Mascot Issue (AGAIN)

[SkinEmAll]

NCAA rules 'Tribe' not offensive; objects to feathers

News · W&M News · 2006 archive · NCAA ruling on Tribe
Author: Brian Whitson, Source: W&M News
Date: May 17, 2006

Related content
See President's letter to the community concerning the NCAA ruling.

William and Mary will appeal a recent ruling by the NCAA stating that the College should stop using two feathers on its athletic logo. In that same ruling, issued in a letter May 16 to William and Mary President Gene R. Nichol, the NCAA review committee did agree with the College that the nickname “Tribe” is not offensive.

“We learned last evening that the NCAA staff review determined the use of the nickname ‘Tribe’ by our athletic teams was neither ‘hostile or abusive,’” Nichol wrote in an e-mail to the campus community and alumni. “The report did object, however, to the use of the feathers as part of our sports logo. We will appeal the ruling as it applies to the logo.”

Nichol added, “The good news, of course, is the NCAA has agreed with our assessment of the term ‘Tribe.’ The nickname—so close to the heart of this community—will remain the College’s moniker.”

In 2004, the NCAA requested that several member institutions, including William and Mary, submit a self-evaluation to determine if the Native American imagery or nicknames used at the schools were hostile or abusive. Schools found in violation would not be permitted to wear the offending logos during postseason competition or be allowed to host postseason NCAA athletic events on their own campuses.

The College will appeal the ruling regarding the use of the feathers to the NCAA’s executive committee and expects a decision by the end of the summer, said William T. Walker, associate vice president for public affairs at William and Mary.

“It boggles our minds that the NCAA would find objectionable what William and Mary does, and at the same time find acceptable what schools like Florida State University do,” said Walker, referring to FSU’s use of a spear-wielding warrior during football games.

“Perhaps it is the absurdity of judgments like these that is causing the U.S. Congress to consider taking this matter out of the hands of the NCAA,” Walker said. “The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and several of his colleagues have introduced legislation that would forbid the NCAA from regulating mascots and nicknames.”

Several schools, including Florida State, have been removed from the list because the NCAA ruled that “namesake” tribes have given authority to use the nicknames. William and Mary uses the generic nickname Tribe. William and Mary does not have a mascot.

“The nickname Tribe connotes the strong sense of community at William and Mary,” Walker said. “It is meant to signify the affirmative and inclusive nature of our campus community, our strong commitment to each other. We are pleased the NCAA agrees.”
Contact Us © 2007 The College of William & Mary

Anyone else think this is WAY out of line or what?! I hope the U.S. House of Rep. prevails.

[IrishSkins Fan]

My whole problem with this is the sensitivity of everyone in the world today. Come on, every heritage has been persecuted on some level.

Yes the term can be perceived as derogatory, although most slang terms can be derogatory given the context. I hate to say it, but this is the same argument most politicians use. Everything today must be considered in the context that they are used, but it is the implied intent of the comment that should be analyzed.

For example as mentioned earlier, if someone refers to say "Blackskins" and identifies that moniker with a Zulu Warrior, anyone who is educated should know that this is the contemporary equivalent of respect and admiration for warrior who at the time was considered primitive, and later proved to be a worthy adversary of the most fearsome military in the world. I would say that in this context this was a show of respect and admiration for the warrior spirit inherit to this culture and should be appreciated by it's people. But if they are too ignorant to understand context and it's applications in the world today, then I say ---- them!!!!!!

Irish Skins Fan

[dblanch66]

I am Cherokee and have no problem with the name. Those who are offended by such trifles have too much time on their hands. Why give so much power to a word? Usually it is people who have low self worth and self loathing who get all aggro over silly things like this anyway.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

I just think there is something inherently patronizing about someone from outside of that ethnic group dictating to them what they should and should not be offended by.

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I find it somewhat interesting that so-called civil libertarians who get so riled up about the "PC police" think that no one has the right to get offended.

If both of you go back and look, you will find that nowhere in any of my posts do I imply that people 'don't have a right to be offended'.

I question the right of people who are offended to force someone into action in order to conceed to the offended party's demands.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Sheriff:

When much of this controversy started about 8-10 years ago, I suggested to some colleagues that there was a simple solution to the problem:


Keep the name Redskins.

Change the logo on the helmet to a potato.


No one liked the idea then; I doubt lots of folks would like it now. But it might stop the focus on the team name and allow people to focus on the team performance - - which is a lot more important to me.

How about a sun-burned picture of my ass??!!

[#56fanatic]

when will someone draw the line on the PC crap. To have a NFL franchise, one of, if not, the richest franchise in all of sports honor your heritage would make me proud. They dont do all the crap Florida state does with the guy riding a horse and throwing a spear and doing the little dance. This stuff is what America is all about. We are able to express ourselves freely. Like it or not, as americans we have that right. Because someone finds it offensive, doesn't make it wrong. We can't even call Christmas, christmas. It is now not PC to say that. Halloween is being cut out of neighborhoods, pledge of alegance... this stuff has gone way too far. its just people trying to get their names in the paper and face on TV. WE as americans are losing our rights to people that move in to our country because things are offensive. Well, if you dont like it, dont watch it, celebrate it, take part in it, what ever. That is what living in America gives you, choices!

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

WE as americans are losing our rights to people that move in to our country because things are offensive.

What does that mean?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

I still am amazed by people on both sides of this issue who get their panties in a wad.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

What does that mean?

He means these damn Native Americans need to stop trying to take over our country! It's like they think they own the damn place.









(BTW, I'm obviously kidding )

[Bushead]

After killing their whole race, trails of tears, lying and theiving, forcing them on reservations, destroying them, and making resolutions only to break later, hell, if they want the name to be changed, go ahead. Its ****ing football, not life.

[SkinEmAll]

I usually dont get my pantys in a wad over too many things. But this issue is one exception. I guess my thing is why persecute something whose intention is not meant to be negative? This franchise was born in 1932 as the Boston Braves. George Preston Marshall bought the new team in 1932. A year later he renamed them the Redskins and hired an Indian coach named Lone Star Dietz. They reached the NFL championship in 1936, losing to Green Bay. Not getting much fan support, he moved the team to D.C. in 1937. Enter Sammy Baugh, Cliff Battles and other Redskin greats. I guess my point is the name has always represented something great and proud. The attendance nearly doubled the first year in D.C. from 57,363 for 7 games in Boston to 120,022 for 6 games the first year in D.C. And back then people were much more divded. I just hate to even think that some people consider the name Redskin, as it is associated to the football team, offensive. Im sure the team will never be faced with a name change, but man it just drives me crazy to even think about it.

[SkinEmAll]

Originally Posted by Bushead

After killing their whole race, trails of tears, lying and theiving, forcing them on reservations, destroying them, and making resolutions only to break later, hell, if they want the name to be changed, go ahead. Its ****ing football, not life.

I agree, this is football were talking about, and those things did happen. But the name Redskins in no way, shape or form represents any of that.

[Summo]

If the team is "Forced" to change there name and logo's, would you still be a fan of the franchise? Especially the out of state fan's.

[Monkeydad]

I'd still be a fan but I'd be super-pissed.

I did a research paper on this in high school in like '94 or '95.

Something like 90-95% of ACTUAL Native Americans either loved the name and felt it was a honor, or had nothing against it.

A tiny minority actually cares and claim they're offended. MOST of the people raising this issue are white people, mainly politicians, mainly Democrat, PC-dictators...the same people who want to call secretaries "administrative assistants", garbage men "waste removal technicians" and dog walkers "canine fitness coordinators".

[Monkeydad]

Oh, and I've been told I'm "vertically challenged".