All-Star 2018 - 2019 Teams

[CheerBank]

I might be wrong but I swear I read an interview with Victor Rosario about Top Gun's name origin being based on a group of awards given a college camp that he attended in college. He won several of them and the awards were ma,ed/based on the popularity of the movie and not the gun culture.

How many team names would they have to change if they decided to? All I can think of is the BBs.

I always thought it was in reference to the movie too.

 

[icequeen]

I might be wrong but I swear I read an interview with Victor Rosario about Top Gun's name origin being based on a group of awards given a college camp that he attended in college. He won several of them and the awards were ma,ed/based on the popularity of the movie and not the gun culture.

How many team names would they have to change if they decided to? All I can think of is the BBs.

Yes he was the first or one of the first to win the top gun awards at NCA? and the name stuck.

 

[luv2cheer92]

I might be wrong but I swear I read an interview with Victor Rosario about Top Gun's name origin being based on a group of awards given a college camp that he attended in college. He won several of them and the awards were ma,ed/based on the popularity of the movie and not the gun culture.

How many team names would they have to change if they decided to? All I can think of is the BBs.

Bullet Gold/Black, Assassins, and Young Gunz come to mind. Not sure if there are others as well. But I'm sure if they made it a requirement, the name Top Gun would have to go too, even though it wasn't based on an actual gun.

 

[BlueCat]

I personally don’t think Cali or Top Gun should change their names, but that is their call to make, not mine. To the folks that want them to change it, I don’t think the origin of the name matters at all. It has the word “gun” or “shooting” or “bullet” or similar and those are politically charged trigger words at the moment (pun intended).

My concern with the “someone may be offended, so they should change it” argument is where do you stop? Take the finalists in the two large senior divisions at World as examples. Conservatively, over half of the mascot/names have either caused or are closely related with human deaths or have some semblance of a political correctness issue. You could probably make a case for a few more. Which ones deserve to be censored because they may conceivably cause sadness or offense in somebody somewhere?

Panthers, Cheetahs, Jags - animals that have killed people.
Shooting Stars - Mass shootings have killed people
Vengeance, Affliction - Aggressive words, War and Disease have killed billions of people
5 Alarm - Large fires have killed people
F5 - Tornadoes have killed people
Chiefs, Warriors - War has killed people, both may be considered derogatory towards Native Americans
Supermodels, Lady Lace - People have died from eating disorders, possibly brought on by unrealistic body images. Sexual imagery
Orange - Agent Orange was a serious chemical weapon used in warfare, killed many people.
Steel - one of the primary components of weaponry which has killed people.

Even I would admit that there is a line somewhere. One could come up with names that would offend nearly everyone and would make terrible business sense to use. I don’t personally think the Cali or TG ones are even close to that line.

 

[FierceIsTheName]

y'all it isn't hard to have creative names and not have voiceovers that could be words said by a mass shooter. The name "gunz" or "bullets" doesn't bother me, its mainly the voiceovers. I don't think it's asking a lot to not be ignorant of the issues and how terrible they sound in and out of context

just because it "doesn't offend you" doesn't mean that its okay or that it doesn't make other people uncomfortable. People in our community are gun violence victims. Vegas, Orlando, damn near everywhere at this point and I encourage all of you to read about students who literally couldn't shower after being in a school shooting because the sound of the water hitting the floor sounded like gunfire and made them anxious and panicked.
And to the people bringing up "safe spaces"... i encourage you to do some research on the history of that phrase and what it truly meant before the right wing nuts used it as a way to make themselves appear bigger/better than their counterparts. it's not like it was a term used to describe places for someone who is lgbt could go and not feel like they'd be literally assaulted or murdered for being who they are... but what do I know? :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure I could post quotes from a mass shooter and quotes from a team with a gun theme and y'all wouldn't be able to guess which is which.

just a disclaimer: i don't agree with censorship but because this isn't censorship at all (since they're not being forced to change their name, just encouraged to) I find it a great way for Cali and similar gyms to really look at what they're really saying in their names and voiceovers


Edited because my last sentence was cut off half way through oops

 

[AndyT_T]

I personally don’t think Cali or Top Gun should change their names, but that is their call to make, not mine. To the folks that want them to change it, I don’t think the origin of the name matters at all. It has the word “gun” or “shooting” or “bullet” or similar and those are politically charged trigger words at the moment (pun intended).

My concern with the “someone may be offended, so they should change it” argument is where do you stop? Take the finalists in the two large senior divisions at World as examples. Conservatively, over half of the mascot/names have either caused or are closely related with human deaths or have some semblance of a political correctness issue. You could probably make a case for a few more. Which ones deserve to be censored because they may conceivably cause sadness or offense in somebody somewhere?

Panthers, Cheetahs, Jags - animals that have killed people.
Shooting Stars - Mass shootings have killed people
Vengeance, Affliction - Aggressive words, War and Disease have killed billions of people
5 Alarm - Large fires have killed people
F5 - Tornadoes have killed people
Chiefs, Warriors - War has killed people, both may be considered derogatory towards Native Americans
Supermodels, Lady Lace - People have died from eating disorders, possibly brought on by unrealistic body images. Sexual imagery
Orange - Agent Orange was a serious chemical weapon used in warfare, killed many people.
Steel - one of the primary components of weaponry which has killed people.

Even I would admit that there is a line somewhere. One could come up with names that would offend nearly everyone and would make terrible business sense to use. I don’t personally think the Cali or TG ones are even close to that line.

Hate to be that guy, but the slipper slope argument is a logical fallacy and is an argument tactic that when used, be it unintentionally or intentionally, diverts from the real issue by using hyperbole to play into peoples emotions.
Slippery slope - Wikipedia

Think of major universities and pro sports; how common is it for their teams to be named the "assassins" or "snipers" or "the Killers" or "team guns"? I can't think of any off the top of my head.
Now consider youth sports. My step son is 11 and is in little league football and I know for a fact a name like that wouldn't fly. There is no way it would even be considered, yet in cheer it is the rule - not the exception. I couldn't imagine a high school ever considering a gun themed mascot either, can you? But theres never been a push to move away from any of the other mascot names/themes you've mentioned in high school, peewee, little league, or pro sports.

Other sports have rules - either written or unwritten - against mascot names like that and their hasn't been a push to get rid of cats, models, colors, materials, weather events, or shooting stars (Which I think we both know is very different than assassins). I don't think that there is any evidence of mascots like those being frowned upon.
Moving away from weapons and racism in mascots doesn't take anything away from the sport, but it does make it easier for our sport to be taken seriously.

The only other names that will realistically be encouraged to change would be overtly sexual names and racist names, and I don't at all think that would be a bad thing. I would honestly hope ACE is the next people to be 'encouraged' to change their names.

Edit: When I mention ACE I'm not talking about names like "chiefs" or "warriors" or the other names they have along those lines.

 

[Keep_Believing]

Instead of wasting time and energy focused on wording and semantics people should volunteer or raise money for charities that benefit causes such as mental health, education, and awareness.

 

[Nothanks]

Think of major universities and pro sports; how common is it for their teams to be named the "assassins" or "snipers" or "the Killers" or "team guns"? I can't think of any off the top of my head.
Now consider youth sports. My step son is 11 and is in little league football and I know for a fact a name like that wouldn't fly. There is no way it would even be considered, yet in cheer it is the rule - not the exception. I couldn't imagine a high school ever considering a gun themed mascot either, can you? But theres never been a push to move away from any of the other mascot names/themes you've mentioned in high school, peewee, little league, or pro sports.

FWIW - the public school system where I grew up was the Blue Devils. It has been fought many times to change their mascot, but they never have. The private (non-religious based) high school I went to used to also be the Blue Devils. Being a private school, they used to frequently compete against religious based schools (not so much any more), who didn't appreciate their mascot, and they did actually change it many years ago to appease those other schools. Blue Devils are the mascot for a pretty major NC University. Just a personal example of something that I felt was on that "slippery slope" to be fought about, and is a mascot used in "real life" outside of cheer (and at a major University).

 

[dat.jpp]

If were going to eliminate names, let's not forget Adam&Eve from T&S cause that might offend some folks out there.:confused:

I'm gay & I honestly love that name, so clever!

 

[AndyT_T]

FWIW - the public school system where I grew up was the Blue Devils. It has been fought many times to change their mascot, but they never have. The private (non-religious based) high school I went to used to also be the Blue Devils. Being a private school, they used to frequently compete against religious based schools (not so much any more), who didn't appreciate their mascot, and they did actually change it many years ago to appease those other schools. Blue Devils are the mascot for a pretty major NC University. Just a personal example of something that I felt was on that "slippery slope" to be fought about, and is a mascot used in "real life" outside of cheer (and at a major University).

That’s exactly the point though. The slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy because it uses outlier examples to draw causative relationships where none exist. Selected isolated instances doesn’t mean that those few outlier statistics are going to rampantly reproduce leading to benign mascots being banned.

Human beings have a tendency to draw parallels where none exist and this can make small isolated occurrences appear much bigger than they are. Hyperbole and logical fallacies prey on this tendency.
Saying that mascots shouldn’t be based on weapons, race, religion, or sex doesn’t mean that the other 10,000 things they can be based on are going to be banned as well. But in using arguments like these you can play to emotions and anecdotal evidence to make it *seem* like they will.


I’m not in saying that’s what @BlueCat was trying to do, it’s easy to do unintentionally and I think we’ve all caught ourselves using argument methods like that unintentionally from time to time. I’m just trying to point out that these names being banned won’t lead to supermodels or shooting stars being banned.

 

[Nothanks]

That’s exactly the point though. The slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy because it uses outlier examples to draw causative relationships where none exist. Selected isolated instances doesn’t mean that those few outlier statistics are going to rampantly reproduce leading to benign mascots being banned.

Human beings have a tendency to draw parallels where none exist and this can make small isolated occurrences appear much bigger than they are. Hyperbole and logical fallacies prey on this tendency.
Saying that mascots shouldn’t be based on weapons, race, religion, or sex doesn’t mean that the other 10,000 things they can be based on are going to be banned as well. But in using arguments like these you can play to emotions and anecdotal evidence to make it *seem* like they will.


I’m not in saying that’s what @BlueCat was trying to do, it’s easy to do unintentionally and I think we’ve all caught ourselves using argument methods like that unintentionally from time to time. I’m just trying to point out that these names being banned won’t lead to supermodels or shooting stars being banned.

** I am totally unbiased in this argument, just playing devil's advocate**

Okay, but where do we draw the context line? Shooting stars clearly doesn't have a negative connotation. But the word shooting does, so do we rename them 'Stars'? Being a sniper, in the military sense, is a position that shows excellence in marksmanship and other characteristics that many strive to attain. Should Woodlands Elite (and any other program with sniper teams) be banned because mass shooters (there's that shooting word again) want to call themselves snipers, which they are far from? If so, where do we draw the line with WE team names? Is Generals okay? Or is Sniper an acceptable name if all team names have military names (except 'Gun' or 'Bullet'-esque ones...have we arrived at another context problem)?

I actually don't know if WE has a sniper team. But I'm sure they aren't the only ones with military themes that it could happen to...

 

[mecheermom]

** I am totally unbiased in this argument, just playing devil's advocate**

Okay, but where do we draw the context line? Shooting stars clearly doesn't have a negative connotation. But the word shooting does, so do we rename them 'Stars'? Being a sniper, in the military sense, is a position that shows excellence in marksmanship and other characteristics that many strive to attain. Should Woodlands Elite (and any other program with sniper teams) be banned because mass shooters (there's that shooting word again) want to call themselves snipers, which they are far from? If so, where do we draw the line with WE team names? Is Generals okay? Or is Sniper an acceptable name if all team names have military names (except 'Gun' or 'Bullet'-esque ones...have we arrived at another context problem)?

I actually don't know if WE has a sniper team. But I'm sure they aren't the only ones with military themes that it could happen to...

Snipers used to be Mini 2 at the Oak Ridge location. They haven’t had that division in a few years though.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UCFKnights07]

That’s exactly the point though. The slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy because it uses outlier examples to draw causative relationships where none exist. Selected isolated instances doesn’t mean that those few outlier statistics are going to rampantly reproduce leading to benign mascots being banned.

Human beings have a tendency to draw parallels where none exist and this can make small isolated occurrences appear much bigger than they are. Hyperbole and logical fallacies prey on this tendency.
Saying that mascots shouldn’t be based on weapons, race, religion, or sex doesn’t mean that the other 10,000 things they can be based on are going to be banned as well. But in using arguments like these you can play to emotions and anecdotal evidence to make it *seem* like they will.


I’m not in saying that’s what @BlueCat was trying to do, it’s easy to do unintentionally and I think we’ve all caught ourselves using argument methods like that unintentionally from time to time. I’m just trying to point out that these names being banned won’t lead to supermodels or shooting stars being banned.

what about FSU, i know people had a fit suddenly about their mascot, then suddenly they disappeared and no one talks about it anymore.
But when you have 50 plus professional sports teams from basketball, to soccer, to football with the same use of name, you cant demand everyone change thier names every few years when someone suddenly is offended.
its just not that deep of a thing, to get offended over.

 

[ACEDAD]

“Being offended” is a slippery slope because there are no objective standards.

We’ve seen a sportscaster fired in the last few years because he used the term “guerrilla tactics” in describing a black person and was vilified as a racist.

I have no ownership or direct connection with ACE anymore but I hope Happy continues to remember why he uses the colors and Native American team names. And I hope ACE never changes their names.

 

[quitthedrama]

I'm tired of members of society having to change because one person is offended. This was ONE person who sent someone an email. They have a right to be offended, but they do not have the right to demand change from anyone else. Cali names referencing weapons has never bothered me and I've never once associated their athletes or gym with violence. I would have a hard time believing there is any correlation to actual violence because of their choice of a gym theme.