LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

NCAA somewhat bans use of Native American mascots

Will this affect the USLIA?

Stupid, Stupid, Stupid IMHO but I've stated my opinion on this subject before.

How can a mascot be deemed "hostile or abusive" if the indian tribe it represents supports its use? (ie the FSU Seminoles)

I love how a mascot can be "hostile" or "abusive" but there is nothing wrong with guys running around and smashing in to each other trying to rip each other's heads off (football). Idiots.

I totally agree with lil lady lax fan on this issue. I still miss the good ol days of 1970s....

I am not sure if that would really affect the USL MDIA teams eventhough we have to strictly adhere to the NCAA rules and regulations. I hear that the MDIA board is meeting in the Beantown next week, so I guess this may be a minor issue on the agenda, hmmm...? You know, most MDIA teams do not have mascots running along the sidelines unless someone can correct me. I am even wondering if it has to do with fans wearing T-shirts with Native American mascot logos.

The MDIA follows NCAA rules for play of the game.

We do not currently follow the NCAA manual which is a significantly larger document than the rulebook.

I nominate this for the Stupidity Awards under the heading:

Most Idiotic Ruling by a Collegiate Sporting Body

The ironic thing is that these name changes only serve to anger the alumni and add unnecessary expenses to the school and students when the mascot is changed. I know for a fact that a number of Eastern Michigan alums (yours truly included) refuse to donate to the school because of the mascot debacle in the 90's. Enough said. I'll end my rant here...

I thought about showing up as the mascot for a St. Olaf game. I know the hockey Goldie used to play at Minnesota and is the only mascot to ever be ejected from a Gopher hockey game according to Adam Gamradt. Coach Larson must be proud. In all honesty I would assume some of this has to deal with the Hawaii mascot who regularly belittled his opponents. It was getting out of control.

lil lady lax fan wrote:I nominate this for the Stupidity Awards under the heading:

Most Idiotic Ruling by a Collegiate Sporting Body

The ironic thing is that these name changes only serve to anger the alumni and add unnecessary expenses to the school and students when the mascot is changed. I know for a fact that a number of Eastern Michigan alums (yours truly included) refuse to donate to the school because of the mascot debacle in the 90's. Enough said. I'll end my rant here...

To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

it offends me that they are offended.

To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

Yes...when is it going to end? Some tree hugger could complain that Stanford's representation of their mascot does not "fully represent" the correct use of trees. People could say that any school with a dog is mistreatment or misrepresentation of an animal. I mean...it's getting ridiculous.

DanGenck wrote:

lil lady lax fan wrote:I nominate this for the Stupidity Awards under the heading:

Most Idiotic Ruling by a Collegiate Sporting Body

The ironic thing is that these name changes only serve to anger the alumni and add unnecessary expenses to the school and students when the mascot is changed. I know for a fact that a number of Eastern Michigan alums (yours truly included) refuse to donate to the school because of the mascot debacle in the 90's. Enough said. I'll end my rant here...

To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

No, but if the mascot is supported by the group it represents then the folks making the complaint should take it up with the group instead of the school. Don't get me wrong, there are--or rather were--some native american mascots that were derogatory that have since been changed. I also think some folks just don't 'get' the concept of mascots, taking too serious of an attitude toward the subject. Good thing PETA hasn't raised a stink about animal mascots...

BTW, there was an earlier topic on the subject in both the Water Cooler and General Discussion. You might find those to be interesting reads.

With Huron Pride,
Cathi

DanGenck wrote: To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

Just because someone complains, doesn't mean they have a right to impose their views or thoughts on someone/something else. As stated many times in the past... You don't have a right to not be offended.

Sonny wrote:

DanGenck wrote: To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

Just because someone complains, doesn't mean they have a right to impose their views or thoughts on someone/something else. As stated many times in the past... You don't have a right to not be offended.

You do, however, have a right not to feel socially harassed (made a distinction of) because of your ancestry or family beliefs.

Again, I really do not follow this topic closely. The only reason I consider the opposition is because I would personally find no satisfaction in having my heritage become the name of a sports mascot as a parting gift for having my land/life stolen from me.

The NCAA should have left this topic alone. If schools won't change it, then that's their business. The individual schools can make their own decisions with individual groups (FSU apparently is a good example of that, though I don't know any specifics on their situation other than what I have read here on the message board).

Dan,

There are also many native americans who view the mascot issue as a fitting tribute to the nobility and culture of those who were displaced. There is always two sides to the coin...

Sonny wrote:

DanGenck wrote: To play devil's advocate... would you simply ignore the complaints of people who were offended by mascots?

Just because someone complains, doesn't mean they have a right to impose their views or thoughts on someone/something else. As stated many times in the past... You don't have a right to not be offended.

Well stated. Unfortunately some of those doing the imposing have very deep pocketbooks.