NCAA Has Gone Bloodthirsty

Florida State Seminoles
Originally uploaded by wonderbread74.

Force Of Nickname Ban & NIT Trial Goes Too Far

The NCAA is flexing its muscles--not to protect itself, though--but to show off it rippling physique in the presence of weaklings and nerds.

By announcing a prohibition of college mascots and nicknames that are deemed, "hostile or abusive" during its postseason tournaments, the NCAA is showing no strength at all. In banning these logos, the NCAA has taken four years to get up the courage to deal with a dilemma that many school have already remedied on their own accord.

St. John's University acquiesced years ago and changed their nickname from the Redmen to the Red Storm. Marquette University switched its nickname from the Warriors to the Golden Eagles among others and Stanford University changed its nickname from the Indians to the colorful Cardinal nearly thirty years ago.

Why did this happen aside from the incessant hollering from politically correct groups? Of the eighteen schools with Native American nicknames, only three would be indentified as a major player in college athletics--the University of Illinois-Champaign (Fightin' Illini), Florida State University (Seminoles) and the University of Utah (Utes).

The other fifteen are no-name small colleges such as, Midwestern State, Carthage College, Chowan College, Newberry College, and Southeastern Oklahoma State ominously named the Savages.

How hard was it to push around these schools? Of the three big-name schools, only Florida State has a financial stake in such a name change because of its popular sports apparel licenses. But, as you can see with the logo above, Florida State is due for an update to its early 1970s design. Could it be that the Florida State Board of Regents signed off on the ban?

And why isn't San Diego State's Aztec logo and nicknamed not included as American Indian. Derogertory Meso American nicknames are alright?

Also, the NCAA is attempting to crush the National Invitation Tournament--the forebearer to the NCAA Tournament and puny competitor to the current competition.

The NCAA is claiming exclusivity of its member schools and thereby attempting to render the NIT extinct. The NCAA has never, in the modern era, had an invitation returned. The NIT, on the other hand, is chiefly seen as picking up the crumbs of barely over .500 school and hasn't been a threat to the NCAA since the 1950s.

So, why a trial that would establish precedent and pull the plug on the NIT? There isn't any except for a newfound bloodthirst on the part of the NCAA.