Bonding Over a Mascot Response

I think for this article, the starting question was, “How do people feel about the N.C.A.A. edict?” Lapointe writes in his article about the N.C.A.A. decision to ban the use of “mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin.” The article, “Bonding Over a Mascot” focuses specifically on the reaction to the edict at Florida State. Much of the author’s research to answer this question came in the form of interviews. He begins the article with a quote from Toni Sanchez, a current student of Seminole ancestry who attends Florida State. She calls the ruling “beyond idiotic” and goes on to say, “I know what a real Seminole is. This Anglo guilt and regret doesn’t affect me.” T. K. Wetherell, the president of Florida State, also offered his opinion for the article. He calls the mascot a “marketing tool” and asserts that the Seminole tribe knows this and approved because they are “good businessmen” and “great politicians.”  Lapointe also gathers opinions from the side of the N.C.A.A. According to Myles Brand, the president of the N.C.C.A., the decision received more negative reactions than anticipated, but he still believes the decision was the right one.

In the end it seems that the mascot that was considered “hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin,” didn’t really offend those whom the N.C.A.A. suggested it would.