# our friends at the ncaa



## rusty X (Jul 21, 2003)

What a bunch of chuckleheads. First they are trying to eliminate the NIT, and I for one hope that Bob Knight's view prevails. (see today's espn web site) Screw 'em.

And if they (the ncaa) think that Florida State is going to change their mascot to play post season, they need to put their crack pipes down.


----------



## Chetburger (Dec 24, 2002)

the seminole tribe in tallahassee fully supports the team's mascot and use of the native seminole indian heritage in their athletics program.

in fact, most native americans support nicknames and mascots in their honor by overwhelming majority.


----------



## SCExplorer (Jun 29, 2005)

As long as the name isn't offensive, who cares. The fighting irish is a stereotype of irish people as fighters, throw him a beer and go all the way with it. But no irishmen will complain and the NCAA doesn't step in to protect the offended Irish. Obviously not meant as a literal comparison, but come on.

The articles I have read only say that offensive Indian names are out but they have not decided what that means yet. Of course, I may have misread the article as that was a couple of hours ago and I was in the steaming heat all morning right before I saw it so the brain is fried.


----------



## Kosty (May 14, 2003)

As far as the NCAA vs. NIT thing goes.....we don't want the NIT to succeed here.......that would mean that they could extend an invite to the #2 ranked team in the country while the #1 team goes to the NCAA......that could cause chaos and also eventually cause "Co-National Champions" because the winners of each of those tournaments will claim a "share of the crown". So we'll get the same mess the BCS is giving us every year. We definitely don't want the NIT to win this one!!!!


----------



## JoDete93 (Apr 12, 2003)

Chetburger said:


> the seminole tribe in tallahassee fully supports the team's mascot and use of the native seminole indian heritage in their athletics program.
> 
> in fact, most native americans support nicknames and mascots in their honor by overwhelming majority.


Not saying I agree with the following, but this came from an article on ESPN.com


> Florida State, for example, has received permission from the Seminole tribe in Florida to use the nickname. That, however, will not suffice.
> 
> "Other Seminole tribes are not supportive," said Charlotte Westerhaus, the NCAA vice president for diversity and inclusion.


Entire article here.


----------



## Chetburger (Dec 24, 2002)

its the Florida State Seminoles. Isnt "Seminole Tribe in Florida" the people who would only be the ones you are representing? Its not the America State Seminoles. So whatever other seminole tribes have to say is jibber jabber and nothing more as far as Im concerned.

The most questionable nickname in all of sports belongs to Notre Dame and I dont hear any Irishmen stomping the courtsteps in Indianapolis indicating a problem. If it was the Notre Dame Fighting Africans or Fighting Latinos it would be WWIII.

People need to grow up and grow a set of balls. If you are offended, you shouldnt be. You need to get a thicker skin and reclaim your life back and worry more about yourself than what others might be thinking of you.


----------



## JoDete93 (Apr 12, 2003)

I agree wholeheartedly Chetburger. I worry that some day PETA is going to get involved and take action against Marshall's Thundering Herd b/c it is offensive to the buffalo that just like to graze or against Kent State b/c there is a lightning bolt coming out of the poor bird in their logo. This PC stuff has to stop somewhere and if the Seminole Tribe of Florida is ok with Florida State's nickname then so should the NCAA.


----------



## jimbo65 (Dec 11, 2003)

Heard that the Florida State Boosters Club actually bribed the Florida Seminole Tribe with firewater and wampum to endorse the mascot.


----------



## rusty X (Jul 21, 2003)

Now this is getting just plain stupid

"Charlotte Westerhaus, the NCAA vice president for diversity and inclusion"

The NCAA now exists to give otherwise unemployable people a high paying job. What the h*ll kind of job is that? This political correctness has now gone too damn far. My guess is that this broad is probably paid over 100 g's and for what?

And Bob Knight was correct when he stated that read War and Peace in college and wasn't interested in doing it again, hence he had not completely read the recruiting manual put out by the NCAA. These paper pushers are eating up all the money that could otherwise pay student athletes a small monthly stipend.


----------



## SCExplorer (Jun 29, 2005)

I thought this was an excellent article from MSNBC. The guys makes some excellent points, although that is just my opinion so others may disagree:

Link to MSNBC article


----------



## X-band '01 (Mar 26, 2003)

Illinois is one of the schools listed, but it has been quite a few years since they've featured Chief Illiniwek on their athletic fields and logos. Now it's just a generic Block I, but my understanding is that Illiniwek was meant to be a symbol and not a mascot - quite a few Illini fans that I know get offended when the term "mascot" is thrown about.

But, as the old saying goes, why would the NCAA care if they're not making money on these teams getting rid of Indian nicknames? FSU is not about to scrap the Seminole nickname, and I don't see schools like Illinois, Utah, and Central Michigan scrapping theirs anytime soon. Let the local Seminole, Chippewa, and other tribes decide whether or not it's offensive - not a bunch of suits and pointy-head academics from the NCAA.


----------



## clark1 (Nov 6, 2003)

Wonder if the NCAA can explain why having an Indian reference is considered offensive to that group but having the nickname of the "Vikings" is not? Might the Indians be offended by the nickname "Cowboys"?
(personally I think having a nickname like the Fighting Camels might meet the qualifications) Perhaps the NCAA is a little Indian-phobic? How is it an honor to be a "Pirate" but not so to be a "Chippewa". 
People are actually receiving a pay check to come up with these pronouncements, incredible. Do you think they went on a fully paid trip somewhere to discuss these "burning" issues? 
Next thing they'll be after is the "saints", as in St Joe's, St John's, St Bona, St Francis, etc, etc.


----------



## clark1 (Nov 6, 2003)

double posted.


----------



## SCExplorer (Jun 29, 2005)

Of course they'll come after the saints as the use of a Saints name in the name of college/university is a slap in the face of all Catholics. Of course, having the Hawk as a mascot is wrong too since PETA would be upset. Those people who's decendents fought in the revolutionary war will probably ask that the Colonials and Minutemen and Musketeers not be allowes as a nickname as it is offense to the memory of those that gave us freedom, Charlotte will be asked for a new name because it is offensive to those decended from the orignal gold rush crowd as it forces a stereotype of a scraggly gold hungry man, St. louis falls under the PETA issue with the use of a biliken (bird), La Salle should have known better than to use the mascot of explorer because so many great explorers of the world gave there lives to expand our knowledge of the globe and country and that makes their sacrifice seem like a joke, obviously Fordham is PETA style as do the Spiders of Richmond and the Owls of Temple and Rhode Island Rams. Then we get Dusquene Dukes which obviously is offensive to those in Europe with the hereditary title of Duke that now feel like they are being made fun of by American hoopsters. I would add in Dayton and St. Bons but I have no idea what a Flyer is (radio flyer, UFO, pilot, etc.) or what a Bonnie is. I think we all get the drift though as none of us should have nicknames and some of us will need to change our schools names too.


----------



## Snipe (Mar 24, 2003)

I think that this era will be remembered for the stress of semantics over substance. We care about how groups on treated in the news and media, but don't care so much about the situations and settings that cause the real social burdens of society.

If the KKK had started out 15 years ago on a national campaign to get rid of all Indian names for schools because it isn't good to have fine and decent white people to be acting like drunken casino gambling savages, I am sure that the same groups currently fighting against these names would be fighting for them. Some people just need a reason and a cause.

Miami University in Ohio used to be the Redskins. The Indian tribe in the Miami Valley had largely assimilated into our broader culture long ago. My wife and children have some Indian blood. Even though we had a bunch of Indians here at one point, you won't find anyone of pure Indian blood left. A portion of the Indians of the Miami Valley relocated to Nebraska or Oklahoma. I can't remember. They were always fine with the name "*******". Miami University has always offered scholarships to members of that tribe, and many have been educated for free with my tax dollars at that fine University.

Then a liberal white man who happened to be a Miami professor visited the tribe and convinced them that everything that they believed was wrong. They didn't think of ******* to be offensive until that point. The school then changed the name. My tax dollars still go to fund the scholarships of people who live in a different state. I don't think that should continue to happen. My kids have the same blood in them, and they don't get to go to Miami for free as a birthright.


----------



## Blue Dog (Dec 29, 2002)

SCExplorer said:


> I would add in Dayton and St. Bons but I have no idea what a Flyer is (radio flyer, UFO, pilot, etc.) or what a Bonnie is. I think we all get the drift though as none of us should have nicknames and some of us will need to change our schools names too.


If I remember correctly, haven't the Bonnies already given up their former nickname or mascot, the Brown Indian?

Since I have white man's disease, I'm personally offended by any team called the "Flyers". Every time I hear it, all those painful memories of trying to jump more than 2 feet high come flooding back. I'm gonna find me a lawyer.


----------



## jimbo65 (Dec 11, 2003)

If Ball State's nickname is politically incorrect, for example "Braves" they should consider changing to the "Breakers". :clap:


----------



## Avid Flyer (Apr 17, 2003)

What about Illinois. That is the name of a native american tribe. Does the university now have to change their name? Does the state of Illinois now have to change its name cause it may offend someone?

And while were at it what about the Xavier Muskateers, surely that offends the french.....or men who wear tights......sorry Blue Dog payback time. lol


----------



## Blue Dog (Dec 29, 2002)

No problem Avid Flyer. Except we're the Musketeers, which is what the French used to call the troops who wielded muskets. 

I was listening to Rush today when this came up. Illinois is an indian name, Indiana means place where the indians are, Ohio is I believe an indian name, Kentucky definitely is, so too are Iowa, the Dakotas, Michigan, the list goes on and on. And that doesn't include the thousands of towns and cities that have indian names.

As usual, what started out as a seemingly good idea to make someone feel better will end up as a total mess.


----------



## clark1 (Nov 6, 2003)

Maybe the NIT had a "plant" (mole) on the NCAA committee - brilliant!


----------



## JoDete93 (Apr 12, 2003)

Avid Flyer said:


> What about Illinois. That is the name of a native american tribe. Does the university now have to change their name? Does the state of Illinois now have to change its name cause it may offend someone?
> 
> And while were at it what about the Xavier Muskateers, surely that offends the french.....or men who wear tights......sorry Blue Dog payback time. lol


The NCAA is not making teams change their name, they only have to change what is displayed on their uniforms during NCAA championship competition. So the Florida State Seminoles can have their Seminole Indian all over their uniforms throughout the season and then have new uniforms if the make an NCAA tournament.


----------



## Snipe (Mar 24, 2003)

*Smackdown from the Prez of U. North Dakota*

An Open Letter to the NCAA

August 12, 2005

CHARLES E. KUPCHELLA
President
University of North Dakota


An Open Letter to the NCAA:

The quiet serenity of our beautiful campus was disturbed early August 5 by news reports that the NCAA had decided to address the Indian nickname issue. The early reports were unclear; the words mascot, nickname, and logo were used interchangeably, and the loaded words “abusive” and “hostile” were invoked without definition and without any real clear idea as to how they were being applied. We don’t have a mascot, and our logo was designed by a very well-respected American Indian artist. We couldn’t imagine that these reports would apply to us.

Later, we saw the full release. While it looked like the action taken by the NCAA was insulting, and a flagrant abuse of power, we knew that good, well-meaning people were involved in the decision and we wanted to consider our reaction carefully.

We were initially stunned by the charge “abusive” and “hostile,” and then angry. We reflected and gave it a week before drafting this response. I must admit to sinking at one point during the past week to the notion that my Association was guilty of “political correctness run amok” as suggested by some papers.

We want to file an appeal, but first we need to know the basis for your decisions. We need the answers to some questions first, in other words.

I do not wish to take up the issue, here, of any absolute or general “correctness” of using American Indian imagery. Those on both sides of the issue have long ago made up their minds, and no amount of talking over many years seems to have moved anyone from one side of the issue to the other. Suffice it to say, some choose to be insulted by the use of these terms; others are befuddled by this reaction to what they consider to be an honor. What I would like to take up here is a matter of the appropriateness and legality of the NCAA’s action. I mean to take up the issue of whether the NCAA has gone over the edge and out of bounds in the action announced on Friday.

Is it the use of Indian names, images, and/or mascots to which you are opposed? If it is all of the above, which logos, images, and mascots do you indict by your announcement? Is it only certain ones? As I said, a very respected Indian artist designed and created a logo for the University. The logo is not unlike those found on United States coins and North Dakota highway patrol cars and highway signs. So we can’t imagine that the use of this image is “abusive” or “hostile” in any sense of these words.

Is it the use of the names of tribes that you find hostile and abusive?

Not long ago I took a trip to make a proposal to establish an epidemiological program to support American Indian health throughout the Upper Great Plains. On this trip I left a state called North Dakota. (Dakota is one of the names the indigenous people of this region actually call themselves.) I flew over South Dakota, crossing the Sioux River several times, and finally landed in Sioux City, Iowa, just south of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The airplane in which I traveled that day was called a Cheyenne.

I think you should find my confusion here understandable, since obviously if we were to call our teams “The Dakotans,” we would actually be in more direct violation of what apparently you are trying to establish as a rule, even though this is the name of our state. This situation, of course, is not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Illinois.

Is it only when some well-meaning people object to the use of the names of tribes? If so, what standard did you use to decide where the line from acceptable to “hostile” and “abusive” is crossed? We note that you exempted a school with a certain percentage of American Indian students. We have more than 400 American Indian students here. Who decided that a certain percentage was okay, but our percentage was not? Where is the line between okay and hostile/abusive?

We have two Sioux tribes based here in North Dakota. One has, in fact, objected to our use of the name, “Sioux,” applied to our sports teams. The other said it was okay, provided that we took steps to ensure that some good comes of it, in educating people and students about the cultural heritage of this region. This mix of opinions is apparently not unlike that faced by our sister institution in Florida.

Is it only about applying names to sports teams? If so, would this be extended to the use of the names of all people, or is it just American Indians? Why would you exempt the “Fighting Irish” from your consideration, for example? Or “Vikings,” which are really fighting Scandinavians, or “Warriors,” which I suppose could be described as fighting anybodies? Wouldn’t it be “discrimination on account of race” to have a policy that applies to Indians but not to Scandinavians or the Irish, or anybody else for that matter? This seems especially profound in light of a letter to me from President Brand (8/9/05) in which he, in very broad-brush fashion and inconsistent with the NCAA’s recent much narrower pronouncement, said, “we believe that mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin should not be visible at our events.” (my emphasis)

As to the flagrant abuse of power question, I want to make sure I have this straight. We’ve recently built some magnificent facilities costing well over $100 million, under rules permitting us to host championship tournaments and otherwise participate fully in NCAA sanctioned activities, in which the very architecture of the building incorporates names and images of American Indian people. Do you really expect us now to spend large amounts of money to erase what we consider to be respectful images and names of Indian people who inhabited this region in the interest of the NCAA Executive Committee?

Hostile and abusive??

Help me understand why you think “hostile and abusive” applies to us. We have more than 25 separate programs in support of American Indian students here receiving high-end university educations. Included among these is an “Indians Into Medicine” program, now 30+ years running, that has generated 20 percent of all American Indian doctors in the United States. We have a similar program in Nursing, one in Clinical Psychology, and we are about to launch an “Indians into Aviation” program in conjunction with our world-class Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences. I am very proud when I visit reservations in our state to see that a large number of the teachers, doctors, Tribal College presidents, and other leaders are graduates of the University of North Dakota.

Do you really expect us to host a tournament in which these names and images are covered in some way that would imply that we are ashamed of them?

Concerning tournaments already scheduled: Is the NCAA taking the position that it can actually unilaterally modify a contract already made? Perhaps the charge (sometimes heard) that the NCAA exhibits too much of the arrogance that comes from its status as a monopoly – apart from the question of whether it’s an effective organization – does indeed have a basis.

If the NCAA has all this power, why not use it to restore intercollegiate athletics to the ideal of sportsmanship by decoupling intercollegiate athletics from its corruption by big budgets? Why not use the power to put a halt to the out-of-control financial arms race that threatens to corrupt even higher education itself?

Yes, I know that in theory the NCAA is actually an association, and that UND is a member of it, and therefore it’s really we who are doing all of these things to ourselves, or failing to do all of these things ourselves. But is the NCAA really a democratic organization? Why did we not put these issues to a vote by all member schools??

In his USA Today essay, Myles Brand proclaimed that this is a teachable moment, suggesting that the NCAA decision is “aimed at initiating a discussion on a national basis about how American Indians have been characterized . . . .” Great idea! Let’s have the discussion – one that we should have had before this ruling was handed down, one that actually includes American Indians and puts this in the perspective of all that is important to them at this time in history. And while we are at it, why not also address the state of intercollegiate athletics – whether or not student-athletes at some schools are being exploited, and whether or not there is an out-of-control financial “arms race” threatening the integrity of higher education itself.

In considering how to appeal, we find it exasperating that we can’t tell what the basis for your initial decision was and how you singled us out in the first place. In a letter from Myles Brand to me (8/9/05) he suggests that we could, in an appeal, argue that our symbols or mascots do not create a hostile or abusive environment. But his letter also seems to suggest that as long as some think the environment is hostile, case closed.

By the way, the last time this issue was stirred up on our campus, a formal charge was made to the Office for Civil Rights that the use of our logo or nickname created a hostile environment here at the University. The Office for Civil Rights sent a half-dozen people to our campus. They fanned out across campus and after more than a week here, found no such thing. Did the Executive Committee find some things they missed, perhaps? Or does a committee in Indianapolis trump the Office for Civil Rights here, on the ground, in North Dakota?

Finally, I expect that we will file an appeal, because should we wish to take this issue to court, the courts would undoubtedly ask if we have exhausted all administrative remedies. Please send us the appropriate application forms, and give us an indication of how the appeal will be heard and when. If the timing of this appeal were such that your deadline occurs before the appeal is resolved, we would ask that the deadline be put off, otherwise we may well have to go to the expense of seeking an injunction halting the imposition of these policies until all of our questions can be answered satisfactorily.

We thank you in advance for considering our questions.

Sincerely,


Charles E. Kupchella
President


----------



## ExplorerSteve (Feb 4, 2005)

Avid Flyer said:


> What about Illinois. That is the name of a native american tribe. Does the university now have to change their name? Does the state of Illinois now have to change its name cause it may offend someone?


Yes, and what about the American Indians that find the Indian names Michigan, Kentucky and Indiana offensive... will the NCAA legislate that those states have to change prior to February, 2006 deadline as well???

Not sure if the NCAA was attempting to divert attention away from the NIT lawsuit but it certainly appears that way.


----------



## SCExplorer (Jun 29, 2005)

Snipe, excellent find. I don't think I could ever agree more with a college president. Well written letter with some excellent points.


----------



## ExplorerSteve (Feb 4, 2005)

Anyone who is interested can call the NCAA to complain...

NCAA Headquarters
(317) 916-4255
700 W Washington St
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

So we can have cities, states, Apache, Chinook, etc. helicopters but not sports nicknames?

Like the UND President said, could they even be the North Dakota Dakotans? They probably couldn't be Dakotan Dakotans. Thank God that can't happen. Err, I mean thank goodness. Don't want to make anyone with diverse beliefs upset about my own beliefs that might differ.

Universities like North Dakota and Illinois also offer a lot of American Indian curriculum and information... so... baaad institutions, bad! Good thing we're changing things. Go in a different direction, perhaps.


----------



## ExplorerSteve (Feb 4, 2005)

The NCAA didn't really mean it...

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/custom/blogs/cfb/entries/2005/08/15/ncaa_begins_bac.html


----------



## J92 (Oct 30, 2003)

This was a joke from the begining. Looks like the NCAA is slowly coming to the senses. They just overturned the Seminole decision and are likely to reverse the Utes as well. Why on Earth it would take them this long to reverse only one school and still wait on the others is still a mystery??

http://www.sportsline.com/general/story/8765090


----------

