While I enjoy sports and admire the athletes and coaches of the team called The Washington Redskins, I am appalled that so many people believe that it is "their" team!

The truth was hidden away in the middle of an article on Feb. 4. It said D.C. officials "received an ultimatum from team owner Jack Kent Cooke, who said he would renew his efforts to build a stadium in the suburbs." He added that he would prefer to stay in the District of Columbia -- provided all of his demands are met, of course.

Why don't editors who think they know the answers to every other human dilemma speak of "Jack Kent Cooke's Redskins" so that mob hysteria will stop overriding good judgment? Were the "Oakland Raiders" really Oakland's? Were the "Baltimore Colts" really Baltimore's? In those cases, weren't the fans exploited?

Why is the public so easily deceived by titles? FORREST L. MILLER Rockville

I read with disgust Jack Kent Cooke's latest ultimatum to the city of Washington. It takes quite a measure of arrogance to expect the citizens of this country (Washington still gets quite a federal contribution), or even the citizens of the city itself, to finance a stadium that 95 percent of them will never see.

Since Mr. Cooke will be the one to profit from a new stadium, he should follow the example of Joe Robbie in Miami, and build it himself. If he wants the taxpayers to pity the fact that he is losing money, let him open his books to public scrutiny by an independent auditor. If not, he should stop crying poverty. After all, nobody is forcing him to stay in a business that is losing money.

Mr. Cooke may be in for a rude awakening if he thinks he can get a suburban jurisdiction to finance his stadium.