mksioux, on Nov 4 2005, 09:02 AM, said:
I disagree with Dr. Kupchella on this point. I think there has been consistency.
I disagree with you and agree with Kupchella, although I’m certain that the NCAA Executive Committee will follow your line of reasoning.
The NCAA started out by saying that it didn't matter if a university had the approval of a namesake tribe. That's why Florida State was initially on the list, even though the NCAA knew it had the approval of the Florida Seminole tribe. The NCAA thought it was safe in putting FSU on its list because it wrongly assumed that the Oklahoma Seminole tribe was against FSU's use of the name and mascot.
The NCAA created the exemption for FSU out of thin air after it shot itself in the foot by being embarrassingly wrong about the situation in Oklahoma. That's where the "namesake tribe" standard came from that Utah and Central Michigan successfully used to their advantage.
However, even in granting those exemptions, the NCAA was inconsistent. FSU had to get permission of Seminole tribes inside and outside of Florida to be taken off the list. CMU and Utah only had to get permission from one tribe in their states to be removed.
Did the NCAA ask the Chippewa tribes in Minnesota and North Dakota what they thought of CMU's use of their name? Because if they had -- based on the resolutions passed by groups associated with those tribes on UND's use of the Sioux name -- I'd be very surprised if CMU would find much, if any, support among Chippewa tribes in those two states. Did the NCAA ask the Ute tribes of Colorado if they were okay with the University of Utah's use of their name? It appears that the same standard applied to FSU was not applied to CMU or Utah.
With UND, as far as the NCAA knows, the last official action taken by the Spirit Lake tribe was in support of UND's use of the Sioux name. But that didn't matter to the NCAA because with UND's appeal, it switched back to the standard of "any tribe, anywhere objecting," a standard it failed to apply to CMU or Utah.
There's also the inconsistency of failing to define what exactly constitutes the "hostile and abusive" use of Indian names, mascots and images. How is it that FSU's dancing white Indian isn't "hostile and abusive" but UND's logo is? If the overall goal of the NCAA's policy is to end racial stereotyping, there's no way that FSU should be allowed to continue doing what it's doing while UND and Bradley University are punished for what they're doing. If that's not inconsistent, I don't know what is.
There's also inconsistency in the NCAA's method of determining whose objections count and whose don't. If you're a Seminole living in Florida or Oklahoma and you object to FSU's dancing Indian mascot, your objection doesn't count. But if you're a Comanche living in Oklahoma and you object to how Bradley University in Illinois uses the "Braves" nickname, then your objection does count. In other words, the NCAA will consider valid the objections of American Indians who
aren't directly impacted by a school's use of a Native American nickname while, at the same time, invalidating the objections of those who are directly impacted. Yeah, real consistency there.
Finally, there's the NCAA's "special relationship" standard which, once again, was created out of thin air to solve the FSU mess. If this standard isn't inconsistent, as well as arbitrary and capricious, I don't know what is. How is it that the NCAA can bestow "special relationship" status on FSU, a university that I'm told has had a grand total of seven Seminoles students in its history and a mere three Seminoles graduates? Wow. That's pretty gosh dang special! Just think of what UND would have to do to be as "special" as FSU.
If UND had that sort of "special relationship" with the tribes in North Dakota, the NCAA would have a strong case against the university's use of the Sioux name and logo. But because UND blows FSU out of the water in educating American Indians and because UND's American Indian student enrollment is in the hundreds and increasing every year, all that UND has done and continues to do for tribes in the state is simply disregarded by the NCAA.
I do agree that no matter what the NCAA does with the Illinois appeal, it’s bound to create even more inconsistency in its rulings. I also think it will be interesting to see how the NCAA decides to handle William and Mary’s bid to keep its nickname, “The Tribe.” W&M based a large part of its case on its “special relationship” with local tribes. That will provide another good test of the NCAA’s “special relationship” standard.
Help
Add Reply
Back to top
MultiQuote
