August 5, 2005
Indian mascots banned from postseason
The NCAA has banned the use of American Indian mascots during postseason play beginning on February 1. The way the article reads seems to indicate that NCAA Championships would be affected which as I see it has no effects on I-A football since there is not an officially sanctioned NCAA champion in I-A football.
However, I-AA and lesser divisions with an NCAA-sanctioned playoff will be impacted. William & Mary has been mentioned at this level before as one of the teams affected.
UPDATE: Michael King has more.
Comments:
Roger Young said:
posted on August 5, 2005 3:44 PM — 68.16.159.42 — link — abuse?
With the Florida State Seminoles, getting the cover for NCAA Football (EA Sports) video game. Will that make them exempt from any "Indian banned
mascots". They are the most popular school with an indian mascot!!! What effect will this have?Thank you, Roger Young
posted on August 5, 2005 7:14 PM — link — abuse?Kevin Donahue said:
It's important to remember that the NCAA doesn't control the bowl games. I think that's where the Feb 1 date comes from, so they don't have egg on their face.
That being said, FSU is apparently ready to sue the NCAA.
CHUCK said:
posted on August 6, 2005 2:44 AM — 70.246.176.38 — link — abuse?
All this talk about being politically correct, please don't upset the American Indians. What about the " FIGHTING IRISH " !!!! Should we keep them out of post season??? SSSHHHHHH! Now lets not get CRAZY !!! Where does it end ?
Jeff said:
posted on August 6, 2005 9:48 AM — 70.154.36.18 — link — abuse?
Dave,
PETA already lobbied SC to drop the Gamecock as their mascot, saying they were chickens bred for cockfighting only.Then when they figured out after the fact that they were not getting anywahere with that one they decided to try to lobby the school to remove the spur from the rooster's foot in the logo.
posted on August 6, 2005 11:12 AM — 206.124.221.226 — link — abuse?
Scrappleface apparently had the same idea today. Pretty funny.
Anthony Schaaf said:
posted on August 7, 2005 10:15 AM — 132.79.11.15 — link — abuse?
What's Next!
Political groups calling for States to chage their name be cause it derives from an Native Amercian name? Illinois, The Dakota's, Minnesota
How about New York, having to change its name because it now offends persons of British descent.
Will the maddness ever end!
dave fre said:
posted on August 7, 2005 11:57 AM — 206.124.221.226 — link — abuse?
I don't think it's quite the same thing, Anthony. The argument where sports teams are concerned is that *generally* sports teams choose a mascot that is supposed to be perceived by opponents as warlike or hostile or agressive or fierce. This isn't universally true: TCU Horned Frogs, Oregon Ducks, etc. But more often, teams are named after things like lions or tigers or warriors or raiders. So these Native American groups, or whoever else raises these issues, are saying they're being unfairly portrayed as warlike and hostile.
Naming a state isn't exactly the same thing.
I don't buy that, mind you; I'm just presenting the argument.
Insider said:
posted on August 7, 2005 4:50 PM — 67.52.156.249 — link — abuse?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
This is where the civil rights movement has ended up?
As Independent Sources says, we can honor the 49's, Sooners and Cowboys but not the people who were there before them. Stupid!
http://independentsources.com/2005/08/07/ncaa-mascot-decision-shows-stupidity-knows-no-boundary/
The Short White Guy said:
posted on August 9, 2005 5:52 PM — 24.211.208.142 — link — abuse?
Could we please quit focusiing on the Indian mascots and really focus on the "hurtful" mascots like - The Fighting Irish, The Runnin' Rebs, The Utes, The Lobos, The Ducks - need I drone on? Since I'm part Irish, I don't have to be reminded that the Irish are a fighting lot, a true "little ball of hate" when they have a keg or two in them and that they should have no reason to "apply" to anything, or that Rebs will run if faced by Grant and his army, that if Two-Utes (My Cousin Vinny Reference) are up to no good...never mind, that a wolf in gisguise did misguide a chaste Red Riding Hood, and that the AFLAC Duck might have a problem with the imposters on the left coast. See my point? Maybe a new mascot, let's say Overpaid Chancellor-Guy/Gal (don't forget they should be half in the bag) or Overtenured Half-a-Commi Professor(complete with ACLU card around kneck and Hammer/Sickle ornamentation), should be debuted? Better yet, why not have an "Adopt Your Favorite Idiot NCAA Official" as the mascot for homecoming? Oops, there wouldn't be a suit big enough.
The Short White Guy
The Short White Guy said:
posted on August 9, 2005 6:16 PM — 24.211.208.142 — link — abuse?
Damn, Jeff, I was going to say "what the hell is a Ute, anyway" - I should have known, as I used to live in the Mountain Conference. Maybe I should have gone with a Grizzly-anything blast - stupid bears, they always scare my infant son. What about Pirates? Not much of a vocabulary is it when all they can say is ARGH, but it has got to offend someone, somewhere.
The Short White Guy
posted on August 9, 2005 6:41 PM — link — abuse?
All athletic teams must immediately be renamed the "Varsity".
Scott said:
posted on August 10, 2005 3:38 PM — 207.200.116.133 — link — abuse?
If schools are not allowed to use mascots that represent a particular ethnic group, even though there is no "hostile or abusive" connotation involved (i.e. Florida State Seminoles), then what is next? Will the NCAA ban the Notre Dame Fighting Irish from post season play? Maybe there are a number of Irish-Americans who take offense to that mascot. What about the defending National Champions USC Trojans, or the Michigan State University Spartans? Perhaps there is a large Greek-American contingency offended by those mascots. Are there any Mexican-Americans offended by the San Diego University Aztecs? Shall I go on? How about the Albion College Britons, the Carlow University Celtics, the Northern Kentucky University Norse, the University of Pennsylvania Quakers, the University Of Louisianna at Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns, the Alfred University Saxons, the Edinboro University Scots, the Bethany College Swedes, the Carnegie Mellon University Tartans, the Cleveland State University Vikings? Do they all get the axe?
The Short White Guy said:
posted on August 11, 2005 10:33 AM — 24.211.208.142 — link — abuse?
Scott:
My original point exactly about the other hostile/hurtful names. Especiially, the Quakers. I think that the NCAA should ban that name use, because, in a round about way, they were the ones that got the US in this mess! Bunch of old white guys with funny ties, buckled shoes, all foaming of fire and brim stone (actually, a Quaker meeting is rather sedate). PC is about being fair, isn't it? So, all mascots should be eliminated.
Jeanette said:
posted on November 7, 2005 11:08 AM — 70.243.0.6 — link — abuse?
Here's the deal. I'm a graduating Senior at MSU and our student body is in uproar over the change in our "Indians" name. Our indian populus spread petitions denouncing the change. We of course Lost and now we have to live with being the MSU Mustangs, a name we deplore. We are proud of our indian heritage and the name indians was a great name because it accounted for all the tribes we have represented on our campus. We had an 8 decade history with the name and were very proud of it. The local Kiowa Tribe has supported us for years. I'm mad, the student body is mad.... NCAA not every name is offensive.. You just ticked off a bunch of Local Native Americans who were honored by the name in every way, shape and form... You make me sick.
Sarah said:
posted on February 23, 2006 3:11 PM — 206.176.42.100 — link — abuse?
It seems to me that the people who are the most upset by the Indian mascots are the same people who despise the term "Indian" which actually derives from the latin In Dios - in GOD... The non-Indian people need to get off their moral high-horse and start listening to what each individual tribe wants... if the Seminoles like the FSU mascot, let them keep it... if the Utes don't like theirs, then let them change it, etc. There should not be a national standard other than the individual opinions of the people at the very center of the controversy...
Blackstingray said:
posted on April 11, 2006 10:41 AM — 131.156.220.12 — link — abuse?
Jeanette is absolutely right. If a local Indian tribe gives a team their approval or blessing to use a Native American symbol or name, than the NCAA should have no say in the matter. If a local tribe considers it honorable, than it’s not offensive?
reefy7 said:
posted on May 8, 2006 10:25 PM — 24.91.58.57 — link — abuse?
I think the ncaa should keep their focus on more important issues. It is getting out of control these days, everyone is offended by something. "P.C." is rearing its ugly head everywhere. Where will it end? People need to lighten up. The ncaa needs to keep there eye on recruiting violations, student-athletes' grade point average, their on and off field behavior...etc. The only thing I find offensive is the ncaa telling me what name I can or cann't cheer for.
Ken said:
posted on August 3, 2006 4:33 AM — 24.192.185.142 — link — abuse?
Just want to say thanx for all of your comments. Lucky me, i get to write a 3 page paper on this, but you guys have been a really big help. As of now, I agree that if anyone can calim beyond a perponderance of evidence that they are being directly offended, necessary measures should be taken to make sure that it doesn't happen again. However, if a college shows good taste and has the blessing of specific tribes represented, or presents a tasteful image of a broad scope of people, the fun should be allowed to continue. Btw, my sympathy for that school that had their name changed to the mustangs, other schools running around calling your girls horses and stuff, i feel for ya. thank you all for your help though.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
schmed said:
posted on August 5, 2005 1:29 PM — 208.248.231.58 — link — abuse?ESPN just posted a more detailed article.
Jeff, you might be right about it not affecting D-I football - for the time being - under the current postseason structure (i.e. no "tournament"). But I found the Feb.1 effective date rather interesting.
Do you think the autocracy of the NCAA might choose to redefine bowl games as "tournaments"? I suppose it strains credulity for even the tin-foil helmet wearing D-I playoff conspiracy theorists to think this might motivate the NCAA to set up a real tournament just so they could tell Bobby Bowden to leave the Chief and his flaming spear back in Tallahasee.