Atlanta fans really need to step up and start a write in campaign like Seattle did with the Sounders. It's hard enough to stomach the racist Native American mascots we already have in pro/college sports do we actually need to bring old ones back? If you can't come up with a name just go with Atlanta FC/SC and let a nickname just come about organically, but don't go with the Chiefs. It brings no value back to the brand, its not going to attract any more fans all it is going to do is make you guys look racist. Its one thing to inherit a team that has a racist name its another to actually CHOOSE the name. Seriously guys don't do it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy Clyde Bellecourt, the director of the American Indian Movement, stated: “ It's the behavior that accompanies all of this that's offensive. The rubber tomahawks, the chicken feather headdresses, people wearing war paint and making these ridiculous war whoops with a tomahawk in one hand and a beer in the other; all of these have significant meaning for us. And the psychological impact it has, especially on our youth, is devastating
Dude, don't be that guy. Yes the Braves are racist as well. Notre Dame nickname came from Irish union troops during the Civil War. Irish people also were not the native people of this country and were not slaughtered (estimates over 10 million killed) and exiled from their lands. When you commit one of the largest genocides in human history, its not so cool to then go turn that culture into a mascot for a sports team and make a mockery of the culture you destroyed. Its just not cool. Seriously just go with Atlanta FC if they can't think of anything. I think Atlanta Apollos had a really cool and unique logo. I think they would be a much better choice.
Really prefer the Apollos name and logo. The Silverbacks name and logo is pure cheese. Chiefs is such a dull and common name. And I've heard both use in racist context.
The first is truly negatively stereotypical, but it's not a stereotype most Irish Americans (especially Catholic ones who root for Notre Dame) will take issue with. There was a time when they were a marginalized group in the US--not so much now. And while I'll agree that it is one of the more obtuse mascots around today, I just don't think anybody--with the possible exception of Irish pacifists--takes issue with it. As for Braves? Yeah. I think a red-faced man with a ****-eating grin along with the tomahawk chop and its attendant chant are pretty clearly racially insensitive.
Found a real one and I guess there is another East High in Akron Ohio that is also called the Orientals with a Dragon as a mascot. http://www.akron-east-high.info/gateway.html