Double A Zone Respone:

Josh Has Answered the Question
Read Josh's Response:
I have to admit, I didn’t think that any of the questions asked in the most recent post about mascots were meant to be answered. They seem to be rhetorical in nature because any answer I give isn’t going to be in line with all of your passionate beliefs.

My personal opinion about mascots isn’t directly in accordance with the NCAA position taken by the Executive Committee. For instance, I don’t see much of a difference between Fighting Sioux and Fighting Irish. I know leprechauns aren’t real, but the word “fighting” seems hostile to me. That’s my personal opinion, but the Executive Committee, which is comprised of presidents and chancellors, doesn’t agree with me.

With regard to the questions about Pontiac and Theodore Roosevelt, I can only share my personal thoughts. I do believe there’s a difference between a car company and a sports mascot imitating an American Indian. Teddy Roosevelt was responsible for the establishment of the NCAA, and I see no reason we can’t have an award named in his honor.

You all are going to disagree with me and that’s certainly fine. You’re all passionate, believe the Executive Committee made a poor decision and are looking for hypocrisy in every nook and cranny of the NCAA. I understand the points being made, but personally feel that we’re discussing different situations.

I am not walking a company line – I agree that there are inconsistencies. I can’t imagine how North Dakota fans are feeling and I won’t try to put it in words. I am confident, however, that there are folks up there who are offended by the use of the Fighting Sioux moniker, and I think it’s important to remember that they should have a say as well.


Posted by: Josh Centor | January 3, 2007 02:40 PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically we are back to the belief that if a small number of people are offended by the name or logo that some how a small minority of people should be able to exact it's will on the majority. I guess we are back to the notion that you have a constitional right to not be offended. Yikes.

Jerry Hatch Responds Again:

I don't think anyone is trying to prevent anyone in North Dakota from having a say. But it certainly appears that those people are in a very small minority. The comparison of the "Fighting Sioux" with the "Fighting Irish" is certainly a valid one, but perhaps not this discussion. Comparing the Sioux logo to the Florida State Seminole logo, plus the horse and rider at the game, plus the fans painted in the stands, many of them doing the "tomahawk chop" and I fail to see how one can be declared hostile and abusive, and the other not. It simply makes NO sense. Nor does overlooking the Aztecs for consideration. I don't recall hearing that anyone asked the Nahua about that. Too many exceptions have been made for poorly designed reasons. The NCAA should just eliminate this policy.

When discussing the car company Pontiac, you should be aware that Pontiac sells its trademarked Indian Head logo on all kinds of products as "OFFICIAL PONTIAC MERCHANDISE." Money does speak louder than words apparently.
Posted by: Jerry Hatch | January 3, 2007 04:39 PM
-----------------------------------------------------
I kind of like this guy.