Help William & Mary choose a new mascot

Well, I think I'll get off the political kick for at least one post.

My alma mater is trying to find a new athletic identity. Back when I was in college in the dark ages (you know it as the 1980s), they were making the transition from "Indians" to "Tribe," an appellation they still bear. Problem was, when the NCAA went after schools with Native American team names, they decided to let W&M keep "Tribe," being a word with multiple meanings, but they had to remove the feathers from the logo. As a result, they went from a dynamic, instantly-recognizable logo (right, top) to something amorphous, hyper-stylized, and uninteresting (right, bottom).

Anyway, while the university's teams still will be the "Tribe," they want a new mascot: something that will maintain or enhance school spirit and be identifiable with W&M. And so the College has launched a survey featuring the five finalists out of a process that has been going on for a number of months. It even was featured on ESPN:

At first, it seems odd that the mascot finalists are so divergent from the "Tribe" nickname. Then I got to thinking: there are plenty of other universities whose mascots are distinct from the school's team name. Look for example at the ram representing the North Carolina Tar Heels, the elephant for the Alabama Crimson Tide, or the ibis that inhabits the Miami Hurricanes' sideline. Each is emblematic of something in the universities' history or folklore, but the teams aren't the "Rams," the "Elephants," or the "Ibises." So too for William & Mary ....

So if you're interested, check out the finalists and cast a vote. My W&M friends (at least those who have commented about this on Facebook) have been pretty uniformly disappointed in the finalists, but I actually think there's at least one option that isn't altogether bad. I wonder if anyone feels the same....

A profile in courage

It may not be young John F. Kennedy in PT-109, but Los Angeles Times sportswriter Mike Penner has plenty of courage of his own.

During my 23 years with The Times' sports department, I have held a wide variety of roles and titles. Tennis writer. Angels beat reporter. Olympics writer. Essayist. Sports media critic. NFL columnist. Recent keeper of the Morning Briefing flame.

Today I leave for a few weeks' vacation, and when I return, I will come back in yet another incarnation.

As Christine.

I am a transsexual sportswriter. It has taken more than 40 years, a million tears and hundreds of hours of soul-wrenching therapy for me to work up the courage to type those words. I realize many readers and colleagues and friends will be shocked to read them.

To call this "unprecedented" is a little like saying Rush Limbaugh is an obnoxious bag of assholes. In other words, it's a profoundly inadequate understatement.

Mike/Christine continues:

People have asked if transitioning will affect my writing. And if so, how?

All I can say at this point is that I am now happier, more focused and more energized when I sit behind a keyboard. The wicked writer's block that used to reach up and torture me at some of the worst possible times imaginable has disappeared.

My therapist says this is what happens when a transsexual finally "integrates" and the ever-present white noise in the background dissipates.

That should come as good news to my editors: far fewer blown deadlines.

So now we all will take a short break between bylines. "Mike Penner" is out, "Christine Daniels" soon will be taking its place.

From here, it feels like a big improvement. I hope with time you will agree.

This could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship.

Perhaps Christine's life will be easier in Los Angeles than it might be if she did this in, say, Dallas or Atlanta. But it's still going to be a tough road, and I admire her for not only coming to this decision, but for announcing it with good humor and the appropriate amount of care. And I applaud the colleagues and friends quoted, for taking the announcement in stride.

The more you see of this, along with similar statements by athletes and public figures like John Amaechi, the more the ignorant, hate-filled comments of people like Tim Hardaway and Don Imus will be marginalized, and people will be accepted for what they are, not for the degree to which they conform to some arbitrary "norm."

Sports blogging: nice guys finish last

What a way to start a Monday morning.

I have three favorite professional sports teams (I don't follow pro basketball). In the NFL, I've been a fan of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers since their second season, in 1977, and next year will be my 10th with season tickets. My favorite hockey team is the St. Louis Blues, dating back to my law school days in the Gateway to the West. And my longest-standing fave team is the Baltimore Orioles -- I was born in Baltimore and can remember being an Orioles fan as early as 1970, when they won their second World Series.

But today, I learned that The Sporting News recently named the Orioles and the Blues as the worst franchises in their respective sports. And it's not like the Buccaneers (who were "beaten out" by the Oakland Raiders as the worst franchise in the NFL) are much better, since for years (say, until 1997) they were the losingest team in pro sports.

Looking on the bright side, though, at least when people call me a loser, I can imagine they are referring to the teams I follow. (Don't ruin my fantasy here ...)