Texas athletes petitioning University to replace "The Eyes of Texas" and to no longer require athletes to sing it

[Armybrat 41320]

Fuck the NYT.

The Pulitzer Prize awarded to Walter Duranty in the 1930s for sucking up to the USSR reflects what a fraud they both are.

Yellow journalism definition should have the NYT illustrated right along side Willie Hearst.

[texifornia 58786]

 

[Steel Shank 9533]

Dinah Shore would.

[Istian 241]

18 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I don't support a ban on the Eyes of Texas.

But it's not up to me. Which is the whole point. This train has left the station. The end result will eventually be the ending of this particular tradition. It's not if but when.

I actually think I agree with this. The moment one individual said they won't sing it or be a part of this particular tradition, it became divisive by nature. I get there will be some that stay for it anyway, there will be many that continue to sing it, but as long as there are holdouts, it will be a point of contention. 

I really don't think there's any way out of this going away altogether eventually unless the athletes come together and make an agreement to all stay for it - even if they don't actually sing the song. 

[Veerbone 116]

17 hours ago, David Dennison said:

That being the case, you can understand why this particular issue will continue to come up.

Trhe.  Unlike aggy, SJW’s won’t run out of time.

[Veerbone 116]

9 minutes ago, Istian said:

I actually think I agree with this. The moment one individual said they won't sing it or be a part of this particular tradition, it became divisive by nature. I get there will be some that stay for it anyway, there will be many that continue to sing it, but as long as there are holdouts, it will be a point of contention. 

I really don't think there's any way out of this going away altogether eventually unless the athletes come together and make an agreement to all stay for it - even if they don't actually sing the song. 

It won’t change til a few billionaires say it will change.  Let’s not try to complicate life or forget it’s history.  

[Wally Pryor 5388]

7 minutes ago, Istian said:

I really don't think there's any way out of this going away altogether eventually unless the athletes come together and make an agreement to all stay for it - even if they don't actually sing the song. 

That's what I alluded to above.  Some of the players won't sing it.   I'm sure all will stay for it.  Anyone that walks off the field while the other 99% are at least staying for the song will create an issue.  And I'm sure this is the one thing that Hartzell, Del Conte, et al want(ed) to avoid and got assurance in exchange for all the gives. 

[Istian 241]

3 minutes ago, Veerbone said:

It won’t change til a few billionaires say it will change.  Let’s not try to complicate life or forget it’s history.  

I don't disagree with you. For selfish reasons related to me having extremely fond memories of singing the song on numerous occasions, I hoped the Eyes would stay. It's great that there was a compromise to be found, but I'm confident that this won't be the last we hear about it. 

[Veerbone 116]

8 minutes ago, Istian said:

I don't disagree with you. For selfish reasons related to me having extremely fond memories of singing the song on numerous occasions, I hoped the Eyes would stay. It's great that there was a compromise to be found, but I'm confident that this won't be the last we hear about it. 

Yup.   Justice & equality is the mission, I never felt the song and the BLM funding qualified for consideration, but to each their own.

[EastTexan 666]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Dale can get pretty strident, but he usually gets his facts right.

Haven't watched the pompous ass in years. Will have an agenda served opinion coming soon. He may surprise. Doubt it tho.

[EastTexan 666]

1 hour ago, Armybrat said:

Fuck the NYT.

The Pulitzer Prize awarded to Walter Duranty in the 1930s for sucking up to the USSR reflects what a fraud they both are.

Yellow journalism definition should have the NYT illustrated right along side Willie Hearst.

You called it, sir.

[wood 11747]

6 hours ago, Bevo VIII said:

Personally I would have went with either Ricky Campbell Field.

Ricky VY Earl Field works better for me...

But OK, that's cool. Hookem.

[Horn80 6313]

UT is showing why it is the flagship university in Texas.  

Edited July 15, 2020 by Horn80

[irishtexan 11692]

1 hour ago, Wally Pryor said:

That's what I alluded to above.  Some of the players won't sing it.   I'm sure all will stay for it.  Anyone that walks off the field while the other 99% are at least staying for the song will create an issue.  And I'm sure this is the one thing that Hartzell, Del Conte, et al want(ed) to avoid and got assurance in exchange for all the gives. 

there's no evidence to support this. in fact, there's evidence that a lot of players want nothing to do with this tradition so they may make a point of leaving. which should be fine. it's not the national anthem. this only becomes an issue if the olds get upset and make a stink about the uppity players not respecting tradition.  

[Armybrat 41320]

I could care less whether or not they chose to hang around & sing it,  but do not accuse those who do as being racists.

[Js1 86940]

14 hours ago, 3shot said:

David Dennison lives in Severodvinsk, Russia.  He's a junior agent of the Federal Security Service and has spent years spouting off nauseating takes on all matters of subjects on this board and 12 others similar to the surl.  This is a "fact." 

 

 

Source your facts then, 8badmofo

[Armybrat 41320]

I dunno, but for a rooskie, that would be a helluva plum job to have.

[Armybrat 41320]

17 hours ago, mininghorn88 said:

The local TV station ran the story yesterday that UT "rejected" the request to quite singing the "Eyes of Texas".  This was reported during the 5:00pm news.  I immediately emailed the station a copy of the letter as sent out by the Interim President along with my objection of their reporting.  Within 20 minutes I received a reply from them about the word "rejected":

Email follows:

TV Station Reply:  Thank you for writing in.  I think you bring up a great and fair point. The source on that story was the Associated Press out of Austin. I agree their wording, and as a result ours,  could have better reflected the outcome. “Rejected” assumes too much.    I appreciate you for bringing it to our attention.

 

Text for the story:

RACIAL INJUSTICE-TEXAS

           

Texas keeps 'The Eyes of Texas' despite athlete demands

           

The University of Texas has rejected calls by its athletes to change a school song that they believe has racist undertones. “The Eyes of Texas” has long been criticized for its connection to minstrel shows with characters in blackface in the early 1900s. The school says the song will remain. Texas interim president Jim Hartzell says the Texas community has the power to determine “what the ‘Eyes of Texas’ expect of us, what they demand of us.” 

It would seem that a UT spokesman should be publicly responding to some of the obvious mischaracterizations the media are running with, just to set the record straight.

I am still pissed about the lack of response to the aggy & sports pundit propaganda that was spewed  after those agroids ran away to the SEC

[Scholz 12301]

34 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

there's no evidence to support this. in fact, there's evidence that a lot of players want nothing to do with this tradition so they may make a point of leaving. which should be fine. it's not the national anthem. this only becomes an issue if the olds get upset and make a stink about the uppity players not respecting tradition.  

...or if the only players remaining on the field are white.  I think the players should unify and either all sing it/none of them sing it/all of them remain on the field silently, etc.  Might cause a big rift in the locker room.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Scholz

[bad_teammate 13479]

13 minutes ago, Scholz said:

Might cause a big rift in the locker room.

You can already see the battle lines moving forward and they are exactly the same as they were, there is zero change here. For instance, this highly political sentiment from the last page: "Unlike aggy, SJW’s won’t run out of time."

Any player who chooses to skip The Eyes will be attacked by "fans", so essentially the "freedom" they've been given now is to be spark internal battles along the same boring and tired lines that people fight every other battle in this country (SJWs vs fascists, COVID, race, schools, police, economy, blah blah blah blah blah). This new "freedom" will probably not accomplish much of anything other than to make sure no one currently in a position to make decisions has to actually make a controversial decision.

If we call this a compromise, then the nature of these "concessions" is actually pretty insulting, IMO, the idea that naming things after black people is something you feel is a "give" rather than something you would normally do. "Look, we all suffer here. You have to accept a minstrel-origin school song and we have to officially acknowledge black people who didn't give us a ton of money!"

(Of course, that only applies in the context of a compromise/negotiation. Framing matters.)

1 hour ago, Armybrat said:

I could care less whether or not they chose to hang around & sing it,  but do not accuse those who do as being racists.

Do you think that will happen during games?

Which of the following scenarios do you think is more likely to occur during a UT football game:
A: A fan standing and singing The Eyes is confronted by someone not participating.
B: A fan kneeling during The Eyes is confronted by someone who is participating.

Given the demographics at the games you and I have been to for many decades, I think it's very obviously B. The image of A happening in real life is very hard to conceive. That's the kind of thing one would have to seek out actively on social media/message boards.

I might be wrong, though.

[Tex Long 4616]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I might be wrong, though.

At least you got one thing right.

[Cairn Horn88 8500]

2 hours ago, Steel Shank said:

Dinah Shore would.

Who's that in the kitchen with her?

[Armybrat 41320]

24 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You can already see the battle lines moving forward and they are exactly the same as they were, there is zero change here. For instance, this highly political sentiment from the last page: "Unlike aggy, SJW’s won’t run out of time."

Any player who chooses to skip The Eyes will be attacked by "fans", so essentially the "freedom" they've been given now is to be spark internal battles along the same boring and tired lines that people fight every other battle in this country (SJWs vs fascists, COVID, race, schools, police, economy, blah blah blah blah blah). This new "freedom" will probably not accomplish much of anything other than to make sure no one currently in a position to make decisions has to actually make a controversial decision.

If we call this a compromise, then the nature of these "concessions" is actually pretty insulting, IMO, the idea that naming things after black people is something you feel is a "give" rather than something you would normally do. "Look, we all suffer here. You have to accept a minstrel-origin school song and we have to officially acknowledge black people who didn't give us a ton of money!"

(Of course, that only applies in the context of a compromise/negotiation. Framing matters.)

Do you think that will happen during games?

Which of the following scenarios do you think is more likely to occur during a UT football game:
A: A fan standing and singing The Eyes is confronted by someone not participating.
B: A fan kneeling during The Eyes is confronted by someone who is participating.

Given the demographics at the games you and I have been to for many decades, I think it's very obviously B. The image of A happening in real life is very hard to conceive. That's the kind of thing one would have to seek out actively on social media/message boards.

I might be wrong, though.

Go right ahead and kneel, Herman needs the prayers.

[BrazilHorn 6792]

When team loses, I won't care who is kneeling or standing. I will be pissed at loss as based on the last 10 years it probably would have been to a combo of shitty play calling & execution by players.

When team wins I will be happy and won't care who kneels or stands.

In either case I will probably have a great buzz and just be glad to be at a UT football game.

[Duane Moore 5636]

5 hours ago, Cairn Horn88 said:

Who's that in the kitchen with her?

Burt Reynolds?

[Armybrat 41320]

I’ll bet those BJs she gave him with those buck teeth were extra special.

She was a great singer though.

[mdmost 43850]

Our players speaking up helped lead to this, which is pretty badass.

 

[mininghorn88 2330]

49 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Our players speaking up helped lead to this, which is pretty badass.

 

Who or what is the dude in the blue kerchief and blue socks?  Looks so...out of place?

[Apex73 313]

6 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

You can already see the battle lines moving forward and they are exactly the same as they were, there is zero change here. For instance, this highly political sentiment from the last page: "Unlike aggy, SJW’s won’t run out of time."

Any player who chooses to skip The Eyes will be attacked by "fans", so essentially the "freedom" they've been given now is to be spark internal battles along the same boring and tired lines that people fight every other battle in this country (SJWs vs fascists, COVID, race, schools, police, economy, blah blah blah blah blah). This new "freedom" will probably not accomplish much of anything other than to make sure no one currently in a position to make decisions has to actually make a controversial decision.

If we call this a compromise, then the nature of these "concessions" is actually pretty insulting, IMO, the idea that naming things after black people is something you feel is a "give" rather than something you would normally do. "Look, we all suffer here. You have to accept a minstrel-origin school song and we have to officially acknowledge black people who didn't give us a ton of money!"

(Of course, that only applies in the context of a compromise/negotiation. Framing matters.)

Do you think that will happen during games?

Which of the following scenarios do you think is more likely to occur during a UT football game:
A: A fan standing and singing The Eyes is confronted by someone not participating.
B: A fan kneeling during The Eyes is confronted by someone who is participating.

Given the demographics at the games you and I have been to for many decades, I think it's very obviously B. The image of A happening in real life is very hard to conceive. That's the kind of thing one would have to seek out actively on social media/message boards.

I might be wrong, though.

This is kind of a ridiculous perspective.  No one had to give the players anything but administration chose to listen and compromise came out of it.  The eyes of Texas was probably never negotiable in reality.  But to act like that both sides didn't come together with adequate comprise is ridiculous.  Everyone should be happy with the changes that were made.  That's progress.  I'm sure that's not the last we will hear about this issue but this is how negotiations work.  This isn't the last time these players will have to have negotiations in life either.  

[bullet 1627]

11 hours ago, Valmy77 said:

The funny part is is that often when you actually read the story the journalist did a pretty good job reporting the issues, but then it has this crazy inflammatory headline which is mostly what anybody reads.

Well they know by studies that almost half the people only read the headline and that only a small minority of 10% or so gets past the first couple of paragraphs.  So they lie with their headline and their first couple of paragraphs and later in the story you can read that they've lied to you.  What they report directly contradicts what they said at the start of the story.

 

That's when they don't totally make stuff up or quote anonymous sources who repeatedly make stuff up like the NYT is prone to do.

[bad_teammate 13479]

Again, that's only if you're using the "compromise" language. I don't like looking at it that way, personally, which is why I think people shouldn't frame it that way, because it makes it sound more hostile than it is.

Joe Jamail Field never meant shit to anyone except a tiny handful of very rich people. Campbell-Williams Field is profoundly meaningful. Campbell-Williams is truly unifying and wonderful, because we love those men and they remind us of our connection as Longhorns. To call that something done as a "compromise" cheapens it, IMO.

If we continue to frame this as hostile then future issues become more divisive. We as fans have to prepare ourselves to not frame our student athletes as "SJWs" or anything like that when these issues arise again in the future.

[bullet 1627]

9 hours ago, wood said:

Ricky VY Earl Field works better for me...

But OK, that's cool. Hookem.

Well if you put Vince, then you have to put Colt (also near Heisman) or Street (champion QB).  They aren't the right color.  Heisman works.

[bullet 1627]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Again, that's only if you're using the "compromise" language. I don't like looking at it that way, personally, which is why I think people shouldn't frame it that way, because it makes it sound more hostile than it is.

Joe Jamail Field never meant shit to anyone except a tiny handful of very rich people. Campbell-Williams Field is profoundly meaningful. Campbell-Williams is truly unifying and wonderful, because we love those men and they remind us of our connection as Longhorns. To call that something done as a "compromise" cheapens it, IMO.

If we continue to frame this as hostile then future issues become more divisive. We as fans have to prepare ourselves to not frame our student athletes as "SJWs" or anything like that when these issues arise again in the future.

Yes.  Campbell-Williams Field and the Sweatt statue in front of Painter Hall were win-win resolutions, not compromises.  And spending some athletic money for minority student recruitment and retention was probably something the university wanted to do anyway.

[Apex73 313]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Again, that's only if you're using the "compromise" language. I don't like looking at it that way, personally, which is why I think people shouldn't frame it that way, because it makes it sound more hostile than it is.

Joe Jamail Field never meant shit to anyone except a tiny handful of very rich people. Campbell-Williams Field is profoundly meaningful. Campbell-Williams is truly unifying and wonderful, because we love those men and they remind us of our connection as Longhorns. To call that something done as a "compromise" cheapens it, IMO.

If we continue to frame this as hostile then future issues become more divisive. We as fans have to prepare ourselves to not frame our student athletes as "SJWs" or anything like that when these issues arise again in the future.

I see what you are saying but I think you are assuming a lot.  Lot's of older people really liked the Jamail family for one.  Whether you view that as a compromise or not is on you.  What should we call it?  There were demands made, some were met and some weren't.  That's negotiation and compromise.  There's nothing wrong with that language.  Your'e being too sensitive over nothing.  I don't think people look at the players as SJW's just because they have had some unreasonable demands.  Not sure how this is framed as hostile other than in your own head maybe.

[bad_teammate 13479]

3 minutes ago, Apex73 said:

I see what you are saying but I think you are assuming a lot.

I'm just reading the thread.

Quote

I don't think people look at the players as SJW's just because they have had some unreasonable demands.

Again, I'm just addressing a post literally written here in the thread.

If those kinds of framings are not representative of wider attitudes in the Longhorn community that's fantastic! But I can only really deal with what I see.

 

[wood 11747]

2 hours ago, bullet said:

Well if you put Vince, then you have to put Colt (also near Heisman) or Street (champion QB).  They aren't the right color.  Heisman works.

I wouldn't put VY there because he was a Heisman runner up (& shoulda won it). I'd do it because he was as important to the program as the other two, and because of the National Championship. I'm a huge fan of Ricky and Earl and I'm not taking away from what they've done, but Heisman trophies don't trump that championship imho.

Still very happy Earl and Ricky are getting this honor though...

Edited July 16, 2020 by wood

[Scholz 12301]

11 hours ago, mininghorn88 said:

Who or what is the dude in the blue kerchief and blue socks?  Looks so...out of place?

He's holding for Ricky.  And driving him around.

[Tex Long 4616]

11 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

But I can only really deal with what I see.

Try taking the bag off your head, and look in a different direction?

[GreenspointTexas 9933]

So what happens when we have another black heisman winner?

[Masshole Horn 808]

Let's have that problem before getting worked up about it.

[mulletpelini 5220]

Don't wanna sing huh?  Fuck you we'll cancel the whole season.

[UDontKnow 10557]

7 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

So what happens when we have another black heisman winner?

I mean we should have had a white Heisman winner in recent times, too. 

[Scholz 12301]

4 minutes ago, UDontKnow said:

I mean we should have had a white Heisman winner in recent times, too. 

Not according to Earl.  Too soon?

[Chad 1728]

He'ssssssssss backkkkkkkkk!

 

[Poe It Up 126]

Listened to The Blitz this morning and Babers mentioned that he’s talked to band members that will refuse to play The Eyes. Hopefully he’s wrong or this could turn into a clusterfuck. 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

2 minutes ago, Poe It Up said:

band members that will refuse to play The Eyes

how heroic

[Wally Pryor 5388]

9 minutes ago, Chad said:

He'ssssssssss backkkkkkkkk!

 

Great. Changes have been made.   

Now go do your part to help change the program's mediocrity.  

[Tex Long 4616]

23 minutes ago, Poe It Up said:

Listened to The Blitz this morning and Babers mentioned that he’s talked to band members that will refuse to play The Eyes. Hopefully he’s wrong or this could turn into a clusterfuck. 

There have been quite a few pieces of music they should have refused to play, over the years.

Better, they should play contradictory sounds, rather than just not playing the non-PC or just bad stuff... off-tempo drumming, trombone farts, and whatnot.

[Armybrat 41320]

That would be like a football player tanking a play during the game.

I do not think any band member would do something so stupid. They can just hold their horns at their sides

[Valmy77 13567]

54 minutes ago, Poe It Up said:

Listened to The Blitz this morning and Babers mentioned that he’s talked to band members that will refuse to play The Eyes. Hopefully he’s wrong or this could turn into a clusterfuck. 

Just what I was afraid of. I just don't see how keeping it around is going to work. But I will sing it, I just hope we don't have massive walkouts by players and fans or anything.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Valmy77