eff Wilpon: Indian Giver

[Ceetar]

Agreed. I don't think it was the dancing or music that was an issue. Here's the quote that, if I were the Mets, would have caused the most concern: As for the game, the A.I.C.H. began to promote it in early April. In an e-mail to the Indian Country Today Media Network, the group pitched the event as �a great opportunity to educate the public about the stereotypes professional sports teams continue to promote through logos, mascots and fan traditions, such as the �tomahawk chop.� � But if Mets officials harbored concerns with that type of language over the coming months, they chose not to express them publicly. Would they express this publicly? Would you? Wouldn't you try to handle it one-to-one?

Did that email go to the Mets? Probably not. Did they even see it? Would they? I mean,if you buy group tickets and email blast your group, the Mets don't QC that email. So perhaps it wasn't an issue, even with the Braves, at first, but once they realized it was going to be a bigger endeavor..

[Guest Swan Swan H]

Agreed. I don't think it was the dancing or music that was an issue. Here's the quote that, if I were the Mets, would have caused the most concern: As for the game, the A.I.C.H. began to promote it in early April. In an e-mail to the Indian Country Today Media Network, the group pitched the event as �a great opportunity to educate the public about the stereotypes professional sports teams continue to promote through logos, mascots and fan traditions, such as the �tomahawk chop.� � But if Mets officials harbored concerns with that type of language over the coming months, they chose not to express them publicly. Would they express this publicly? Would you? Wouldn't you try to handle it one-to-one? Did that email go to the Mets? Probably not. Did they even see it? Would they? I mean,if you buy group tickets and email blast your group, the Mets don't QC that email. So perhaps it wasn't an issue, even with the Braves, at first, but once they realized it was going to be a bigger endeavor..

Exactly.

[Frayed Knot]

soupcan wrote: I'm not a big fan of singular names for teams like 'The Heat' or 'The Liberty', but The Atlanta Braves could just rename themselves 'The Atlanta Brave' and be done with it.

And the Redskins could simply keep their name while changing the logo to a potato and suddenly the word 'redskin' takes on a new and non-insulting meaning.

[Edgy MD]

Or adopting Teddy Ruspin's image as a logo.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Frayed Knot wrote: soupcan wrote: I'm not a big fan of singular names for teams like 'The Heat' or 'The Liberty', but The Atlanta Braves could just rename themselves 'The Atlanta Brave' and be done with it. And the Redskins could simply keep their name while changing the logo to a potato and suddenly the word 'redskin' takes on a new and non-insulting meaning.

I always liked this idea. I hated when St. John's University changed their nickname to the Red Storm. I thought they ought to have just ditched the mascot and associated Indian imagery and reinvented their legend so that Redmen would stand for athletes wearing red. But what would the new Redskins helmet logo be? A potato? I guess they could keep the old R helmet from the early '70's, but without the feathers.

[Edgy MD]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I thought they ought to have just ditched the mascot and associated Indian imagery and reinvented their legend so that Redmen would stand for athletes wearing red.

Wasn't that more-or-less the original connotation?

I wanted SJU to officialize their unofficial nickname of the Johnnies. That would have been lo-frills awesome.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I thought they ought to have just ditched the mascot and associated Indian imagery and reinvented their legend so that Redmen would stand for athletes wearing red. Wasn't that more-or-less the original connotation?

Could be. I'm not sure. But I thought a Redman, as used by SJU, was an Indian with a red face, either painted, or supposedly from natural complexion.

[Edgy MD]

Wikipedia wrote: Until prior to the 1994�1995 school year, the university's nickname was the St. John's Redmen, which referenced the red uniforms worn by its teams in competition. The name was interpreted as a Native American reference in the 1960s, and the university did have a mascot (adorned in Native American dress), which eventually led to the team's name change to the Red Storm. The change happened at a time when there was mounting pressure on colleges and universities to adopt names more sensitive to Native American culture. The Redmen name still remains popular among fans, however, as does "Johnnies". On September 18, 2009 the new mascot, which was voted on by students, was revealed; Johnny Thunderbird.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: Wikipedia wrote: Until prior to the 1994�1995 school year, the university's nickname was the St. John's Redmen, which referenced the red uniforms worn by its teams in competition. The name was interpreted as a Native American reference in the 1960s, and the university did have a mascot (adorned in Native American dress), which eventually led to the team's name change to the Red Storm. The change happened at a time when there was mounting pressure on colleges and universities to adopt names more sensitive to Native American culture. The Redmen name still remains popular among fans, however, as does "Johnnies". On September 18, 2009 the new mascot, which was voted on by students, was revealed; Johnny Thunderbird.

Sounds like the meaning of Redmen got muddled over the years, starting out representing SJU's sports uniforms, reinterpreted by the fan base to symbolize Indians, with the University then encouraging the Indian interpretation.

[nymr83]

Edgy MD wrote: Wikipedia wrote: Until prior to the 1994�1995 school year, the university's nickname was the St. John's Redmen, which referenced the red uniforms worn by its teams in competition. The name was interpreted as a Native American reference in the 1960s, and the university did have a mascot (adorned in Native American dress), which eventually led to the team's name change to the Red Storm. The change happened at a time when there was mounting pressure on colleges and universities to adopt names more sensitive to Native American culture. The Redmen name still remains popular among fans, however, as does "Johnnies". On September 18, 2009 the new mascot, which was voted on by students, was revealed; Johnny Thunderbird.

Thunderbird?? so they basically managed to slip a little Native American stereotyping in there anyway?

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

My Dad was an SJU alum. I have a vague memory of watching a basketball game on tv and there being "Indians" beating hand drums and chanting to rally the crowd.

[seawolf17]

I voted for Johnny Lunchbucket.

[Guest d'Kong76]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: "Please accept these blankets as a measure of our deepest apologies".

Pretty damn funny!

[ashie62]

As I am convinced Citifield was built on an Indian burial ground, I welcome their world and ways at Citi on a daily basis...

[soupcan]

Centerfield wrote: soupcan wrote: You know though, the Mets did offer alternate dates. I think its perfectly fine to do what the Mets did in deference to the Braves. Notwithstanding that in my opinion The Braves shouldn't be named 'The Braves' and the screaming Indian and Tomahawk chop shouldn't be things associated with the organization. Should the Mets have checked the schedule and seen that the opponent that day was The Braves and figured out that maybe Native American Day and the Atlanta Braves probably wouldn't be a good mix? Yeah, they should've but I'm not going to kill them for it. Eventually they did see it and - again - offered several options to the Native American group including doing it on another date. I like The New York Times but they can be just like The Post in that they often reach to make a story out of very little in order to further their own agenda. I have to disagree with you. Any time you set up something like this, you have to anticipate that emotions are going to run strong. It boggles my mind that no one would think that the Braves and American Indian Heritage night might be a bad mix. Or that no one would bother to check. It is the type of thing that leads to people being fired, and if the Mets are incompetent enough to let this happen, they should get their just criticism. They also butchered the situation by trying to curtail the festivities, instead of just immediately proposing the alternative dates. This is just a cop out instead of admitting their mistake about scheduling this against the Braves. To be fair, the A.I.C.H. is acting like a bunch of spoiled brats. If the cultural message is that important, it can be delivered in August just as well as July. And I'm sure there are logistics to be worked out, but if they wanted to do it, it could be done.

I don't know, would they think to check if on Jewish Heritage night that the opponent was the aforementioned Hoboken Heebs? It's just not something that immediately comes to mind. 'Which MLB team offends which ethnic group?' Who thinks that? If in fact it turned out that the Dodgers were that night's opponent and nobody bothered to check, it wouldn't be an issue that nobody bothered to check. It was just dumb luck that it turned out to be The Braves.

Do we know that they tried to curtail the festivities before offering the alternate dates? I was thinking that all options were laid out at the same time and if not what's the big deal? 'You're not happy with our offer of curtailing the festivities? Okay, then we can offer you another couple of dates to choose from...' What's so horrible about that?

They made a mistake and tried to rectify it. The A.I.C.H. decided to stick it up their asses. Fine, whatever.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Dad, Chief Noc-A-Homa called. He wants tickets for the Braves series. I put him behind
home plate, field level, but told him not to do his dance if the Mets hit a HR. That's what
the apple's for, right?