NCAA bans "hostile" Indian mascots in Post-Season

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

And the funny thing is that the only thing that keeps the "marginalization of American Indians" alive is not the mascot. It's in the peope that make it an issue.

That's right. For example, but for the people who made civil rights an "issue" back in the 1950's and 1960's, the whole "marginalization of black people" would have just gone away. These types of problems just tend to fix themselves.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Fighting this battle makes people feel good. Like they are really doing something special. And your statement above feeds that. In reality, they are fighting a battle that will not help end racism or stereotypes. They are fighting one that will ensure the issues that truly need attention won't get it.

I think there is a lot of truth in that. While I don't disagree with the NCAA's decision here, I don't think it's a particularly effective or meaningful one. It's kind of stupid for the most part.

While I think there are certain aspects of political correctedness that are good (many people blame things on PC that have nothing to do with it), there comes a point (often very soon) where the "PC police" go so far that they lose credibility in the fights that actually matter.

There was a great quote in the "Preacher" comic series about PC. I will have to find it.

[Cringer]

How many of you would be ok with a team called the Blackies? Niggas?

At halftime the white students can dress up in black face and then proceed to act like african savages perhaps? Or maybe dress up like Crips and Bloods and act like they are shooting the place up?

Maybe this as their logo...



Maybe a team called the Wetbacks or Beaners?

Halftime could consist of a Alamo reenactment? Maybe a little scene of people dressed up and acting like they are sneaking across the border, and have the goal line represent the border?

This could be their logo...



I bet you all feel these would be fine at a sporting event, performed and watched by kids and teenagers?

Also, your poll of a few hundred indians can be refutted by another poll.

In a survey by Indian Country Today, 81 percent of respondents indicated use of American Indian names, symbols and mascots are predominantly offensive and deeply disparaging to Native Americans.

Polls are not something to always go by.

There are many national American Indian groups against these nicknames/mascots. I suppose they only have 4 or 5 people in each group though huh?

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Cringer

How many of you would be ok with a team called the Blackies? Niggas?

At halftime the white students can dress up in black face and then proceed to act like african savages perhaps? Or maybe dress up like Crips and Bloods and act like they are shooting the place up?

Maybe this as their logo...



Maybe a team called the Wetbacks or Beaners?

Halftime could consist of a Alamo reenactment? Maybe a little scene of people dressed up and acting like they are sneaking across the border, and have the goal line represent the border?

This could be their logo...



I bet you all feel these would be fine at a sporting event, performed and watched by kids and teenagers?

Also, your poll of a few hundred indians can be refutted by another poll.



Polls are not something to always go by.

There are many national American Indian groups against these nicknames/mascots. I suppose they only have 4 or 5 people in each group though huh?

so your obviously for getting rid of the Fightin Irish then too right?

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Chubby

so your obviously for getting rid of the Fightin Irish then too right?

The whole Fightin' Irish analogy is interesting. Actually, the Native American activists use it too by asking the rhetorical question, "how would Irish-Americans feel if the ND mascot was depicted as a drunk beligerent guy, instead of the goofy leprechaun they have now?"

I think another point the activists are trying to make is that in the Notre Dame case, Irish-Americans were, and still are, a significant presence and a big part of the administrative leadership on campus. They presumably had a say on the naming of the mascot, while Native Americans did not usually have the same presence in campus administrations and thusly the Native Americans did not have that same say in the mascots named after them.

I think the issue of getting a say is what will resolve the issue. As is mentioned previously, the majority of Native Americans don't find the nicknames offensive, so long as the names and portrayals aren't insensitive (e.g., Chief Wahoo, the "Savages", etc.). FSU got the blessing of the Seminole tribe without problems. My take here is give the mainline tribal leadership consultation on the issue, where appropriate. They will probably give the okay 99% of the time, and everyone leaves happy. I think a lot of the issue is that the NA tribes feel disrespected not because of the nicknames themselves, but because they were disrespected by not ever being consulted on it. For those people saying that the nicknames are signs of respect, I say that they should put their money where their mouths are and show the respect by getting the imprimatur from whomever you're getting the nickname from.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

The whole Fightin' Irish analogy is interesting. Actually, the Native American activists use it too by asking the rhetorical question, "how would Irish-Americans feel if the ND mascot was depicted as a drunk beligerent guy, instead of the goofy leprechaun they have now?"

I think another point the activists are trying to make is that in the Notre Dame case, Irish-Americans were, and still are, a significant presence and a big part of the administrative leadership on campus. They presumably had a say on the naming of the mascot, while Native Americans did not usually have the same presence in campus administrations and thusly the Native Americans did not have that same say in the mascots named after them.

I think the issue of getting a say, is what will resolve the issue. As is mentioned previously, the majority of Native Americans don't find the nicknames offensive, so long as the names and portrayals aren't insensitive (i.e., Chief Wahoo, the "Savages", etc.). FSU got the blessing of the Seminole tribe without problems. My take here is give the mainline tribal leadership consultation on the issue, where appropriate. They will probably give the okay 99% of the time, and everyone leaves happy. I think a lot of the issue is that the NA tribes feel disrespected not because of the nicknames themselves, but because they were disrespected by not ever being consulted on it. For those people saying that the nicknames are signs of respect, I say that they should put their money where their mouths are and show the respect by getting the imprimatur from whomever you're getting the nickname from.

and yet the NCAA has ruled that FSU is not allowed to use Seminole in the postseason because some other seminole tribe isn't cool with it.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Cringer

How many of you would be ok with a team called the Blackies? Niggas?

At halftime the white students can dress up in black face and then proceed to act like african savages perhaps? Or maybe dress up like Crips and Bloods and act like they are shooting the place up?

Maybe this as their logo...



Maybe a team called the Wetbacks or Beaners?

Halftime could consist of a Alamo reenactment? Maybe a little scene of people dressed up and acting like they are sneaking across the border, and have the goal line represent the border?

This could be their logo...



I bet you all feel these would be fine at a sporting event, performed and watched by kids and teenagers?

Also, your poll of a few hundred indians can be refutted by another poll.



Polls are not something to always go by.

There are many national American Indian groups against these nicknames/mascots. I suppose they only have 4 or 5 people in each group though huh?

Niggas and beaners. Hmmm. Only one team name I can think of has that comparison.

But it's interesting, because as we've talked about through this entire peice, there are teams named for white people or groups of people all over the place. And in most cases, there really isn't a gread deal of thought put into how accurate the portryal is.

We have Vikings, Celtics, Fighting Irish. Eskimos (in the CFL), Buccaneers, Raiders, Pirates, Rebels. . . I could do this all day. Any of the above (save the Eskimos), use white people as the main mascot and none are shown in exactly flattering images. If you think the Celtic on center court of The Garden is a flattering image for an Irishmen, I feel for you.


So what the hell, lets ban em all. You guys have convinced me of the dangerous, damaging stereotypes this causes.

Now that I see a world where the Florida State Seminoles are now the Florida State Crocs, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel here. I'm excited. Lets finish this crap up and start with the next big thing on the agenda that'll impact about 15 people nationwide.

Maybe you can all help me figure out a way to show Italians in a positive light. I have a really low self worth because all I've ever seen my heritage played out on TV is as a mobster or a dumb ass boxer.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Maybe you can all help me figure out a way to show Italians in a positive light.

Although there are one or more groups out there devoted to that particular cause, I don't believe you'll get too much relief. It seems that, at least where this is concerned, Italians are likely to be deemed as "too white" to matter.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Although there are one or more groups out there devoted to that particular cause, I don't believe you'll get too much relief. It seems that, at least where this is concerned, Italians are likely to be deemed as "too white" to matter.

Yep. You are dead on.

Just to be clear here, I don't care about how my heritage is portrayed on TV. It doesn't have an impact as to who I am. The Godfather never caused me to lose self esteem. And there is no Italian "struggle" no matter how hard the NIAF tries to make it appear there is one.

It's just amusing to watch what happens when they make a case. When they protested the Sopranos and filed a lawsuit, it generated about 10 seconds of national airplay. I wonder what would have happened if HBO had a show about Indians and there was a lawsuit filed by one of their protest groups?

[ice4277]

http://www.detnews.com/2005/college/...ort-271468.htm


CMU defends nickname following NCAA postseason ban


Associated Press

Comment on this story Send this story to a friend Get Home Delivery

MOUNT PLEASANT -- Central Michigan University defended the use of the Chippewas nickname after the NCAA on Friday banned the use of American Indian mascots by sports teams during its postseason tournaments. The league did not prohibit them otherwise.

The university said the nickname was adopted in 1942 "to reflect the rich Native American heritage of the mid-Michigan region" and its use has been approved by the area's Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe.

"CMU's continued use of the name is dependent on whether the Chippewa people in our region continue to feel that CMU's use of the name is in fact a proud reflection and is used with dignity and respect," the university said in a joint statement with the tribe.

The NCAA's executive committee decided this week the organization does not have the authority to bar American Indian mascots by individual schools. But nicknames or mascots deemed "hostile or abusive" will not be allowed on team uniforms or other clothing beginning with any NCAA tournament after Feb. 1.

Central Michigan said the university "does not support any derogatory and stereotypical use" of the Chippewa name and prohibits the use of American Indian images, symbols or mascots.

"The rich relationship that the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe has with CMU cannot be determined by an outside entity without contacting the institution and the government involved," said tribe spokesman Joseph Sowmick. "Any arbitrary decision from an outside source regarding university-tribal relations is not acceptable."

He added that that tribe would be open to further discussion with the NCAA.

At least 18 schools, including Central Michigan, have mascots the NCAA deems "hostile or abusive." Not all schools with Indian-related nicknames are on the NCAA's list. Officials said some schools using the Warrior nickname do not use Indian symbols and would not be affected.

Schools on the list could still appeal.

------

Speaking from personal experience, I can say that CMU has done a very good job integrating elements of the Chippewa tribe in many aspects of campus life. I don't recall from my time there any serious issues raised due to the school's use of the nickname or relations with the tribe. So thanks NCAA for getting on your high horse yet again and determining what is moral and just. I can't see this doing anything but creating a wedge issue at Central and other schools in the same situation.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by John Galt

I believe the noble savage stereotype is just as wrong as the crazed warrior. I don't believe you have to choose between them. And this isn't primarily about history for me - it is about the present and the role mascots have in continuing to reinforce the marginalization of American Indians.

I guess I must be the only person in this country who doesn't even think of American Indians as some group of people to be marginalized. I just thought they were people, same as you and me. I mean, if I need to conform my attitude and behavior to match your expectations, please tell me.

My take on this issue is pretty simple - I can understand some consternation over the mascots. I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand the other side of that. But this goes beyond just mascots and bans the names of the tribes. These are, in most cases, not perjorative names, but actual tribal names. To me, there's a huge difference between Redskins or Savages and Seminoles, Aztecs, Illini, etc. Just taking the name itself, it is no different than Trojan or Spartan. So I see no basis for eliminating the right to use those names. As for how the association is played out in terms of mascots, I can at least see the argument against mascots that further stereotyping.

However, having said that, I just honestly can't see the correlation between a depiction of an indian warrior and American Indians in today's society. I don't think anyone, consciously or subconsciously, watches an FSU game on Saturday afternoon, sees the whole Burning Spear intro, comes across a Native American during the work week, and decides to treat them any differently because of what they saw on Saturday during a football game. That just seems so ludicrous to me, that I find it hard to believe we have to discuss it. But that's just me.

The whole point of our society is to get to a point where the first thing we don't notice about people is what or who they are. Or, if that's too idealistic, that we don't form our actions abased on who or what someone is. This type of stuff goes a long way toward delaying our ability to achieve that ideal. When I come across a Native American, I don't but give it a passing thought that they are what they are, and I sure don't worry that if I deny them a job, for instance, that they're going to come back in war paint and plant a burning spear on my front lawn. But apparently that's what I'm supposed to think, so that I can feel the NCAA has done something worthwhile here.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I guess I must be the only person in this country who doesn't even think of American Indians as some group of people to be marginalized. I just thought they were people, same as you and me. I mean, if I need to conform my attitude and behavior to match your expectations, please tell me.

My take on this issue is pretty simple - I can understand some consternation over the mascots. I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand the other side of that. But this goes beyond just mascots and bans the names of the tribes. These are, in most cases, not perjorative names, but actual tribal names. To me, there's a huge difference between Redskins or Savages and Seminoles, Aztecs, Illini, etc. Just taking the name itself, it is no different than Trojan or Spartan. So I see no basis for eliminating the right to use those names. As for how the association is played out in terms of mascots, I can at least see the argument against mascots that further stereotyping.

However, having said that, I just honestly can't see the correlation between a depiction of an indian warrior and American Indians in today's society. I don't think anyone, consciously or subconsciously, watches an FSU game on Saturday afternoon, sees the whole Burning Spear intro, comes across a Native American during the work week, and decides to treat them any differently because of what they saw on Saturday during a football game. That just seems so ludicrous to me, that I find it hard to believe we have to discuss it. But that's just me.

The whole point of our society is to get to a point where the first thing we don't notice about people is what or who they are. Or, if that's too idealistic, that we don't form our actions abased on who or what someone is. This type of stuff goes a long way toward delaying our ability to achieve that ideal. When I come across a Native American, I don't but give it a passing thought that they are what they are, and I sure don't worry that if I deny them a job, for instance, that they're going to come back in war paint and plant a burning spear on my front lawn. But apparently that's what I'm supposed to think, so that I can feel the NCAA has done something worthwhile here.

As I've said here, I actually agree with you that there is a big difference in how some mascots are portrayed (I used the Braves as a "positive" example, but I'm going on secondhand info). "Redskins" and Chief Wahoo represent the other end of the spectrum for me. If it was just a question of the innocuous mascots, I would agree with you. The problem comes in the hair-splitting. As you notice from people like JW, slippery slopes seem to hold a lot of argumentative force and people insist on a "bright line." Since none can really be drawn, I'm fine letting the relatively harmless mascots get trashed with the bad ones. I know that isn't an ideal solution, but I don't think there is a better one in today's world. But I would be happy to be proven wrong and for someone to successfully sort out the "good" from the "bad."

I will quibble about your last point too. I think a good many people would disagree with your statement that, "The whole point of our society is to get to a point where the first thing we don't notice about people is what or who they are." I for one believe race, gender, etc. will ALWAYS matter so the point is to strive for tolerance, understanding, and respect for multiculturalism. I believe blindness is impossible. Even if it weren't, I believe trying to be blind in a world that is anything but works to the strong disadvantage of those who are worse off. I'm not sure acting blind actually leads to societal blindness (it may even have the opposite effect).

And I've read your first paragraph a few times and I still can't figure out what it means. But it's the morning and I'm not so bright sometimes.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by John Galt

And I've read your first paragraph a few times and I still can't figure out what it means. But it's the morning and I'm not so bright sometimes.

I disagree with the premise that American Indians are being marginalized in our society, let alone that there's some connection to sports mascots.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I disagree with the premise that American Indians are being marginalized in our society, let alone that there's some connection to sports mascots.

Hmm. I think the way reservations get crapped on in terms of mismanagement by the BIA (including flat out stealing Indian money), the ridiculous poverty rates in many tribes, and the inability to develop economically because of horrible resource availability (unless you can build a casino!) pretty much marginalize a lot of American Indians in our society. And that doesn't even address racism. Why do you think there is no marginalization?

[rkmsuf]

All they have to do is build a casino and problems solved. Geez.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

All they have to do is build a casino and problems solved. Geez.

Not so easy though, there is a lot of opposition to deal with whenever a new casino is proposed...

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by John Galt

Hmm. I think the way reservations get crapped on in terms of mismanagement by the BIA (including flat out stealing Indian money), the ridiculous poverty rates in many tribes, and the inability to develop economically because of horrible resource availability (unless you can build a casino!) pretty much marginalize a lot of American Indians in our society. And that doesn't even address racism. Why do you think there is no marginalization?

I just don't see any concerted effort to relegate Indians to a lower social class in this country. In fact, it seems to me that the autonomy that tribes desire has hampered their ability to make the gains that other groups have made over the past 40-50 years. Not saying things couldn't be made better for them, but that's pretty much true of most minority groups - doesn't mean they've been marginalized.

I'm familiar with the BIA Trust scandal, and frankly, I'm appalled at the continuing inability of the government to fix things. I'm not sure whether this started as a case of mismanagement decades ago or a concerted effort to screw the Indians out of money, but the actions of the past several administrations (regardless of party) have been disgusting - destruction of records, contempt hearings, etc.

[Wolfpack]

Besides that, some reservations are just not in a tourist-friendly area (granted, they could probably build elsewhere, but that may entail additional red tape). I can hardly picture some people heading out to Shannon County, SD or Fort Peck in Montana to go gambling.

[WrongWay]

But, will the NCAA be able to "Stop the Chop"?

I know the NFL can punish their fans for cheering to loud, so will the NCAA punish their fans for making doing the FSU chant?

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by WrongWay

But, will the NCAA be able to "Stop the Chop"?

I know the NFL can punish their fans for cheering to loud, so will the NCAA punish their fans for making doing the FSU chant?

They can certainly try to pass some rule, similar to the NFL's excessive noise penalty. They cracked down pretty hard on excessive celebration after the 1990-1991 Cotton Bowl. Apparently, the Miami Hurricanes' post-TD celebrations were so outrageous, the NCAA decided to legislate the issue.

PS- I didn't see the game, but does anybody remember what the Miami players did that was so over the top?

[Ksyrup]

[JW]

Originally Posted by John Galt

Hmm. I think the way reservations get crapped on in terms of mismanagement by the BIA (including flat out stealing Indian money), the ridiculous poverty rates in many tribes, and the inability to develop economically because of horrible resource availability (unless you can build a casino!) pretty much marginalize a lot of American Indians in our society. And that doesn't even address racism. Why do you think there is no marginalization?

However, it is considered terribly politically incorrect to suggest that we come to some kind of end to the reservation system, even though there are terrible problems on many reservations. It seems that Native Americans and Native American groups that exist outside the system generally fare better, though I really have no stats to back that up. My own wife if a member of a recognized Native American tribe that has no reservation and no casino. They seem to do quite well in general, working through a tribal organization to promote tribal heritage and help out tribal members who need help through various charities and other means. Thus they retain their distinctive heritage while not separating themselves from general American society. At this point I think we really should consider how to best modernize the reservation system, if not end it, so that the system itself does not continue to perpetuate marginalization and dependency.

[JW]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I think there is a lot of truth in that. While I don't disagree with the NCAA's decision here, I don't think it's a particularly effective or meaningful one. It's kind of stupid for the most part.

While I think there are certain aspects of political correctedness that are good (many people blame things on PC that have nothing to do with it), there comes a point (often very soon) where the "PC police" go so far that they lose credibility in the fights that actually matter.

There was a great quote in the "Preacher" comic series about PC. I will have to find it.

I can agree with this. I think whether one agrees or disagrees with the decision, that it is really going to do nothing to help Native Americans. That is one thing I've been saying in my posts. Let's assume all Native American mascots are banned from elementary school (we have a local elementary school with the Braves nickname) to professional sports. If we did that, it would change nothing for Native Americans.

I also believe activists often choose battles in the post-civil rights era not for the good it will do but for the visibility, and not in the hope that it will unite people, but because they know the issue will be divisive and thus generate lots of heat and publicity. This helps the activists, not the people they supposedly represent.

As to the comments about black mascots...

How many of you would be ok with a team called the Blackies? Niggas?

I think Zulus would be a pretty good nickname. They have a proud history and were known for their aggressive militarism. I like that better than Seagulls. I have to repeat that no one is going to pick a nickname or mascot because of perceived negative attributes. They are going to choose based on perceived positive attributes.

My wife, btw, loves her Jeep Cherokee. She also loves the name.

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Yeah, that was pretty funny when those guys did that. Would have been funnier if it was a bunch of indian/asian/black guys, but they tried.

Now imagine if they had choosen Fighting Blacks, bet there would have been a bunch of pissed off people.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

I also believe activists often choose battles in the post-civil rights era not for the good it will do but for the visibility, and not in the hope that it will unite people, but because they know the issue will be divisive and thus generate lots of heat and publicity. This helps the activists, not the people they supposedly represent.

Ding Ding Ding.
We have a winner.

[Ksyrup]

The most ridiculous thing about the coverage of this issue is that everyone continues to report the same, erroneous thing:


The NCAA has ruled that mascots such as FSU's Chief Osceola will not be allowed to perform at games.


No! That's not what happened. The NCAA doesn't control any football games, so Chief Osceola will not be affected (unless the BCS bows to pressure from the NCAA, which IMO is likely). But until then - get the fucking story straight, you losers! It's not that difficult.

[miami_fan]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...s/12455849.htm

Seminoles they will stay.

The Florida State University athletic department celebrated a major victory on Tuesday when the NCAA announced it had removed FSU from its list of universities subject to restrictions on the use of Native American mascots and nicknames.

Earlier this month, the NCAA told FSU and 17 other schools that their use of a Native American mascot and nickname was inappropriate, and that mascots deemed ''hostile or abusive'' would be prohibited from appearing on team uniforms during NCAA-sanctioned tournaments beginning in February 2006.

FSU president T.K. Wetherell threatened legal action. The school appealed the NCAA ruling on the grounds that its six-decade relationship with the Seminole Tribe of Florida was one of mutual respect, so much so that the tribe in June passed a unanimous proclamation offering its endorsement of FSU's nickname and mascot, Chief Osceola.

The NCAA, upon review, decided to scratch FSU from its list.

''The NCAA Executive Committee continues to believe the stereotyping of Native Americans is wrong,'' read an NCAA statement from Bernard Franklin, VP for Governance/membership. ``However, in its review of the particular circumstances regarding Florida State, the staff review committee noted the unique relationship between the university and the Seminole Tribe of Florida as a significant factor.

``The NCAA recognizes the many different points of view on this matter, particularly within the Native American community. The decision of a namesake sovereign tribe, regarding when and how its name and imagery can be used, must be respected even when others may not agree.''

Andy Haggard, a Coral Gables attorney and vice chair of the FSU Board of Trustees, was thrilled with the news.

''The NCAA showed great wisdom,'' Haggard said by phone from Daytona Beach, where he was involved in a trial. ``We never should have been included in that list. It should never have come to this. But I'm extremely happy with the final result. I can see banning names like Savages or Redskins, but Seminole is completely different. The NCAA is finally treating the Seminole tribe with the dignity they deserve.''

Among the other school still on the list are the University of Illinois (Illini), University of Utah (Utes), and Central Michigan (Chippewas).

''The NCAA position on the use of Native American mascots, names and imagery has not changed, and the NCAA remains committed to ensuring an atmosphere of respect and sensitivity for all who participate in and attend our championships,'' read the statement. ``This decision applies to the unique relationship Florida State University has with the Seminole Tribe of Florida. Requests for reviews from other institutions will be handled on a case-by-case basis.''

[sterlingice]

Who didn't see that coming...

Then again, this whole exercise was asinine from the start.

SI

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Who didn't see that coming...

Then again, this whole exercise was asinine from the start.

SI

Gee, and I thought they were really trying to do some good too. They'll back off about 15 of the other 17 too. Especially when they are threatened with legal action by the rest of the schools. It's not that they can't win, it's that they don't have the spine to.

I wonder how much money went into this worthless rule. Money that could have been spent doing something good. How F'n pathetic.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Gee, and I thought they were really trying to do some good too. They'll back off about 15 of the other 17 too. Especially when they are threatened with legal action by the rest of the schools. It's not that they can't win, it's that they don't have the spine to.

I wonder how much money went into this worthless rule. Money that could have been spent doing something good. How F'n pathetic.

You know the saddest thing about it is that the money they spent was on lawyers and having them research if the schools could sue or if the NCAA had a legal case. Good to see that was money well spent

SI

[Buccaneer]

But JG and NoMyths said it was a good thing to do.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

You know the saddest thing about it is that the money they spent was on lawyers and having them research if the schools could sue or if the NCAA had a legal case. Good to see that was money well spent

SI

Words just can't express how sickening this entire thing has been to me. Especially the fact people bought into it. We've simply lost touch with reality. I'd really like to see the number. You figure the lawyer fees (as you've said above), the number of "business" lunches, trips, meetings, etc. Then you add in the salaries of the people working on this. The paperwork. The professional lobbyists who pushed for this.

This was a two year freakin study to try eliminate SEVENTEEN logos from the NCAA tournament. (the only damned time anyone would see the things in an NCAA controled event anyway)

NoClueAtAll

[HomerJSimpson]

How's this for hypocracy. You can shop on the NCAA site and buy:

A figthing illini sign

Chief Illini pendant bracelets

and other products deemed "offensive" by the NCAA! "It is real offensive to use American Indian mascots, unless we make a buck of it!"

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by HomerJSimpson

How's this for hypocracy. You can shop on the NCAA site and buy:

A figthing illini sign

Chief Illini pendant bracelets

and other products deemed "offensive" by the NCAA! "It is real offensive to use American Indian mascots, unless we make a buck of it!"

To be fair, I'm sure this is more a case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing.

SI

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

To be fair, I'm sure this is more a case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing.

SI

Well, before you go accusing a bunch of other people of using stereotypes and talk about how offensive they are, maybe it'd be a good idea to clean your own house first?

Nah.

OK, I'll stop now. Nothing more to say on this thing anyway.

[JW]

Here's another guy who apparently hates Native Americans since he supports UL-Monroe's Indian nickname. ULM has announced it intends to fight the NCAA ruling, and this guy, btw, will be on their side.

http://www.region10.com/sp_news.php?id=254

Beaver Addresses New Generation of Indians

His walk and his speech were a step slower than his playing days in 1959 and 1960, but Chief Perry Beaver had a sparkle in his eye as he addressed the ULM student-athletes at their annual season kickoff convocation on Tuesday evening in Brown Theatre.

Beaver, a football player for ULM, then Northeast Louisiana, shared stories of his pride in being a Native American and pride in being a Northeast Louisiana Indian. He spoke of the strides made by Native Americans in the area of education and about respect for people of all cultures.

"It is all about how you treat your fellow man," said Beaver. "In order to get respect, you have to give respect."

A ULM Sports Hall of Fame inductee in 1998, Beaver played center and linebacker for head coach Jack Rowan. He spent some time in the early 1960s with the Green Bay Packers under legendary head coach Vince Lombardi. He has been an educator for most of his professional career, coaching at Jenks High School in Oklahoma for 25 years. He spent 14 of those years as the head coach winning two state championships and eight district championships.

Beaver recently retired as the Principal Chief of the Muskogee (Creek) Nation in Oklahoma. He was elected the Principal Chief of the Muscogee Nation in January 1996. He had previously served as a Tulsa District Representative to the Muscogee (Creek) National Council for two terms. He also served two terms as the Second Chief of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation. He was the third Principal Chief of the Tribe since 1971 when tribal elections were resumed after being banned before statehood by Congress.

"It means a great deal to me (to come back to campus)," said Beaver. "I have ties here. The hospitality has been great. It's really something that they welcomed me back. I felt like I should be welcoming them (the student-athletes)."

The student-athletes also heard new year welcomes from ULM President Dr. James E. Cofer, Sr. and Director of Athletics Bobby Staub. ULM Faculty Athletics Representative Dr. Walter "Skeet" Creekmore emceed the event.

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://sports.myway.com/news/09022005/v3204.html

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The NCAA gave Utah permission to continue using its Utes nickname Friday, just hours before the school's nationally televised football game against Arizona.

The university sent a seven-page appeal to the college sports governing body Wednesday, asking that it be removed from a list of 18 schools subject to restrictions because they have American Indian nicknames, mascots or images.

The NCAA approved the removal of Utah and the Central Michigan University Chippewas from the list.

"The NCAA Executive Committee continues to believe the stereotyping of Native Americans is wrong," the organization said in a statement. "In its review of the particular circumstances regarding Central Michigan University and the University of Utah, the NCAA staff review committee noted the relationship between the universities and the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan and the Northern Ute Indian Tribe, respectively, as a significant factor."

In its appeal, Utah included two letters in support of the university, one from Maxine Natchees, chairwoman of the Uintah and Ouray Tribal Business Committee, and one from Craig Thompson, commissioner of the Mountain West Conference.

[Franklinnoble]

This is a shakedown. Plain and simple.

[fantastic flying froggies]

With the tragedy that just happened, I would think a lot of people will find the 'Hurricanes' nickname of Miami much more offensive...

[ice4277]

Also, Central Michigan was given permission to continue to use the nickname 'Chippewas'.

Anybody think that by the time all is said and done, almost all these schools will be allowed to keep their nicknames?

[sterlingice]

Except the ones who can't afford to lawyer up enough No, this wasn't a joke from the start...

SI

[duckman]

hxxp://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2313521

Illinois files second appeal of NCAA's mascot decision

---

Associated Press

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. -- The University of Illinois on Tuesday filed another appeal of an NCAA decision that would require the school to drop its Chief Illiniwek athletic mascot and logo before it could host any postseason competition.

The appeal is the university's second attempt to persuade the National Collegiate Athletic Association to reverse its decision that Chief Illiniwek was an example of "hostile and abusive" American Indian imagery. A staff review committee in November upheld the "hostile and abusive" classification of Illiniwek, but allowed the school to keep its Illini and Fighting Illini nicknames.

The latest appeal, to the same committee that approved the original policy, challenges the NCAA's power to impose it, the school said.

"This appeal is about the institutional autonomy of NCAA member schools," the university told the executive committee. "It is about flawed rules and process."

The policy is scheduled to take effect Wednesday but the university asked the committee to postpone any enforcement of the policy, should the appeal be denied, until after the completion of the current academic year, said UI spokesman Tom Hardy. The NCAA has said it intends to postpone any enforcement for schools with pending appeals until at least April.

NCAA spokesman Bob Williams did not immediately return a telephone message Tuesday.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

This is a shakedown. Plain and simple.

Exactly, what the heck is Illinois supposed to do? We are the Fighting Illini, our mascot is the "Chief" of the Indians the state was named after, but we can't have a mascot? Give me a break.

Below is a great article from the St. Louis newspaper, unfortunately the original link at the paper is dead, but I found the article:

NCAA crackdown on Illiniwek is Bunch of hooey
By Bill McClellan
Of the Post-Dispatch
Monday, Aug. 08 2005

The National Collegiate Athletic Association has announced a crackdown on
colleges and universities that have nicknames or mascots connected to American
Indians. Eighteen schools were cited. One of them was the University of
Illinois, home of the Fighting Illini and mascot Chief Illiniwek.

Before discussing this further, let's put things in historical perspective.
According to the Illinois Blue Book, published by the secretary of state's
office, the first humans arrived in Illinois about 25,000 years ago. The Blue
Book refers to them as Paleo-Indians. In the 17th century, a federation of
tribes including the Cahokias, Kaskaskias, Mitchagamies, Peorias and Tamaroas
met some French explorers. The confederation called itself the Illiniwek, which
translates loosely into group of men, and the French referred to the people and
the country as Illinois.

And Illinois it has remained.

So that brings up our first question. If it is politically incorrect to name a
team after a Native American federation, is it right to name a state after the
federation? Especially when the whole thing is a misunderstanding on the part
of the French. None of the tribes were the Illini. Illiniwek was the name of
the group of tribes. This is like naming the state Bunch of Tribes. Or, more
simply, Bunch. As in, "I grew up in Chicago, Bunch."

Illinois is out. Definitely. Even if you're not offended by the French - and I
know our neighbors across the river in Bunch are blue-staters and presumably
pro-French - we ought to be sensitive enough to figure that if you can't name a
football team after a federation of Native American tribes, you ought not to be
able to name a state after the federation.

At the very least, let's give it its English name - Bunch. We could try to
update it with something more reflective of its present reality. Daleyland has
a nice ring. Corrupcio is nice. Moneytalks sounds good. But for now, let's go
along with history - Bunch.

Now we can deal with the problem facing the University of Bunch. What should
its new nickname be?

How about the Fighting Jews?

I suggest that only because Fighting Irish is already taken. You see, the NCAA
is concerned only about the feelings of Native Americans. You can still use
other ethnic groups for your nicknames and mascots. To a sensitive person, the
Fighting Irish might be particularly bothersome, since you're dealing with an
ethnic slur, a stereotype. The drunken Irish, always brawling. Actually, the
Fighting Jews is a lot less offensive than the Fighting Irish because Jews are
not known for being drunken brawlers.

But maybe the university ought to stay away from religion. I like the Fighting
Iranians. We could have Ayatollah Khomeini as the mascot. Or the Shah. Or both.

Perhaps we should go another direction entirely. Maybe the NCAA will someday
get around to other ethnic groups besides Native Americans. So we need a
nickname that doesn't involve ethnic groups and has something to do with the
state's heritage.

We could give a nod to the plaintiff's bar in Madison County. The court system
there has become world famous. The Fighting Judicial Hellholes. Can't you just
imagine the student section chanting: "We will sue! We will sue!" But what if
reform comes to the legal system? That's unlikely, but possible.

On that score, the political system will never change, and that really is what
the state is most famous for. Does any state have a more colorful history of
corrupt politicians? Democrats, Republicans, black and white. I remember when
Paul Powell died and there were shoeboxes full of cash in his closet. How does
a secretary of state acquire shoeboxes full of cash? George Ryan probably
knows. If you go by number of cronies indicted, he was probably the most
corrupt secretary of state in Bunch history, and he went on to become governor.
On the local level, think of East St. Louis.

So that should satisfy the NCAA - the Fighting Corrupt Pols of the University
of Bunch. And a mascot will be never be a problem. It will always be the
governor.
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 314-340-8143