FB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[dawg gone it]

Stag boy...nicely done.  Your examples are convincing.  I cant agree with you more.  Especially about Oxy Boob feeling superior.   Man, I really need a spell check.

I enjoyed your argument so much that I am cheering for the Stags this weekend, by the way,who are they playing?

[RFB]

Oh Bob, I bow to your superior intellect. You must really love feeling above others. Even throwing in the latin. Cute. Must be a lawyer.

I don't give a rat's ass about what someone chooses as a mascot. I have heritage that is a true melting pot of cultures. I fail to see the purpose of banning a mascot based on ancestral or racial identity. I think the slippery slope is a terrible argument to make. However, why does the NCAA cave to a small minority of people who are offended? It is a guarantee that the native american populations are most likely split on this issue themselves. I am sure you can find many who support the use of the mascots. Let the school pick, put it to a vote, to the alums, students, faculty, fans.  If the fans and students are insulted, fine change the mascot. If not, let them keep their traditions. Simple as that. Because the vast majority of people don't care and would probably prefer to keep their tradition. 

Arguing from absurdity is entertaining to say the least. However, there is truth to the matter? At what point does anything become acceptable? Does Oxy ban the "that's allright, that's ok, you're going to work for us someday" chant? That being said, I abstain from the absurdity arguements. Does a private institution have the right to choose their own mascot? They have the ability to choose their courses, students, athletes, professors, etc. I would assume they should have the ability to choose their own mascot. No one is forcing the students to go there or cheer for said mascot. No one is forcing native americans to attend the games or see the mascot. If it offends a student, then out of principle he or she should not attend. As for public education, put it to a vote and let those who fund the school ie taxpayers, choose if it is truly that offensive.  Is it possible that the mascots were chosen with racist desires as the key? Oh heck I am sure it is. However, why can't a school stand up and say we want to keep this mascot to honor the culture and people of x tribe? Change a characture if you want, but rather than waste time, money, and discolour others memories and pride, put it to good use. That will go alot farther to engender good relations and will than caving to the whims and whining of the few. IF nothing else, put in a whole page about the wonderful and colorful history of the x tribe in each program handed out at the gate. There is usually a nice middle of the road path of compromise acceptable to both sides.

I believe you meant to say try to concentrate?? I won't respond to the reasoning comments, because as someone once said on this board, (paraphrase) "if a person has to talk up their own education and school, it is likely they feel inferior at times."

Wow, CMS represent. That was an impressive read.

[rbaikie]

OxyBob -

I would gve your stance more credence if -

(Just a note - before I go any further - I am of mixed ethnicity, with three quarters of my bloodlines being a combination of Native American and Scottish.)

You stopped referiing to "Indian " Nicknames - that in itself is politically incorrect - Indians are from India, the proper term is native american if you are refering to the inhabitants of the western hemisphere.

My personal opinion in regard to many of the nicknames is get over it -  Unless the name used is a derogatory slur, it isn't worth the effort in most cases. Stanford was the Indians - that was not generally used in the negative, unlike redmen or redskins, which are slurs.

I guess my biggest problem within this topic (and some others) is that no matter what is said and done, someone is going to be offended - if our goal is to not offend anyone at all, then we need to all become hermits and avoid all other human interaction.  A lot of times, it is human nature to take things personally whether they are intended that way or not. If the goal is not to offend intentionally, but to voice one's opinions (which may cause offense somewhere) then that is free speech.

Since we all agree to disagree, let's get back to football -  .....

[diehardfan]

You stopped referiing to "Indian " Nicknames - that in itself is politically incorrect - Indians are from India, the proper term is native american if you are refering to the inhabitants of the western hemisphere.

Actually, many Native/Indian people I know refer to them as such. And heck, the beautiful new Smithsonian museum in DC is called "the Museum of the American Indian."

All the tribes I work with refer to them selves as the  ___ band of ___ Indians or the ___ Indian Tribe.

I prefer the name "First Peoples" because, they weren't native American, because when they first crossed the Bering Strait (actually many of them believe their people went the other way into Asia, which probably happened too at some point) into the land now known as North America... it wasn't called America. It's the term they use in Canada (I think) and I hope eventually it sticks down here.

I guess my biggest problem within this topic (and some others) is that no matter what is said and done, someone is going to be offended - if our goal is to not offend anyone at all, then we need to all become hermits and avoid all other human interaction.  A lot of times, it is human nature to take things personally whether they are intended that way or not. If the goal is not to offend intentionally, but to voice one's opinions (which may cause offense somewhere) then that is free speech.

Free speech is a little different when it comes to things that are inherant to a person's being. I guess I think free speech should be allowed to attack ideas... not people. I am half-Korean, and honestly, the derrogatory way I've heard the word "Korean" come off the lips of many white and ethnic minority people makes the word sound bad to me a lot of the time... to the point where I actually cringe at it's usage. I'm very proud of my culture and socially conscious... and yet despite all my logic, I've become ashamed of a word that is perfectly innocent because of people with bad hearts. I think this happens to any term used to describe a racial group at some point. And it's a terrible shame... I hope someday it stops.

I also hope that people are proud of whatever they are. I'm proud of my German heritage (well minus the whole Nazi thing) and totally celebrated Oktoberfest in addition to the traditional Korean holidays.

Basically, what I think it comes down to is this. I don't think that mascots should be made of any eithnic group, including Vikings, or Irish, unless they get an official "we don't mind, in fact we like it" stamp from the entire population.  The very idea of a mascot is that it's supposed to invoke fear in the opponent. (Unlike the poets ) The steriotypes of that people group being a violent is therefore inherantly there... the cheers and logos of many of these teams with Indian nicknames reflects that.

On the other hand, I think it's absolutely freeking ridiculous when people of the white majority (or any outsider) tells a people group that they're supposed to be offended about something they are not offended by. If a tribe, such as the Seminoles chose to endorse themselves as the mascot of a school, than how dare anyone tell them that their decision is wrong. The idea of the NCAA making a blanket rule with no exceptions when a tribe is in favor of it just prepetuates and exacurbates the same patronizing, condescending attitude that the people of this country have had toward the First Peoples in this land from the beginning.

[diehardfan]

No one is forcing native americans to attend the games or see the mascot.

I am extremely shocked that you would say that it's okay to create a culture where people are not welcome, and I'm even more upset that so many people here think that's okay.

I suppose it's okay for the KKK to have their meetings? I mean, no one is forcing black people to go to them...

Or what about this country during the WWII era... all the places that used derogatory steriotypes of Jewish people? Jewish people could just go to other shops, right?

There have to be limits. There have to... for the decently of humanity. When people do unjust things to other people, and the people feel oppressed but don't have the power to change things... someone has to be willing to stop them.

[dawg gone it]

OK...... so who is going to step up and actually make some football predictions???   

ps.........my daughters dog, a papillion,(sp?) is offended that she hasnt been choosen as a mascot.  she is filing suit, Sabertooth is her attorney.  Lets start a class action!!!   papillon's unite! they may be small and cut but they are vicious.

The whole mascot situation just make me want to throw up. The racila slurs should not be allowed but I agree with the Stag!

GO DAWGS   GO DEEP....dawg gone it!

[Eye of da TIGER]

Predictions....

If the last few years are any indication, Oxy beats Stags by 30+

If Cal Lu is the real deal this year, then they beat La Verne easily...

And just for the sake of the Redlands vs Oxy game living up to the hype, I hope that Redlands beats Chapman.

Who else is playing?

[Browneagle64]

In the words of many kids today "Kill it" on the topic of mascots....

Btw, Oxy lights up the stags like the rockerfeller center tree, the bulldogs "return to" confusion within their offense and chapman takes advantage, U.L.V shows up with two Q.B's in Martinez and Doolittle that can actually rotate and run the system( hhhem, unlike at another school in the SCIAC) and finally the Chicken nuggets of Pomona lose to an up- and- coming Poet team.

Hope to see more people at the Oxy-Stag game

[EastCoastStag]

wow. dawgs and I agreed on something. how about a beer after the Redlands game?

as for my own game. Oxy's D lacks last years intensity. Really, should CC have put up that much offense? Collins is good, very good. Only had 5 incompltets last year and they were all drops if I remember correctly. (But lets not get on our knees for him right away, do we not remember Elliot and Linfield making Oxy look like a HS team in the playoffs?)  However, younger O-line. Offensive output drops and D allows more points than would like or would like to admit. Opportunity is there for CMS offensively. D improved as well. Opportunity is there IF the team permits themselves to take advantage of it. IF the bye week and poor showing against UPS holds, not so good. W or L, the game is about establish tempo and whatwill define their performances for the rest of the season. No prediction of score or outcome, remain optimistic.

The focal point(s) for the week- how does Redlands handle their outcome agains Chapman (good or bad) and how does LaVerne handle an asskicking at the hands of CLU. Oh, and coming off of a win, how do the Poets look for the rest of the season? Any more than 2 wins?

[dawg gone it]

Stag boy....how about a beer before and after?   I may even have one at halftime!

I think the dawgswill start a new qb this week, I hope he can get the offense on track if not then.....wh knows what.

The dawgs desperatly need to not only win but win convincingly to bulid confidence for Oxy.  From next week on its almost like one and out for the dawgs.  I think hope they are up to the task.   

Anyone else going to the game?

[Browneagle64]

Stags---I'll have to disagree on thinking that Oxy's D lacks last years intensity and your misunderstanding on why CC put  that much offense?

Oxy's D returns more starters from last year and guys that had some play time. On offense, even though most of the guys are new, they are maturing quick. IMO, I would say that Oxy's D is the strong corner stone (along with the offense) right now. The L.B corp is good, the D-line is getting better and the others are feeding off of that.

To get to the point, after Oxy has scored and handled its business, the staff doesn't care about stats and numbers. In the end they want to get the younger guys in the game to get experience. This is where everyone gets the misunderstanding on why some teams get a huge number on Offense. It pays off for Oxy and its younger guys.

The stags played UPS and got their face pounded. Last time I checked, we haven't lost to UPS in years. Even during my years many would say that was a H.S. team. So how in the world did the stags get knocked out like that??Makes you wonder??

Oxy by a large 30+, the tigers come out with intensity and defend their 1st step to the crown at the Rock. The stags leave dazed and confused.....

[EastCoastStag]

BrEagle:
If you can disagree, than so can I. I am well aware of Oxy's use of subs and younger guys in the 4th if and when the game is firmly in hand. Every good program should do that (unless on the losing end). But after watching film on Oxy this year I stand by my statement that the D is not the same as years past. Maybe come November it will be. It is certainly no slouch though.
As for CMS against UPS, it is not a matchup CMS does well with regardless of year or ability. However, after watching the film of the game, the play did not resemble the score. Failing to execute will create 14 point swings. Personally, I'll be glad when UPS is off the schedule. If nothing else, having to play in Tacoma is punishment enough. I will give UPS credit for becoming a middle of the pack and slightly better program in the NWC.
I won't give Oxy a 30+. That's putting us well below CC against your snubs, that is if the policy continues during SCIAC play.
Oxy is still my pick for the conference title with CLU getting a C bid.
Best keep the intensity lest CMS catch a break and play better than they exepct. Even the best look past teams.. and Oxy might want to be leary of looking past an improved team and a Redlands playing below the norm.
All that being said, do you foresee Oxy becoming a Mount-esque program?

[EastCoastStag]

dawgs:
UR going to another QB? Has this guy seen anytime yet this year? Are they looking for a fix or consistency. Hopefully a good performance this week by the new guy. However, if not, will the spot revert to the two previous starters or will the search continue. Just seems that looking for a starter in conference play isn't the best idea.
Gotta say, the week to week attitude might be exactly what is needed. Would like to see all games be a slugfest in the SCIAC this year.

[tmerton]

The very idea of a mascot is that it's supposed to invoke fear in the opponent. (Unlike the poets )

I don't really want to perpetuate the discussion of this topic but I do think this statement merits a response.  I believe the idea of a mascot is to instill pride in the team that carries its name, not to invoke fear in the opponent.  Thus you have Poets and Professors and such.  Now schools may also pick mascots who embody "manly" characteristics such as fierceness (how many high school teams are called Wildcats?) that they wish their teams to embody - but fear in the opponent?  How many opponents fear a mascot or a nickname?  As the graduate of a school whose nickname - Fighting Irish - often gets thrown into this debate, I can tell you that no team or school I know fears the leprechaun.  The name instead grew out of and embodies pride in Irish heritage, as well as the courage and tenacity of the Irish who fought their way up in this society.

My wife teaches at a Catholic high school in the Bay Area that has decided to change its name from Chiefs to something else as yet undecided.  There was no protest of the name or pressure on the school to make the change; indeed everyone associated with the school has great pride in the name and the Native Americans/Indians to which it has referred (they used the profile of an American Indian chief as a symbol).  Nonetheless, there was also a feeling that a nickname associated with Native Americans/Indians was no longer appropriate, and thus the decision was made.  Similarly, if Notre Dame at some point feels that Fighting Irish is no longer appropriate, then that too will change.  But that's a decision that will come from within, not without.

As I said, this wasn't made to prolong the debate; more a point of order.  Carry on with the football discussion.

[Browneagle64]

E.C. Stag---You are entitled to your opinion and rightly so. I also have to agree with what you had to say about Oxy keeping  their  intensity or CMS will catch a break and play better than they expect. However, You are taught at Oxy to not look past teams. Oxy has been on the opposite side in which others looked past us.(late 90's early 00') So i can assure you that even the tigers do not look past anyone.
 
Finally, do i foresee Oxy becoming a Mount-esque program? Yes, i do. But it's going to take time and a one year and one game at a time approach. With positive things coming out of academics and athletics at the rock i am confident that we will reach such level.