PUBLICATIONS Inside Illinois Vol. 25, No. 4, Aug. 18, 2005

The following letter appears in the Aug. 18 issue of The News-Gazette. A shortened version also appeared in USA Today that same day.

Aug. 15, 2005

By Lawrence C. Eppley

In his USA Today essay (“NCAA takes high road with ban of offensive mascots,” Aug. 11, 2005) Myles Brand described the NCAA Executive Committee’s injection of incendiary rhetoric into the issue of the use of Native American imagery as a “teachable moment.” Surely there are better ways of “initiating discussion on a national basis” than to decree that the traditions of 18 member institutions, many of which are rooted in reverence and decorum, are “hostile and abusive.”

The Executive Committee’s uninformed use of inflammatory rhetoric does not create a “teachable moment.” Instead, it retards meaningful discussion and debate on an important issue, especially in the communities of the 18 institutions “branded” by the NCAA as politically incorrect.

At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, we are engaged in a dialogue regarding our 80-year-old Chief Illiniwek tradition. For years the debate was hamstrung by the kind of harsh rhetoric the NCAA espoused. We learned that it only entrenched opinions and left us with a Hobson’s choice.

Eighteen months ago we decided to tack away from the extremists on both sides and set a goal of reaching a consensus solution. What we found since then is the opportunity for real, substantive, and constructive dialogue. It narrowed the focus and led people to put the university’s best interest ahead of their own personal agendas.

Our goal is a solution that embraces heritage and culture through the resources and reach of a major university, not one that pretends American Indians never thrived and created a rich history in our state.

It is noteworthy that the NCAA’s edict as it pertains to the University of Illinois directly contradicts a 1995 finding by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. After exhaustively investigating a formal complaint that the Chief, the name “Fighting Illini” and alleged harassment of students violated provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the OCR concluded that the existence of the Chief did not constitute a “racially hostile environment at the University.”

Our focus also has been on the Chief Illiniwek tradition, not on “Illini” or “Fighting Illini.” “Illini” is an appellation proudly carried not only by our student-athletes, but also by tens of thousands of students, hundreds of thousands of alumni, and all who positively associate themselves with our university.

Coined by our student newspaper 52 years before the Chief Illiniwek tradition was established, “Illini” is merely a moniker derived from our state’s name, which, like the names of 27 other states and countless villages and cities, is derived from a Native American term (Would the NCAA also have us remove “Illinois” from our uniforms?). “Fighting Illini” can be traced to 1921 and the campaign to build Memorial Stadium in honor of University of Illinois students and alumni who fought—and died—in World War I.

Mr. Brand’s essay missed the point. The likely and ironic consequence of the NCAA’s provocative rhetoric will be a giant step backward in the debate, re-engagement of harsh and disingenuous rhetoric and the loss of common ground to the armies of divisiveness.

Lawrence C. Eppley is a Chicago attorney who holds three degrees from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and currently serves as chair of the University of Illinois Board of Trustees.

Back to Index