talks about the Wahoo are currently ongoing between the Indians' owner and MLB's commissioner. from Paul Hoynes' article on cleveland.com, Commissioner Rob Manfred said, "i think we'll produce a result that will be good for the Indians and good for baseball. but what exactly that is, i don't want to speculate." that certainly doesn't sound like he plans on just leaving the Wahoo alone. i'd guess there's a high probability that it be will completely abolished within the next two years. i strongly believe this change would be a mistake, however, and i'm going to support my pro-Wahoo position right now.
the following contains excerpts from my Where Are You, Chief Wahoo? Save The Chief! blog, published back on December 15, 2014, combined with corresponding thoughts and updates of how things are today in 2017. i've also included some brand new sections that address subjects that most people don't usually bring up when referring to this hot button issue.
be sure to check everything out!
If You Look Really Hard, You Might Find the Chief
in 2014, i wrote:
i absolutely HATE how the Wahoo is being phased out in all aspects of baseball, including at Progressive Field, despite what the team states. the Indians organization insists that they are not eliminating the Chief. but the truth is, they've scaled back their self-promotion of it quite a bit (more than i realized until i really thought about it), to the point where even the players themselves are rarely seen rockin' the Wahoo.
|photo courtesy of celinacolombo.wordpress.com|
in spring training, the Indians wear only the C on their jerseys and hats. during regular season batting practice, their shirts and hats, again, only display the C, and all batting practice gear sold to fans also features the C. as for the game uniforms, players wear the hats with the Wahoo on them with just their blue jerseys and white home jerseys. luckily, the left sleeve of all 4 jerseys still has the Chief, but who knows how long that will continue. their batting helmets recently dropped the Wahoo for the C as well.
|photo courtesy of clevescene.com|
even the mini helmets they put the ice cream in at the ballpark concession stands now exclusively have the C on them in place of the Wahoo.
|photo courtesy of amazon.com|
plus, all Indians personnel currently wear shirts with only the block C on them. that to me sends a big message to the world about how they want the Indians to be viewed, and it is NOT by the Wahoo anymore.
|photo courtesy of tribevibe.mlblogs.com|
let me give you some more disturbing examples. on the scoreboard at the park, they no longer use the Wahoo in any capacity. looking back at the photos i've taken when i've gone to games over the last 5 years, i can say with confidence that this change happened just this past season, in 2014. now every time the Tribe is represented with a symbol, it's the "C," and the Chief is nowhere to be found.
|photo courtesy of monkeywithahalo.com|
moving outside of Progressive Field, you'll find the same thing on the TV sports shows and news. when they're talking about the Tribe, you don't see the Wahoo anymore; you see the C. on MLB Network, and probably ESPN too (idk cause i don't watch that channel), when they have their list of topics to discuss on the side, and the Indians are on the agenda, they're represented only by the C. even on the sports websites, the Tribe logo is the C. it may be the politically correct thing to do in the eyes of the media, but it actually came about because this C logo has unofficially become the Indians' primary logo, while the Wahoo has slipped down to its secondary. i say unofficially because the Indians have yet to formally announce this change in words, but these actions all speak loudly and clearly.
|photo courtesy of news.sportslogos.net|
i'm sure a lot of people see those C hats on fans and have no clue who/what team that represents. C could mean so many different things. but with the Wahoo, you always knew what that was for; the Cleveland Indians were always recognizable by that. and let's face it, the Wahoo is way cuter than some dumb old block letter C lol
the Indians used to be one of 3 teams in baseball that didn't use a letter or letters as their primary logo. now there are just 2 teams left standing, both in the American League, that use actual non-letter symbols to represent them: the Baltimore Orioles and the Toronto Blue Jays. sigh. i suppose it could always be worse. i mean, we could be like the Minnesota Twins. i promise you that someone who's unfamiliar with baseball would never assume that the overlapped "TC" on their hats stands for "Twin Cities" and represents the Minnesota Twins. at least we aren't that confusing i guess.
throughout the 2014 season, it was very evident that a gradual removal of the Chief Wahoo was taking place around Progressive Field. (and it's vanished even further since i last wrote about this topic.) however, the Indians didn't come out and officially declare that the Wahoo had been demoted to their secondary logo in favor of the block C until the 2016 season. presently, the Indians and MLB still rarely use it anymore in all the aforementioned ways and situations EXCEPT during spring training. shockingly, as of 2016, the spring jerseys went back to exhibiting INDIANS across the chest and the Chief on the left sleeve. the hats the players wear with them are still C hats though.
need more examples of the Wahoo phase out? you know those magnet schedules that the Indians give away at every Home Opener? they have a big C on them now, as the Wahoo is long gone. the tiny foam finger for your finger has the C on it, not a Wahoo. not to mention all the 2016 postseason programs displayed the C on the covers as opposed to the Wahoo.
as for the ballpark, after all its renovations over the past few years, more Cs are visible than ever before. there are Cs on the ceiling by all the food concessions, and they even have Cs on the gates to get in. really, the only place you can find stuff with Wahoos on it is on the merch they sell in the Team Shop. for now anyway.
|photo courtesy of @Indians on twitter|
|photo courtesy of tribevibe.mlblogs.com|
the players still wear the Wahoo on the arm of their jerseys and now supposedly just one of their hats. in case you didn't know, that cream jersey has been retired. (and whatever they replace it with in 2018 will be lucky to showcase the Wahoo on its sleeve at all, cause he may be "retired" by then as well.) but the hat that was worn with the cream uniforms, the red cap with the blue block C on it, will now be worn with the blue jerseys at home instead of the all blue hat with the Chief.
besides that, all the official playoff gear the Indians wore this past year, their t-shirts and sweatshirts, only had the C on them.
|photos courtesy of mlbshop.com|
for something that's barely even detectable on the players anymore, it continues to generate a great deal of controversy.
i still stand by the fact that the Wahoo is way more identifiable as being the logo for the Indians than that C is. non-baseball fans wouldn't know that meant Cleveland. C could stand for Columbus, Cincinnati, or hell even Colorado for all people know. okay, maybe not people in Cleveland and Northeast Ohio, but think about the rest of the country and the world. do you think someone in Arkansas, someone in California, someone in Italy, who's not into sports, would instantly know a C hat or shirt symbolized the Indians? doubtful. but with the Wahoo, they'd at least have a much better chance to correctly guess that it stood for the Indians. why make things more complicated if you don't have to?
What Once Was Not Offensive Is Now Unacceptable
in 2014, i wrote:
so why did the C become more prominent in recent years? it's somewhat odd to me honestly, but more and more people have decided the Wahoo is racist and offensive to Native Americans. i always hear about the protesters coming out to Progressive Field before the Home Opener to bring more awareness to their cause. i've never seen them though because i get to the ballpark insanely early, early enough that i apparently avoid running into all that. anyway, it's obvious to me that the Indians are trying to appease the protesters by cutting down on their usage of the Wahoo.
|photo courtesy of tattoopins.com|
on the contrary, for every person who's against the Wahoo, there seems to be someone IN FAVOR OF the Chief.
|photo courtesy of indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com|
|photo courtesy of usatoday.com|
i don't know if that makes any real difference, but i deeply hope those people who are outwardly, openly, and proudly throwing their support to the Chief are enough to convince the organization not to entirely rid the Indians of the Wahoo.
this all just begs the question, why is the Chief so offensive now when it wasn't a century ago? smh. the first Chief Wahoo logo didn't appear until 1928. did different groups initially start getting riled up about it back then? or did it all begin when the image took on the present-day cartoon-like Wahoo? because, if anything, i would have thought the evolution into this caricature of a Chief detached it from the group of real life Native American Indians, and consequently wouldn't be offensive to them since it was no longer pictorially tied to those Indians. if you're up on your Cleveland Indians logo history, then you know the first couple of Chief Wahoos resembled an actual Indian. were people just as pissed about that? were they demanding a logo change then, too? cause that i would understand, but considering the design of the current Wahoo, i don't agree with the protesters' stance on the issue.
|photo courtesy of thediehardnerd.com|
look at all the Tribe logos--carefully. the Chief logo, once it started reflecting an Indian, was revised several times after the first one was revealed. as of 1946, the Wahoos have only contained 1 feather. Walter Goldbach, creator of the cartoonish character, stated that since then, technically, we have all been mistakenly referring to him as Chief Wahoo, when really he is not a Chief anymore because he's no longer sporting a full headdress. i feel like that fact only adds to my case about it being the opposite of offensive.
2017 UPDATES & THOUGHTS:
i'm no longer sure that there are as many people advocating the Chief these days. i honestly feel as though some fans are getting tired of the whole issue and essentially giving up by saying just get rid of it to end all the controversy. i am not one of those people, and our current players aren't ready to give up the fight either, as proven by their voting to wear their Chief Wahoo caps in the 2016 postseason.
here's Corey Kluber at Tribe Fest 2017 and the Chief Wahoo he drew on the table in between signing autographs for fans:
|photo courtesy of Chuck Crow via The Plain Dealer|
|photo courtesy of @fox8news on twitter|
it should be no surprise that Goldbach also agrees with keeping the Chief. he gave an insightful interview back on March 7, 2014, on the Kiley & Booms show, where he clarified that he never thought anyone would get worked up and be offended by his drawing when he was designing it back in the 1940s. there was no objection to Chief Wahoo when he created it, but that's changed since around the 1980s. Goldbach contended, "right after World War II, everybody was close to each other. all the fellas were coming home from the service and all families, they were just closer-knit." now that's not the case and so the offense comes in. he also told the story of how he used to go to Opening Day games with his son and see the protesters, and as soon as the TV vans left, they would leave too and that bothered him. the bottom line is, Goldbach wanted to make something like a character, like you're reading the comic strips. "a happy type Indian, but yet something that would not offend people."
whatever your outlook is on this subject, definitely give this audio a quick listen on cleveland.cbslocal.com. Goldbach is 87 years old today and still roots for the Indians AND the Wahoo.
so the Wahoo was created as if he was gonna be part of a comic. do people get mad at comics? and he's sporting a big smile on his face, which is supposed to make you happy, like Goldbach said. and he's just a head. a cartoon-like head. there's no full body depicting an actual Native American. he's not in a patronizing pose. it's just a head. a smiling head.
|photo courtesy of lefthookjournal.wordpress.com|
no, sir, they don't, and that was the intent when it was designed--to make it look like a separate entity from an actual race.
i feel like this is similar to South Park. when that first came out on TV, loads of people, parents in particular, thought it was vulgar and distasteful. but guess what? the show is still on today, the complaints have diminished, and people barely bat an eyelash at it anymore. the stuff on there now seems almost tame compared to some of the other things currently on television, such as all those gaudy, staged reality shows. so why can't the Wahoo now get a pass?
let me provide more examples of how certain things that were unacceptable and possibly controversial in the past are no longer in that category today.
--TV shows can now pretty much openly use all the swear words, minus the F--- word, without bleeping them out. but a cartoony sports logo is offensive?
--TV shows can also now show people giving the middle finger without having to blur it out. but a sports logo honoring a former player is offensive?
--there are so many more sexual situations and acts of violence on TV now, and apparently that's fine just as long as they show a TV-MA rating prior to the beginning of the show. you can watch a person's skull being bashed in on television, but a smiling sports logo is inappropriate?
--it's now acceptable in fashion for women to walk around in sheer tops that expose their breasts and short shorts that reveal their butt cheeks. that's not an issue, that's fine for young children to see in public, but a sports team logo is offensive?
are we sure this is the year 2017? it's kind of amazing how, as time goes on, the tables turn regarding what's permissible. except, things are going in the opposite direction for the Chief.
many people also feel that the newest President of the United States is racist. that might be a more pressing matter to attend to right now than the Indians' logo, wouldn't you say?
oh and Tribe fans, myself included, still erroneously identify the Wahoo as a Chief. that makes us dumb, not discriminatory.
He's NOT the Mascot, He's a LOGO
in 2014, i wrote:
can i also quickly address that the Chief isn't even the team's mascot, as some people incorrectly argue? we have Slider, who for all intents and purposes is a made-up kid-friendly fuchsia creature (not even a real animal, mind you), completely unrelated to ALL Indians--the Cleveland team AND the racial group. nobody is dressing up as a Native American parading around the ballpark as an official Tribe mascot. the Wahoo is simply a team symbol. so again i ask, what is all the vitriol about?!
|photo courtesy of fathead.com|
it's extremely disturbing when i see people arguing against the use of the Wahoo as our mascot because THAT'S NOT EVEN CORRECT! the Wahoo is merely a logo/symbol of the Indians, plain and simple. so when people say that our mascot is racist, i quip, "what do you have against Slider?" cause i really don't think he would appreciate that too much. yes, i concede it's fair to say that Slider can seem a bit creepy, but racist? hardly. now as i indicated above, if there was a real human dressed from head to toe in Native American fatigues trying to reproduce our cartoon Wahoo, going around acting as our mascot, then i would understand and be outraged, too. but that's not the case, so please get your facts straight.
|photo courtesy of wcpo.com|
for all those saying "we are not mascots," which again is inaccurate in and of itself, the Wahoo is NOT meant to be a literal portrayal of the Native American race.
What's In a Name?
in 2014, i wrote:
for those fans who don't know the story of how the Indians got their name, i'll tell you. from 1903-1914, the Indians were called the Cleveland Naps after player-manager Napoleon Lajoie, even though he was widely referred to as Larry. after the 1914 season ended, owner Charles Somers was broke and the team needed to cut payroll. (some things never change, huh?) so Nap was traded to the Philadelphia Athletics, literally given away just so Somers wouldn't have to pay his then-expensive $9,000 contact. at that point, it was decided that they needed a new team name. Somers asked several writers from the Cleveland News, the Cleveland Press, and the Plain Dealer to run a contest to rename the team. once they got some names from the fans, they would all get together and make a decision. 30 different suggested names were chosen to mull over, but Indians wasn't one of them.
Somers and the writers couldn't get over the big story of 1914, how the "Miracle" Boston Braves went from last place on July 4 to winning the World Series after sweeping the Phillies. clearly, they couldn't name the team the Braves, but they could name them the Indians. it was remembered that the team was briefly called the Indians back when Louis Sockalexis played on the team from 1897-99. so the Indians name presumably paid homage to the old National League Club of the late 19th century in hopes that the team could be like their National League opponents in turning themselves around. in some fans' eyes, it may also be in honor of Sockalexis and a time when Cleveland's baseball team was really good. and so the decision was made. however, when each newspaper announced the new name as Indians in 1914, they all stated it was a temporary nickname. yet here we are, 100 years later, still called the Cleveland Indians.😁
(btw, if you want even more details about this and the Indians' previous names, i suggest you read Terry Pluto's book "Our Tribe." it's a fantastic read and that is indeed how i learned the true story behind the Tribe's name/naming.)
the intentions behind the name were pure and in no way defamatory. the name was supposed to be an inspiration to the players to play hard and never give up. besides, if some people see it as a tribute to Native American Sockalexis, then how can Native Americans today be upset by that?
how is it that people loved the name Indians back in 1914, but not in 2014? as time passes, we are supposed to be making progress in the area of racism and be more open-minded about things. in spite of this, there are people who remain more sensitive than ever about topics such as this. so i'm confused. are you telling me that a hundred years ago, people were more tolerant than people in the world today?
and so with the team name Indians, what other kind of logo would you expect? yes, Cleveland started out with the C, but it needed to be updated. and now that you know how the Indians got their name, you know it was never meant to be offensive and, as a result, neither was the Wahoo logo.
i like the story of the Miracle Boston Braves, and i think it's not unlike people today to seek motivation from their opponents in order to better themselves. and again, if the fans chose to think of the Indians' name as a recognition of a good player and great team, then who are we to dispute that?
i'm also curious to know if when the team was first named Indians, were there protesters at League Park back then? i'm gonna assume no.
i've said this before and i'll say it again--a lot of people don't know the true origin of how the Indians' name and logo came to be. even if their opinion doesn't change, i think everyone should at least take the time to become educated about it.
**the rest of this blog contains all new stuff that i did not formerly examine or write about in my first blog from 2014.**
If the Logo Goes, Will the Name Be Changed Next?
most of the people who want the Wahoo eradicated also want the team name changed. so if in fact the Wahoo does get permanently eliminated in the next few years, that likely won't be the end of all of the complaints. the protesters will continue to come around, calling for the team name to be changed because they feel that is equally as insulting as the logo was. from what i've gathered, the anti-Wahoo group pretty much believes the logo and name go hand-in-hand in terms of inappropriateness. the argument would be, well it's good that you finally got rid of the logo, but now you need to discard the name. the debate will go on, and the name may not survive it.
No Shirt, No Shoes... No Wahoos?
it's already been established that the Wahoo isn't shown much at the park anymore. neither the Indians nor MLB go out of their way to promote it, as i described earlier in this blog. so even if someday the players can no longer wear the Wahoo, which we'll barely notice cause again, they hardly wear it now, where does that leave the fans? how will the fans who are loyal Wahoo defenders and want to Save the Chief/Keep the Chief be affected by this?
if people are still offended by the very limited display of it coming from the actual team nowadays, then who's to say those same people won't be offended by the fans who choose to wear Wahoo gear to games and then begin to protest against them? and would that once again get the attention of our owner and the commissioner and lead to the fans eventually being told they cannot wear Wahoos to the games or else they'll be reprimanded by not being allowed inside the park?
that all might sound a bit extreme, but if the logo becomes forbidden from team use--something i never thought would even be a possibility when i first became a fan--then it's really not that crazy of a notion to think any fan promotion of the Wahoo at games could also be banned in the future. imagine the backlash that would cause...
whether or not that ever occurs, will they no longer sell old Wahoo stuff in the Team Shop or online and perhaps not even make any new items featuring the Wahoo? i mean how far is this gonna go? i absolutely worry that one day all Wahoo gear will be discontinued. so buy it up now if you want it because if the floodgates open, there's no telling how much damage will be done. give people an inch, they'll take a mile.
Were We Betrayed By One Of Our Own?
if Tribe fans weren't already aware, our old team president Mark Shapiro was the driving force behind implementing the C symbol as the primary team logo. and once he was far enough removed from having been part of the Indians' front office, he outwardly proclaimed that he was bothered by the Chief Wahoo. (source: theprovince.com, October 12, 2016.) hearing this disappointed me. pretending to endorse something that you really took issue with all along gets zero respect from me. and if he had to come up with a different logo, could he not have been more creative than to just revamp the old C? put a little effort into it man. smh.
|photo courtesy of fans247.com|
now let's look at the timing of this. the Toronto Blue Jays won their American League Division Series against the Texas Rangers on October 9, 2016, and the Indians won their ALDS against the Boston Red Sox on October 10. then on October 12, the Shapiro bombshell drops. had the Indians lost to the BoSox, would Shapiro have confessed anything publicly about the Wahoo? most likely not.
the American League Championship Series began in Cleveland on October 14. the Indians were scheduled to play Game 3 of the series in Toronto on October 17. that same day, a request was sent in the morning to an Ontario court by Douglas Cardinal to block the Indians from using both their team name and logo on their uniforms. (source: Robert Higgs, cleveland.com.) the judge denied Cardinal's request (source: fox8.com) and the Indians were free to wear their usual jerseys for the remainder of the playoff series.
did Cardinal truly expect the ruling to go his way on such short notice? how would the Indians have been able to remove the Wahoos on their jerseys so quickly before the game? there was really nothing anyone could do about it at that particular time. had someone approached a judge with this petition as soon as it was known that the Indians would be playing Toronto in the ALCS, then maybe the outcome would have gone differently. but waiting until the day of the game in Toronto? after Toronto was down, 2-0, in the series no less? doesn't that seem suspicious?
i don't recall the Wahoo and team name being a problem when the Tribe played in Toronto during the regular season. how come Cardinal didn't rally against our logo and name back in April 2016 when the Blue Jays hosted the Indians during opening week? to all of the sudden decide the name and logo are a problem once the two teams were coming onto a national stage has a ring of transparency to it. i don't think it was a coincidence that both Shapiro's admittance of his Wahoo disapproval and Cardinal's ban request didn't emerge until we had to play each other in a very meaningful series. would Texans have taken issue with our name and Wahoo too had they advanced to the ALCS instead of the Jays? i'm guessing no considering we didn't hear any complaints of this magnitude when the Tribe went to Boston in our previous playoff series or to Chicago to play the Cubs in the World Series... think about that.
lastly, i know all about how the Blue Jays broadcaster refuses to use our name when he calls Indians-Jays games. luckily now he doesn't have to worry about what to say when we play them this year because he can call us the American League Champions. and we can refer to Toronto as that team we snatched EE from! (ugh, i promised myself i'd remain civil in my blog, but i couldn't avoid that burn.😛)
What the Wahoo Means
most of those who want the Chief Wahoo to stay feel that way because of a special, emotional connection to the cartoon logo. many fans around the city of Cleveland have a personal relationship with the character, as they maintain it not only represents their baseball team, but the city as well. and so they take immense pride in that. some fans also view the Wahoo as an important part of the team's heritage and would be upset if it was no longer affiliated with the present club.
for other Indians fans, the Wahoo symbolizes many happy memories from their childhood. it takes them back to a time when they were kids and shared the experience of going to Tribe games with their fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, etc. for some, it provides a link to a now deceased family member. there's a nostalgia factor attached to it and i for one would never want to be the person to tell somebody that their connection to the dead is gone.
i have never associated any derogatory meaning to the Wahoo in all my days as a fan. and to be perfectly honest with you, i'm not sure i ever would have been lured to the team if the Wahoo hadn't existed. without getting too personal here, let me disclose that when i decided i wanted to take an interest in professional baseball in 1996, i made the effort to teach myself by watching the sports part of the nightly news. and when i saw that smiling Chief Wahoo on my TV screen, it was like a lightbulb went off and i immediately knew i was meant to be a fan of that team. he just looked so happy, with that contagious smile, and he hooked me in. i don't think i would have gotten that same warm feeling if the Tribe's logo had simply been a C. now that might sound totally stupid to some of you, but since then, i have never once wavered in my support of this team. so i have a loyalty to the Chief in sort of the same way that i just mentioned the homegrown Clevelanders and lifelong Indians fans do.
What Is the Wahoo Worth?
the 2019 All Star Game is said to bring in between $60-65 million to Cleveland. and obviously it's also going to put a huge national spotlight on the city. but is that really worth the possible stipulation of getting rid of the Indians' Chief Wahoo?
|photo courtesy of animal-dream.com|
there are some things in life that you should not put a price on, and this is one of them. and i know there are plenty of other Indians fans and Clevelanders who feel the same way. people have been against the Wahoo for years, and for years the Indians ensured the fans that he would not be going anywhere. so now, if the only condition to land the All Star Game was to ditch the Chief, then it wasn't worth it. i don't care how much money the city stands to make. if Cleveland wanted/needed attention and an economical boost, then the Indians should have just let their basketball neighbors across the Gateway Plaza host the ASG in their own sport where nothing would have to be altered.
if the Indians were ever gonna change their stance on the Wahoo and basically cave in, then they should have done it YEARS ago. to do it under these circumstances would not look good. to go back on their position after ALL this time for some money and publicity would be the absolute worst way they could allow the Chief to go out.
If We're Going Down, We're Taking Everybody With Us
so what about the other teams in other sports that people find offensive? many people also consider the logos and names of the Washington Redskins, Chicago Blackhawks, Florida State Seminoles, and Notre Dame Fighting Irish as being disparaging. some even feel that way about MLB's Atlanta Braves as well.
|photo courtesy of laloyolan.com|
now i admit, i don't know if those teams have protesters outside their venues demanding that their names and logos be changed. but we cannot be the only team that's (potentially) required to change anything about us. if the Wahoo and/or the Indians name has to go, then every other team with a questionable logo and/or name should also be ordered to make mandatory modifications.
i don't personally deem any sports names or logos as vilifying, i don't take it to that level of gravity to the point of offense, but i'm sorry--if we're going down, we're taking everybody with us. the Indians should not be the only ones forced to make adjustments (if that day comes).
as i wrote in my 2014 blog, i cannot and will not tell any person or group of people how to feel about the Wahoo. i know that i'm unlikely to change anyone's attitude, just like nobody can change mine. but by citing facts and offering my reasons for why i feel the way that i do, i at least hope that maybe all those opposed to the Indians' logo and name can see the other side from a different point-of-view.
with the decreased usage of the Chief, the Cleveland Indians have already succumbed to some of the desires of those who view our logo as racist and demeaning. and because the Wahoo is no longer a celebrated figure of the ballclub, the protesters have not only gotten their point across, but are being heard and taken seriously. so if you want to say that one particular side is "winning" the battle over the other, it's not the Save the Chief side.
people are always going to be offended by something or another. but if you get rid of everything that people are offended by, there'll be nothing left in existence. the line has to be drawn somewhere. i'd love to see Paul Dolan stand his ground and keep what's left of the Chief, but i think now it's too late, and i hope he's prepared for the potential repercussions.
if you want to save the Chief Wahoo, you can sign Janet Smelko's petition here.
MAIN BLOG TAKEAWAYS:
1. the Wahoo is our LOGO, not our mascot.
2. the logo was created with love and good intentions.
3. the Indians name is in honor of former Cleveland Indian/Native American Louis Sockalexis.
4. neither the logo nor the name were meant to represent the entire group of Native Americans.
thank you for reading through this post, regardless of what side of the matter you're backing. again, i'm merely presenting the facts and my thoughts, i'm not here to start a nasty internet debate. those who want the Wahoo gone may wish to contest the points i've contrived and that's fine. feel free to leave a comment below explaining your stance.
and if you've made it all the way to the end of this without being (too) offended, then let me take a minute to promote my twitter, @clevelandgirl23, where i mainly post updates and other news about Michael Brantley. and if you'd like to join my subscription list to receive email notifications when i post new blogs, go ahead and submit your email address in the box underneath the Blog Archive sidebar on the upper right side of this page.