News and Commentary

Washington Football Team Unveils 8 New Potential Names (Or Did They?)
LANDOVER, MD - AUGUST 15: A Washington Redskins helmet sits on the field before a preseason game between the Cincinnati Bengals and Redskins at FedExField on August 15, 2019 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by
Patrick McDermott/Getty Images

The Washington Redskins last year ditched its name and couldn’t come up with a new one so they became simply the Washington Football Team (WFT).

But now there are eight names floating around, according to Tanya Snyder, the co-CEO of the Washington franchise (and also the wife of owner Dan Snyder). She appeared on Adam Schefter’s podcast Tuesday and confirmed there are eight possible nicknames for the team. Here they are, in alphabetical order:

  • Armada
  • Brigade
  • Commanders
  • Defenders
  • Presidents
  • Red Wolves
  • Red Hogs
  • WFT

Snyder went even further, saying on the podcast that the team had narrowed the list to three. But when Schefter asked if she could reveal them, she replied, “No!” according to Newsweek.

But there is still confusion. When the eight names leaked out last month, team president Jason Wright said they weren’t necessarily the final eight, but rather just a random selection of some names under consideration. But Schefter read the names and asked Snyder if those were the final eight, and she said yes.

Later, though, Ben Standig of The Athletic wrote on Twitter that the eight names were not the final eight, echoing what Wright had said.

“Received some clarification. Nothing new here re: the names. The 8 mentioned by the interviewer in the ESPN podcast are not a final 8 but part of a broader list, as Jason Wright stated previously. Why Tanya Snyder said ‘that’s right’ as shown below, you got me. Down to 3 overall,” he wrote.

Standig also wrote: “During the pod, Schefter notes they’re down to 3 names w/ 8 candidates: Red Hogs, Defenders, Armada, Presidents, Brigade, Commanders, Red Wolves, WFT. Schefter: ‘Those are the candidates, right?’ Snyder: ‘That’s right. Has that been said?’ Schefter: ‘That’s been said, yes.’”

So maybe eight, maybe three — but either way, it’s way down from 42,000 possible names Snyder said the team received.

Last July, the Washington Redskins officially announced they would retire their 87-year-old name and Indian head logo, finally caving to complaints that the name is offensive to Native Americans.

The real motivator behind the change, though, appears to be money. “FedEx, Nike, Pepsi and Bank of America all lined up against the name, which was given to the franchise in 1933 when the team was still based in Boston,” The Associated Press reported. On July 2, FedEx threatened to pull out of $205 million stadium naming rights deal and issued a statement asking for a change to the controversial name.

Dan Snyder had long expressed opposition to changing the name, telling USA Today in 2013 that he would “never change the name. It’s that simple. NEVER — you can use caps.”

But a poll in May 2020 found that nine in 10 American Indians are not offended by the name, The Washington Post reported. And the son of Walter “Blackie” Wetzel — the Native American whose 1971 design of the Redskins logo depicts John “Two Guns” White Calf, a Blackfoot chief who also appears on the buffalo nickel — said the mascot is not offensive.

Of the mascot change, Lance Wetzel said, “It takes away from the Native Americans. When I see that logo, I take pride in it. You look at the depiction of the Redskins logo and it’s of a true Native American. I always felt it was representing my people.”

Create a free account to join the conversation!

Already have an account?

Log in

Got a tip worth investigating?

Your information could be the missing piece to an important story. Submit your tip today and make a difference.

Submit Tip
Download Daily Wire Plus

Don't miss anything

Download our App

Stay up-to-date on the latest
news, podcasts, and more.

Download on the app storeGet it on Google Play
The Daily Wire   >  Read   >  Washington Football Team Unveils 8 New Potential Names (Or Did They?)