collapse

* '23-'24 SOTG Tally


2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

2024 Transfer Portal by swoopem
[Today at 09:38:41 AM]


2024-25 Outlook by Big Papi
[Today at 09:34:04 AM]


Recruiting as of 3/15/24 by GoldenEagles03
[Today at 08:56:20 AM]


2024-25 Non-Conference Schedule by The Thing
[Today at 08:13:27 AM]


Big East 2024 Offseason by Herman Cain
[April 23, 2024, 09:23:41 PM]


Best case scenarios by Frenns Liquor Depot
[April 23, 2024, 03:55:21 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: The long cold summer

Marquette
Marquette

Open Practice

Date/Time: Oct 11, 2024 ???
TV: NA
Schedule for 2023-24
27-10

Author Topic: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?  (Read 55647 times)

humanlung

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 336
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #75 on: June 15, 2017, 03:46:33 PM »
I think was pisses off a lot of us old timers is the way MU went about doing the name change.  It started as a competition amongst the students to come up with a non-Indian mascot/logo.  That is what the admin sold. 

After a year of looking at the alternatives, at the "unveiling", they dropped the chicken...err...Golden Eagle...on everyone.

I was a student at the time that process started and that still irritates me.  For an institution that spends a lot of time preaching about integrity and values, it was a rather hypocritical move.

Just my opinion.


Juan Anderson's Mixtape

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4359
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #76 on: June 15, 2017, 04:04:39 PM »
I think was pisses off a lot of us old timers is the way MU went about doing the name change.  It started as a competition amongst the students to come up with a non-Indian mascot/logo.  That is what the admin sold. 

After a year of looking at the alternatives, at the "unveiling", they dropped the chicken...err...Golden Eagle...on everyone.

I was a student at the time that process started and that still irritates me.  For an institution that spends a lot of time preaching about integrity and values, it was a rather hypocritical move.

Just my opinion.

Thanks for the story. That jives with what I have heard before and alluded to in my earlier post.

Do you remember the finalists? I want to say Lightning was one of them.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #77 on: June 15, 2017, 04:06:36 PM »
It was Lightning and Golden Eagles.  There was no public suggestions taken for any other names that I recall.

oldwarrior81

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #78 on: June 15, 2017, 04:29:08 PM »
Wasn't Lightning v. Golden Eagles the final two brought about by the DiUlio name change in 1994?

I think the debacle that followed the Gold had Hilltoppers v. Golden Eagles as the final two.   There may have been a preliminary list of ten before these two emerged.  I think it included the Golden Avalanche and Knights as two others on the list.

My write-in vote of Engines never made the finalists.


Bocephys

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #79 on: June 15, 2017, 05:34:38 PM »
Wasn't Lightning v. Golden Eagles the final two brought about by the DiUlio name change in 1994?

I think the debacle that followed the Gold had Hilltoppers v. Golden Eagles as the final two.   There may have been a preliminary list of ten before these two emerged.  I think it included the Golden Avalanche and Knights as two others on the list.

My write-in vote of Engines never made the finalists.

There was definitely a list of 10, and the top two vote getters had a run-off which was Hilltoppers vs Golden Eagles.  Despite the administration's statement up front that no write-in votes for Warriors would be counted, I believe it came in second during the round of ten voting.

Juan Anderson's Mixtape

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4359
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #80 on: June 15, 2017, 06:14:29 PM »
There was definitely a list of 10, and the top two vote getters had a run-off which was Hilltoppers vs Golden Eagles.  Despite the administration's statement up front that no write-in votes for Warriors would be counted, I believe it came in second during the round of ten voting.

...which was then used to claim that Warriors wasn't the popular sentiment.

MU Fan in Connecticut

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3463
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #81 on: June 16, 2017, 08:24:32 AM »
Wasn't Lightning v. Golden Eagles the final two brought about by the DiUlio name change in 1994?

I think the debacle that followed the Gold had Hilltoppers v. Golden Eagles as the final two.   There may have been a preliminary list of ten before these two emerged.  I think it included the Golden Avalanche and Knights as two others on the list.


It was this.  I think the original 10 included Warriors without the Native American imagery?

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #82 on: June 16, 2017, 08:28:05 AM »
It was this.  I think the original 10 included Warriors without the Native American imagery?



It did not.  Warriors was not in consideration. 

Bocephys

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #83 on: June 16, 2017, 09:01:16 AM »
It was this.  I think the original 10 included Warriors without the Native American imagery?

As Sultan stated, it absolutely was not.  It could have had an Irishman walking alongside a Badger as its imagery and Warriors would have still garnered 90% of the vote.

oldwarrior81

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #84 on: June 16, 2017, 10:38:28 AM »
list of 10:   
http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2005/05/nickname-list-announced.html

* Blue and Gold
* Explorers
* Golden Avalanche
* Golden Eagles
* Golden Knights
* Hilltoppers
* Saints
* Spirit
* Voyagers
* Wolves

Write-in option
Voters will have the opportunity to select up to two nicknames on the first vote, one of which can include a write-in option, provided that selection adheres to the Board of Trustees' criteria. To be counted, write-in nicknames must be consistent with the university’s Catholic, Jesuit mission and the Board of Trustee’s resolution forbidding Native American imagery and references. Additionally, write-in suggestions of nicknames that are intended to mock or embarrass the university will not be counted. Any nicknames under review by the NCAA for their relationship to Native American imagery will not be counted. Examples of nicknames that will not be counted include Warriors (or any variation of the word, i.e., war) and Jumpin’ Jesuits.

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22150
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #85 on: June 16, 2017, 11:39:57 AM »
What was wrong with Jumpin' Jesuits?

Gotta say, of the 10 choices, I would probably go for Golden Eagles or Hilltoppers. Voyagers is unique and ties in with our namesake's history I guess.
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #86 on: June 16, 2017, 12:34:25 PM »
I voted Golden Avalanche in the first round.  When it was down to two, I voted Hilltoppers.

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17539
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #87 on: June 16, 2017, 12:42:07 PM »
Hilltoppers
Jumping Jesuits
Knights
Wolves
Saints

All unquestionably better than Golden Seagles. There are others that are on par with it.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

Bocephys

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #88 on: June 16, 2017, 01:04:54 PM »
list of 10:   
http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2005/05/nickname-list-announced.html

* Blue and Gold
* Explorers
* Golden Avalanche
* Golden Eagles
* Golden Knights
* Hilltoppers
* Saints
* Spirit
* Voyagers
* Wolves

Write-in option
Voters will have the opportunity to select up to two nicknames on the first vote, one of which can include a write-in option, provided that selection adheres to the Board of Trustees' criteria. To be counted, write-in nicknames must be consistent with the university’s Catholic, Jesuit mission and the Board of Trustee’s resolution forbidding Native American imagery and references. Additionally, write-in suggestions of nicknames that are intended to mock or embarrass the university will not be counted. Any nicknames under review by the NCAA for their relationship to Native American imagery will not be counted. Examples of nicknames that will not be counted include Warriors (or any variation of the word, i.e., war) and Jumpin’ Jesuits.

It is pretty impressive that they came up with 6 names worse than Gold to put on this list.  Spirit is possibly the worst nickname of all time.

warriorchick

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8080
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #89 on: June 16, 2017, 01:06:48 PM »
It is pretty impressive that they came up with 6 names worse than Gold to put on this list.  Spirit is possibly the worst nickname of all time.

Not if the mascot is Hologram Al.
Have some patience, FFS.

Billy Hoyle

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2667
  • Retire #34
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #90 on: June 16, 2017, 01:14:04 PM »
the biggest problem was that after years and years of no longer having Warriors as the mascot fans, particularly student (one little d-bag in particular) kept wearing Native American headdresses and the like, even when asked not to do so. That led the administration to the conclusion that the Native American imagery could never be fully separated from the Warrior name.

I personally voted for Golden Avalanche. I also remember that Al said he liked Golden Eagles.
“You either smoke or you get smoked. And you got smoked.”

oldwarrior81

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #91 on: June 16, 2017, 01:59:01 PM »
It is pretty impressive that they came up with 6 names worse than Gold to put on this list.  Spirit is possibly the worst nickname of all time.

Spirit
In one word, Spirit captures the character and energy of student-athletes and coaches, and the enthusiasm that students, alumni and fans bring to every game. At Marquette, spirit can refer to a higher power.

Bocephys

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #92 on: June 16, 2017, 02:11:09 PM »
Spirit
In one word, Spirit captures the character and energy of student-athletes and coaches, and the enthusiasm that students, alumni and fans bring to every game. At Marquette, spirit can refer to a higher power.

Explaining it only makes it worse. They couldn't even decide if it was a proper noun or not.

Juan Anderson's Mixtape

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4359
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #93 on: June 16, 2017, 02:18:59 PM »
Would the spirit squad be the Spirit Spirit Squad?

humanlung

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 336
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #94 on: June 16, 2017, 02:26:58 PM »
Thanks for the story. That jives with what I have heard before and alluded to in my earlier post.

Do you remember the finalists? I want to say Lightning was one of them.

The ORIGINAL "competition" was for a different Warrior mascot/logo that did not have any American Indian references.  There was no mention at all of changing the name.  This is the thing that has all us oldies bent out of shape. 

I do not know what the finalists were but, in my opinion, the whole "competition" was just a load of fertilizer to cover for the name change.

humanlung

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 336
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #95 on: June 16, 2017, 02:28:10 PM »
There was definitely a list of 10, and the top two vote getters had a run-off which was Hilltoppers vs Golden Eagles.  Despite the administration's statement up front that no write-in votes for Warriors would be counted, I believe it came in second during the round of ten voting.

This was the vote that happened a couple of years ago, I think.  Different than what happened back at the time of the original name change. 

humanlung

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 336
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #96 on: June 16, 2017, 02:30:31 PM »
What was wrong with Jumpin' Jesuits?

Gotta say, of the 10 choices, I would probably go for Golden Eagles or Hilltoppers. Voyagers is unique and ties in with our namesake's history I guess.

As I recall, "Jumpin' Jesuits" was an overwhelming favorite pre-vote.  In perfectly consistent behavior, the admin then announced that write-in votes for it would not count.

MerrittsMustache

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4676
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #97 on: June 16, 2017, 02:34:31 PM »
As I recall, "Jumpin' Jesuits" was an overwhelming favorite pre-vote.  In perfectly consistent behavior, the admin then announced that write-in votes for it would not count.

They also said write-ins for Warriors would not be counted...and then they were counted, the name finished behind Golden Eagles and was used as evidence that alums preferred Golden Eagles.



Oops. I see Lazar already mentioned this. I should have read back further!
« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 02:37:30 PM by MerrittsMustache »

willie warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9583
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #98 on: June 16, 2017, 02:45:03 PM »
As I recall, "Jumpin' Jesuits" was an overwhelming favorite pre-vote.  In perfectly consistent behavior, the admin then announced that write-in votes for it would not count.
Jumpin' Jesuits, while a good name, would never pass muster in todays PC. It would offend the atheists and other religions. Could not be tolerated. Makes one wonder how Providence gets away with Friars.
Now how about the MU Three Point Holy Trinities?
I thought you were dead. Willie lives rent free in Reekers mind.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
« Reply #99 on: June 16, 2017, 02:54:07 PM »
Jumpin' Jesuits, while a good name, would never pass muster in todays PC. It would offend the atheists and other religions. Could not be tolerated. Makes one wonder how Providence gets away with Friars.
Now how about the MU Three Point Holy Trinities?


I think it offended the Jesuits more than anyone.

 

feedback