Jerry Palm is one of those guys that just gets college football. He runs collegeBCS.com and just knows this stuff inside and out. I respect his knowledge and having gotten to know him a bit through a couple emails but mostly his blog and websites, I listen to what he has to say.
That’s why I’m pretty excited about his questions he’s taking to the NCAA regarding their recent legislation on “hostile and abusive” names:
1. Why did the executive committee limit the ban to mascots, nicknames and imagery and not include the names of schools?
2. Since this is only in effect for NCAA championship events, can we assume that the NCAA will no longer enter into sponsorship agreements for those events with companies that use hostile and abusive racial/ethnic/national origin names and/or logos?
3. Why is Central Michigan, which has no Indian mascot or imagery — only the nickname Chippewas, forced to cover up its nickname as hostile and abusive, but the University of Mississippi Rebels, which disposed of its Confederate imagery in the 80s (if I recall correctly), gets to continue to display its nickname?
4. This is a broadly written policy, but for now anyway, narrowly enforced. Can we assume that other racial/ethnic/national origin mascots will be included eventually as well, such as Highlanders, Spartans, Trojans, Vikings, and Fighting Irish (to name a few)?
So far no answer from the NCAA. You can read more on Jerry’s site.