Cal Is Condemned for Accepting Bid : King controversy: NAACP decries Golden Bears’ decision to play Wyoming in Tucson’s Copper Bowl as ramifications of holiday rejection spread.

The Copper Bowl was unable to avoid the mounting controversy over the Arizona voters’ rejection of Martin Luther King Day as professional and college sports officials re-evaluated their future dealings with the state on Monday.

The University of California, the center of the Free Speech movement in the 1960s, was condemned by the NAACP for accepting an invitation to the Dec. 31 postseason game in Tucson. California is scheduled to play Wyoming.

The Golden Bears, tied for second with USC in the Pacific 10, voted unanimously to play in Tucson, as did Wyoming players.

Paul Roach, Wyoming’s coach and athletic director, said: “We got the squad together and the players voted to accept a formal invitation.

“If a tremendous wave of opposition develops, we would possibly reconsider our decision, and bowl officials have said they understand that.”

Arizona voters last Tuesday defeated two measures that would have created a paid state holiday. One that would have substituted a paid King holiday for a paid Columbus Day was turned down by a 3-1 margin; the other, which would have kept a paid Columbus Day and added a paid King holiday, lost by fewer than 17,000 votes out of more than one million.

“We just don’t understand how a school with the University of California’s tradition could have made this decision,” James Williams, an NAACP spokesman in Washington, told reporters. “The University has always been a campus that has fostered humanitarian ideals.”

The NFL has threatened to pull the 1993 Super Bowl out of Arizona, and Fiesta Bowl officials are reeling after losing Notre Dame and Virginia, whose representatives said they would not accept bids to play in Tempe, Ariz.

But the Copper Bowl appeared to escape controversy until Monday.

Cal (6-3-1), which has not been to a bowl game since the 1979 Garden State Bowl, has a majority minority student enrollment. It also has a minority chancellor, Chang-Lin Tien, the first Asian to head a major research university in the United States.

Still, the players were united in playing in Tucson.

Joel Dickson, Cal’s defensive end, said he was willing to accept criticism from Berkeley’s liberal element.

“It’s hard to tell how much support we’re going to get with our decision or what will be the ramifications,” said Dickson, who is black. “We don’t agree with what Arizona is doing, but at the same time that should not stop us from participating in something we’ve worked six, seven months to achieve.

“I have no control over how people vote. If we were to sit out the game, I don’t think that’s going to influence any political ways.”

Ron Juanso, a spokesman for Cal, said the team wanted to do something as a tribute to Dr. King.

“Something subtle, possibly an emblem on a jersey, possibly (on) a helmet,” he said.

But Michael Wolgelenter, assistant sports editor of the campus newspaper, the Daily Californian, said the players voted not to wear any kind of emblem.

“I talked to several players today and there was no hesitation about accepting the bid,” Wolgelenter said. “They’re aware of what they’re doing and the significance of the issue, but there don’t seem to be any reservations.”

The Daily Californian published an editorial today supporting the players’ decision.

“Almost everybody (on the editorial board) expressed some reservations about Cal going to the game,” said Cedric Puleston, editor and chief. “But the decision was left up to the players and they voted unanimously to go, that’s what we respect, the way the decision was made.”

Wyoming officials said their players would wear armbands as a salute to King. “(Players) requested that due to the situation . . . that they wear an emblem somewhere on the uniform as a tribute to Dr. King,” Roach said.

If Phoenix loses the 1993 Super Bowl, which would be a blow to an already depressed economy, the game probably would be moved to Pasadena or San Diego.

Awarding San Diego the game, however, could present NFL officials with a similar scenario.

San Diego twice has been embroiled in controversy over the use of King’s name. In 1987, the city council voted to rename Market Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Way. But the decision was overturned by voters in a referendum, which changed the name back to Market Street.

In 1989, San Diego Board of Port Commissioners voted against renaming a newly constructed convention center after King.

NBA officials relocated their winter meetings in Phoenix after the King holiday was voted down in the Arizona state legislature.

NBA Commissioner David Stern said of the Super Bowl: “We wouldn’t have scheduled it there in the first place.”

Backlash from the vote concerns Lamar Whitmer, chairman of the Maricopa County sports Authority. One of the group’s main objectives is getting a baseball expansion team.

Whitmer said the chances of winning a franchise could be jeopardized if reaction against the state continues.

“The possibility of having a Super Bowl pulled is not encouraging,” he said. “It’s hard to tell if this will have a lasting effect.

“It’s not fair to the people of this state to label them as bigots or the Alabama of the 90s. But people inside the state feel they are being called racists.”

George Raveling, USC’s basketball coach and a consultant for the Black Coaches Assn., agrees.

“I’m certainly not prepared to brand a whole state of people as racist,” Raveling said. “I have a lot of mixed feelings about what’s right and what’s wrong in the situation. Obviously, they knew going in that if the vote failed they stood to lose the Super Bowl.”

Little indication was given Monday whether baseball teams based in Arizona for spring training are considering relocating.

Eight teams train in Arizona--the Angels, San Francisco Giants, Chicago Cubs, Seattle Mariners, Milwaukee Brewers and Oakland Athletics are based in the Phoenix area. The Cleveland Indians are in Tucson, the San Diego Padres in Yuma.

Angel spokesman Tim Mead said that it seemed unlikely the team would move its training facility. “It hasn’t come up,” Mead said. “There aren’t a lot of options if it did become an issue. I don’t think it’s going to involve us.

“It’s safe to say the options are pretty limited for Cactus League clubs.”

Pitcher Dennis Rasmussen, player representative of the Padres, said it would be difficult to boycott.

“I’m sure the issue’s going to come up at our player-rep meetings in December, but I don’t think it’s going to be a big issue for the simple reason being that this isn’t a one-game stand like the Super Bowl,” Rasmussen said.

Steve Greenberg, deputy commissioner of baseball, said it would be difficult to relocate eight teams.

“It’s a tempestuous issue that we’re keeping an eye on, but we obviously are going to have spring training in Arizona,” he said. “It’s a different issue for us then it is for other sports in that we have an on-going relationship and in some cases a contractural relationship.”

Tom Werner, Padre chairman, called the Arizona vote disturbing.

“How it affects the San Diego Padres is something we’ll have to determine,” Werner said. “We’ll have to weigh playing there--with our proximity to San Diego--with the other issues.

“I’d hope the issue isn’t a dead issue because I think we (major league owners) have a responsibility to make sure the dialogue keeps alive.”

Locally, Phoenix Cardinal players said Monday the decision will hurt Cardinal recruiting. They said the NFL’s Plan B free agents, who each spring can choose their future employers from among several clubs, might avoid Arizona.

Luis Sharpe, the Cardinals’ player representative, said: “If I was in position to negotiate with other teams, it would (adversely) affect my decision to play here. I wouldn’t want to come (to Arizona). It means that much to me.”

Times staff writers Chris Baker, Thomas Bonk, Julie Cart, Helene Elliott, Randy Harvey, Mark Heisler, Maryann Hudson, Ross Newhan, Bob Nightengale and Bob Oates contributed to this story.