The Univ. of Minnesota wants the Redskins to "wear throwback jerseys without the team name or logo for the Nov. 2 game" against the Vikings at TCF Bank Stadium, according to Ian Shapira of the WASHINGTON POST. UM also has asked that the game "not have any Washington apparel or paraphernalia sold on the premise; that the word 'Redskins' not be uttered by the game’s public address announcer; and that the team’s moniker not appear on the scoreboard or in the program guide or other game-related print or digital material" (WASHINGTON POST, 8/8). ESPN’s Keith Olbermann said of UM not wanting to use the Redskins moniker during the Vikings game, "Exactly how much of the use of the name could be eliminated is up for grabs, probably it depends on the Vikings contract to rent the stadium for a quarter of a million dollars a game. If the university retained complete contractual control over what could be considered offensive terms or signs or clothing, it could, in theory, ban Washington from wearing anything baring the word ‘Redskins’ or wearing the team logo. If the contract is looser the university might be limited to insisting that the name and logo not appear on the scoreboards, or the programs, or the tickets. The outcome could be anywhere on the spectrum, from trivial and vaguely symbolic to the NFL having to fight back by pulling the game out of the University of Minnesota stadium and trying to play it somewhere else." He added, "Regardless, the fact that the boycott hinges on pitting one NFL team against another and then maybe one team against the whole league with public institutions like state universities or say local governments then applying the pressure, this is of enormous importance. The Minnesota boycott and whatever is next along these lines combined with the growing media revolt and the gathering stampede of opportunistic politicians will create the proverbial critical mass maybe as early as November 2” (“Olbermann,” ESPN2, 8/8).