Monty Montezuma - SDSU mascot.
This is in the category of "get to know your opponent." Or, perhaps, Installment Number 3.4 in "Why Michigan should never, ever consider a 'mascot'."
Behold, Monty Montezuma, who I presume will be making his first-ever visit to Michigan Stadium, to thrill and entertain the all-important 4- to 8-year old demographic. Because of, like, all the revenue and everything:
Cut biceps; check. Headgear just made for Lee Corso; check. 'Skorts' that Lee Corso must never wear; check. Conch shell horn; awesome. Threatening weaponry including optional spear and/or broadsword; confiscated by Stadium security services.
I've actually seen Monty Montezuma, when SDSU visited Camp Randall to play Wisconsin a few years ago, and given that the game was 0-0 at the half, Monty Montezuma was nothing less than the star of the show. I left with the game 7-0 in the third quarter.
Your little members of the all-important 4- to 8-year old demographic will be loving Monty Montezuma this Saturday.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
this is more for women, 39-55
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^
You SURE about the "women" part of your target demographic?
NTTAWWT
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:20 AM ^
I think Hoke has changed the tide on the rivalry. Hell people in Ohio are starting to believe him. Never in a million years I would have thought that. Selling Michigan jerseys is a good start.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:13 PM ^
Okay - I get that this keeps getting repeated. What I don't get is why. I know I missed a joke somewhere in there, but will someone just save me the trouble of scouring the blog to find its origins?
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:19 PM ^
lol lol
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^
....eagles are badass. that is all
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:12 PM ^
like they do at Auburn
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
and watch out for the window.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
Are you a huge Fiddler on the Roof fan?
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:23 PM ^
All day long I'd biddy biddy bum.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
I seem to remember the school getting rid of Monty a few years back (caving to pressure from a Mexican Students Against Sideline Shenanigans type group). If I recall correctly a group of fans decided to just pay the guy to keep dressing up and bought him a ticket to every game.
Not sure if that policy has changed, but this guy appears to be dressed differently and seems to have field access, so maybe they were allowed to bring him back so long as they tweaked the image somewhat.
Which isn't to say the NCAA isn't ridiculous about things like the North Dakota mascot situation.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:30 PM ^
I played golf the other day with a guy from Chicago who had an old Miami (Not that Miami) Redskins headcover. He had headcovers from the schools of each of his kids, and the oldest one had graduated form Miami pre-Redhawks.
So we got takling about the schools who had abandoned their Native American names and mascots, and the more we talked, the more we figured that there may be more schools that successfully resisted changes, than those who did change. Anyway, there are noteworthy examples on both sides of the divide:
CHANGED:
Stanford Indians/Cardinal; Miami Redskins/Redhawks; Eastern Michigan Hurons/Eagles; several more whose names escape me.
NOT CHANGED:
Almost too many to name! San Diego State Aztecs, Florida State Seminoles, Illinois Illini (minus Chief Illiniwek), North Dakota Fighting Sioux, Utah Runnin' Utes, Central Michigan Chippewas, and many, many more.
Is the "get rid of Native-American team names movement" over? How did the "Chippewas" survive but the "Hurons" did not?
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:37 PM ^
Tribal council approval. The NCAA is ok with Indian nicknames/mascots as long as schools get approval from the relevant nearby tribal councils.Central Michigan and the Saginaw Chippewa Tribal Council have a proclamation approving the name, along with some joint educational and scholarship efforts. Same thing for the Seminole Nation.
http://go.cmich.edu/About_Us/Saginaw_Chippewa_Indian_Tribe.shtml
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^
But I think that Eastern jumped before FSU and CMU asked for and got their tribal approvals. I really wonder whether Eastern would make the same move, if it were being considered today.
I do recall there being the usual protests, on both sides, at the time of the Eastern change, but I don't really recall there being a big push from the Huron band/nation.
Nowadays, I think that what they really want to do is to co-brand football weekends with casino gaming opportunities.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^
Both of those suppositions (about Eastern and tribal gaming) might well be true. I know the tribal council that has approved UND's use of "Fighting Sioux" has asked for the liscensing rights to the mascot in return for their support. (The other Sioux council nearby hasn't, in part because the two councils don't frequently get along.)
All this is fine by me. They're leveraging the imagined connection of sports fans to their tribes for the greater good of the communities they represent. The key point for me is that the tribes themselves possess some degree of control about how their names are used.
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:39 PM ^
Don't whine about it and get relegated to a history book (oh, they're still around?), but get your cut and help promote it. Kudos to them.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:56 PM ^
Should add that the tricky thing with Eastern is that most Huron (Wyandot) peoples were forced to Oklahoma and Kansas in the 1820s and 1830s, so there's not the same kind of relevant local political entity to deal with. I'm not sure how the NCAA deals with tribes that were exiled.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^
Chippewas survived as the university and Tribe have an agreement in place where they said they dont really care if the use their name as long as its used in a non offensive way blah blah PC crap aka they will kick you out of the game if you even attempt to wear anything native related.
I would assume they showed that piece of paper to the NCAA hence being able to keep their name.
September 22nd, 2011 at 5:39 PM ^
What's the latest on North Dakota? Weren't they on the verge of changing their name?
One other one that changed was St. John's (Redmen to Red Storm).
September 23rd, 2011 at 9:44 AM ^
UND is changing their name. The NCAA required they get approval from the 2 Sioux tribal groups closest to the university (there are 6 or 7 sioux nations/reservations, each with their own tribal council). They got approval from the Spirit Lake Tribal Council but not Standing Rock.
September 22nd, 2011 at 5:48 PM ^
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^
SDSU did cave to student pressure but concerned alumni stepped up and bought Monty a ticket to the games so his momentum changing presence could be felt. Even though at the cavernous Qualcomm about 45% of the fans are never in their seat and just wander around, it was brought to security's attention that Monty was always out of his paid-for seat, moving to and fro, entertaining the masses. Obviously this had to stop so Monty was told to stay in his seat. Again, concerned alumni stepped up and bought Monty multiple tickets in different areas of the stadium, giving him the right to wander.
That was old Monty. They've since tamed his costume and muscles and now he is allowed on the sidelines. New Monty is much shorter and is not smeared in olive oil.
They changed the Aztec logo about the same time.
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:01 PM ^
You are right; the old Aztec was truly freakish. Like a South American "Hulk." They slathered him in what looked like a combination of bodybuilding oil and suntan-in-a-bottle. That's what I remember from the game at Camp Randall. And the headdress was a lot wilder; much more in the way of spikes and feathers and other freaky stuff. Have there been changes post-2006?
http://www.beesandbows.com/2009/09/college-football-season.html
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:44 PM ^
But who doesn't want to be depicted as having MORE muscles?
And the link, talking about dressed as a chicken, made me realize they're mascot was actually this-
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:25 PM ^
I think there's a difference between a mascot that features an ancient civilization and one that potentially features your neighbor (unless the neighbor's cool with that, which the Seminole Nation is but the Standing Rock Sioux Nation isn't). YMMV.
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:44 PM ^
I agree with you and I tend to err on the side of being sensitive of others, if possible. However, I never got the big deal about mascots (as long as they are done tastefully).
Consider Florida State: The Seminole tribe was (and is) a big part of Florida history. However, most people would not know anything about Seminoles were it not for the fact that FSU features them so prominently. In other words, FSU has propped up the tribal name and continued it into the present day, thereby benefitting the tribe.
On the other hand, in SDSU's case, the Aztecs were part of an amazing civilization. They dominated Central America for centuries and everyone learns about them in middle-school history classes. And now their good name is being used by SDSU? Not that anyone really cares, but SDSU is arguably bringing down the tribe. If there was ever a case for de-naming a school, this has got to be one of them . . . (Of course, as mentioned above, there is no existing Aztec tribe to object, making this a mere academic discussion)
September 22nd, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
No actual Viking culture around either, but does it really bother any Danish/Swedish/Norwegian person?
September 22nd, 2011 at 2:54 PM ^
In my effort to make a joke I stumbled upon something truly scary. I wanted to make a joke about SDSU playing a team with a Conquistador mascot, which there actually is, and having the mascots fight on the sideline. That would be really offensive.
In the process, I came across this site that sells mascot costumes. Some of them are pretty horrible. Hopefully DB does not ever venture there. Something about this picture was too funny. If we do get a mascot, please no, make sure they come dressed to the stadium so no little kids witness this
September 22nd, 2011 at 1:45 PM ^
Irish.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^
Hope he leaves the shit in SD. I've got it for visiting TJ, Mazatlan, and Acapulco or perhaps it's was the binge drinking.
September 22nd, 2011 at 5:58 PM ^
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^
So I'd SDS gets lucky and avenged Hoke's departure, this would become Montezumas revenge?
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:31 AM ^
... I'd just rather not do one at all.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^
Montezuma's Revenge just didn't catch on.
Edit: Man I'm slow on the draw today.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
The graphic more than makes up for it...that's atrocious.
September 22nd, 2011 at 11:40 AM ^
Yours is better, the picture really ties it together.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^
but I'm terrified that I recognize the word "oral" in that poster!
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:13 PM ^
Diarhea is very dangerous. Give your child Suero Oral (electrolyte beverage).
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:31 PM ^
Are you saying that picture is an advertisement for a beverage??? Holy buckets.
September 22nd, 2011 at 12:41 PM ^
Glad we don't have that in the states. Though pepto could use the same ad, I wouldn't like to think about the summers eve or preperation H print ads.
September 22nd, 2011 at 2:36 PM ^
In reality it's a beverage provided by the department of health, it's free and its just an envelope that you're supposed to mix with water, I know bc i live in Mexico (although this seems to be from Nicaragua)
September 22nd, 2011 at 2:52 PM ^
I didn't even notice it says Nicaragua at the bottom of the poster. At first I thought you somehow identified the nationality from the poo color or something.
September 22nd, 2011 at 3:03 PM ^
haha I'm not that good yet
September 22nd, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^
Unless you're some kind of lab technician, please don't ever develop that ability. Seriously though, good luck with whatever has taken you South of the Border.
September 22nd, 2011 at 10:20 PM ^
you mix it with the water?? Not sure it will ever end... /s