A mascot is not essential for our talented team. While many sports teams and organizations have mascots, we believe that our talented team does not need one. Our team is already highly skilled and dedicated to their sport, and a mascot would not enhance their performance or ability to win games. Mascots are often used to create a sense of fun and excitement for fans, but our team can create this energy through their impressive plays and victories. Their hard work and talent are what attract fans and create a loyal following, not the presence of a mascot. Furthermore, mascots can be costly to maintain.
Each job also requires different skills to carry out their responsibilities. A mascot uses "community appearances," "animation," "giveaways," and "local community." Performers are more likely to have duties that require skills in "guest service," "excellent guest," "safety procedures," and "character integrity. "
They coordinate with floral arrangers and floor designers to design the event s motif and contact entertainers who might improve the experience of people who attend. Increased news coverage has broadened awareness of ongoing policy issues such as voting access and land rights, but when audiences seek out scripted content on TV that includes Native Americans, representation of Native American talent in lead roles is less than 1 in multiple TV genres.
Furthermore, mascots can be costly to maintain. They require costumes, performers, and routines that may distract from the team's focus and resources. Our team would much rather allocate their time and resources towards training, practice, and improving their skills.
A mascot is not essential for our talented team
4 minute read | May 2021
ShareNo matter the sport, fans’ love for the game—and for their favorite team—runs deep. That love fuels family traditions, community rivalries and hours of tune-in time. It’s also a love that’s central to American culture. But what happens when that sense of connection comes at the expense of a culture or heritage that has endured centuries of harm in the name of Americana? For many Native Americans, the appropriation of sacred symbols and propagation of stereotypes have been par for the course in American sports at professional, collegiate and K-12 levels. But many of today’s fans are saying it doesn’t have to stay that way.
Fans applaud the shift away from the appropriation of Native American culture as mascots. In fact, a recent Nielsen Fan Insights survey in collaboration with IllumiNative found that 46% of respondents believe teams are doing the right thing by changing their names and stopping the use of culturally insensitive mascots. For example, after years of pressure, the Washington Football Team finally retired the use of its former name and logo in 2020. The Cleveland Indians made a similar move at the start of the 2019 baseball season when it stopped using its former mascot, Chief Wahoo.
But 45% of fans want sports teams to do more than just stop using culturally insensitive mascots and names. They want them to end the appropriation of Native American culture as well, citing the harm it does to the community and the damaging emotional effects on Native Americans. And much of the appropriation starts in school sports, which the American Psychological Association says establishes an unwelcome and oftentimes hostile learning environment for American Indian students that affirms negative images/stereotypes that are then promoted in mainstream society.
The response to evolving consumer sentiment is also evolving, as the Cleveland Indians took their stance a step beyond retiring its old mascot when it announced in December of last year that it will change its name, which is perceived as more neutral in nature than its former mascot. The phased evolution of the team’s persona reflects how consumers have shifted from intolerance about offensive mascots to intolerance about any cultural appropriation at all.
In some instances, sports organizations and teams had good intentions, using Native American culture and mascots to honor the community. Crystal Echo Hawk (Pawnee), founder and CEO of IllumiNative, explains that what is intended as an honor can often have a demoralizing effect. “Native Americans are the only group being used as sports mascots, depicting our Native American communities not as people, but as ‘other’. It’s dehumanizing and objectifying.”
Not only do fans recognize that sports mascots are the primary means by which Native American cultures are represented on television, 50% of respondents in our recent survey acknowledged that options to see Native American culture or people are represented on TV were limited—especially in contemporary roles and not just historical context. Outside of team names and logos, Native peoples’ share of screen stands at just 0.27%—a figure about one-sixth the presence of Native Americans in the U.S. population today. Increased news coverage has broadened awareness of ongoing policy issues such as voting access and land rights, but when audiences seek out scripted content on TV that includes Native Americans, representation of Native American talent in lead roles is less than 1% in multiple TV genres:
More needs to be done to expand representation of Native Americans on their terms. And when it comes to championing social issues, sports are leading the way. Nielsen Sports Managing Director Jon Stainer says the changing tide is another opportunity for pro sports teams: “Sports fans want more from the teams they love—beyond watching their favorite teams play their best, fans want their teams to represent their values. The racial reckoning in the U.S. has created a greater awareness, and sports fans expect their favorite teams to stand up for underrepresented communities and take a stand against cultural appropriation of Native Americans.”
Trading cultural appropriation in sports for the visibility that Native Americans deserve—representation that is defined by and not dictated to Native peoples—is a long overdue way to truly honor this underrepresented population.
Cheerleader positions earn lower pay than mascot roles. They earn a Remember this. Everyone watches and focuses on the performance during the 7th inning. It is the highlight of all the intermissions. On a good day getting a pretty girl to dance is no easy task. Getting a pretty girl to dance on a dugout in front of a crowd on a Jumbo Tron is another thing! This is only one inning. It makes you forget The Bird is up and dancing ALONE throughout the game…just like a manager. lower salary than mascots per year.
In addition, a mascot may be seen as a gimmick or a distraction from the true essence of the sport. Our team wants to be known and respected for their athletic abilities and achievements, not for the presence of a mascot. In conclusion, a mascot is not essential for our talented team. They already possess the skills, dedication, and passion necessary to succeed. The focus should remain on their abilities as athletes rather than on the presence of a mascot. A mascot would not enhance their performance or ability to win games, and the resources required to maintain a mascot can be better allocated towards training and improvement..
Reviews for "Talent Takes Center Stage: The Advantages of Not Having a Mascot for Our Team"
1. John - 2 stars - I don't understand why the author of this article is so against having a mascot for our talented team. A mascot can bring so much energy and excitement to the games. It creates a sense of unity and camaraderie among the fans and the players. The author argues that a mascot doesn't contribute to the team's skills or success, but that's not the point. A mascot is there to entertain and engage with the fans, and that alone is worth having one.
2. Sarah - 1 star - This article completely misses the point of having a mascot. It's not about being essential for the team's performance, it's about creating an enjoyable experience for the fans. A mascot adds a fun and lighthearted atmosphere to the games and can help boost team spirit. It's disheartening to see someone so dismissive of something that brings joy to so many people. I strongly disagree with the writer's viewpoint and believe a mascot is an integral part of creating a vibrant and memorable sports experience.
3. Michael - 2 stars - I have to disagree with the author's opinion on mascots. While it is true that a mascot might not directly contribute to the team's performance, it's important to consider the broader impact it can have. A mascot can be a symbol of the team, a representation of their identity and values. It can also create a sense of community and pride among fans. Mascots have been a part of sports culture for a long time, and to dismiss their significance is shortsighted. A mascot may not be essential, but it sure does add an extra layer of excitement to the overall sports experience.