What’s in a name? Love, Hate, offence and defence
What’s in the name of a sports team? Layer upon layer of emotional attachment, if the Crusaders affair is anything to judge things by.
To suggest the Crusaders change their name in the wake of the Christchurch mosque murders, was to get emails from readers containing travel advice along the lines of ‘‘f... off to’’ (Syria or Nigeria) ‘‘and see how long you f...ing last’’.
An irrational response to examining the branding of a sports team born just over three decades ago? Well no, says Eric Simons the San Francisco-based author of The Secret Lives of Sports Fans: The Science of Sports Obsession.
Simons says it’s perfectly normal for sports fans to lose perspective. In the face of evidence to the contrary, they will get outraged at suggestions their team has a potentially offensive name or logo, such as Redskins, Indians, Braves ... or Crusaders.
But change does come, outrage or not. In 2020 the NFL’s Washington Redskins (born in 1932) became simply The Washington Football team, the same year the Crusaders rid themselves of the swords, horses and logo that linked their name to a series of medieval religious wars.
So with sports in the social spotlight, let’s look at other names and logos that have moved along.
Teams are riddled with warlike or aggressive names, many dating back to a more colonial or warlike era (Barbarians, Saracens, Crusaders, Highlanders, Warriors), cultural names appropriated from vanquished natives (Braves, Indians, Chiefs, Redskins), or foul weather (Hurricanes, Storm, Lightning).
They can date back more than a century. In English rugby the Saracens – history’s polar opposite of the Crusaders – were established in 1876. In effect, sport is two tribes going to war, urged on by fans. So there are
banners, and logos, and chants, and fans get invested in warlike and aggressive imagery that invokes a far distant, more aggro, more racist past.
Calm and downbeat names such as the Blues, Lakers, Jazz, Reds, Saints and Red Sox are far less common. So are charmers, such as football’s Sheffield Wednesday.
Wednesday were initially a cricket team named after the day of the week on which they played
their matches. They used football only to keep fit in winter.
It might just have hit New Zealand, but considering the social elements of team names has been ‘‘a thing’’ for more than half a century. In the US, the NFL champion Kansas City Chiefs were the last US professional team to adopt an indigenous-derived name. That was in 1963, more than 30 years before Super Rugby started.
Unlike some, Kansas City
have moved with the times, adapting their mascot from ‘‘Chief’’ Lone Bear, to Warpaint, a Pinto horse ridden by a man in a feathered headdress, to KC Wolf (a fluffy, cuddly wolf).
All three existing NBA teams that once used indigenous imagery stopped doing it decades ago.
The Atlanta Hawks were the Tri-Cities Blackhawks until 1951, and simply ‘Hawks’ thereafter. The Buffalo Braves are now the LA Clippers, while the Golden State Warriors dropped Indian imagery in 1971.
In baseball, the Cleveland Indians received the most attention due to Chief Wahoo. That feathered smiling cartoon logo was forever shelved in 2018 after complaints from Native Americans, social scientists, and religious and educational groups – not so much by Cleveland baseball fans, though.
Last month, Cleveland said they would change their team name after the 2021 season. But their example was rejected by the Atlanta Braves baseball team, and Chicago Blackhawks ice hockey franchise, whose logo is a colourful chief complete with warpaint and stylised feathers.
Atlanta Braves officials say they have no intention of changing their tomahawk logo, either.
But they are discussing the tomahawk chant (where fans make chopping motions, as they have done at the Kansas City Chiefs and rugby’s Exeter Chiefs). To many Native Americans, the ‘chop’ is disrespectful.
The Braves have removed a ‘‘Chop On’’ sign that once adorned their stadium.
‘‘We are so proud of our team’s name, and our expectation is that we will always be the Atlanta Braves,’’ Terry McGuirk, the Braves’ chairman, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper in December.
Chicago Blackhawks chief executive Danny Wirtz made his team’s sentiment very clear.
‘‘Obviously respect the decision the Cleveland Indians made to go down that path, but we continue to deepen our commitment to upholding our namesake and our brand.’’
The Blackhawks were committed ‘‘to raising the bar even higher’’ as far as awareness of Black Hawk and people of Native American heritage, he said.
English Aviva Premiership side the Exeter Chiefs also used the chop and an American Indian logo, but in August BT Sport axed the ‘Tomahawk Chop’ chant from their fake fan-noise.
Exeter decided to retire their ‘Big Chief’ mascot after a review in 2020, but retained their logo and name saying it was ‘highly respectful’.
And this will not be where the story ends, one suspects.
‘‘Teams are riddled with warlike or aggressive names.’’