves (Wolverhampton Wanderers).

 

Wolves.jpg.0c4a391e09161318bef12fcd23ef0d8d.jpg

 

Edited by London Kev
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, London Kev said:

 

All soccer teams do have nicknames, they're just not usually referred to when using the location name. There's even an EPL team whose nickname is Wolves (Wolverhampton Wanderers).

 

Wolves.jpg.0c4a391e09161318bef12fcd23ef0d8d.jpg

 

Interesting. Maybe that’s what we do. Referred to as Washington Football Team/Club and as the Hogs/Redwolves/Liberals as a nickname.

Edited by #httr1979
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

 

You came in here and planted a flag that read Wolves is pretty great and I'd be cool w/ Redwolves, but anyone that supports the name Redwolves is lying to themselves and just trying to hide behind an endangered species so they can continue to use the Red naming convention and grasp at straws of the past.

Not exactly in that critical or harsh of a way. I also don't think a lot of people are lying to themselves, they're openly honest about liking it mostly for carrying over the "red" and using HTTR.  They'll tell you that's why. People in this thread have said that's why.

 

Overall though yeah you're right, in a broader sense I think that's the only reason the name is as popular as it is, and I think most would agree with that being why.

 

2 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

All you did was come in here and throw a massive backhanded complement.

 

I don't think I even handed out a compliment to backhand? Is it your name to accept the compliment for? I don't have a camp for a name like some people. I said I like parts of the name, and here's why I don't like this major part. That's what I think, and I'm sorry but I believe that's what most people think when they see the name. That far above anything else, it's a way to maintain the Red from Redskins.

 

2 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

If hiding behind an endangered species is your truth behind your personal support of Redwolves, so be it. Your feels are yours bro and I can not change them. Just don't think everyone is on that same page and that you can paint a whole community with your own brush because that is how you see it. You might be, but I'm not here just for Red.

If you're really going to sit here and tell me the vast majority of fans that like the name Redwolves, don't like it first and foremost because it carries over the name Red, then yep I think you're incorrect. If you're going to move the goal posts and then ask why that's a bad thing they want it for that, I've already listed out the differences people have in what they want this brand to go forward as, and expressed that nobody is "wrong"  (except with WFT, it's awful). You are right I am painting the community with that majority opinion that they want it for the word "red", and I I think you and some others are outliers who like it for more than that right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There’s nothing wrong with a nickname having Red in it. Just like there’s nothing wrong with Cowboys name having boys in it. It doesn’t need to be the Dallas Cowpersons because a vocal minority of people are offended because of gender.

 

It’s time to push back.

Edited by #httr1979
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DCF said:

If you're really going to sit here and tell me the vast majority of fans that like the name Redwolves, don't like it first and foremost because it carries over the name Red,

 

Your previous posts continuously de-validated every other reason for liking Redwolves against multiple posters and paired it down to the single reason of just continuing the "Red" name.

 

Even going so far as to say other reasons, such as saving an entire species, was "not the real reason though, it's not even a reason" Your exact words on the topic, not mine.

 

Your stance was clearly defined as one and only one reason for wanting the Redwolves name and everything else was utterly inconsequential. That much was very apparent in your words.

 

 

 

If you now understand that there are multiple reasons for wanting "Red" and "Redwolves" which is evident in your latest post with your newly developed "First and foremost" stance, (which demonstrates a crystal clear understanding that several factors exists and have weight) than we are now very close to being on the same page.

 

 

 

I just wanted you to understand that some people value a lot of those other reasons, and now it looks like we are on the same general path, hunting together, which is good. Wolves always work best in packs after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Change it from Red traffic light to traffic light with dark shading. I mean, if they don’t change it from red light it will remind me too much of Redskins. And we just can’t have that in our Brave New World. It’s okay to say brave or is that wrongspeak?

Edited by #httr1979
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...