I remember walking into Jacobs Field in Cleveland for the 1995 World Series. That was the year the preeminent batting order in baseball took on the best rotation of the 1990s. Yes, my Indians and the Braves were poised to answer the classic question: Does good pitching beat good hitting? I was excited to find the answer.
But then, as my dad and I walked from our garage on East Ninth Street and Prospect, I noticed people screaming and yelling in protest of this World Series. Being the inquisitive 10-year-old that I was, I looked to the pillar of knowledge that is my father for an answer.
He explained to me that these people were Native Americans and took exception to the nicknames of the two teams in the Series.
To me, this seemed ludicrous, even moreso now than in 1995. And now, in 2005, in the era of “wellness” and “political correctness,” NCAA President Dr. Myles Brand has pulled the ultimate trump card. The NCAA ruled in early August that schools would not be allowed to have mascots in championship play that are deemed “hostile or abusive.” Ostensibly meaning teams with nicknames with Native American derivations could not use their logo, etc. in postseason play.
Has it really come to this?
Has the country’s political correctness movement really stretched to college team nicknames?
Frankly, I could not be more saddened. It is one thing for teams with derogatory nicknames that I can understand. Teams like the Redskins, or, I don’t know, say, the Fighting Irish.
There is a large Irish population in this country, one that was abused and beaten for much of the early 20th century. Now, Notre Dame, one of the most recognized schools in the world, has a mascot depicting, for all intents and purposes, a drunken Irishman, poised to duke it out. Where is the outcry from the Irish community? I suppose as an Irishman I have a right to be outraged, but alas, I am not.
The irony is that in June, the Seminole tribe of Florida passed a resolution supporting the nickname to be used by Florida State. So, then, what seems to be the problem?
Well, a tribe in a different state’s feelings were hurt, and that just is not savvy in this day and age. The last time I checked, no team or school has ever used a nickname that was intended to be harmful to that particular group. Then again, I am sure Alexandre Dumas sees it as an affront to his novel that teams are named the “Cavaliers.” Hardly.
In actuality, nicknames are doled out as a matter of respect and to pay homage to a group that showed strength, courage and conviction when faced with times of difficulty, especially Native American tribes. Are those not qualities a coach would love to see out of his or her team? Surely, I can not think of more admirable qualities.
Surely, they are, and that is why programs choose names that will not only instill those virtues in their teams, but also impose that impression on the opponent. Perhaps this is trite and illogical, but, nonetheless, the intentions are there.
I fail to see Dr. Brand’s logic on this issue. Clearly this is a knee-jerk reaction to a long-debated problem. There have been picket lines for years, but those groups are usually the minority. For the most part, there are no complaints. And while a tribe of Seminoles in Kansas complained to Dr. Brand, clearly there was not a large outcry from the Native American community.
No, Dr. Brand simply overreacted because he surely did not want to offend anyone from his position of power. But in turn, isn’t the Seminole tribe in Florida offended? Clearly they wanted to support Florida State athletics, but their wishes have apparently fallen on deaf ears. Or rather, they don’t outweigh the wishes of a tribe hundreds of miles away. I find this strangely illogical.
I can only hope that the Florida State appeal overturns such an egregious example of oversensitivity, and frankly idiocy. And, if not, at least I promise you will never see me in a picket line under the Golden Dome.
