As the Washington Redskins faced off with the Dallas Cowboys on Sunday night, NBC Sports broadcaster Bob Costas referred to Washington's mascot as "an insult" and "a slur" as heated debates on the fate of the team name continue, the Washington Post reported.
You can read his entire statement during NBC's "Sunday Night Football" program below.
"With Washington playing Dallas here tonight, it seems like an appropriate time to acknowledge the ongoing controversy about the name, "Redskins." Let's start here: there's no reason to believe that owner Daniel Snyder, or any official or player from his team, harbors animus towards Native Americans, or chooses to disrespect them. This is undoubtedly also true of the vast majority of those who don't think twice about the longstanding moniker. And in fact, as best could be determined, even a majority of Native Americans say they are not offended.
But, having stipulated that, there's still a distinction to be made. Objections to names like Braves, Chiefs, Warriors and the like, strike many of us as political correctness run amok. These nicknames honor, rather than demean. They're pretty much the same as Vikings, Patriots, or even Cowboys. And names like Blackhawks, Seminoles and Chippewas, while potentially problematic, can still be okay provided the symbols are appropriately respectful. Which is where the Cleveland Indians, with the combination of their name and Chief Wahoo logo, have sometimes run into trouble.
A number of teams, mostly in the college ranks, have changed their names in response to objections. The Stanford Cardinal and the Dartmouth Big Green were each once the Indians. The St. Johns Redmen are now the Red Storm. And the Miami of Ohio Redskins, that's right Redskins, are now the RedHawks. Still, the NFL franchise that represents the nation's capital, has maintained its name.
But think for a moment about the term "Redskins," and how it truly differs from all the others. Ask yourself what the equivalent would be if directed towards African Americans, Hispanics, Asians or any other ethnic group. When considered that way, "Redskins" can't possibly honor a heritage or noble character trait, nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term. It's an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present day intent.
It's fair to say that for a long time now, and certainly in 2013, no offense has been intended. But if you take a step back, isn't it clear to see how offense might legitimately be taken?"
Costas, who is not shy about expressing his political opinions during sports broadcasts, ignited fury on social media websites immediately after his broadcast remarks. On Twitter, several notable personalities responded to his comments.
David Burge tweeted "In honor of the courage of Bob Costas, the Redskins should change their name to the Facelifts" and Ben Shapiro posted "Bob Costas says Redskins should change name, as he makes money announcing a sport where players routinely dole out brain damage."
While outrage for his comments were strong, Twitter users also expressed their support for a Redskins name change.
Byron Tau of POLITICO tweeted "I love that it's controversial for Bob Costas to correctly identify a racial slur as a racial slur on national TV."
Members of Oneida Indian Nation launched an advertisement campaign in September aimed at pressing the NFL to order a mascot change for Washington's football team. At a press conference last week, tribe spokesman Ray Halbritter said he will not back down in the fight.
"The Oneida Nation has a vested interest in the league being a unifying force in communities throughout America," Halbritter said. "This name is not a unifying force. It is a divisive epithet."
