4 hours ago
10
The Washington Commanders have unveiled the first renderings of their next home currently being planned for the site of the old RFK Stadium.
Designed by global firm HKS and scheduled to open in 2030, the 65,000-seat facility features a cantilevered, translucent roof similar to the ones utilized in Minneapolis and Los Angeles. And much like SoFi Stadium in LA, which was also designed by HKS, the stadium will be one continuous loop rather than separate structures.
The team hopes to recapture the homefield advantage it enjoyed at RFK Stadium from 1961 until 1998, when the Redskins moved to Landover, Maryland and later became the Commanders. With that goal in mind, the stadium will feature a 'Wall of Fans' in one end zone, where 'affordable fan-friendly seating' should give die-hard Commanders supporters the chance to be heard.
Like RFK Stadium, the new stadium will offer a view of the US Capitol, albeit one that comes behind a massive glass façade. And it's that glass enclosure that will allow the facility to be fully temperature controlled, making it eligible to host future Super Bowls under NFL rules.
The planned $4 billion facility took in $1.1 billion from taxpayers, with another $2.7 billion coming from the team.
It does not have a name yet, but that hasn't stopped Donald Trump's White House from suggesting his.
The Washington Commanders have unveiled the first renderings of their next home
Fans are seen walking towards the new stadium in the rendering shared by the Commanders
Designed by global firm HKS and scheduled to open in 2030, the 65,000-seat facility features a cantilevered, translucent roof similar to the ones utilized in Minneapolis and Los Angeles
The demolition of RFK Stadium is still in the final stages, with vertical construction on the new facility set to begin next spring.
Once open, it will be able to host more than 200 events per year, with the domed design also qualifying it to host a Super Bowl. The NFL does not award its end-of-season showpiece to stadiums located in climates less than 50°F unless the field is completely covered by a dome.
The stadium does not yet have a name but Donald Trump is already suggesting his own.
As he's currently trying to do with the Kennedy Center, Trump wants to name the new stadium for himself, ESPN reported in November. Previously, then-White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told ESPN it would be a 'beautiful name' because 'it was President Trump who made the rebuilding of the new stadium possible.'
Leavitt's statement was not accurate. It was Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, who signed the federal legislation to transfer the RFK Stadium site land to the district.
Like RFK Stadium before it, the new facility will have a clear view of the US Capitol
The Washington Monument and US Capitol are visible amid the RFK Stadium deconstruction
In this 1984 picture, RFK Stadium can be seen with the US Capitol sitting in the distance
The stadium will be encolsed with glass, allowing it to be fully temperature controlled
But that hasn't stopped Trump from weighing in on the project. Last year, Trump vowed to block the stadium's construction if the team did not change its name from Commanders to its previous name, the Redskins.
Former Washington owner Dan Snyder dropped the Redskins name in 2020 as the country was going through a racial reckoning in the wake of the George Floyd murder by Minneapolis Police.
The origin of 'Redskins' is disputed, according to a 2016 Washington Post article that claims it was first used as a pejorative as early as 1863 in Minnesota.
'The State reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory,' read an announcement in The Winona Daily Republican. 'This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth.'
By 1898, Webster's Collegiate Dictionary began defining 'redskin' with the phrase 'often contemptuous.'
A 2016 Washington Post poll found that 90 percent of the 504 Native American respondents were 'not bothered' by the team's name. Snyder ultimately wrote an open letter, defending his decision to keep the moniker by citing the study.
However, that survey and other similar studies have been slammed by journalists and social scientists as being unreliable.
'The reporters and editors behind this story must have known that it would be used as justification for the continued use of these harmful, racist mascots,' read a statement from the Native American Journalists Association. 'They were either willfully malicious or dangerously naïve in the process and reporting used in this story, and neither is acceptable from any journalistic institution.'
In March of 2020, UC Berkeley revealed a study that found that more than half of its 1,000 Native American respondents were offended by the team name.
