Chargers ponder nickname issue, racial sensitivity

By: JAY PARIS - Staff Writer | Saturday, November 26, 2005 11:15 PM PST ∞

The Chargers worked hard this week, preparing for an important game today against the Washington Blackskins.

Sounds coarse, doesn't it? How about the Washington Brownskins? Or Washington Whiteskins? Would people feel different about the name of the Chargers' opponent if it were their skin color being mentioned?

"That is a good question," linebacker Donnie Edwards said.

Edwards, it's believed, has the most American Indian blood of any Charger. He is half black, with the other half a combination of Spanish and American Indian roots.

"Apache," Edwards said enthusiastically.

The use of American Indian nicknames and traditions is a hot-button topic, with emotions riding high on either side of the argument. The NCAA this year restricted postseason usage of monikers and customs that it deemed offensive to Indians.

"It all depends on what side you look at it from," Edwards said. "If you're from the school that (says) 'It's great that they are recognizing us' and 'We are not forgotten,' that's kind of cool. But if you come from another school, you think that it is derogatory and racist."

John Currier, the tribal chairman of the Rincon San Luiseno band of Mission Indians, said the reaction to Indian team names is mixed.

"I think a lot of different people have a lot of different opinions," he said. "In my opinion, I don't think the intent is to be negative to Native Americans."

But the notion of pointing to a skin shade causes some to squirm.

"I never heard anything called the Brownskins," said defensive end Luis Castillo, who grew up in the Dominican Republic. "So it's a tough call with the Redskins. I think they are alluding to the race of fighting people and not necessarily the color of the skin.

"But not being part of that race, we can't make that choice. If (American Indians) are offended, it's their choice to be offended and we have to respect them in that regard."

About 70 percent of the NFL players are black. And the name Blackskins was nearly 100 percent repulsive when mentioned to a sampling of Chargers.

"The name seems a bit bad, the Blackskins, so I can see the Indians' point of view," said linebacker Shaun Phillips, who is black. "I can definitely see why they would be offended, especially if people impersonate you and it is a complete stereotype of what they are.

"What if people said the Blackskins and they had a (mascot) wearing a big nose or a dark mask or had corn rows in their hair?"

Safety Clinton Hart, who is also black, agrees the Blackskins name is unpleasant.

"It would be an odd situation to think I was going to play a team called the Washington Blackskins," he said. "That wouldn't go well with me. I'm pretty sure if the tables were turned, people would feel the same whether it's the Blackskins, the Whiteskins, whatever. I can see where (American Indians) would be a little offended."

Long snapper David Binn, who is white said calling a team the Whiteskins instead of the Redskins would pale in comparison.

"It's apples and oranges," Binn said. "Indians were obviously a group of people which were persecuted, where the white people weren't.

"The Indians are a forgotten tragedy of our country. It's an embarrassment and something not talked about much. The history of slavery and civil rights gets a lot of attention, and rightly so. But Indians were basically killed and massacred. The whites tried to wipe them off the face of the earth."

The Chargers play both NFL teams this year with Indian connotations ---- the Chiefs and Redskins. Those names make some uncomfortable. Others don't give them a second thought.

"Unfortunately we live in a mainstream society they dibbles and dabbles into everything," Phillips said. "It shouldn't be a racist issue at all, but unfortunately it is."

Contact staff writer Jay Paris at jparis8@aol.com.