Native American mascot opposers insist that mascots are disgraceful to Native American culture. Even though Snyder, the owner of the Redskins, states that their mascot pays homage to the Oneida that lived in the Washington area, protesters argue that the term is contemptuous; Barack Obama, former President, wrongly called on Snyder and encouraged him to make a name change (“Point” par. 6-10). Furthermore, as well as the Redskins being pushed to have a mascot change, the University of Utah is also urged to change their mascot and name. The petition for changing the “Ute” reference states, “The University of Utah is unilaterally allowing the denigration and mockery of Native American traditions, customs, and religious symbols" (qtd in. Richards and Tanner par. 5). Basically, the petition is saying by the University allowing Native American customs and traditions to be a part of the mascot, the University is mocking these Natives and their “Ute” nickname. Connor Richards, columnist for the University Wire, argued the Ute nickname does not solely refer to the indigenous people who have their own rich personal history but instead allows students attending the University to be called a Ute (Richards and Tanner par. 3).In other words, the nickname is allowing the students attending to be racially profiled, causing a misinterpretation of the name Ute. Richards explains that taking an identity to make a sports franchise is wrong (Richards and Tanner par. 3). Aaron Payment, executive officer of the National Congress of American Indians, stated, "It's denigrating, whether they intend it or not. It's objectifying us” (Armour par. 3). Payment argues that using Native American mascots, whether meant to mock customs or not, is absurd, and the names need to be changed. These antagonists call fans who support Native American mascots arrogant, but in reality, they are the arrogant ones. Anyone familiar with Native American customs should agree that these mascots honor traditions. Native American mascots should not be looked at as disgraceful but instead should be looked at as respecting the team names and traditions. Stull emphasizes that teams chose their mascots a long time ago, and these teams would like to keep these names because of traditional beliefs (qtd. in Stull and Leatherman). Stull is correct when arguing that mascots are seen as tradition. In fact, Chief Lee Vest of the Appalachian Confederated Tribes discusses his personal history of being a Warrior: “I was a Warrior. . . I remember being in football games with that Warrior Spirit. . . It actually got my juices flowing” (qtd in. Smith par. 10). Vest celebrates the fact that he was part of the Warrior family. He reminds citizens that a Chief of the Tribes believes mascots that have a Native American name honor traditions. To continue, in lieu of the controversial nickname for the University of Utah students, Utes, the name is unnecessarily argued because the Northern Ute Tribe approves of the nickname (Richards and Tanner par. 5). The Ute nickname should not be argued because it, along with the Redskins, respects mascot traditions rather than disgracing them. These mascots are historical traditions that embrace and respect their Native American communities (“Sports Teams Name Changes par. 16). For example, Barbara Bruce, a Chippewa teacher, explained that she was not bothered by the Redskins name. Bruce praised, “I'm proud of being Native American and of the Redskins” (qtd. in Cox, Clement, and Vargas par. 14). Bruce insists that she is not ashamed of the mascot’s name. According to a poll that was taken over a five-month period, 70 percent Native Americans said they did not feel the word "Redskin" was disrespectful to Indians (qtd in. Cox, Clement, and Vargas par. 3). A mascot is not chosen to show disrespect; it is chosen to respect traditions of Native Americans. If a sports team changes its name, years of cultural tradition will be undone, and the teams and the communities they serve will obtain financial losses (Auerbach par. 7). Even though some Americans are pushing to have these honorable team names changed, changing the names is not as simple as it may seem. Financially speaking, teams would be forced into investing millions into designing and producing new branding and apparel (Auerbach par. 5). Communities who are advocating that the mascots are not honorable have not considered a new mascot from a financial standpoint. Changing the mascot would mean a loss of spectators. Without the brand and fan recognition, sports teams could waver, resulting in fewer jobs and tax revenues that benefit the community (“Sports Teams Name Changes par. 16). Mascot names should not be changed because the names honor Native American tribes. Furthermore, changing such names is sensitive to Native Americans, and name changes would damage team's tradition and economics (“Sports Teams Name Changes par. 3). Despite these reasons for keeping the Native American mascots, antagonists still argue for a change.