Letter: Texas A&M, not Seahawks, had the first 12th Man

I found the Tacoma News-Tribune editorial in the Aug. 21 newspaper — “The 12th Man is given the bum’s rush” — interesting, although I’m not sure what point the writer was trying to make.

First of all, the “first” 12th Man was not E. King Gilfrom, but E. King Gill. Then the writer appears to blame Texas A&M for protecting a term that has been an honored tradition at the school, existing long before the Seattle Seahawks franchise was even a gleam in someone’s eye. In the age of trademarking and the inevitable lawsuits to protect intellectual property, A&M can hardly be condemned for protecting its usage of the term.

Finally, the writer says, “... the concept of the 12th Man goes beyond branding and money-making and enters the realm of things more profound.” As a former student of Texas A&M University, I can tell you that is exactly how Aggies feel about being part of the 12th Man at Texas A&M.

We were the 12th Man first, and the Seahawks can’t and shouldn’t be able to take that away from us.

This story was originally published August 25, 2016 at 4:04 AM with the headline "Letter: Texas A&M, not Seahawks, had the first 12th Man."