Conference 7.286::sports_91

       Political Correctness in action, pure nad simple. Wonder if the MIT
    Engineers are offensive. How about the Purdue Boilermakers? Boston
    Celtics? My dog objects to Wash. Huskies!
                                     Denny

Bottom line ... Each and every on of these team nickname issues is a red 
herring (no offense to fish lovers, by the way).   The more time we spend 
worrying about people's tender sensibilities, the less time we have to spend 
solving the really tough problems.

Let's get the Indians off the reservations, into the schools, into the labor 
force, into the political process, and off the firewater ... and *then* we 
can worry about dignifying Chief Wahoo.

Next time you hear someone piss and moan about Israel's treatment of the 
Palestinians, remind them that we've got our own stateless refugees right 
here in the Land Of The Free And The Home Of The Brave.  Do we have to change 
that song lyric, too ???

Bob Hunt

    Seems we've had this discussion in the past, but here we go again. Bob,
    you're right about taking steps to improve the Native Americans' every
    day lives is much more important than the names of sports franchises in
    the grand scheme of things. However, a simple gesture by the Cleveland
    Indians to redesign their logo (perhaps to a more Redskins-like
    design?) would be a small concession. People say the team was named to 
    honor the first NA ballplayer, so why the logo. If it was a stereotype of 
    a different ethnic group, there would be hell to pay. 
    
    Now I supose someone is going to have a problem with the new logo that
    I re-designed for the "WhiteFish" of the DEC soccer league. Some people 
    will say that the beer mug held in the right fin of the fish is a slap at 
    left-handed (or should that be left-finned) fish, and our motto on the 
    lower part of the logo, "Drinkimvs Maximvs" offensive to the ancient 
    Greeks because it's in Latin, and everyone knows that the Romans stole 
    all their culture from the Greeks. The soccer ball in the fish's mouth
    was made in Taiwan, so that will offend mainland Chinese. The Maynard
    part of "The Maynard Whitefish" has been taken off, since we don't
    represent towns anymore, but the Selectmen of Maynard will have our
    heads when they find this out. The large, circular fish-hook encircling
    the logo is also offensive to those politically in-correct Hartford
    Whalers fans (both of them), because the hook is not the heavy-duty 
    kind of harpoon that was actually used in those days, and suggests that 
    they used less-than-top quality equipment to earn their livelihood.
    
    You just cain't win.
    
    Tom   

    
    	The Washington logo wasn't always a picture of an Indian.  I can't
    remember the year it changed, but in the '60's, the helmets were
    adorned with just the picture of a spear and feather.
    
    	Anyone remember the year it changed?
    
    
    								bill..g.
    

    Bob - I understand where you are coming from and you pose a very
    convincing angle to the subject.
    
    However, I think it is much too easy to just dismiss this as an attempt
    by a minority to gain attention. We have been conditioned to accept
    these things since childhood. Most of the contributors to this note
    (myself included) are white and lack certain sensitivities. 
    
    But I recall, in childhood, how fights started when words like Wop or
    Harp were used. These terms generated such intense feelings in some
    folks and people went to great lengths to try to never use slogans or
    words or phrases that would, in any way, upset the French, Italian,
    Irish, German....Euro people.
    
    So, I ask, is Redskin a derogatory term? If you were a NA, would you
    like to be called a Redskin? Do you think a soccer team in, say, Zaire
    called the Whiteskins would be offensive?
    
    I guess I, too, think that perhaps too much is being made of the
    tomahawk chop and Cheif Nockahoma. The NA, more than any other people,
    have a secure place in our history that we should never forget. We have
    honored them by naming our towns, cities, states and rivers after them.
    I think the original intentions were good. I just wonder how I would
    feel if I was a NA and looked at the Cleveland Indian logo.
    
    Rich
    

    I think we're crossing a thin line into cynicism here. The Indians'
    logo is blantantly offensive, IMO (if we saw a logo with a grinning
    charicture of a black man, everyone would slam it). It should be
    changed ...
    
    As for "Redskins", there are Native Americans who have no problem with
    'Braves' (in fact quite a few don't). Most don't seem to have any
    problem with 'Indians' (the logo notwithstanding) ...
    
    
    
    But the term "Redskins" is universally despised. And I agree with you
    Rich, the logo is pretty classy. However, the analogy Vikings :=
    Redskins is a little flawed. Vikings := Seminoles may be a little more
    accurate. (I have no idea how they feel about the FSU teams ... :-)
    
    re Denny,
    
    PC presses a hot button in me, but I'll stay cool. I think that many
    so-called 'PC" critics are using PC as a cynical smokesceen to avoid
    accepting change. To explain would take 500 lines, and I have work to
    do. Call me one day if ya want to talk about it.
    
    Doc

    re .4
    
    Goose, I beleive Wash. used the spear (like FSU does now) until 1970 or
    1971. I remember Lombardi's Wash. team (1969) using the spear helmet.
    In 1970, they went to an ugly yellow helmet that had a 'R' where the
    Indian is now. It was 1972 when they went to the current helmet.
    
    Trivia : Wash. had a feather going down the backs of the helmets before
    they had the spears, but I understand that TV had problems picking up
    that logo, so it was changed. Supposedly it also doomed the spear, but
    that doesn't sound right.
    
    Doc
    
    p.s. When are the summer ref camps Goose ? Any in July ?

    I still think people could find more needy causes to spend there
    valuble time and resources on.  This country is literely falling
    apart.... Why there's about 100 reasons.  But every little thing
    we do (or dont do) is the cause and the answer.  We have the
    resources and the means to slow down or stop Homelessness, Unemployment
    etc, etc.  And there's many volunteer programs out there that these
    people could be part of that are more needed.  When i see some group
    going after Rock Musicans for there Lyrics and Sports team's for there
    name's/Logo's or a national effort to move the bundy's to a later time
    slot All I can think of is some rich, Under fullfiled PERSON with
    nothing better to do/complain about.  I hope I someday have the time
    to spend in one of the many programs out there, but Im proud to not
    be wasting my time on something trivial.....
    
    							Mike

I think a lot of politically correct attitude is people taking themselves
so damn seriously.

Our society has degenerated to the point where if you look at your neighbor
cross-ways over the fence, they take you to court and sue you for mental
anguish.

People (all people) have lost the ability to LAUGH at themselves, and
are feeling slighted all the time.  Hell, when I was a kid, my father
had a buddy who told an endless string of Scottish jokes, about how
stingy the Scots are, about their "skirts" and stuff...  No one laughed
louder or longer than me.


I personally don't have a problem with the Redskins logo.  The Indians
logo is a caricature, and is probably found offensive by NA.  What needs
to be balanced in the tradition of the team/logo vs the feelings of
the NA.....


DreadTom had a great note.  The more you try to please everyone, the
more you'll piss everyone off.   And the more emasculated it makes you....


Just a few opinions from someone who tries not to take himself too
seriously......

 Just in case anyone wonders if I would actually put my $$$ where my ample
 mouth is, let me tell you that I'm in actual danger of losing *my* land
 and *my* house to settle an Indian issue.
 
 The Catawba Indian tribe (a *very* peaceful tribe, by the way) filed suit
 over 10 years ago here in upstate South Carolina to recover 144 square
 miles of their land that was improperly taken away from them by the white
 man's government back in the mid 19th century.   The treaty signed by the
 Catawbas back then was never ratified by Congress and since then the
 Catawbas have been pushed farther and farther into the background of South
 Carolina society.
 
 Now, they're pushing back looking to settle old scores.  No, they don't
 really want to uproot 27,500 landowners and their families and businesses
 but they haven't succeeded in getting anyone in any position of authority
 to listen to them at all.   Their case has already been to the US Supreme
 Court twice.
 
 Bottom line is, to force a settlement, they have no choice but to sue each
 and every landowner in their claim area ... and I'm one of 'em.  They've
 had their requests for a class action suit turned down so they're going to
 clog the legal system here but good.  Can you imagine 27,500 process
 servers fanning out over a 12x12 mile area ???   And just think how hot
 the phone wires'll get the very nexted day !!!
 
 And I support 'em 100%.   They've been jerked around for over a hundred
 years and it's time somebody stopped and listened to them instead of just
 buying their ceramic ashtrays in their souvenir shops and patting them on
 their heads.   Yes, I have title insurance and no, I do not want to move.  
 But the elected officials in this heah state had better start smelling the
 coffee burning real real soon ... else they gonna be ex-officials if they
 don't work out some sorta deal.
 
 Like I said, let's deal with the "invisible" problems first and we'll deal
 with the silly grinning mascots later.  Small concessions are fine but
 they don't add up fast enough.
 
 Bob Hunt

    The last thing I want to do is sound cynical. And, yes, I agree there
    are more pressing things that need attention. But, we are talking
    sports here and certainly the realm of sports does little to address
    the homeless, drug abuse, the hungry, etc. Sports is a diversion as Bob
    said. So, a diversion from the discussion of sports should not be
    harmful to discuss.
    
    I think the main reason many of us find the negative reactions to team
    names ludicrous stems from conditioning. Many of us were brought up
    (well, those of us who were born in the 40's and 50's) on Wild Bill
    Hickock, F-Troop, The Cisco Kid, John Wayne westerns and Wagon Train.
    We became accustomed to hearing NA's being referred to as redskins,
    savages and other names. We played cowboys and Indians as kids. So we
    saw nothing wrong with teams being named after Indians. Yet, how many
    Indians had access to media in the 40's and 50's? If it offended them,
    how could they tell us? We didn't know so we saw no harm in it.
    
    I think the other piece of this is tradition. Sports purists love
    tradition. That is why we love to see the return to the architecture of
    the old ballparks. We love to see reruns of "When it was a Game" on
    HBO. These nicknames are a piece of the tradition we love. So we
    immediately lash out at any attempt to change what we have known all
    our lives.
    
    I would like to think that we are a more enlightened group of people
    that are receptive to the feelings of some. Can any of us truthfully
    look at the Cleveland Indians logo and not admit that it depicts NA's
    in an unfavorable light? 
    
    And, Doc, just prior to the Super Bowl many members of the Powatan
    tribe here in Virginia were queried as to their feelings on the term
    Redskins. By an overwhelming majority they had no problem with it.
    Quotes ranged from "We feel good that the best team in the NFL is
    associated with our people" to "We never thought about it until you
    folks brank it up". I am certain this sentiment is not truly
    representative of all NA's but I thought these responses were quite
    interesting.
    
    Rich
     

    Bob, your situation is a perfect answer to why homeowners should fork
    over the $$ for mortgage title insurance.
    
    Mark.

    re.11
    
    Not to diminish anyone's feelings, but I have heard similar stories of
    NAs who are not offended by these things, and recognize that white
    people are making most of the fuss. Of course there are examples of the
    opposite as well. 
    
    My sister-in-law is a member of the Wannabe Indian tribe. She's one of
    these self-righteous fur-coat socialists, bred from Mayflower stock,
    who has taken up the Native American "cause." She was the sole reason I
    wanted the Braves to win the WS, and since I enjoy playing devil's
    advocate (because it really rattles her cage), I got pretty good at 
    the side of the argument against teams changing long-standing names.
    She was going on and on about how awful the Braves were (never, ever
    having actually been to a baseball game). I suspect that it's people 
    like this that are behind a lot of these movements, although no doubt 
    there are Native Americans involved as well. 
    
    She is also one of the same patronizing types who says how terrible
    some Native Americans are because they favor gambling casinos on their
    reservations, only for economic reasons. She thinks it's terrible,
    because it's not "traditional." Of course, I don't see her advocating
    the forcing of white people to farm the land and grow only enough food 
    to make ends meet, like they used to do 350 years ago, either. 
    
    Tom  

    re .11
    
    Rich, I had read a couple of articles myself. For we know it may be
    50-50, and we've just heard one side of the '50' ... :-)
    
    re Bob,
    
    Will the Indians take a cash settlement for the land at current rates ?
    And what do you think the Supreme Court will do, and will the more
    conservative makeup of it influence the ultimate ruling ?

 There have been many slow and painful steps along the way to a settlement
 for the Catawbas.  Yes, some cash figures have been tossed around.  Also
 some additional (presently unused) land to expand their reservation.  They
 also need new and better schools.
 
 Lotsa settlement stuff has been talked about but never to the point of
 closing a deal.  The time is now.  And don't think that *you* won't help
 pay for it just 'cause you ain't livin' in SC, either.  This is a national
 treaty issue that has to be settled in Congress.
 
 And, yes, I never thought for a moment that I'd need my title insurance. 
 I'm covered for losses and damages should I lose the land and house but
 I'll have to pay for my own legal costs.
 
 Bob Hunt

    
    	Great paragraph on "traditionalists" Rich.  That's me for sure.
    	
    	However, I saw an interview with Charles Mann on the issue and
    	he summed it up perfectly (to me anyway).  He was asked if the
    	Redskins should change their nickname.  He answered that it
    	wasn't up to him.  He went on to say that if it offends NA's,
    	then it should be changed.
    
    	Claybone

    re several back asking about the Seminoles:
    
    I heard during a college football game last season that the Seminoles
    have no problems with Florida State using the nickname.
    
    
    py                               

     re .17
    
    In fact, the University even consulted with the local chief so that the
    mascot who rides around on a horse was dressed appropriately and in a
    "respectful" way, instead of in a steroetypical manner.
    
    Tom

    Cool ...
    
    Found out from an aunt a few years ago that there are/were some Seminoles 
    on my mother's side of the family, so I did a little research on them. Seems
    like they were one of the few NA tribes to kick the hell out of the
    Army and get away with it ... Yeah !
    
    Doc

    re Seminoles
    
    Am I right in asserting that the Seminoles are the only NA tribe that
    never signed a peace treaty with the US Gov't? Hence, the US and the
    Seminole nation are still at war, technically?
    
    re Rebels
    
    Doc, my high school alma mater, Walpole High, was known as the
    Hilltoppers when I attended. One year after I left, John Lee came to
    the school. He had previously been an assistant at Memphis St. One of
    his first acts was to change the name to the Rebels. I attended a few
    Thanksgiving Day games after that and never thought anything about it.
    Actually, the big news after Lee arrived was that the team started to
    win football games. I saw the Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia
    being waved all over the place.
    
    (The flag we currently refer to as the Rebel flag was only used by the
    Army of Northern Virginia during the War Between the States. After
    First Bull Run, General PGT Beaureguard commisioned a soldier to come
    up with a design that was distinctive and that would not be confused
    with the Stars and Stripes of the Union. Thus, the blue St George's
    cross with 10 stars on a field of red was born. It was also more sqaure
    than the rectangle we are used to seeing today. During the war, no
    other Confederate armed unit flew this flag.
    
    After the war and during Reconstruction, Nathan Bedford Forrest
    bastardized the flag of the Army of Northern Virginia and used it as
    the standard for his Kights of the Ku Klux Klan. 
    
    So, technically, the flag we know today "could" be called a Rebel flag
    since the members of Lee's Army of Northern Virginia used it but Lee
    and his soldiers would have been repulsed and disgusted that it came to
    be a symbol of the Klan)
    
    Now, what was I saying.......Yes, Walpole. Then a couple years ago I
    went to the Super Bowl to see Walpole play Brockton. The Walpole
    uniform now had the flag of the AoNV on the sleeves. I immediately
    thought of how the Brockton players would react. The Walpole band
    played Dixie and the flags were waving. If any Brockton players were
    offended, I never heard about it. And, I have not heard much fuss about
    Walpole's use of the flag since.
    
    The University of Mississippi athletes are known as the Ole Miss
    Rebels. I have no way of knowing how blacks attending the school feel.
    However, if some are offended, I understand.
    
    The only nit I have with the whole Rebel flag is.....the symbol was a
    symbol of the soldiers, not the Klan. I guess being a student of the
    War Between the States has made me more aware of the Southern white
    feelings. The shame heaped upon the area by Reconstruction is hard for
    some of us to realize and understand. Does this justify the acts of the
    Klan? Certainly and most emphatically not. But the pride many
    Southerners still have in that flag is unmistakable. To them it is a
    symbol of defiance and independence - not racism. To many Southerners,
    Jeff Davis, Andy Stephens and the Confederates took their lead from
    other rebels like Sam Adams, Tom Jefferson and George Mason. And the
    Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia represents, to them, the
    courage and bravery of the leader of that army, Lee.
    
    Wow, talk about a rat hole............
    
    Rich
    

    Rich, I recall some controversy over the use of "Rebel" and the
    "Confederate Flag" while I was in Texas.  Many of the local schools
    were getting away from using them.

    RE: Seminoles
    
    Instead of allowing his tribe to be rounded up for the infamous Trail
    of Tears march from the southern states to Oklahoma, Osceola, chief of
    the Seminole nation, led his tribe to the Florida Everglades.  For two
    years (1835-37) the Seminoles waged a skillful guerilla war...the first
    known use of such tactics...against the US calvalry in the dense
    swamps.
    
    The Seminoles lost 52 men over two years while the US troops lost men
    by the hundreds trying to flush them out.  In '37 the US government
    decided the cost was too great and that if the Seminoles wanted the
    swamp, they could have it.  Osceola appeared for peace talks, was
    arrested by a vengeful government, and died in prison in 1838.
    
    The Seminole war started again only this time, all white men were fair
    game until a treaty was signed in 1842, giving the tribe a large
    portion of Florida as their protected lands.
    
    The guy who rides the horse at the FSU games is attired in a replica of
    Osceola's clothes, head dress, and war paint.
    
    	--dan'l

    re .20

    I hear you Rich. (Thanks for the fascinating story - I'm a
    history/trivia junkie.)

    But for me, the Stars and Bars was also used by segregationists, and
    "State's Rights" was just a code phrase for "If we want to keep Jim
    Crow - it's *our* business !" 

    The Civil War was fought so that the richest 1% of the South could
    continue to stay rich by keeping 90% of the slaves and land. At the
    expense of blacks, and poor whites. Since that would read funny in a
    history book, many Southerners would say it was fought "for our way of
    life" ... what a joke.

    The sad part is that the Civil War is *still* being fought in much of
    the South (and North) - look at how our politics still follow regional
    lines.

    I try to work up pity for the South during Reconstruction, but I can't.
    Lincoln was for a compassionate policy towards the defeated South, but got 
    assassinated. Afterwards, even Andy Johnson was pursuing a rather lenient 
    policy. Then many of the 'old guard' instituted the infamous "Black Codes",
    N.B. Forrest helped to found the KKK, and generally pushed the North (which
    admittedly didn't need much prodding) into a vengeful mode ... and we
    probably know much of the rest of the story.

    In Houston, there is a Lee High School (Rebels, which produced David
    Klinger), a Jeff Davis H.S., and this goes on all over the South. At
    Ole Miss, Confederate flags are waved, and no, black students don't
    like it. But change has come slow. But it must come. I personally am
    insulted when someone waves a Rebel flag in my face - for me it's the
    moral equivalent of a swastika.

    And the swastika was originally used by other races (including some
    Native Americans) as a religious symbol wasn't it ?

    So, while I understand the 'Rebel' spirit against authority (God knows
    it's in me ... :-), a better symbol can be used. It has meant too many
    other things to me, and millions of others. And often, even when it
    meant rebelling, it was with intent on subujugating others ...
    
    re Seminoles

    I think you're right Rich. I believe that they fought Andrew Jackson's
    troops to a standstill, and basically told the US to shove the peace
    treaty where the sun don't shine.

    Doc

    re .22
    
    Dan'l I've been looking for that story. Could you refer some sources to
    me ?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Doc

    re: .23
    
    The only point I disagree with is that the Civil War was fought solely,
    maybe even mainly, for the
    reason Doc mentioned. Sure that was part of it but the causes of the
    Civil War were many. I don't think there was just one reason for the
    war but rather a number of circumstances and reasons that all came to a
    head at one time. Sure slavery was a big reason, but in doing research
    back in HS and College I became convinced that Lincoln fought the war
    to keep a united country more than for the slavery reason, in fact much
    more than for the slavery reason. Look at the Emancipation Proclamation
    and you'll notice that it frees slaves only in states that are
    rebelling against the Union. In other words ths slaves in Maryland were
    not freed by the Emancipation Proclamation but only later with the
    14th (I think) ammendment. South fought the war in large part on
    economic grounds, of course slavery was a big part of that.
    
    Don't get me wrong I do not approve at all of all the things that went
    on in the South long after the Civil War, but slavery played only a
    part in why the South fought, and possibly even less in why the North
    fought.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    re Swastika: I also heard that it was used by indigenous peoples in
    religious cremonies. The otther story I heard was that it was originally 
    derived from a cross.
    
    Tom 

    Doc, any US history book worth its weight will have the Seminole story
    in it.  I think there was a comprehensive book published out of Florida
    Atlantic University a few years back, but the name escapes me.
    
    	--dan'l

    Doc - I hear you, my friend. I can understand perfectly how you feel
    about the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. That is why I
    try so often to keep sensitizing myself to the feelings of others.
    
    BTW - Back to the flag thing again....The Stars and Bars refers to the
    first flag of the CSA. It had a blue square field in the upper left
    with a circle of 10 stars. It then had three horizontal stripes (bars),
    Red, White and Red. This flag was known as the Stars and Bars. It was
    replaced by the Stainless Banner in 1863 (I think) which was all white
    except for the replica of the battle flag of the AoNV in the upper
    left. This falg was mistaken for a surrender flag so, in 1864 it was
    replaced by an almost identical flag which had a vertical red stripe on
    the far right corner.
    
    The Civil War was precipitated by the argument over admission of new
    territiries as slave or free states. Cut through all rhetoric and
    that's what it's based on. Economic, yes. But the agrarian Southern
    society depended on slavery for it's existance. In it's desire to
    maintain equality in the federal government, it had to ensure that new
    states be entered as slave states. Buchanan sat by with his thumb in
    his ear, the Democrats self-destructed by running 2 candidates in 1860
    and Lincoln snuck in.
    
    I agree with the premise that only a small % of Southerners benefitted
    from the profits of antebellum society, Doc, but each and every
    white resident suffered under Reconstruction. Many wealthy plantation
    owners may have lost money and land but continued to live a pretty
    comfortable life. But, for the average Jim Bob and Bubba, times were
    made real difficult by the occupation Union forces. 
    
    Sadly, the army of occupation was made up of pencil pushers and
    non-combatants who did not fight in the war. Had the actual
    participants of the war served in this capacity, I think more
    compassion would have prevailed and less animosity would have resulted.
    
    Leading Southern economists of the 1850's predicted that slavery could
    not last. It was costing land owners progressively more to support the
    system and clearly productivity was falling. 
    
    My own feeling is that slavery would have ended by the year 1890 if the
    war had not occured. But, I also believe that the mindset of the region
    was still neanderthall in it's views of black people. The
    non-agricultral educated class of the South was always anti-slavery.
    But they were not the power and they did not control the economy so
    their views were not spread or accepted.
    
    Rich
    

    Good notes .. I'll have to respond tomorrow though.
    
    Good day folks !

 Re: The causes of the Civil War.
 
 *ALL* wars, including the Civil War, are about money.  Profits, to be
 precise.  Slavery was all about money so it follows that the war was about
 $$$.   The American North and South made for one of the strangest pairs of
 combatants in all of world history since they both depended so heavily on
 each other's output for each's own well-being.   
 
 The North had to have Southern cotton and other agrarian products and the
 South desperately needed Northern machinery and finished goods.  Yet, they
 were at each other's throats as well.  Northern abolitionists were a very
 vocal minority but they badly frightened the Southern aristocracy to the
 point where they saw nothing but a complete collapse of their economy
 followed by wholesale rioting of newly freed slaves.
 
 Once the South watched Lincoln win the election, they threw all reason to
 the wind and seceded.  And over 600,000 died.
 
 Some of the most fascinating stories about the Civil War describe the
 fantastic chances taken by some very daring individuals to carry on active
 trade between the enemies.  Profits were immense and the risk more so. 
 Nassau (Bahamas) was a wild town during that time.   Northerners with
 weapons and Southerners with cotton met every day to do business.   And
 all of it, more or less, quietly sanctioned by the two governments.
 
 If you had a seaworthy boat and could run the blockade, you were a very
 very rich person.
 
 Bob Hunt

Okay, folks, I'll have to put on my moderator hat and ask you to
please keep this SPORTS related.......


With that said, this has been a very interesting discussion.  Very 
interesting.   We could debate these points all day.

Doc, I understand where you are coming from with your views on the
Civil War and the South and all.  In playing Devil's Advocate, let
me say this....

Yes, wars are fought about money, and yes, Southern folks (and probably
quite a few northern folks) thought Blacks less than human.  Slavery
was one of the saddest statements on the human condition (though by
no means THE saddest).

However, if you look at it this way, the Southerners WERE fighting
to keep their way of life (read that economy etc etc etc etc).   Rebelling
like that is probably one of the major tenets of being an American.

Very few rebellions ever seem to work (the Scots -- my people -- against
English rule comes to mind), but in their minds they were right.  They
were trying to preserver their society as they saw it.


With that said, I can say that when I see the flag of the Army of
Northern Virginia, I respect it as the banner of a bunch of men who
fought against great odds for something they believed in.   It's 
unfortunate that it was taken and used for something as heinous as
the KKK banner....


Now, how this all relates to SPORTS is that Virginia is still one
helluva school and team.  Right Bob?????


'Saw

'Saw,

I can appreciate where you are coming from in this matter. I realized when I 
started it that there might be the possibility of the subject matter being
interpreted as a rat hole.

BUT -

If we can agree that the logos and nicknames of sports teams are sports
related...........

THEN -

We need to delve deeper into the root causes of the discontent some have with
these logos and names.

Honestly, how many noters knew that the "Rebel Flag" was NOT the flag of the
Confederate States of America but rather the Battle Flag of the Army of
Northern Virginia? How many noters knew about the Seminole wars?

Clearly there has been some interesting discussions conducted by some noters
who wish to get to the real reasons behind the demonstrations against certain
nicknames and logos.

It's easy to dismiss the demonstrators who showed up at the Super Bowl and
World Series as trouble-makers. Sure, some who were there represent only
their own selfish persona. However, there WERE some who are deeply offended
and their reasoning SHOULD be understood and discussed.

We have a wealth of knowledge available to us in the form of contributors to
this file. Surely a better understanding can be gleaned by having these
noters share their thoughts and knowledge.

'Saw, I respect your verdict on this matter (and the decision by your co-mods)
but I respectfully request that this discussion be allowed to continue.

RoCW (Rich on the Civil War)

Rich,

If we can keep it more sports related than it has been, then it can
continue.

Please understand, no one enjoys these wonderful discussion more than
I do.  I find them informative, and enriching.

However, because certain noters could not play by the rules, this
unfortunate "Pure Sports" rule had to be instituted.  As a *noter*,
I abhor it.  As a Moderator, it's my only recourse to survival...


I'm sorry it has to be this way.


'Saw

    No Problem, 'Saw. I understand. 
    
    Well, back to sports team nicknames.
    
    The last I heard, the Braves have said, flat out, they have no
    intentions of changing the name, logo or dicouraging the tomahawk. The
    Redskins have said they have no intention of changing their name, logo
    or discouraging the singing of their victory song. I have heard no
    activity concerning any actions aimed against the Cleveland Indians.
    
    Since the statements from the Braves and Redskins have been issured I
    have heard nothing from the opposing group(s). 
    
    Rich
     

    Best team nickname a all time, in terms a originality, inoffensiveness,
    meaningfullness, and prettiness:
    
    Hoosiers
    
    MrT

    The Braves had a Bud tomahawk night earlier thised year....

       What's a Hoosier anyway? Yhey're all like Woody Boyd on Cheers as
    far as I cain tell, right?
                               Denny

    T - what exactly does Hoosier mean? Anything like a Sooner?
    
    Other odd names:
    
    Deamon Deacons of Wake Forest
    Camels of Campbell
    Zippers of Toledo
    Horned Frogs of TCU
    
    And, how many teams chose the Tiger?
      Clemson, Detroit, Auburn, LSU, Princeton, Missouri.....
    
    And Bulldogs?
      Georgia, Mississippi St, Yale,.......Doesn't G'Town have a bulldog as
      a mascot?
    
    Rich
    

    re .34
    
    Sawmain, this looks like a rare note - one that has digressed along
    well-thought out, fascinating lines. Everyone has been civil and
    thought-provoking (and no, I never knew that fact about the Stars &
    Bars - I'd love to see some pictures), and I've learned a lot reading
    this note.
    
    Besides, I owe Francus and Brake a couple of replies.
    
    Everyone here is enjoying it, and it is positive, so let's keep this
    *one* note going eh ?
    
    Please ?
    
    Doc

    Hooiser - I had heard (totally serious), it was a shortened form of
    "Who's Here ?" which is supposed to the old pioneer equivlant of "Last
    person to leave MA., please turn out the lights ..."

Going okay so far.


Question:

	What in the Redskins victory song was offensive?
	I know the title "Hail To The Redskins" contains the
	term redskins, but is that all the fuss is?

	I know that song is kind of grating if you're not 	
	a Skins fan, but it is a neat kind of march...


'Saw

       Maybe the "Braves on the warpath" line?
                                    Denny

    In Hail to the Redskins, there's not only "braves on the warpath" but
    also a line that goes "whomp 'em stomp 'em" or something like that.
    
    I once had a list of the most common college nicknames but I can't find
    it anymore.  Tigers are among the most common.  While Georgetown uses a
    bulldog as its mascot, it has nothing to do with Hoyas.  Again, Hoya
    comes from an old Georgetown cheer of "Hoya Saxa", which means "what
    rocks".  It's a combination of Greek and Latin and it refers to how
    steadfastly their football linemen once stood.
    
    Among the other great nicknames - Akron Zips, Amherst Lord Jeffs,
    Williams Ephmen, Pace Setters and Macon Whoopies.
    
    John

    My all-time favorite nickname is for Polka High School near Wheeling,
    WV.  They are, of course, the Polka Dots.

    Best in college is the University of California Santa Cruz Fighting
    Banana Slugs.

    	--dan'l

       Marshall's Thundering Herd! 
       Dumbest? My high school...The Westford Grey Ghosts!
                                       Denny

    Hoosier - a Midwestern Redneck.  Cousins to the Hoser or Canadian Redneck
              and the Southern Rednecks that populate most of Texas.
    
    hope this helps,
    Mike

    Wasn't Hoosier the name of the MacKenzie Brother's dog in the movie
    "Strange Brew"?
    
    Rich
    

Frank's Secret Ambition:

	To found a college, and then nickname the football team


			The Droods


hth,
'Saw

re: .46

Dan'l,

There's another high school near Charleston, WVa: Poca Dots

Personal favorite: Cal-Irvine Anteaters

TTom

    The Faber Mongols from Animal House.
    
    John

    I thought it was Hosehead...

       Same thing...

    Right, Walt, that's what I said; HoosierHead.
    
    

    TTom is right.  It is Poca High, which makes the Dots nickname even
    funnier, and it is near Charleston.  I was confusing it with another
    favorite high school in a town up the river from Wheeling called
    Weirton.  The name of the high school is Weir High School.  They have a
    cheer that ends in "Weir High!"
    
    	--dan'l
    

    On the lines of high school names, near Warren Ohio two class A schools
    decide too combine into one district. The name of the new school
    district was LaBre or has we call them LaBra.
    
    Tim