Utah and CMU off the list

[jimdahl]

Statement by NCAA senior vice-president for governance and membership Bernard Franklin on Central Michigan University and University of Utah reviews

"The NCAA staff review committee has removed Central Michigan University and the University of Utah from the list of colleges and universities subject to restrictions on the use of Native American mascots, names and imagery at NCAA championships.

"The NCAA Executive Committee continues to believe the stereotyping of Native Americans is wrong.

[CoteauRinkRat]

Each school that is removed from the list, the more shakey the NCAA's legal ground becomes.

[mikejm]

With all due respect, CRR, I'd say the NCAA is dispensing with the "easy" deals first. In all three cases to date, the universities have enjoyed "special relationships" with their respective tribes. UND's case virtually ignores its relationships with the "tribes", but instead bases a large part of their appeal on the number of individual native students enrolled on campus, and on the number of native-centric courses and programs.

The fact that most of the neighboring Lakota tribes have spoken out in opposition to the continued use of the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo does not bode well for UND's appeal. The NCAA will be able to hold up that "official" opposition and say, "See, we told you".

Sad day coming, I'm afraid.

[airmail]

I'm not sure which way it will go, but I do like our officials' attitude:

Herald

"It's my hunch we will purse legal action to who really owns those words in the public domain," Harmeson said.

[jimdahl]

I'm not sure which way it will go, but I do like our officials' attitude:

Herald

Through their exemptions, the NCAA is consistently claiming that Indians have the right to determine the use of their names, a narrow standard that removes most of the "common sense" criticisms of the NCAA's rule. On the flipside, UND gave the NCAA plenty of other reasons it could grant UND an exemption AND made it perfectly clear that a lawsuit focused on the public domain use of Indian names and massive media attention are forthcoming should UND lose.

I suspect the NCAA is currently debating the merits of finding "unique cause" to give UND an exemption, thereby silencing the loudest remaining appellant but granting another criterion for appeal to the remaining punished institutions; or risking an ongoing media and court battle that would certainly continue their embarrassment and that, if lost, would gut the NCAA ruling and open the floodgates for all remaining punished institutions.

[PCM]

Each school that is removed from the list, the more shakey the NCAA's legal ground becomes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. The NCAA can judge each appeal in terms of which schools have tribal approval and which don't, but a court isn't going to overlook the fact that the NCAA has given a pass to some of its members who are engaging in uses of American Indian mascots, names and logos that are the same as or worse than UND's.

That is unequal application of a standard that the NCAA set based on the hostility and abuse allegedly caused by racial stereotyping. Either these practices are hostile and abusive or they're not. You can't say that some are and some aren't without unfairly discriminating against some of the organization's members.

[NorthDakotaHockey]

I'm not sure which way it will go, but I do like our officials' attitude:

Herald

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Damned straight. The crack members, staff, and representatives of the Administration are going to take the NCAA hard to the net on this one, maybe even

all the way to the Supreme Court. It is going to be a sad day coming alright. Sad for the rabblerousers after the courts rightly start drawing lines in the sand, and they are on the side of logic, history, decency, and respect. Not to mention the business of sport, a subject on which the NCAA has long had its head in the sand. Time to feed the NCAA some of its own bird.

[NDSU grad]

What's the turnaround time on the appeals process, i.e. when did Utah and Central Michigan file their appeals, and when can UND expect a response on their appeal?

[YaneA]

"The decision of a namesake sovereign tribe, regarding when and how its name and imagery can be used, must be respected even when others may not agree."

As with the FSU exemption, this is key. While I would never accuse the NCAA of being slave to consistency, if the decision of the namesake tribe must be respected when it has chosen to endorse a school's use, then the converse--the decision must be respected when the namesake does not endorse use--must also obtain. I suspect this will be the ground the NCAA backpedalers cite when denying UND's appeal because we cannot put forward the same justification as did FSU, CMU and Utah.

For me the whole exemption-based-upon-endorsement road is anathema to the NCAA's oft-repeated position that it believes usage of Indian imagery is hostile and abusive. If true, then no tribe could ever effectively consent to being subjected to hostility and abuse. And, yet, three tribes have chosen to endorse their abuse by the corresponding school and the NCAA has said, "That's good enough for us." Which is it, NCAA? It's always wrong or it's only sometimes wrong?

It will be interesting to see what linguistic gymnastics the NCAA will use to deal with the instances when there is no existing, identifiable namesake tribe (e.g., Indians, Illini, Braves) to either grant or withhold approval.

[PCM]

What's the turnaround time on the appeals process, i.e. when did Utah and Central Michigan file their appeals, and when can UND expect a response on their appeal?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I could read minds at the NCAA, I could answer your question. But UND was the second school to submit its appeal after Florida State. CMU and Utah followed. I suspect that tonight's meeting of the Spirit Lake Tribal Council will help the NCAA make up its mind.

[Let'sGoHawks!]

It will be interesting to see what linguistic gymnastics the NCAA will use to deal with the instances when there is no existing, identifiable namesake tribe (e.g., Indians, Illini, Braves) to either grant or withhold approval.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The situations above illustrate that there has to be other criteria used to determine if a school will be kept on the list. UND has 7 pages of why they should be off the list. If the NCAA only used the tribal approval or disapproval as the determining factor, the schools listed above would have no chance of getting off the list.

[airmail]

What's the turnaround time on the appeals process, i.e. when did Utah and Central Michigan file their appeals, and when can UND expect a response on their appeal?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe Utah's appeal was received at the same time as UND's... not for sure.

[PCM]

For me the whole exemption-based-upon-endorsement road is anathema to the NCAA's oft-repeated position that it believes usage of Indian imagery is hostile and abusive.  If true, then no tribe could ever effectively consent to being subjected to hostility and abuse.  And, yet, three tribes have chosen to endorse their abuse by the corresponding school.  Which is it, NCAA?  It's always wrong or it's only sometimes wrong? 

That's what I was trying to say, but you said it much better.

It will be interesting to see what linguistic gymnastics the NCAA will use to deal with the instances when there is no existing, identifiable namesake tribe (e.g., Indians, Illini, Braves) to either grant or withhold approval.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that if Illinois ever files an appeal, the NCAA will have to grant it because of what it did with San Diego State and Florida State.

[PCM]

I believe Utah's appeal was received at the same time as UND's... not for sure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Based solely on the news reports I saw, it was UND, then CMU and then Utah. They all came in rather close together, so I'm not sure that the order in which they were received makes much difference.

The interesting aspect to this is that Utah asked for the NCAA to decide by today, and the NCAA said it wouldn't. Now it has. What's up with that?

[The Sicatoka]

... if the decision of the namesake tribe must be respected when it has chosen to endorse a school's use, then the converse--the decision must be respected when the namesake does not endorse use--must also obtain. 

Here's another scenario:

What if the Florida Seminoles say "aye" but the Oklahoma really did say "nay". Or if Chippewas in Wisconsin or Minnesota say "nay" but others say "aye"?

Who do you listen to ("respect") and who do you not ("dis"?).

[ScottM]

I would have to agree that by making tribal "permission" a main criteria, the NC$$ got the easy ones out of the way first. UND's case, and its particular appeal, are less concerned about permission, so much as its mission which is different from the other schools'.

[mikejm]

There is a very clear pattern developing here folks:

FSU + tribal support = quick approval

CMU + tribal support = quick approval

Utah + tribal support = quick approval

UND + (all the votes not in yet) = ?? (And I'll bet no NCAA response will be forthcoming until after the Spirit Lake tribal council acts)

The NCAA has put themselves in the perfect position with this whole deal. A nickname and/or logo is clearly NOT hostile and abusive if the tribe approves its use.

No tribal support, and the name is verboten.

We'd all better pray the Spirit Lake vote comes down in UND's favor. I hope Pres. Kupchella does well in his meeting with the tribal leaders. And I hope a couple of our favorite posters here and their friends are, ahem, unable to attend the meeting.

[Diggler]

The NC$$ has yet to reject any appeals, so we don't really know what their stance is. UND has plenty of other proof to support their claim.

[mikejm]

The NC$$ has yet to reject any appeals, so we don't really know what their stance is.  UND has plenty of other proof to support their claim.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I continue to hope you're right, Diggler.

[HockeyMom]

We'd all better pray the Spirit Lake vote comes down in UND's favor. I hope Pres. Kupchella does well in his meeting with the tribal leaders. And I hope a couple of our favorite posters here and their friends are, ahem, unable to attend the meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I highly doubt that the NCAA is only using tribal support in giving exemptions.

I do hope that a couple of our favorite posters are able to attend the meeting and act exactly like they do on these boards.

People will listen to them for about ten words (about the time it takes to call the people that disagree with them names) and then start ignoring them.

[mikejm]

I highly doubt that the NCAA is only using tribal support in giving exemptions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From the NCAA release concerning the latest exemptions:

The decision of a namesake sovereign tribe, regarding when and how its name and imagery can be used, must be respected even when others may not agree.

That's pretty straight forward language.

[MafiaMan]

I think the NCAA has shown that the #1 criteria for allowing schools to keep their nickname is tribal support. With that not being the case in UND's situation, I expect that UND will be the first school denied an exemption. What happens after that will be interesting...

[Goon]

I think the NCAA has shown that the #1 criteria for allowing schools to keep their nickname is tribal support.  With that not being the case in UND's situation, I expect that UND will be the first school denied an exemption.  What happens after that will be interesting...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

UND is going to slap the NCAA with a law suit.

I was wondering why CMU and Utah were given exemptions already and UND wasn't.

[MafiaMan]

[HockeyMom]

From the NCAA release concerning the latest exemptions:

That's pretty straight forward language.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly, notice the word only in my post above.