MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on April 20, 2014, 01:52:45 AM
-
https://blogs.emory.edu/sportsmarketing/hot-topics/native-american-mascots-in-sports/
Long post but here is the conclusion (with MU mention)
---
Here’s the upshot of our study examining the impact of changing the Native American mascot: Schools experience a very short (1 or 2 years) negative financial impact and then quickly recover. Furthermore, in the long-term, the shift away from a Native American mascot yields positive financial returns. Now, an examination of our study, and all of the caveats associated with it.
NCAA basketball includes numerous examples of teams that have dropped, kept or adapted Native American mascots. For example, St. John’s and Marquette have dropped Native American mascots and changed the team nickname. Illinois and Bradley have retained their team names but dropped all Native American imagery. Other schools such as Florida State and Utah have received permission from tribal representatives and made no changes to their mascots or team names. But, it is not perfect data because there are only a relatively small number of examples where teams change names (and as noted above there are a large number of special circumstances such as the Seminole tribe’s embracing of FSU). The approach we have taken to analyzing the impact of Native American mascots and switches away from using a Native American mascot therefore requires some creativity and several assumptions.
-
After reading that, I may have to demote one of my staff members that has a MBA from Emory if that is the analysis they came up with. ;)
Uhm, revenues for the Redskins are down because of the mascot name? No, couldn't have anything to do with them playing poorly. I'd love to see them factor in things like the donations that have been held back from North Dakota, MU, etc as a result.
-
After the nickname change, one of my friends (and fellow alums) vowed to never give another nickel to the school. But when we made the Final Four in 2003, he was there in New Orleans, all decked out in blue and gold and said he happily was donating again.
As is almost always the case, winning cures all ills.
-
After the nickname change, one of my friends (and fellow alums) vowed to never give another nickel to the school. But when we made the Final Four in 2003, he was there in New Orleans, all decked out in blue and gold and said he happily was donating again.
As is almost always the case, winning cures all ills.
I happily give very little....I've given my share but I give to others now. People will rip me for it, too bad. We've had people on this forum that worked for advancement and said they took a hit on donations. Of course, winning also helps with donations.
My issue with this article is if Dan Snyder thought for one second he could make more money by changing the nickname, he would change it. There are so many things that go into sports revenues, tying it to the lack of a nickname change is especially hilarious. I'd love to know how they controlled for other factors.
-
After reading that, I may have to demote one of my staff members that has a MBA from Emory if that is the analysis they came up with. ;)
Uhm, revenues for the Redskins are down because of the mascot name? No, couldn't have anything to do with them playing poorly. I'd love to see them factor in things like the donations that have been held back from North Dakota, MU, etc as a result.
Can anyone really quantify how much in donations have been held back? Sure, it's quite easy to say that you didn't donate anything to Marquette this year because you're upset about the nickname, but my guess is that the reality for most of these people is simply that they wouldn't have donated anyway.
-
I happily give very little....I've given my share but I give to others now. People will rip me for it, too bad. We've had people on this forum that worked for advancement and said they took a hit on donations. Of course, winning also helps with donations.
My issue with this article is if Dan Snyder thought for one second he could make more money by changing the nickname, he would change it. There are so many things that go into sports revenues, tying it to the lack of a nickname change is especially hilarious. I'd love to know how they controlled for other factors.
The easiest question is whether you would use the term 'Redskins' to a Native Americans face when talking to him about his tribal heritage.
Obviously not, but I would not feel bad about using the term 'warriors' when talking about their history..
-
Can anyone really quantify how much in donations have been held back? Sure, it's quite easy to say that you didn't donate anything to Marquette this year because you're upset about the nickname, but my guess is that the reality for most of these people is simply that they wouldn't have donated anyway.
If they are capturing dispositions why people fail to do so, that should come up. I suspect that they are doing that. Things like:
don't have the money
upset with Marquette
donated to other charities
NOYB
Etc.
-
The easiest question is whether you would use the term 'Redskins' to a Native Americans face when talking to him about his tribal heritage.
Obviously not, but I would not feel bad about using the term 'warriors' when talking about their history..
I've answered this question many times. Say I'm at Red Mesa High School, a Native American school which has the nickname of REDSKINS. I'm at the school, and I'm attending the Redskins football game and I cheer on the Redskins, by team name, am I going to be somehow looked down upon with my fellow fans also cheering, be they Native American or something else because I'm saying "Let's go Redskins!"
(http://aacerflooring.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/new-floor-red-mesa-high-school-scissor-loc.jpg)
-
I think giving donations is an independent event from the mascott change. Personally I dont see myself donating any money to MU after I graduate (they took enough from me) but not for any particular reason. Those who will always donate will and those who dont, well, wont.