MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on June 12, 2017, 10:52:35 PM

Title: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 12, 2017, 10:52:35 PM
Just asking
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: forgetful on June 12, 2017, 10:57:01 PM
They didn't have Willie Wampum as a mascot.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 12, 2017, 11:00:14 PM
The San Pablo Lytton Casino didn't build them a new arena.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 12, 2017, 11:06:03 PM
They didn't have Willie Wampum as a mascot.

Yes they had Native American logos every bit resembling Willie Wampum during their history that includes a Philadelphia Warriors.  Charicature logo.

Golden State also used a headdress as a logo early on.

They kept name but shifted away from the Native American imagery and fans moved. Same thing could easily happen with MU as the Golden State Warriors and their fans have proven.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Benny B on June 12, 2017, 11:19:06 PM
The San Pablo Lytton Casino didn't build them a new arena.

Bingo.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 12, 2017, 11:31:18 PM
It's because Native Americans didn't ask Golden State to stop using the name like they did the Jesuitsvwho run Marquette. Plus, Marquette is an institution of higher learning, held to a higher standard in society, Golden State a rotating cast of mercenaries put together solely for entertainment and profit.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 12, 2017, 11:34:04 PM
Yes they had Native American logos every bit resembling Willie Wampum during their history that includes a Philadelphia Warriors.  Charicature logo.

Golden State also used a headdress as a logo early on.

They kept name but shifted away from the Native American imagery and fans moved. Same thing could easily happen with MU as the Golden State Warriors and their fans have proven.

The key was when. They moved away from native american imagery in the late 60s. By the time people were becoming aware of it as an issue, many had forgotten the cartoony native american logo used back in Philadelphia.

I agree that Marquette could have done something similar. Would have been better to acknowledge the offensive past, apologize for it, and make a concentrated effort to be respectful effort moving forward. I've seen it work at other schools, Central Michigan does a great job of this with their fans.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Jockey on June 12, 2017, 11:37:18 PM
Just asking

Wah, wah, wah.

It is about time MU fans man up on this subject.

I loved the Warrior nickname and still call them that ofttimes. But it ain't coming back, so quit whining.

And the answer is very simple to find if you'd stop crying long enough to do so.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: dgies9156 on June 13, 2017, 12:17:58 AM
It would not be summer without the annual Warrior debate. This one has a slightly different twist, but it's the same argument in a new package.

It aint happening. No way. No how. There's pretty close to as many people who know us as the Golden Eagles as the Warriors.

While I will always be a Warrior, not a Furry Bird or a Hilltopper, we are a dying breed. The debate is over and we lost.

Period.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 13, 2017, 12:21:17 AM
It should be the Warriors.

But at least give us the Hilltoppers. Or the Jumping Jesuits.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Eldon on June 13, 2017, 12:26:36 AM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/125g3jjof9eexa/200.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: WarriorFan on June 13, 2017, 01:54:09 AM
Bring Back Willie!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 13, 2017, 05:34:40 AM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/125g3jjof9eexa/200.gif)

+1
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 13, 2017, 06:11:35 AM
The key was when. They moved away from native american imagery in the late 60s. By the time people were becoming aware of it as an issue, many had forgotten the cartoony native american logo used back in Philadelphia.

I agree that Marquette could have done something similar. Would have been better to acknowledge the offensive past, apologize for it, and make a concentrated effort to be respectful effort moving forward. I've seen it work at other schools, Central Michigan does a great job of this with their fans.

Superbly stated as usual, TAMU.

I have trouble saying "Golden Eagles." I don't hate the name, but it's so uninspiring.

Although I still occasionally say "Warriors," I totally understand all that went into the name change and I am opposed to Indian mascots for sports teams.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on June 13, 2017, 06:40:29 AM
Hilltoppers>Warriors
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 13, 2017, 07:41:50 AM
It isn't going to change, so I just call our team the Warriors, enjoy when I hear broadcasters occasionally use it too, and let the current nickname go in one ear and out the other.

It is what it is....

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 13, 2017, 08:09:54 AM
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/542/748/0bf.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 13, 2017, 08:56:38 AM
Hilltoppers>Warriors

No.

But it isn't a bad consolation prize.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: AccredoJoe on June 13, 2017, 09:14:23 AM
The animosity won't change until us old folks die.

Perhaps we could of called them the Hittite Warriors. Since the Israelites slew them all and there is no one left to offend

Folks from my day would have been OK with the Hilltoppers or Avalanche.

Pissed me off so much I stopped donating for 5 years.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MUBurrow on June 13, 2017, 09:19:08 AM
I hate myself for even participating in the mascot/name vote debacle, but...

Warriors > Jumping Jesuits > Hilltoppers/Golden Avalanche is a matter of pref (I voted for Golden Avalanche) > not being able to shake a bout of sinus congestion > Gold > Golden Eagles

Most days I think the kitsch of the Gold and bricky and all that would be preferable over the yawn inducing chicken hawk. But how everything went down was such a travesty that it was unsalvageable.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: muwarrior69 on June 13, 2017, 09:22:24 AM
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/542/748/0bf.gif)

I'm calling PETA! That'a animal abuse at its extreme. In fact I'm so upset the SKIN on my face is turning RED.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 13, 2017, 09:24:16 AM
I'm calling PETA! That'a animal abuse at its extreme. In fact I'm so upset the SKIN on my face is turning RED.

No animals were harmed in the making of this GIF.


(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-WwvtCYtKFEs/UQGMtSbOyyI/AAAAAAAABdY/LgfFmISMkIg/s781/AHA%20end%20creditJPG.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: muwarrior69 on June 13, 2017, 09:27:48 AM
No animals were harmed in the making of this GIF.


(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-WwvtCYtKFEs/UQGMtSbOyyI/AAAAAAAABdY/LgfFmISMkIg/s781/AHA%20end%20creditJPG.jpg)



....but, but he identifies as a dead horse.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Silkk the Shaka on June 13, 2017, 09:36:47 AM
If he can be Pancho, why can't I be Tyrone?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 13, 2017, 10:19:46 AM
It's all pointless, but I maintain the best solution is to not have a mascot. We Are Marquette.

If the pundits want to call us Marquette, or Warriors, or Golden Eagles, who cares? Just go with Marquette. It's what all the marketing already does anyway. The only thing we'd lose is an oversized walking bird at the games.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 13, 2017, 10:25:56 AM
It's all pointless, but I maintain the best solution is to not have a mascot. We Are Marquette.

If the pundits want to call us Marquette, or Warriors, or Golden Eagles, who cares? Just go with Marquette. It's what all the marketing already does anyway. The only thing we'd lose is an oversized walking bird at the games.

That'd actually be a pretty awesome move. Unique and unite the fan base.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 13, 2017, 10:38:00 AM
So, how are we more righteous and better people 'cause we have a PC, fooked up, nickname, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Earl Tatum on June 13, 2017, 10:51:38 AM
It's all about the 'MONEY'. Who was the Padre, who screwed this up?
Forgot the name. Pro ball sucks anyway. run by the Mafia. Fixed!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 13, 2017, 10:55:23 AM
So, how are we more righteous and better people 'cause we have a PC, fooked up, nickname, hey?

I don't know about us.  But the university is now doing a better job of living it's mission of social justice.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: #UnleashSean on June 13, 2017, 10:56:27 AM
Doesn't have to be warriors. But can we get rid of the stupid golden pigeon?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dawson Rental on June 13, 2017, 11:21:51 AM
I'm calling PETA! That'a animal abuse at its extreme. In fact I'm so upset the SKIN on my face is turning RED.

Unbelievable!  You can't even protest against animal abuse without turning into a caricature of a Native American!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on June 13, 2017, 11:31:33 AM
(http://orig06.deviantart.net/5f60/f/2011/279/b/2/abandon_thread_1_by_mezkalito4p-d4c1g8v.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 13, 2017, 12:08:22 PM
Most days I think the kitsch of the Gold and bricky and all that would be preferable over the yawn inducing chicken hawk.

Made me laugh.

I voted for The Blue!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: DoggyDaddy on June 13, 2017, 12:13:23 PM
In keeping with the name variation of the NBA Champs, how about we become the Golden Eagle Warriors, keep the Eagle Mascot of course but in regular converstion MU teams become the Golden Warriors or better yet, just plain Warriors. This issue remains a sore point for us older alums and it ain't going away.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on June 13, 2017, 12:25:32 PM
And millennial's are the ones who get outraged over nothing  ::)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 13, 2017, 12:47:34 PM
In keeping with the name variation of the NBA Champs, how about we become the Golden Eagle Warriors, keep the Eagle Mascot of course but in regular converstion MU teams become the Golden Warriors or better yet, just plain Warriors. This issue remains a sore point for us older alums and it ain't going away.

Well, it will go away when the last Warrior dies or is too old to remember the former name, leaving only Golden Eagles.

I remember when they did the vote, I happened to run into Diener and asked him what he chose. "Golden Eagles," he said, matter-of-factly. "That's what we were when I was there, and that's what I know."

About 40 years from now, if basketball is still being played despite half of 'Merica being under water, the last of the Marquette Warriors players will be about 80 years old.

If you're thinking, "40 years! That's eons from now!" Well, it's how many years have passed since our one and only title, too! The time goes too damn fast, baby.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: WI inferiority Complexes on June 13, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Why can't get get football back?
Just asking.

Why did the 'Lanche close?
Just asking.

Why do we have to do re-seating every year?
Just asking.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 13, 2017, 02:34:15 PM
This ship sailed so long ago that it may have been the Pinta.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 13, 2017, 02:56:27 PM
Well, it will go away when the last Warrior dies or is too old to remember the former name, leaving only Golden Eagles.

I remember when they did the vote, I happened to run into Diener and asked him what he chose. "Golden Eagles," he said, matter-of-factly. "That's what we were when I was there, and that's what I know."


Wade said something similar on PTI the day of the "Gold" announcement.

And to look at it this way, outside of any of the rare non-traditional students, not one member of the last two, probably three, entering classes at MU was born when MU was "Warriors," 23 years ago.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MuMark on June 13, 2017, 05:17:43 PM
Because they are in the NBA and not the NCAA
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 13, 2017, 05:28:32 PM
TAMU is 100% right.

If Marquette would have dropped the Native imagrey in the 60s or early 70s, they'd still be Warriors. Trying to make it "respectable" caused more problems.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on June 13, 2017, 06:34:56 PM
So, how are we more righteous and better people 'cause we have a PC, fooked up, nickname, hey?

doesn't golden eagles give ya that warm, tingling feeling up and down your legs...me neither
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 13, 2017, 06:57:39 PM
Kinda like rectal gas does, ai na?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on June 13, 2017, 08:37:51 PM
Kinda like rectal gas does, ai na?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: chapman on June 13, 2017, 09:57:14 PM
Golden Eagles are cool.  Throwing goats and foxes off cliffs then eating them and all.  We should use a realistic one instead of the cartoon.  Maybe get a falconer to let one fly around the arena. 


(https://m.popkey.co/345c28/QX7g6.gif)f

(https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-25-2015/DP93Rs.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 14, 2017, 12:50:05 AM
How about a mascot that has our opponents shaking in their shoes and throwing in the towel?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3167052130/304f514cfdaeab5b137dc57b02897211_400x400.jpeg)

Hell, he even has his own sponsorship deal...
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/b376019d80442c340a41c94b9626d89ab6090201/r=x329&c=580x326/local/-/media/USATODAY/gameon/2013/01/26/batcourt-16_9.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 14, 2017, 08:09:03 AM
In keeping with the name variation of the NBA Champs, how about we become the Golden Eagle Warriors, keep the Eagle Mascot of course but in regular converstion MU teams become the Golden Warriors or better yet, just plain Warriors. This issue remains a sore point for us older alums and it ain't going away.
"War Eagles".  Tip of the hat to us oldsters, nod to the current name, and far, far less generic and uninspiring.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 14, 2017, 08:11:22 AM
"War Eagles".  Tip of the hat to us oldsters, nod to the current name, and far, far less generic and uninspiring.

I'd vote for this
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on June 14, 2017, 08:35:23 AM
"War Eagles".  Tip of the hat to us oldsters, nod to the current name, and far, far less generic and uninspiring.

Nahh, people would just accuse us of ripping off Clemson Auburn.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: cheebs09 on June 14, 2017, 08:57:17 AM
Nahh, people would just accuse us of ripping off Clemson.

Auburn I believe. I agree though.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 14, 2017, 08:59:47 AM
Gotta tink "war" ain't part of da Jesuit mission, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 14, 2017, 09:11:27 AM
Golden Eagles are cool.  Throwing goats and foxes off cliffs then eating them and all.  We should use a realistic one instead of the cartoon.  Maybe get a falconer to let one fly around the arena. 


(https://m.popkey.co/345c28/QX7g6.gif)f

(https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-25-2015/DP93Rs.gif)

I always thought this too. Golden eagles in real life are bad ass. Would love to capitalize on that at games somehow.

Also,  if anyone has mad tech skillz. They should edit that second gif to the eagle dropping various BE mascots and bucky off the cliff
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocky_warrior on June 14, 2017, 09:25:27 AM
Wade said something similar on PTI the day of the "Gold" announcement.

He did not.  He heard about warriors, but not gold...

https://www.youtube.com/v/CcrEl_r8xEE
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 14, 2017, 09:47:33 AM
It's not that Golden Eagles aren't badass.  It's that the name isn't creative.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 14, 2017, 09:53:39 AM
Auburn I believe. I agree though.

If we are being accurate, "War Eagle!" is Auburn's battle cry, not its mascot, which is the Tigers.

That being said, there is nothing to stop us from using a battle cry...just saying.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: mikekinsellaMVP on June 14, 2017, 10:49:09 AM
If we are being accurate, "War Eagle!" is Auburn's battle cry, not its mascot, which is the Tigers.

That being said, there is nothing to stop us from using a battle cry...just saying.

What about a trademark?

http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html (http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 14, 2017, 10:49:27 AM
Can we at least get the GS Warriors "WARR-IORS!" chant going from the sweater vests?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 14, 2017, 10:53:57 AM
Can we at least get the GS Warriors "WARR-IORS!" chant going from the sweater vests?

The first time I heard them do that I thought they were saying "craw-ford" like every NHL team does against the Blackhawks
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 14, 2017, 12:41:53 PM
What about a trademark?

http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html (http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html)

I said A battle cry, not that particular battle cry.

That being said, I am amazed they were able to get that term trademarked.  Then again, I know legal types that were surprised Marquette was able to get "Be the Difference" trademarked.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 14, 2017, 02:48:35 PM
Can we at least get the GS Warriors "WARR-IORS!" chant going from the sweater vests?

In order to be audible they would need to project....which would involve standing. So that's out.  ;D
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Class71 on June 14, 2017, 07:31:48 PM
Golden Eagles is just a poor name for marketing a sports team. Maybe better than the silver fish or the brown squirrels but I think we can do better than the name of a bird that eats rodents. I suspect the name was selected since some native tribes believe the birds have mystical powers. Let's move on from using warriors but the golden pigeons just does not inspire anyone.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 14, 2017, 07:39:22 PM
Golden Eagles is just a poor name for marketing a sports team. Maybe better than the silver fish or the brown squirrels but I think we can do better than the name of a bird that eats rodents. I suspect the name was selected since some native tribes believe the birds have mystical powers. Let's move on from using warriors but the golden pigeons just does not inspire anyone.

What's wrong with a bird that eats rodents?


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CJLxjlDMrpw/TrkGLl_9o9I/AAAAAAAAAQA/_ZsD-TE04qs/s1600/Golden%2Beagle%2Bbadger.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 14, 2017, 07:41:21 PM
Can we at least get the GS Warriors "WARR-IORS!" chant going from the sweater vests?

There have been a few "Let's go Warriors" chants over the years, but they never last long.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2017, 11:58:17 PM
What's wrong with a bird that eats rodents?


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CJLxjlDMrpw/TrkGLl_9o9I/AAAAAAAAAQA/_ZsD-TE04qs/s1600/Golden%2Beagle%2Bbadger.jpg)

Great photo, Khaleesi!!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: cheebs09 on June 15, 2017, 05:50:14 AM
What about a trademark?

http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html (http://www.auburn.edu/administration/trademark/campus.html)

Would this fall under Bird Law? Because I know a guy.

(http://www.tvovermind.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ssunnamedjpg-c748a9_1280w-e1455768765791.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 15, 2017, 07:21:21 AM
Great photo, Khaleesi!!

It may not be your mascot of choice for Marquette, but in the real world, no one effs with a golden eagle.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TallTitan34 on June 15, 2017, 08:53:35 AM
The only thing we'd lose is an oversized walking bird at the games.

(http://media.tmz.com/2017/06/01/0601-mr-mets-middle-finger-01-1200x630.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 15, 2017, 09:04:41 AM
It may not be your mascot of choice for Marquette, but in the real world, no one effs with a golden eagle.

Exactly
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: DienerTime34 on June 15, 2017, 09:10:40 AM
I think we're missing a larger discussion here, which is why do grown adults care about mascots at all? Are they still sleeping with stuffed animals as well?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 15, 2017, 09:11:46 AM
I think we're missing a larger discussion here, which is why do grown adults care about mascots at all? Are they still sleeping with stuffed animals as well?


DON'T JUDGE ME!!!!  SOMETIMES I HAVE TROUBLE SLEEPING!!!!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on June 15, 2017, 09:33:16 AM
I think we're missing a larger discussion here, which is why do grown adults care about mascots at all? Are they still sleeping with stuffed animals as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: CreanLover on June 15, 2017, 12:05:04 PM
Well, it will go away when the last Warrior dies or is too old to remember the former name, leaving only Golden Eagles.

I remember when they did the vote, I happened to run into Diener and asked him what he chose. "Golden Eagles," he said, matter-of-factly. "That's what we were when I was there, and that's what I know."

About 40 years from now, if basketball is still being played despite half of 'Merica being under water, the last of the Marquette Warriors players will be about 80 years old.

If you're thinking, "40 years! That's eons from now!" Well, it's how many years have passed since our one and only title, too! The time goes too damn fast, baby.
Diener was on television saying basically the opposite of what you claim.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: dgies9156 on June 15, 2017, 01:25:03 PM
What's wrong with a bird that eats rodents?


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CJLxjlDMrpw/TrkGLl_9o9I/AAAAAAAAAQA/_ZsD-TE04qs/s1600/Golden%2Beagle%2Bbadger.jpg)

That Badgers looks sooo tasty too.

Nice one Chick!!!!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on June 15, 2017, 01:31:39 PM
The sham of a process has as much to do with the dislike of Golden Eagles as anything else.  A fair and square choice would have gone a long way towards acceptance.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 15, 2017, 01:38:03 PM
We should replace the silly mascot with a real golden eagle that swoops down toward the opposing team during intros.  Of course, Ed Cooley might object....
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: humanlung 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.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 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.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut 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?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG 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. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on June 16, 2017, 02:18:59 PM
Would the spirit squad be the Spirit Spirit Squad?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: humanlung 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: humanlung 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. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: humanlung 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MerrittsMustache 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!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: willie warrior 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?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG 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.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 16, 2017, 02:59:44 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?

The thing with most of you anti-PC folks is that you just assume something it going to offend other groups and then blame everything on "PC." I guarantee you no atheist or member of another religion has complained about "Friars." As one myself I'd never even thought of being "offended."
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 16, 2017, 03:01:16 PM
The thing with most of you anti-PC folks is that you just assume something it going to offend other groups and then blame everything on "PC." I guarantee you no atheist or member of another religion has complained about "Friars." As on myself I'd never even thought of being "offended."


Those who complain the most about "PC" are often the biggest snowflakes among us.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 on June 16, 2017, 04:30:44 PM
I have a friend named Bill that was extremely offended after Buffalo lost 4 straight Super Bowls.
Even threatened to loot Grand Avenue.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 16, 2017, 09:11:13 PM
The thing with most of you anti-PC folks is that you just assume something it going to offend other groups and then blame everything on "PC." I guarantee you no atheist or member of another religion has complained about "Friars." As one myself I'd never even thought of being "offended."
Don't ruin willie's narrative.  It makes him feel better about himself when he can blame imagined sleights on horrible, horrible "PCs".
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: willie warrior on June 17, 2017, 11:45:33 AM

Those who complain the most about "PC" are often the biggest snowflakes among us.
Yeah, thats right Sultan. I learned all about snowflakes from my 3 years in the USMC.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 17, 2017, 11:52:37 AM
Yeah, thats right Sultan. I learned all about snowflakes from my 3 years in the USMC.

Being a snowflake in this context has nothing to do with physical toughness. Its about the inability to deal with opinions and ideas that you don't agree with.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 17, 2017, 03:33:31 PM
What's amusing is contemporary use of "snowflake" originated with Fight Club, written by Chuck Pahlaniuk. It was spoken by the narrator's alter ego, Tyler Durden, talking about how the fight club members were not unique or special.

So basically, the term was coined by a gay writer's paranoid delusion terrorist that blew up buildings to mask his sexual inadequacies.

Sounds like the fragile description of most everyone that tries to use the term  ;D
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 17, 2017, 06:37:57 PM
Well this is a crap show.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: WellsstreetWanderer on June 17, 2017, 06:46:23 PM
What's amusing is contemporary use of "snowflake" originated with Fight Club, written by Chuck Pahlaniuk. It was spoken by the narrator's alter ego, Tyler Durden, talking about how the fight club members were not unique or special.

So basically, the term was coined by a gay writer's paranoid delusion terrorist that blew up buildings to mask his sexual inadequacies.

Sounds like the fragile description of most everyone that tries to use the term  ;D
No its a term thst adequately describes people who demand to ne able to escape to safe places when exposed to ideas they can't  shout down.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 17, 2017, 10:01:40 PM
No its a term thst adequately describes people who demand to ne able to escape to safe places when exposed to ideas they can't  shout down.

Exactly.  The most common of which is people who complain about being PC.  They want to go to a safe space where they do have to think about being pc
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 18, 2017, 02:07:50 AM
No its a term thst adequately describes people who demand to ne able to escape to safe places when exposed to ideas they can't  shout down.

No, it's a term used by Neo-Nazis that was popularized by a gay writer's fictional delusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibtimes.com/what-snowflake-origin-insult-alt-right-leaders-who-support-trump-2492485%3Famp%3D1

The level of irony that drips off the term is thicker than crude oil.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: willie warrior on June 18, 2017, 12:11:30 PM
Being a snowflake in this context has nothing to do with physical toughness. Its about the inability to deal with opinions and ideas that you don't agree with.
Like I said, learned all of that in the military. And your definition certainly describes the many intolerant "snowflakes" out there, especially the PC warriors.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 18, 2017, 01:41:31 PM
Like I said, learned all of that in the military. And your definition certainly describes the many intolerant "snowflakes" out there, especially the PC warriors.

How is challenging something you find offensive being a snowflake? I feel like a snowflake would just melt and say nothing. And the term isn't PC Warrior. Its social justice warrior. As in the most badass nickname in sports history, that fights for social justice, something we all learned to aspire to from the Jesuits at Marquette.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on June 18, 2017, 02:16:07 PM
Like I said, learned all of that in the military. And your definition certainly describes the many intolerant "snowflakes" out there, especially the PC warriors.

Someone seems triggered.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GooooMarquette on June 18, 2017, 02:58:29 PM
I'm anti-PC.

I use a MacBook.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 18, 2017, 06:58:30 PM
No, it's a term used by Neo-Nazis that was popularized by a gay writer's fictional delusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibtimes.com/what-snowflake-origin-insult-alt-right-leaders-who-support-trump-2492485%3Famp%3D1

The level of irony that drips off the term is thicker than crude oil.

The irony drips heavier knowing Snopes says this claim is not true


http://www.snopes.com/snowflake-nazi-term-holocaust/
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Newsdreams on June 18, 2017, 09:22:25 PM
Like I said, learned all of that in the military. And your definition certainly describes the many intolerant "snowflakes" out there, especially the PC warriors.
So because you "learned it" in the military makes it right. Most of what is learned in the military is BS if you just accept it as fact. All militaries teach follow, don't ask else they don't work. And don't preach me on military, born on an army base, son of an army pilot And Colonel, been ROTC and Ranger camp. The I learend all in military is BS.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 18, 2017, 09:42:54 PM
No, it's a term used by Neo-Nazis that was popularized by a gay writer's fictional delusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibtimes.com/what-snowflake-origin-insult-alt-right-leaders-who-support-trump-2492485%3Famp%3D1

The level of irony that drips off the term is thicker than crude oil.

I don't know what the true origin is, but I'm quite certain it pre-dated the Orange Menace's presidential run.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 09:42:23 AM
Why do/did people hate Gold? Is it purely because of the way it was rolled out, or the name itself.

Personally, I liked it a lot.  It would put MU in the company of these schools that use colors as their names.  Also, no one uses Gold so we would have been unique.

Dartmouth = Big Green
Cornell - Big Red
Wellesley = Blue
Unversity of Chicago = Maroons
Roanoke = Maroons
Harvard = Crimson
Syracuse = Orange (color, not food)
Stanford = Cardinal (color, not bird)


Conversely, here are all the Golden Eagles.  Nothing desirable about his list.

Cal State Los Angeles (Los Angeles)
Charleston (West Virginia) (Charleston, West Virginia)
Cincinnati Christian (Cincinnati)
Clarion (Pennsylvania) (Clarion, Pennsylvania)
College at Brockport: SUNY (Brockport, New York)
Cornerstone University (Grand Rapids, Michigan)
John Brown University (Siloam Springs, Arkansas)
La Sierra (Riverside, California)
Marquette (Milwaukee)
Minnesota, Crookston (Crookston, Minnesota)
Oral Roberts (Tulsa, Oklahoma)
Rock Valley College (Rockford, Illinois)
Southern Miss (Hattiesburg, Mississippi)
Tennessee Tech (Cookeville, Tennessee)

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys on June 19, 2017, 10:03:12 AM
Why do/did people hate Gold? Is it purely because of the way it was rolled out, or the name itself.

Personally, I liked it a lot.  It would put MU in the company of these schools that use colors as their names.  Also, no one uses Gold so we would have been unique.

Dartmouth = Big Green
Cornell - Big Red
Wellesley = Blue
Unversity of Chicago = Maroons
Roanoke = Maroons
Harvard = Crimson
Syracuse = Orange (color, not food)
Stanford = Cardinal (color, not bird)


Conversely, here are all the Golden Eagles.  Nothing desirable about his list.

Cal State Los Angeles (Los Angeles)
Charleston (West Virginia) (Charleston, West Virginia)
Cincinnati Christian (Cincinnati)
Clarion (Pennsylvania) (Clarion, Pennsylvania)
College at Brockport: SUNY (Brockport, New York)
Cornerstone University (Grand Rapids, Michigan)
John Brown University (Siloam Springs, Arkansas)
La Sierra (Riverside, California)
Marquette (Milwaukee)
Minnesota, Crookston (Crookston, Minnesota)
Oral Roberts (Tulsa, Oklahoma)
Rock Valley College (Rockford, Illinois)
Southern Miss (Hattiesburg, Mississippi)
Tennessee Tech (Cookeville, Tennessee)

Pretty sure you're confusing Dartmouth with the catcher from The Sandlot 

(https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/5rqaZBfg3kWv3x1enth0GeKpBsT.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 19, 2017, 10:12:36 AM
How is challenging something you find offensive being a snowflake? I feel like a snowflake would just melt and say nothing. And the term isn't PC Warrior. Its social justice warrior. As in the most badass nickname in sports history, that fights for social justice, something we all learned to aspire to from the Jesuits at Marquette.

Challenging something you find offensive in open, inclusive discussion and debate is not being a snowflake. Retreating to safe spaces where political orthodoxy and a predetermined one sided definition of social justice is the only one tolerated is. That's not "badass" at all and nothing I learned to aspire to at Marquette.



Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 19, 2017, 10:13:14 AM
Honestly didn't hate Gold. But whatever name they picked was doomed to be hated.  Maybe Hilltoppers would have been OK. But that's the only non warrior name that I could have seen being embraced by a significant amount of alumni.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 19, 2017, 10:15:37 AM
Challenging something you find offensive in open, inclusive discussion and debate is not being a snowflake. Retreating to safe spaces where political orthodoxy and a predetermined one sided definition of social justice is the only one tolerated is. That's not "badass" at all and nothingI learned to aspire to at Marquette.

You'll need to give me examples. I hear this all the time but other than a few isolated incidents I have never seen evidence of the snowflake epidemic that many seem to think  is happening in our country.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Bocephys on June 19, 2017, 10:21:59 AM
This thread took a turn
(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/fire_community.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 19, 2017, 11:41:12 AM
Why do/did people hate Gold? Is it purely because of the way it was rolled out, or the name itself.

Personally, I liked it a lot.  It would put MU in the company of these schools that use colors as their names.  Also, no one uses Gold so we would have been unique.

Dartmouth = Big Green
Cornell - Big Red
Wellesley = Blue
Unversity of Chicago = Maroons
Roanoke = Maroons
Harvard = Crimson
Syracuse = Orange (color, not food)
Stanford = Cardinal (color, not bird)


Conversely, here are all the Golden Eagles.  Nothing desirable about his list.

Cal State Los Angeles (Los Angeles)
Charleston (West Virginia) (Charleston, West Virginia)
Cincinnati Christian (Cincinnati)
Clarion (Pennsylvania) (Clarion, Pennsylvania)
College at Brockport: SUNY (Brockport, New York)
Cornerstone University (Grand Rapids, Michigan)
John Brown University (Siloam Springs, Arkansas)
La Sierra (Riverside, California)
Marquette (Milwaukee)
Minnesota, Crookston (Crookston, Minnesota)
Oral Roberts (Tulsa, Oklahoma)
Rock Valley College (Rockford, Illinois)
Southern Miss (Hattiesburg, Mississippi)
Tennessee Tech (Cookeville, Tennessee)

So what if other schools have it?  How many are Wildcats or Bulldogs or Tigers?  It doesn't seem to affect Kentucky, Butler or LSU.

The way the Warrior crowd gets wrapped up in a nickname and mascot isn't much different than Wisconsin and their Bucky worship. The chant is "We Are Marquette," not "We are Warriors/Golden Eagles." None of us chose Warrior College or Golden Eagle University, we chose Marquette.

Oh, and an excellent point about "Gold." I think it was the rollout. It came out of nowhere.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 01:17:40 PM
So what if other schools have it?  How many are Wildcats or Bulldogs or Tigers?  It doesn't seem to affect Kentucky, Butler or LSU.

The way the Warrior crowd gets wrapped up in a nickname and mascot isn't much different than Wisconsin and their Bucky worship. The chant is "We Are Marquette," not "We are Warriors/Golden Eagles." None of us chose Warrior College or Golden Eagle University, we chose Marquette.

Oh, and an excellent point about "Gold." I think it was the rollout. It came out of nowhere.

Some schools have unique nicknames and they are known as much by their nicknames as they are the name of the school.

Examples are the Hoyas, the Orange, the Buckeyes, The Huskers, The Boilermakers, Demon Deacons, Long Horns, Crimson Tide, Seminoles,  Fighting Illini, Nittany Lions, Bucky/Badgers, Hoosiers, Fighting Irish, Hawkeyes, etc.  Again you know which schools these names are attached to.

There are other schools that have "generic" names that are almost non-existent.  Tops of the list are Wildcats.  That name is used by Villanova, Kentucky and Northwestern (among others).  Duke is the Blue Devils, UCLA Bruins, Auburn Tigers, etc.  Golden Eagles are definitely in this group.

I think many liked the Warrior name because MU was associated with it.  If someone asked you who you were a fan of, you could have answered "Warriors" and that would have been understood to mean MU, similar to Buckeyes today.  Golden Eagles are more in the Wildcats, a generic name we have but illicit no emotions (like Nova and Kentucky). 

Since Gold would have been a unique name n college sports, could have continued in that distinctive mode as an alternative name for the schools.   Golden Eagles will not approach this level.

Opportunity lost.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 19, 2017, 01:28:01 PM
What is a Gold? It is like being named The Oxygen. Lame and meaningless to the history and tradition of Marquette. Just like a Golden Eagle but at least that is worthy of personification.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 01:44:31 PM
What is a Gold? It is lked being named The Oxygen. Lame and meaningless to the history and tradition of Marquette. Just like a Golden Eagle but at least that is worthy of personification.

Could you now say the same about Badgers, Orange, Crimson Tide, Nittany Lions, etc?  What do these names have to do with the school?

My point is a unique name is preferable to a generic name.  And, yes, I would prefer "Oxygen" over Golden Eagles for this reason.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 19, 2017, 01:53:26 PM
Could you now say the same about Badgers, Orange, Crimson Tide, Nittany Lions, etc?  What do these names have to do with the school?

My point is a unique name is preferable to a generic name.  And, yes, I would prefer "Oxygen" over Golden Eagles for this reason.

Stanford is "The Cardinal" and their mascot is a tree on LSD. I'd say they are pretty well known as an institution despite the "generic" name.

Though perhaps "Blue and Gold" would have been better received than just "Gold."
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: cheebs09 on June 19, 2017, 01:55:14 PM
Could you now say the same about Badgers, Orange, Crimson Tide, Nittany Lions, etc?  What do these names have to do with the school?

My point is a unique name is preferable to a generic name.  And, yes, I would prefer "Oxygen" over Golden Eagles for this reason.

Wisconsin is the Badger state due to the miners that were in the state. They didn't just pick a random animal.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 19, 2017, 01:59:00 PM
Could you now say the same about Badgers, Orange, Crimson Tide, Nittany Lions, etc?  What do these names have to do with the school?

My point is a unique name is preferable to a generic name.  And, yes, I would prefer "Oxygen" over Golden Eagles for this reason.

No. Those nicknames are tied to their state. Gold? Beer foam?  Please explain? 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 01:59:09 PM
Stanford is "The Cardinal" and their mascot is a tree on LSD. I'd say they are pretty well known as an institution despite the "generic" name.

Though perhaps "Blue and Gold" would have been better received than just "Gold."

Stanford was the Indians until 1971 when they lead the movement as the first institution, college or pro, to move away from Native American names.

Cardinal is not a generic name, they are the only in Cardinal in college sports

(maybe generic is the wrong word... "commonly used" might be a better term for what I was getting at.)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 02:02:32 PM
Stanford is "The Cardinal" and their mascot is a tree on LSD. I'd say they are pretty well known as an institution despite the "generic" name.

Though perhaps "Blue and Gold" would have been better received than just "Gold."

agreed that would have been a better name.

Again I would prefer a unique name which can be interchangeable with "Marquette."  Golden Eagles will never be that.... for the same reason the name "Wildcats" does not make you immediately think of Kentucky... because it could also be Nova or Northwestern or many other schools.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on June 19, 2017, 02:08:47 PM
Gold would make people think our mascot is a pretzel.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Jockey on June 19, 2017, 03:59:00 PM
Gold would make people think our mascot is a pretzel.

Or an ice cold mug of beer. What could be more appropriate for college?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 19, 2017, 06:27:50 PM
The irony drips heavier knowing Snopes says this claim is not true


http://www.snopes.com/snowflake-nazi-term-holocaust/

???

That Snopes article supports what I said. The derivation is from Fight Club, written by Chuck Pahlaniuk (who is gay) and the quote was from Tyler Durden, a character who was a paranoid delusion of the narrator. The term came into popular use recently from Neo-Nazis.

Did you get confused by my use of Neo-Nazis? Sorry, but I call the "Alt-Right" exactly what it is, which is contemporary fascism.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 19, 2017, 09:12:30 PM
How is challenging something you find offensive being a snowflake? I feel like a snowflake would just melt and say nothing. And the term isn't PC Warrior. Its social justice warrior. As in the most badass nickname in sports history, that fights for social justice, something we all learned to aspire to from the Jesuits at Marquette.
I am opposed to the social justice bs . It is nothing more than code words for people who can't compete  yet want the same rewards of those who are willing to take the hard work and risks of competing.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: jesmu84 on June 19, 2017, 09:32:32 PM
I am opposed to the social justice bs . It is nothing more than code words for people who can't compete  yet want the same rewards of those who are willing to take the hard work and risks of competing.

Where does intentional unprotected sex with drunk girls fall on your "social justice bs" spectrum?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MUDPT on June 19, 2017, 09:33:16 PM
Now that we are 12 years out, anyone want to confirm or deny that the Gold was primarily TC's idea, as been rumored?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Tugg Speedman on June 19, 2017, 11:11:17 PM
Now that we are 12 years out, anyone want to confirm or deny that the Gold was primarily TC's idea, as been rumored?

TC came up with the idea 6 years before he was named HC of MU?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 19, 2017, 11:17:47 PM
TC came up with the idea 6 years before he was named HC of MU?

Tom Crean wasn't named the head coach of Marquette 6 years ago...
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 19, 2017, 11:44:56 PM
I am opposed to the social justice bs . It is nothing more than code words for people who can't compete  yet want the same rewards of those who are willing to take the hard work and risks of competing.

So you are against the primary mission of the Jesuits.....
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MUDPT on June 20, 2017, 07:44:25 AM
TC came up with the idea 6 years before he was named HC of MU?

Correct, TC was head coach for 6 years before the Gold nickname came into existence. Smh.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 20, 2017, 08:04:02 AM
Now that we are 12 years out, anyone want to confirm or deny that the Gold was primarily TC's idea, as been rumored?

While TC was pushing for this, it was a completely out of touch BOT that led us off the cliff. I always admired that Fr. Wild manned up and admitted it was a pr disaster, however. This is a case where group think with the wrong group leads to ill-formed decisions. If Warriors wasn't ever going to be allowed, it should have ended there.

And yes, TC was there sniffing the BOT's lead...or something else.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/18/sports/ncaabasketball/at-marquette-hawks-dont-fly-and-gold-doesnt-glitter.html
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 on June 20, 2017, 08:31:10 AM
chart of college nicknames.  Marquette Golden Eagles is on the far left between John Brown and Clarion.
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0211/4926/files/PopChartLab_ChartofCollegeSportsTeams_Zoom_407.jpg (http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0211/4926/files/PopChartLab_ChartofCollegeSportsTeams_Zoom_407.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 20, 2017, 08:47:47 AM
chart of college nicknames.  Marquette Golden Eagles is on the far left between John Brown and Clarion.
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0211/4926/files/PopChartLab_ChartofCollegeSportsTeams_Zoom_407.jpg (http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0211/4926/files/PopChartLab_ChartofCollegeSportsTeams_Zoom_407.jpg)

Interesting, warriors would have been shared by more other schools than golden eagles.

Not saying I prefer golden eagles but the whole unique nickname argument kinda goes out the window
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 20, 2017, 11:20:18 AM
I'd say the best thing that came out of the whole Gold fiasco was the interlocking MU logo (though I'd prefer they got rid of the version with the banner saying "Marquette" across it. Too busy).

As for warriors being unique, we wouldn't even be the only school in Milwaukee with the nickname.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 20, 2017, 11:34:12 AM
I'd say the best thing that came out of the whole Gold fiasco was the interlocking MU logo (though I'd prefer they got rid of the version with the banner saying "Marquette" across it. Too busy).

As for warriors being unique, we wouldn't even be the only school in Milwaukee with the nickname.

On my daily commute, I go past two different high schools that have the Warrior nickname.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 20, 2017, 11:38:46 AM
I don't think many have claimed that "Warriors" was unique.  But it was part of Marquette's heritage.

I think the complaint is that Golden Eagles as a replacement is just a generic nickname without any connection to the University. At least "Hilltoppers" has a tradition behind it.  And "Gold" does too in a more indirect way.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 20, 2017, 01:20:50 PM
I don't think many have claimed that "Warriors" was unique.  But it was part of Marquette's heritage.

I think the complaint is that Golden Eagles as a replacement is just a generic nickname without any connection to the University. At least "Hilltoppers" has a tradition behind it.  And "Gold" does too in a more indirect way.

Agree completely.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 20, 2017, 01:37:53 PM
I don't think many have claimed that "Warriors" was unique.  But it was part of Marquette's heritage.

I think the complaint is that Golden Eagles as a replacement is just a generic nickname without any connection to the University. At least "Hilltoppers" has a tradition behind it.  And "Gold" does too in a more indirect way.

What was the connection that warriors had to the university?

I mean I get that now it has all but 13 of our NCAA appearances and 5 of our NITs but back when it started was it really connected to MU?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 20, 2017, 02:35:41 PM
What was the connection that warriors had to the university?

I mean I get that now it has all but 13 of our NCAA appearances and 5 of our NITs but back when it started was it really connected to MU?


When it started?  I have no idea.  But at the time it was replaced it meant a great deal to the University.  That's why people were upset.

Now I completely get why younger alumni don't care.  Or why they are more connected to Golden Eagles.  And that is why I have basically thrown in the towel. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: dgies9156 on June 20, 2017, 04:05:15 PM
I know this is the dead of summer.

I know there is little recruiting news.

There is even less news about the team itself.

But really folks, is this the best we can do. Seven takes on Warriors?

Get over it.

We're Furry Birds. There is no circumstance short of somebody giving Marquette $1 billion (that's BILLION with a "B") in its endowment fund that would cause the university to even consider a Warrior nickname.

Even then, if Mark Cuban gave us $1 billion, the Jesuits probably would turn it down before we would ditch the Furry Bird.

So, move on. No news here.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 20, 2017, 06:35:55 PM
So you are against the primary mission of the Jesuits.....
That is a recent interpretation. Ignatius was more in line with my thinking.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 20, 2017, 06:58:55 PM

When it started? 

1954 to coincide with the Braves move to Milwaukee.  This article is on MU archives site if interested.

http://www.marquette.edu/library/archives/documents/WhosonMUflag.pdf (http://www.marquette.edu/library/archives/documents/WhosonMUflag.pdf)
http://www.marquette.edu/library/about/bio/thiel.php (http://www.marquette.edu/library/about/bio/thiel.php)

Quote
In 1953, the Braves professional baseball team moved from Boston to Milwaukee
and had a very successful first year with 92 wins and 62 losses that drew a then-National League record of 1.8 million fans to Milwaukee County Stadium. Tom Kitchkume, a local Milwaukee-raised Native youth (Potawatomi-Ho Chunk), served as the Indian mascot, “Chief Noc-A-Homa”, who added to the festivities. While dressed in regalia, he came out of a tipi and danced a war dance whenever one of the Braves hit a homerun.

Prompted by the popularity of the Indian mascot and nickname used by the Braves, the Marquette Student Senate adopted the “Warriors” as its sports nickname in May, 1954. Thereafter, Marquette teams used “Warriors” in conjunction with a series of three Indian images through 1986. ” In the fall of 1954, Patrick W. Buckett, a local non Indian student, began to promote the nickname through his portrayal of “Chief White Buck” at Marquette football games and homecoming events. With the name from the then popular white buck shoes, Buckett developed “White Buck” from his experiences and wardrobe with Indian-themed pageantry at a nearby Boy Scout summer camp plus support from local author W. Ben Hunt and enthusiasts of Native American powwow
celebrations. As White Buck, Buckett also hosted an award-winning Saturday morning children’s television show on WOKY-TV in Milwaukee and performed Indian dances at the 1958 Hokkaido Grand Fair in Japan
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 20, 2017, 07:38:16 PM
That is a recent interpretation. Ignatius was more in line with my thinking.

So not only are you are against the primary mission of the Jesuits....you also know how to interpret the words of Saint Ignatius of Loyola better than the Jesuits.

I'm just seeking to understand.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: jesmu84 on June 20, 2017, 07:44:26 PM
That is a recent interpretation. Ignatius was more in line with my thinking.

So Ignatius believed in getting girls drunk and then intentionally having unprotected sex with them?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 20, 2017, 08:43:47 PM
More performance art.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 20, 2017, 08:49:03 PM
So not only are you are against the primary mission of the Jesuits....you also know how to interpret the words of Saint Ignatius of Loyola better than the Jesuits.

I'm just seeking to understand.
Social Justice has nothing to do with the Jesuit Mission. Social Justice is a construct designed by conniving losers who aren't willing to work hard and want to free ride on the hard work of others .  So they give their thievery a nice sounding label.

Back in the day ,the Jesuits were the hard workers willing to take on dangerous missions to spread the word of Jesus. They were some pretty good guys . Ignatius in fact was a wealthy man.

 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 20, 2017, 08:52:29 PM
Social Justice has nothing to do with the Jesuit Mission. Social Justice is a construct designed by conniving losers who aren't willing to work hard and want to free ride on the hard work of others .  So they give their thievery a nice sounding label.

Back in the day ,the Jesuits were the hard workers willing to take on dangerous missions to spread the word of Jesus. They were some pretty good guys . Ignatius in fact was a wealthy man.

So if I work hard with a group of people to achieve social justice does that make a new category where you're just an a$$?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 20, 2017, 08:56:56 PM
And he gave it all away when he realized that anything he did for himself gave him no pleasure, but anything he did in Christ's name was better.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 20, 2017, 09:12:16 PM
Crean sucks
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 20, 2017, 09:29:52 PM
So if I work hard with a group of people to achieve social justice does that make a new category where you're just an a$$?
Get a real job. Parasites rob the vitality of the country.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 20, 2017, 10:31:00 PM
Social Justice has nothing to do with the Jesuit Mission. Social Justice is a construct designed by conniving losers who aren't willing to work hard and want to free ride on the hard work of others .  So they give their thievery a nice sounding label.

Back in the day ,the Jesuits were the hard workers willing to take on dangerous missions to spread the word of Jesus. They were some pretty good guys . Ignatius in fact was a wealthy man.

Huh. I wonder why all those Jesuits lied to me about the importance of social justice when I was a student at Marquette.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 21, 2017, 12:24:11 AM
Social Justice has nothing to do with the Jesuit Mission. Social Justice is a construct designed by conniving losers who aren't willing to work hard and want to free ride on the hard work of others .  So they give their thievery a nice sounding label.

Back in the day ,the Jesuits were the hard workers willing to take on dangerous missions to spread the word of Jesus. They were some pretty good guys . Ignatius in fact was a wealthy man.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/2/1333/1052775673_acf578a8c1.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 21, 2017, 12:46:41 AM
What was the connection that warriors had to the university?

I mean I get that now it has all but 13 of our NCAA appearances and 5 of our NITs but back when it started was it really connected to MU?

Warriors was chosen to connect with the new Milwaukee Braves and that's why it was a Native 
American chosen as the mascot.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 21, 2017, 06:52:19 AM
Warriors was chosen to connect with the new Milwaukee Braves and that's why it was a Native 
American chosen as the mascot.

So that was a connection to the city but not to the unversuty.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 21, 2017, 06:59:42 AM
Get a real job. Parasites rob the vitality of the country.

Many of the social justice individuals have "real jobs" whatever that means. It's just a passion on the side. So again if they work hard toward that end goal doesn't that mean that your stereotype is incorrect? 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Newsdreams on June 21, 2017, 07:54:35 AM
Many of the social justice individuals have "real jobs" whatever that means. It's just a passion on the side. So again if they work hard toward that end goal doesn't that mean that your stereotype is incorrect?
You really trying to make him think logically? I've come to the conclusion that he is a Russian bot gone rogue and hacking scoop  :P
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 21, 2017, 08:06:26 AM
Social Justice has nothing to do with the Jesuit Mission. Social Justice is a construct designed by conniving losers who aren't willing to work hard and want to free ride on the hard work of others .  So they give their thievery a nice sounding label.

Back in the day ,the Jesuits were the hard workers willing to take on dangerous missions to spread the word of Jesus. They were some pretty good guys . Ignatius in fact was a wealthy man.


Correct.  Spread the word of Jesus.  But what do you think the "word of Jesus" is if not based in social justice?

"Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. "And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. "Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

"But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. "On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

--Luke 10:30-37
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on June 21, 2017, 08:17:22 AM

Correct.  Spread the word of Jesus.  But what do you think the "word of Jesus" is if not based in social justice?

"Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. "And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. "Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

"But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. "On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

--Luke 10:30-37


(https://media0.giphy.com/media/CzqaMnNuBhaNO/200.webp#1-grid1)

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: oldwarrior81 on June 21, 2017, 08:37:50 AM
the 50's were the golden age for nicknames in Milwaukee.

Marquette Warriors
MLB Braves
NBA Blackhawks (shortened to Hawks)
minor league hockey Milwaukee Chiefs
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 21, 2017, 08:45:49 AM
You really trying to make him think logically? I've come to the conclusion that he is a Russian bot gone rogue and hacking scoop  :P

I cannot believe that anyone is so blissfully ignorant and irrational. I mean willie is, but he comes off more like a person having a temper tantrum but this guy cannot possibly be this illogical.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 08:51:14 AM
I cannot believe that anyone is so blissfully ignorant and irrational. I mean willie is, but he comes off more like a person having a temper tantrum but this guy cannot possibly be this illogical.

Have you not been paying attention? 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 21, 2017, 08:56:38 AM
Have you not been paying attention?

Not really. I just know you think it's performance art, is there any reasoning behind that?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 09:04:35 AM
Matthew 25:35-46
"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink.   I was a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me.   I was ill and you comforted me, in prison and you came to visit me.
       Then the just will ask him: 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed your or see you thirsty and give you drink?   When did we welcome you away from home or clothe you in your nakedness?    When did we visit you when you were ill or in prison?'   the King will answer them: 'I assure you, as often as you did it for one of my least brothers, you did it for me.'
    Then he will say to those on his left:  'Out of my sight, you condemned, into that everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels!   I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink.   I was away from home and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing.   I was ill and in prison and you did not come to comfort me.'   Then they in turn will ask: 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked or ill on in prison and not attend you in your needs?'   He will answer them: 'I assure you, as often as you neglected to do it to one of the least ones, you neglected to do it to me.'   
These will go off to eternal punishment and the just to eternal life."

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 09:06:55 AM
Not really. I just know you think it's performance art, is there any reasoning behind that?

The poster in question has a history of saying contrary things.     Somebody else coined the phrase performance art in reference to his posts.  I agree with that assessment.    Sometimes. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 21, 2017, 09:30:17 AM
Free Chicos 2017
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 09:37:37 AM
He's around.   
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: axaguy on June 21, 2017, 10:53:40 AM
OK, since when is a "Warrior" exclusively connected with native Americans? A Warrior doesn't need to incite anyone's feelings of racism or slight in any way, you know. I think a better mascot than Willie Wampun could do, though.

How about Arnold Schwarzenegger instead?? Could make guest appearances. Thoughts?? Seems like plenty of creative folks out there with time to contemplate this..... And interest in keeping this socially significant thread going....
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 21, 2017, 10:56:10 AM
OK, since when is a "Warrior" exclusively connected with native Americans? A Warrior doesn't need to incite anyone's feelings of racism or slight in any way, you know. I think a better mascot than Willie Wampun could do, though.

How about Arnold Schwarzenegger instead?? Could make guest appearances. Thoughts?? Seems like plenty of creative folks out there with time to contemplate this..... And interest in keeping this socially significant thread going....

I believe this was suggested but someone concluded that even without native imagery the name warriors would forever be connected to the original mascot and thus racist. I think that was a bit far but it seems like we can blame a handful of students that continued to wear headdresses or something?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 21, 2017, 11:11:48 AM
I believe this was suggested but someone concluded that even without native imagery the name warriors would forever be connected to the original mascot and thus racist. I think that was a bit far but it seems like we can blame a handful of students that continued to wear headdresses or something?

More or less. If we had switched imagery back in the 60s or 70s it's could have been done.  I also think if we put it out in the open in the 90s we could have done it.  Acknowledged past racism,  apologize,  and make a strong effort going forward to erase any native imagery.  Instead we chose to run from the past and change the name.

What's done is done.  Pretty soon Golden Eagles will outnumber Warriors.  Only productive thing to do is embrace the Golden Eagle while remembering the history of the Warriors.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 21, 2017, 11:12:56 AM
I know this is the dead of summer.

I know there is little recruiting news.

There is even less news about the team itself.

But really folks, is this the best we can do. Seven takes on Warriors?

Get over it.

We're Furry Birds. There is no circumstance short of somebody giving Marquette $1 billion (that's BILLION with a "B") in its endowment fund that would cause the university to even consider a Warrior nickname.

Even then, if Mark Cuban gave us $1 billion, the Jesuits probably would turn it down before we would ditch the Furry Bird.

So, move on. No news here.

There is only one thing to do
(https://media.giphy.com/media/igR5863TALcSk/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 21, 2017, 11:16:08 AM
???

That Snopes article supports what I said. The derivation is from Fight Club, written by Chuck Pahlaniuk (who is gay) and the quote was from Tyler Durden, a character who was a paranoid delusion of the narrator. The term came into popular use recently from Neo-Nazis.

Did you get confused by my use of Neo-Nazis? Sorry, but I call the "Alt-Right" exactly what it is, which is contemporary fascism.

It is not a term used by just Neo Nazis.  It is used by  by the right, by comedians, by writers, and so many others, yes even the left. It isn't owned by a group as you are trying to do.  It was often used as a slight against millenials.  The history goes beyond Fight Club, it used to be a replacement term for Uncle Tom. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 11:16:51 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFgAXoEyCdE

A better version of 'Let it go'.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 21, 2017, 11:24:16 AM
More or less. If we had switched imagery back in the 60s or 70s it's could have been done.  I also think if we put it out in the open in the 90s we could have done it.  Acknowledged past racism,  apologize,  and make a strong effort going forward to erase any native imagery.  Instead we chose to run from the past and change the name.

What's done is done.  Pretty soon Golden Eagles will outnumber Warriors.  Only productive thing to do is embrace the Golden Eagle while remembering the history of the Warriors.

Timing has nothing to do with it.  70's, 80's.  Could have been done in the 90's.  Could happen today.  Those are just excuses not to change it.

The same is true when teams change names.  Eventually the old name dies out, which is what is happening to Warriors. If the name can die out, so can the imagery. To suggest otherwise is not logical at all.

The Washington Bullets were around until 1997.  Do you see many Washington Bullets stuff around?  No.  The timing argument is nothing but an excuse.

Tennessee Oilers?  That happened in the 1990's, somehow everyone got beyond that to adopt Titans.  Charlotte Hornets, Bobcats, Hornets?  Anaheim Mighty Ducks.  New Orleans Hornets, Pelicans. 

If teams can change names and the old name goes away, then by all means the associated imagery can easily do the same when that is changed. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 21, 2017, 11:26:38 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFgAXoEyCdE

A better version of 'Let it go'.

A GBS fan???  Much respect my friend!

Elsa is still a better gif though.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 21, 2017, 11:30:22 AM
Timing has nothing to do with it.  70's, 80's.  Could have been done in the 90's.  Could happen today.  Those are just excuses not to change it.

The same is true when teams change names.  Eventually the old name dies out, which is what is happening to Warriors. If the name can die out, so can the imagery. To suggest otherwise is not logical at all.

The Washington Bullets were around until 1997.  Do you see many Washington Bullets stuff around?  No.  The timing argument is nothing but an excuse.

Tennessee Oilers?  That happened in the 1990's, somehow everyone got beyond that to adopt Titans.  Charlotte Hornets, Bobcats, Hornets?  Anaheim Mighty Ducks.  New Orleans Hornets, Pelicans. 

If teams can change names and the old name goes away, then by all means the associated imagery can easily do the same when that is changed. 


Just last year I saw students on wearing Native "headresses."  The imagery hasn't died out yet.  And it won't if they bring back the name. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 21, 2017, 11:42:38 AM
A GBS fan???  Much respect my friend!

Elsa is still a better gif though.

Well, yeah.   But GBS does a better version. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Newsdreams on June 21, 2017, 12:26:20 PM
Timing has nothing to do with it.  70's, 80's.  Could have been done in the 90's.  Could happen today.  Those are just excuses not to change it.

The same is true when teams change names.  Eventually the old name dies out, which is what is happening to Warriors. If the name can die out, so can the imagery. To suggest otherwise is not logical at all.

The Washington Bullets were around until 1997.  Do you see many Washington Bullets stuff around?  No.  The timing argument is nothing but an excuse.

Tennessee Oilers?  That happened in the 1990's, somehow everyone got beyond that to adopt Titans.  Charlotte Hornets, Bobcats, Hornets?  Anaheim Mighty Ducks.  New Orleans Hornets, Pelicans. 

If teams can change names and the old name goes away, then by all means the associated imagery can easily do the same when that is changed.
Think too many things happened remember while I was a student they introduced the solemn Native American warrior dance ritual and students booing. Administration tried, but it looked it was going nowhere and I recall all upperclassmen wanted wilie wampum back.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 21, 2017, 02:29:38 PM
I believe this was suggested but someone concluded that even without native imagery the name warriors would forever be connected to the original mascot and thus racist. I think that was a bit far but it seems like we can blame a handful of students that continued to wear headdresses or something?

I seem to recall sometime in the early 90's before I graduated they had the current students vote on a new mascot to replace Blueteaux.  (I think I confused this with the nickname change?)
I remember one of the choices was a "warrior" that resembled "The Ultimate Warrior" from WWE wrestling.  Keeping the name but dropping the imagery.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 21, 2017, 02:35:43 PM
I seem to recall sometime in the early 90's before I graduated they had the current students vote on a new mascot to replace Blueteaux.  (I think I confused this with the nickname change?)
I remember one of the choices was a "warrior" that resembled "The Ultimate Warrior" from WWE wrestling.  Keeping the name but dropping the imagery.


One was a caveman.  Another was a knight.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 21, 2017, 03:20:37 PM
I would take the ultimate warrior anyday.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 21, 2017, 03:40:44 PM

Correct.  Spread the word of Jesus.  But what do you think the "word of Jesus" is if not based in social justice?

"Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. "And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. "Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

"But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. "On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

--Luke 10:30-37
Wealthy and successful people are the most charitable in society. Who do You think pays for all the buildings academics like you get to work in?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 21, 2017, 04:07:11 PM
Wealthy and successful people are the most charitable in society. Who do You think pays for all the buildings academics like you get to work in?

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

Mark 12: 41-44
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on June 21, 2017, 04:49:52 PM
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

Mark 12: 41-44
Ok so the widow had some good deeds
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 21, 2017, 05:13:25 PM
Ok so the widow had some good deeds

Yes.  And Jesus would take issue with your definition of most charitable

23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Matthew 19 23-24
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 21, 2017, 05:38:00 PM
Can't we ever just have fun and talk stupid nonsense on a basketball message board with out making every thing a "my philosophy is better than your philosophy" chat?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 22, 2017, 05:55:28 AM
It is not a term used by just Neo Nazis.  It is used by  by the right, by comedians, by writers, and so many others, yes even the left. It isn't owned by a group as you are trying to do.  It was often used as a slight against millenials.  The history goes beyond Fight Club, it used to be a replacement term for Uncle Tom.

SMDH

Fight Club is where it was recently redefined and Neo-Nazis are the ones that popularized its recent use.

Seriously, this shouldn't be that difficult to explain. You even posted an article that supports my argument. Not sure why you're struggling so much with it.
Title: Ignatius Loyola: "leader of the Storm troopers of the Catholic Church"
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 22, 2017, 07:53:53 AM
If one student or fan showed up in a headdress, that is not a reason to shoot the idea down. It is impossible to have 100% compliance. 

However, if you offer the name back and new imagery, you have a much better chance of fans adopting the new image than the reverse because they only have one historical source to tie it to currently.

This is why Golden State (going back to the original intent of this thread) fans have Warrior gear that is not tied to Native American imagery, because a legitimate alternative exists. 

If the university said we are going back to Warriors and presented a fighter logo (not Native American), even modeling it after Jesuit founder Ignatius Loyola, the adoption rate would be off the charts.  The amount of merchandise would fly off the shelves.

What are the Jesuits going to do, hide from who the founder of their order and mission was?  Ignatius Loyola was a Spanish Aristocrat and soldier, it is who he was.  He was the founder of "the storm troopers of the Catholic Church".  Think about the marketing possibilities while being true to who he was.  Complete win win.

(http://www.setonbooks.com/sempics/M-RDB4-1413953.JPG)  (http://classic-literature.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/1888/06/ignatius-loyola.jpg)  (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/9b/be/14/9bbe14bc45245ded9d0156d1a8e3a748.jpg)
(https://www.ignatius.com/Content/Site107/ProductImages/IOL-M.jpg)




Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 22, 2017, 07:55:33 AM
SMDH

Fight Club is where it was recently redefined and Neo-Nazis are the ones that popularized its recent use.

Seriously, this shouldn't be that difficult to explain. You even posted an article that supports my argument. Not sure why you're struggling so much with it.

If that is what you had said, I would have acknowledged it, but you said it was a neo-nazi term as if exclusively theirs, and that is an untrue statement.
Title: Re: Ignatius Loyola: "leader of the Storm troopers of the Catholic Church"
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 22, 2017, 08:16:37 AM
If one student or fan showed up in a headdress, that is not a reason to shoot the idea down. It is impossible to have 100% compliance. 

However, if you offer the name back and new imagery, you have a much better chance of fans adopting the new image than the reverse because they only have one historical source to tie it to currently.

This is why Golden State (going back to the original intent of this thread) fans have Warrior gear that is not tied to Native American imagery, because a legitimate alternative exists. 

If the university said we are going back to Warriors and presented a fighter logo (not Native American), even modeling it after Jesuit founder Ignatius Loyola, the adoption rate would be off the charts.  The amount of merchandise would fly off the shelves.

What are the Jesuits going to do, hide from who the founder of their order and mission was?  Ignatius Loyola was a Spanish Aristocrat and soldier, it is who he was.  He was the founder of "the storm troopers of the Catholic Church".  Think about the marketing possibilities while being true to who he was.  Complete win win.

I think the Jesuits put out their position on this the last time we went through the nickname lottery.  Maybe they could pull off what you describe - they didn't feel they could.  I don't know that I 100% agree with them, but I do accept Fr Wild's reasons as valid and final at this point. 

The longer it has been, the less I feel like this is a critical issue for Marquette.  Particularly since the circumstances of the initial selection of the Warriors was just as silly as the circumstances surrounding the selection of the Golden Eagles.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on June 22, 2017, 08:24:19 AM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 22, 2017, 08:33:11 AM
4to5, rather den just 5, is watt probably thru ya off, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on June 22, 2017, 08:43:16 AM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?

If you are just figuring it out, then...... yeah.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 22, 2017, 09:35:29 AM
The poster in question has a history of saying contrary things.     Somebody else coined the phrase performance art in reference to his posts.  I agree with that assessment.    Sometimes.
True.  Sometimes it is straight trolling.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 22, 2017, 09:38:35 AM
Wealthy and successful people are the most charitable in society. Who do You think pays for all the buildings academics like you get to work in?
Yeah!  I mean, why aren't those people working at minimum wage paying donating just as much money for buildings?  Selfish losers, amiright?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 22, 2017, 09:49:03 AM
True.  Sometimes it is straight trolling.
Oops, I see MUFINY was given a holiday.  Often it is a performance artists objective to shock and offend his or her audience.  Sometimes they go too far.

Seeing the post that got him his vacation, can anyone doubt everything he posts is for effect?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 22, 2017, 10:03:54 AM
Oops, I see MUFINY was given a holiday.  Often it is a performance artists objective to shock and offend his or her audience.  Sometimes they go too far.

Seeing the post that got him his vacation, can anyone doubt everything he posts is for effect?

The guy's life goal was to make a Twatter account that had probably 50 followers.  Sad, lonely life.  While he clearly is a performance artist, if I had a daughter I would certainly pray she was never near anybody like that guy.  He should probably be posting from corrections the next time he posts on Scoop.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on June 22, 2017, 10:32:58 AM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?

Yes
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 22, 2017, 10:38:30 AM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?

I thought it was hoopaloop
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: wadesworld on June 22, 2017, 10:44:22 AM
I thought it was hoopaloop

Winner.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 22, 2017, 10:46:01 AM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?

No. I hadn't paid him any attention prior to this thread.

If that is what you had said, I would have acknowledged it, but you said it was a neo-nazi term as if exclusively theirs, and that is an untrue statement.

Says the guy that provided a link to support my posts. Use has expanded since, but the neo-Nazis usage of it popularized it in contemporary vernacular. Sorry I have to hold your hand through every post. Didn't think you'd need a guide dog to operate Scoop.

(https://s3.amazonaws.com/lowres.cartoonstock.com/animals-eye_doctor-eyesight-eye_tests-guide_dogs-seeing_eye_dogs-mban1934_low.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 22, 2017, 02:06:12 PM
Am I the last guy to realize "4to5years" is Chicos?

You and Brew.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 22, 2017, 02:13:13 PM
No. I hadn't paid him any attention prior to this thread.

Says the guy that provided a link to support my posts. Use has expanded since, but the neo-Nazis usage of it popularized it in contemporary vernacular. Sorry I have to hold your hand through every post. Didn't think you'd need a guide dog to operate Scoop.

(https://s3.amazonaws.com/lowres.cartoonstock.com/animals-eye_doctor-eyesight-eye_tests-guide_dogs-seeing_eye_dogs-mban1934_low.jpg)

Why does the origin of the term matter at all?  Everyone knows what it is and people use it to describe those like them, but with a different political persuasion.  The swastika used to be a religious symbol, but the origin doesn't much matter anymore does it? (I just wanted to keep with the nazi theme...)
(https://frinkiac.com/video/S12E04/YlTN23lLiUvXW4nFv1OYl37MTRU=.gif)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 22, 2017, 04:25:08 PM
Why does the origin of the term matter at all?  Everyone knows what it is and people use it to describe those like them, but with a different political persuasion.  The swastika used to be a religious symbol, but the origin doesn't much matter anymore does it? (I just wanted to keep with the nazi theme...)
(https://frinkiac.com/video/S12E04/YlTN23lLiUvXW4nFv1OYl37MTRU=.gif)

I was pointing out the irony that a group known for anti-LGBT tendencies and anti-Islamic sentiment due to fear of Jihadis borrowed a term written by a gay man and spoken by the terrorist.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: B. McBannerson on June 22, 2017, 11:32:47 PM


Says the guy that provided a link to support my posts. Use has expanded since, but the neo-Nazis usage of it popularized it in contemporary vernacular. Sorry I have to hold your hand through every post. Didn't think you'd need a guide dog to operate Scoop.


As mentioned, the term snowflake was used far earlier than fight club.  It was used in the 18th century and again in the 1970's.

This article, "No, 'Snowflake' as a Slang Term Did Not Begin with 'Fight Club'", does a pretty good job of stating the origins.  No need to handhold, we just disagree with your association with that group.  No big deal.  Enjoyed the cartoon, it was funny.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-less-lovely-side-of-snowflake
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 23, 2017, 08:35:05 AM
Can't we ever just have fun and talk stupid nonsense on a basketball message board with out making every thing a "my philosophy is better than your philosophy" chat?
Not when Chicos oozes back in.  Although, that's impossible, right?  I mean, rocket assured us that he "was in a better place" and "wouldn't be back".  And there is no chance a guy would be so pathetic and desperate for attention that he'd come back to a board he was booted from at least a half-a-dozen times, right?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on June 23, 2017, 10:20:25 AM
As mentioned, the term snowflake was used far earlier than fight club.  It was used in the 18th century and again in the 1970's.

This article, "No, 'Snowflake' as a Slang Term Did Not Begin with 'Fight Club'", does a pretty good job of stating the origins.  No need to handhold, we just disagree with your association with that group.  No big deal.  Enjoyed the cartoon, it was funny.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-less-lovely-side-of-snowflake

You're really good at sharing articles that support exactly what I say:

Quote from: Merriam-Webster
Those words fell out of use while snowflake settled into the lexicon with its hushed and lovely literal meaning...

That use very likely has its genesis in Chuck Palahniuk's 1996 cult-favorite book Fight Club, in which a member of the anti-consumerist Project Mayhem tells the other members: "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone, and we are all part of the same compost pile."

I have repeatedly spoken about how Fight Club is the contemporary usage:

What's amusing is contemporary use of "snowflake" originated with Fight Club, written by Chuck Pahlaniuk.

The term came into popular use recently from Neo-Nazis.

Fight Club is where it was recently redefined and Neo-Nazis are the ones that popularized its recent use.

Use has expanded since, but the neo-Nazis usage of it popularized it in contemporary vernacular. Sorry I have to hold your hand through every post. Didn't think you'd need a guide dog to operate Scoop.

I think your time away has made you rusty on how to operate a message board. Contemporary use started with Fight Club and was popularized in recent years by Neo-Nazis. Both articles you shared have supported this. Any other non-dictionary definition use predates modern use by at least 20+ years, including one regional usage that did not spread beyond a single state and was used over 150 years ago.

Is there like a MUScoopJunior.com (http://www.kidzworld.com/forums/) you could visit for awhile to brush up on how this message board debating thing works? Or do you want to look for a few more articles that support my argument?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Newsdreams on June 23, 2017, 12:03:37 PM
I can see snowflake taking this thread places. How about Marquette snowflakes as a new name!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on June 23, 2017, 12:11:58 PM
and was popularized in recent years by Neo-Nazis.

i.e., the alt-right, i.e., Breitbart, i.e., Bannon, i.e. Senior Advisor to the POTUS.  smh.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on June 23, 2017, 04:14:24 PM
I'm hesitant to weigh into this thread but just a question: did any of you hear "snowflake" used in everyday nomenclature as commonly as it is now before this past election cycle?  I can honestly I did not.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on June 23, 2017, 04:18:02 PM
I was pointing out the irony that a group known for anti-LGBT tendencies and anti-Islamic sentiment due to fear of Jihadis borrowed a term written by a gay man and spoken by the terrorist.

Yeah, got it.  Ironic.  Still doesn't matter. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on June 23, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Sure are a lot of snowflakes weighing in on this discussion.  ;)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 23, 2017, 07:00:26 PM
On da contrare, no one here is as pure as da driven snow, ai na?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on June 23, 2017, 10:41:20 PM
Wait ... we're not the Warriors any more?

Jeesh - miss a little, miss a lot.

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on June 24, 2017, 05:34:54 AM
   " Twatter account"

   typo or a new dating site?  :D
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: DavidBoone2inchesTaller on June 25, 2017, 01:23:49 PM
Wah, wah, wah.

It is about time MU fans man up on this subject.

I loved the Warrior nickname and still call them that ofttimes. But it ain't coming back, so quit whining.

And the answer is very simple to find if you'd stop crying long enough to do so.

The thing about Warriors, Jockey...they never quit.


Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: mileskishnish72 on April 08, 2018, 12:13:34 PM
Check the front of today's NYT magazine section. It shows an American Indian (Native American) HS team - across their chests in script is "Warriors." Are they sticking it to the tribe's elders by perpetuating a stereotype of warmongering savages? Think how offended they must be.
Or are they thumbing their noses as the PC European Americans that decide based on their own moral code what is best for everyone?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GoldenWarrior11 on April 08, 2018, 12:19:37 PM
Holy Cross is now getting rid of the Crusaders imagery (not nickname).  Pretty crazy they were almost in the Big East back in the day.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 08, 2018, 12:31:15 PM
Check the front of today's NYT magazine section. It shows an American Indian (Native American) HS team - across their chests in script is "Warriors." Are they sticking it to the tribe's elders by perpetuating a stereotype of warmongering savages? Think how offended they must be.
Or are they thumbing their noses as the PC European Americans that decide based on their own moral code what is best for everyone?


Or maybe they use respectful imagery that doesn't stereotype?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: WarriorDad on April 08, 2018, 01:12:39 PM

Or maybe they use respectful imagery that doesn't stereotype?

The imagery we used the last 20 years was respectful and designed by a Native American.

People can judge for themselves, here is the link to article with many pictures of the uniforms and warmups.  Scroll down a bit in the article to see variety. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/magazine/arlee-warriors-montana-basketball-flathead-indian-reservation.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fmagazine
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on April 08, 2018, 02:02:20 PM
Check the front of today's NYT magazine section. It shows an American Indian (Native American) HS team - across their chests in script is "Warriors." Are they sticking it to the tribe's elders by perpetuating a stereotype of warmongering savages? Think how offended they must be.
Or are they thumbing their noses as the PC European Americans that decide based on their own moral code what is best for everyone?

It's different when a school that serves primarily native students uses the mascot than when a school that serves primarily white students. That's why the NCAA granted waivers to certain schools like UNC Pembroke
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on April 08, 2018, 02:09:12 PM
Also,  it's now officially the off-season
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on April 08, 2018, 02:12:19 PM
Check the front of today's NYT magazine section. It shows an American Indian (Native American) HS team - across their chests in script is "Warriors." Are they sticking it to the tribe's elders by perpetuating a stereotype of warmongering savages? Think how offended they must be.
Or are they thumbing their noses as the PC European Americans that decide based on their own moral code what is best for everyone?

This argument has echoes of being mad that some hip-hop artists can use a certain word that you as a "European American" cannot.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on April 08, 2018, 02:36:06 PM
Check the front of today's NYT magazine section. It shows an American Indian (Native American) HS team - across their chests in script is "Warriors." Are they sticking it to the tribe's elders by perpetuating a stereotype of warmongering savages? Think how offended they must be.
Or are they thumbing their noses as the PC European Americans that decide based on their own moral code what is best for everyone?

Maybe it's because they are actually Native Americans.

Had the tribes the Jesuits work with not raised the issue perhaps MU remains the Warriors.  The request came from actual Native Americans.

What is "PC run amok" for a certain segment of America: the inability to use racial, sexist and bigoted slurs in public anymore.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on April 08, 2018, 02:49:35 PM
Were people this pissed off for decades when we changed the nickname from Hilltoppers?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on April 08, 2018, 02:56:13 PM
Were people this pissed off for decades when we changed the nickname from Hilltoppers?

No they were too excited by the Native American theme sweeping through Milwaukee after the Braves came to town. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on April 08, 2018, 03:01:27 PM
Were people this pissed off for decades when we changed the nickname from Hilltoppers?

Hilltoppers was offensive to students from Illinois. An easy and popular decision to change the nickname.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 08, 2018, 03:11:45 PM
Hilltoppers was offensive to students from Illinois. An easy and popular decision to change the nickname.

I think Hilltoppers is a great nickname
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on April 08, 2018, 03:15:57 PM
I think Hilltoppers is a great nickname

It was a joke.  Some Wisconsinites refer to people from Illinois as "flat landers."
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 08, 2018, 03:28:08 PM
It was a joke.  Some Wisconsinites refer to people from Illinois as "flat landers."

I know it was a joke. I was just saying I like the nickname Hilltoppers in general. I can only think of one college who rocks the Hilltoppers nickname.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on April 08, 2018, 03:37:41 PM
I know it was a joke. I was just saying I like the nickname Hilltoppers in general. I can only think of one college who rocks the Hilltoppers nickname.

I like it too.  Would definitely support that nickname if MU went back to it.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GoldenWarrior11 on April 08, 2018, 04:04:53 PM
The Cleveland Indians, under order from MLB, are currently removing Chief Wahoo from all uniforms and stadium signs by 2019.  The Braves got rid of Chief Noc-A-Homa in the 80's.  Illinois got rid of Illiniwek in 2007.  San Diego State have recently been in the news for an attempt to remove their Aztec imagery. 

No one wants to complain or argue against Central Michigan or Florida State since they were granted "exceptions" by the NCAA. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on April 08, 2018, 04:15:26 PM
No one wants to complain or argue against Central Michigan or Florida State since they were granted "exceptions" by the NCAA.

Both schools have explicit permission from the respective tribal leadership (Chippewa, Seminole) to use the nickname.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on April 08, 2018, 04:22:07 PM
Both schools have explicit permission from the respective tribal leadership (Chippewa, Seminole) to use the nickname.


Though Florida State only has permission from some of the Seminole nations, not all of them.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Silkk the Shaka on April 08, 2018, 05:36:49 PM
The imagery we used the last 20 years was respectful and designed by a Native American.

People can judge for themselves, here is the link to article with many pictures of the uniforms and warmups.  Scroll down a bit in the article to see variety. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/magazine/arlee-warriors-montana-basketball-flathead-indian-reservation.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fmagazine

And you're still trying to pretend you aren't Chicos?

Hysterical how many of your accounts have posted in this thread.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on April 08, 2018, 05:48:59 PM
Interestin' how dis chit all hit da fan wit Sam as AD, aina?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: burger on April 08, 2018, 06:25:38 PM
I guess you guys were too young to remember the "defacto" rain dance and mascot we had back in the 70's and 80's.....

If the university for whatever reason had not gone there for whatever reason.....I think we could have kept the name....

When some dumbA$$ attached the Indian mascot to the name and did a jig at center court every game.....Hard to argue the ambiguity of the "name".....We were certainly at least politically incorrect.....

PS......Who gives a rat's A$$ about being politically correct.....
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on April 08, 2018, 06:35:04 PM
Da first Warrior wuz 'bout as appropriate at a basketball game as fartin' in church, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on April 08, 2018, 06:40:14 PM
I guess you guys were too young to remember the "defacto" rain dance and mascot we had back in the 70's and 80's.....

If the university for whatever reason had not gone there for whatever reason.....I think we could have kept the name....

When some dumbA$$ attached the Indian mascot to the name and did a jig at center court every game.....Hard to argue the ambiguity of the "name".....We were certainly at least politically incorrect.....

PS......Who gives a rat's A$$ about being politically correct.....

Probably those that are offended
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 08, 2018, 06:54:12 PM
I guess you guys were too young to remember the "defacto" rain dance and mascot we had back in the 70's and 80's.....

If the university for whatever reason had not gone there for whatever reason.....I think we could have kept the name....

When some dumbA$$ attached the Indian mascot to the name and did a jig at center court every game.....Hard to argue the ambiguity of the "name".....We were certainly at least politically incorrect.....

PS......Who gives a rat's A$$ about being politically correct.....


Yep.  If MU had dropped the imagery when they dropped willie wampum, MU is still the Warriors today.  (IMO of course...)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: brewcity77 on April 08, 2018, 06:59:49 PM
This thread feels like some sort of seasonal right of passage. Like it's not the offseason until we again revisit the Warriors name debate.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 08, 2018, 07:02:15 PM
This thread feels like some sort of seasonal right of passage. Like it's not the offseason until we again revisit the Warriors name debate.


A tradition unlike any other...
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on April 08, 2018, 08:38:33 PM
This thread feels like some sort of seasonal right of passage. Like it's not the offseason until we again revisit the Warriors name debate.

Also,  it's now officially the off-season
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on April 08, 2018, 08:51:57 PM
If a benefactor were to pony a significant amount of money for a new building such as a new Warrior Arena on the vacant land , I am sure we could get the name back.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on April 08, 2018, 09:04:04 PM
If a benefactor were to pony a significant amount of money for a new building such as a new Warrior Arena on the vacant land , I am sure we could get the name back.

as long as fr. wilde ain't in the house, right mr. stollenwerk?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: WarriorDad on April 08, 2018, 09:57:08 PM
And you're still trying to pretend you aren't Chicos?

Hysterical how many of your accounts have posted in this thread.

I have one account and only one account.  What are these multiple accounts?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on April 08, 2018, 10:20:22 PM
If a benefactor were to pony a significant amount of money for a new building such as a new Warrior Arena on the vacant land , I am sure we could get the name back.

Never. MU has too much dignity to whore themselves like that. Even Pilarz would t have, that’s how dead and buried it is. Accept it, old timers, there is a better chance of Sherrif Clarke being elected as NAACP President than Marquette bring the Warriors again.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Marcus92 on April 09, 2018, 02:22:36 AM
I'll always be a Marquette Warriors fan. That was the name of the team when I was at Marquette. And it was the name of the team during the glory days of Al McGuire. Personally, I thought it honored the Native Americans that our university's namesake, Jacques Marquette, met as a missionary.

That said, I understand and accept why the name changed. That decision was completely out of my control, and I try not to obsess over such things (like traffic or the weather). The entire process was handled about as poorly as possible, which didn't help. But I don't see any circumstances where it ever changes back.

Golden Eagles is an okay nickname. It ties to our school colors, and eagles are kind of badass. Or maybe it's because they fly like basketballs, or like basketball players, or something. I'm fine with it.

It's certainly no less unique than the Wildcats of Kentucky, Villanova, Arizona, Kansas State, Northwestern, etc. Or the the Bulldogs of Georgia, Butler, Fresno State, Gonzaga, Drake, Mississippi State, etc. And it's way better (in my opinion) than names such as Tar Heels, Demon Deacons, Billikens, Anteaters, Cornhuskers, Aggies, Red Storm or Hokies.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on April 09, 2018, 07:18:30 AM
I'll always be a Marquette Warriors fan. That was the name of the team when I was at Marquette. And it was the name of the team during the glory days of Al McGuire. Personally, I thought it honored the Native Americans that our university's namesake, Jacques Marquette, met as a missionary.


Father Marquette would have been horrified that a school that bore his name would have that kind of mascot. He spent a great deal of his time in America protecting peaceful tribes from violent ones.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 09, 2018, 07:21:40 AM
I just don’t care all that much anymore.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on April 09, 2018, 08:32:21 AM
I'll always be a Marquette Warriors fan. That was the name of the team when I was at Marquette. And it was the name of the team during the glory days of Al McGuire. Personally, I thought it honored the Native Americans that our university's namesake, Jacques Marquette, met as a missionary.

That said, I understand and accept why the name changed. That decision was completely out of my control, and I try not to obsess over such things (like traffic or the weather). The entire process was handled about as poorly as possible, which didn't help. But I don't see any circumstances where it ever changes back.

Golden Eagles is an okay nickname. It ties to our school colors, and eagles are kind of badass. Or maybe it's because they fly like basketballs, or like basketball players, or something. I'm fine with it.

It's certainly no less unique than the Wildcats of Kentucky, Villanova, Arizona, Kansas State, Northwestern, etc. Or the the Bulldogs of Georgia, Butler, Fresno State, Gonzaga, Drake, Mississippi State, etc. And it's way better (in my opinion) than names such as Tar Heels, Demon Deacons, Billikens, Anteaters, Cornhuskers, Aggies, Red Storm or Hokies.

Although I wish we would have gone back to Hilltoppers rather than choose a nickname used by more than a dozen other schools, I share this take.

We ain't going back, kiddies!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: tower912 on April 09, 2018, 08:40:49 AM
Like the Crean hatred, it is time to move on from this, too. 
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Babybluejeans on April 09, 2018, 08:46:33 AM
I too was a fan of the Hilltoppers when we had the vote - it at least bore some relationship to the school and its history. Still, as much as most of us would like the Warriors name back, the opportunity to divorce the imagery from the name has passed. To paraphrase Jerry: like a steam locomotive, rolling down the track, it’s gone, it’s gone, and nothing’s gonna bring it back.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocky_warrior on April 09, 2018, 08:55:00 AM
Father Marquette would have been horrified that a school that bore his name would have that kind of mascot. He spent a great deal of his time in America protecting peaceful tribes from violent ones.

Quite inconsiderate of you to attempt to speak for Father Marquette.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: willie warrior on April 09, 2018, 08:55:16 AM
I'll always be a Marquette Warriors fan. That was the name of the team when I was at Marquette. And it was the name of the team during the glory days of Al McGuire. Personally, I thought it honored the Native Americans that our university's namesake, Jacques Marquette, met as a missionary.

That said, I understand and accept why the name changed. That decision was completely out of my control, and I try not to obsess over such things (like traffic or the weather). The entire process was handled about as poorly as possible, which didn't help. But I don't see any circumstances where it ever changes back.

Golden Eagles is an okay nickname. It ties to our school colors, and eagles are kind of badass. Or maybe it's because they fly like basketballs, or like basketball players, or something. I'm fine with it.

It's certainly no less unique than the Wildcats of Kentucky, Villanova, Arizona, Kansas State, Northwestern, etc. Or the the Bulldogs of Georgia, Butler, Fresno State, Gonzaga, Drake, Mississippi State, etc. And it's way better (in my opinion) than names such as Tar Heels, Demon Deacons, Billikens, Anteaters, Cornhuskers, Aggies, Red Storm or Hokies.
Anteater is a great name.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on April 09, 2018, 08:57:15 AM
I'm an assistant HS bkb coach and early this past season, I wore a Marquette t-shirt to practice.

Our head coach is 31 years old. He saw the t-shirt and said, "That's right, you went to Marquette. The Golden Eagles." I said: "We were the Warriors when I was there."

His response: "No way. I didn't know that."

The year the school did the vote on the nickname and it was decided to keep Golden Eagles, I was chatting with Travis Diener (then with the Pacers) and I asked him what he voted for. "Golden Eagles, of course. That's what I know, that's what we are."

There's a whole world out there that either doesn't give a chit about the Marquette Warriors or doesn't even know we ever were the Warriors.

But sure, it's always fun to have this discussion on Scoop ... every few months.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: StillAWarrior on April 09, 2018, 08:57:27 AM
I promise that it's merely a coincidence that a guy who chose the name "StillAWarrior" on this site 12 years ago (and on the other site years before that) ended up sending his kids to Walsh Jesuit High School -- Home of Warriors!  But I have to admit that it makes me smile.

Although I haven't heard any plans to change it, I'm sure it has come up and will come up in the future.  Earlier this year, the new Principal sought to ban the "Beat Hoban" t-shirts that the students all wear the week of the game with their biggest rival.  Ultimately, someone managed to change his mind on that.  But I can't help but think that someone who felt that those t-shirts were not appropriate would also have a problem with the Warriors name.  I hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on April 09, 2018, 08:59:24 AM
Father Marquette would have been horrified that a school that bore his name would have that kind of mascot. He spent a great deal of his time in America protecting peaceful tribes from violent ones.



Didn't no you got his cell number, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on April 09, 2018, 09:25:09 AM
Quite inconsiderate of you to attempt to speak for Father Marquette.

I drew a conclusion based on data I have gathered.    :)

I am certain that any actual scholar of Father Marquette's life and works would say the same thing.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Herman Cain on April 09, 2018, 10:06:41 AM
Anteater is a great name.
Jumpin’ Jesuits would have been catchy.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: lurch91 on April 09, 2018, 10:16:07 AM
We could always go back to the few weeks we were the Gold!! That'll make everyone happy!!!

(http://photos1.blogger.com/img/224/4315/1024/students5041.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Marcus92 on April 09, 2018, 11:12:23 AM
Father Marquette would have been horrified that a school that bore his name would have that kind of mascot. He spent a great deal of his time in America protecting peaceful tribes from violent ones.

When Wojo or anybody else talks about "playing like Warriors," the context isn't violence and destruction. To be a warrior is to be strong, to show courage, and to persevere no matter what. Granted, that may be too nuanced of an interpretation. Maybe the Marquette Pioneers would have been a more fitting nickname from the very beginning, acknowledging Father Marquette's dedication to exploration and the pursuit of knowledge.

Regardless, none of that matter now. I'm fine with Golden Eagles.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Marcus92 on April 09, 2018, 11:32:03 AM
Anteater is a great name.

An animal nickname is usually chosen for the association to strength or ferocity, to inspire both athletes and fans. Examples include Wolverines, Tigers, Bears, Huskies, etc. There is nothing fierce or strong about an Anteater. They look ridiculous. I'll take Golden Eagles over Anteaters any day.

Uniqueness isn't that important in a nickname. There's a reason we don't see teams named the Naked Mole Rats, Sea Lampreys or the Pink Fairy Armadillos.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on April 09, 2018, 11:35:32 AM
An animal nickname is usually chosen for the association to strength or ferocity, to inspire both athletes and fans. Examples include Wolverines, Tigers, Bears, Huskies, etc. There is nothing fierce or strong about an Anteater. They look ridiculous. I'll take Golden Eagles over Anteaters any day.

Uniqueness isn't that important in a nickname. There's a reason we don't see teams named the Naked Mole Rats, Sea Lampreys or the Pink Fairy Armadillos.

Tell that to the thousands of ants that have lost their lives to the terrifying anteater
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on April 09, 2018, 11:38:51 AM
What's terrifying about ducks,  beavers,  or banana slugs?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on April 09, 2018, 11:52:29 AM
What's terrifying about ducks,  beavers,  or banana slugs?

"Ducks" and "Beavers" have connections to the state of Oregon.  Beavers because Oregon is the Beaver State, Ducks actually evolved from "Webfoots" originally applied to a group of fishermen from the coast of Massachusetts who had been heroes during the American Revolutionary War. When their descendants settled in Oregon's Willamette Valley in the 19th century.  The student body voted for "Webfoots" but over time the media began referring to them as "Ducks" and it stuck.

Banana Slugs was voted in as a joke by the UCSC students.

Look at others. A "Buckeye" is a kind of acorn.  A "Hoosier" is merely a resident of Indiana (and a derogatory term for certain people in Illinois and Missouri). An "Aggie" is merely a nickname for students at an agricultural school. Golden Gophers derives from Minnesota being nicknamed as "the Gopher State" by a political cartoonist. Cornhuskers? Boilermakers? Terrapins? Blue Jays? None of those names are particularly "terrifying" but they work.  In the end, it's the name of the university that matters.

The most "terrifying' name in the Big East may be the Blue Demons. How's that working out for DePaul in instilling fear and terror in opponents?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on April 09, 2018, 12:00:03 PM
What's terrifying about ducks,  beavers,  or banana slugs?

A fisherman in Belarus was bitten to death by a beaver, and all he was doing was trying to take its picture.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/04/11/newser-beaver-kills-man/2074145/
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Galway Eagle on April 09, 2018, 12:02:35 PM
"Ducks" and "Beavers" have connections to the state of Oregon.  Beavers because Oregon is the Beaver State, Ducks actually evolved from "Webfoots" originally applied to a group of fishermen from the coast of Massachusetts who had been heroes during the American Revolutionary War. When their descendants settled in Oregon's Willamette Valley in the 19th century.  The student body voted for "Webfoots" but over time the media began referring to them as "Ducks" and it stuck.

Banana Slugs was voted in as a joke by the UCSC students.

Look at others. A "Buckeye" is a kind of acorn.  A "Hoosier" is merely a resident of Indiana (and a derogatory term for certain people in Illinois and Missouri). An "Aggie" is merely a nickname for students at an agricultural school. Golden Gophers derives from Minnesota being nicknamed as "the Gopher State" by a political cartoonist. Cornhuskers? Boilermakers? Terrapins? Blue Jays? None of those names are particularly "terrifying" but they work.  In the end, it's the name of the university that matters.

The most "terrifying' name in the Big East may be the Blue Demons. How's that working out for DePaul in instilling fear and terror in opponents?

In all fairness Depaul was initially the D-Men because they didn't have a mascot and other schools referred to them as the D-Men because they had a big D on the front of their jerseys.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 09, 2018, 12:03:24 PM
In all fairness Depaul was initially the D-Men because they didn't have a mascot and other schools referred to them as the D-Men because they had a big D on the front of their jerseys.


Now that is actually an interesting story.  Never made that connection before.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: naginiF on April 09, 2018, 12:07:59 PM
In all fairness Depaul was initially the D-Men because they didn't have a mascot and other schools referred to them as the D-Men because they had a big D on the front of their jerseys.
When you say "they had a big D on the front of their jersey" are you referring to the letter in the alphabet, or.....
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Eldon on April 09, 2018, 12:18:36 PM
"Ducks" and "Beavers" have connections to the state of Oregon.  Beavers because Oregon is the Beaver State, Ducks actually evolved from "Webfoots" originally applied to a group of fishermen from the coast of Massachusetts who had been heroes during the American Revolutionary War. When their descendants settled in Oregon's Willamette Valley in the 19th century.  The student body voted for "Webfoots" but over time the media began referring to them as "Ducks" and it stuck.

Banana Slugs was voted in as a joke by the UCSC students.

Look at others. A "Buckeye" is a kind of acorn.  A "Hoosier" is merely a resident of Indiana (and a derogatory term for certain people in Illinois and Missouri). An "Aggie" is merely a nickname for students at an agricultural school. Golden Gophers derives from Minnesota being nicknamed as "the Gopher State" by a political cartoonist. Cornhuskers? Boilermakers? Terrapins? Blue Jays? None of those names are particularly "terrifying" but they work.  In the end, it's the name of the university that matters.

The most "terrifying' name in the Big East may be the Blue Demons. How's that working out for DePaul in instilling fear and terror in opponents?

Are you kidding me?  I fear our RPI every time we play DePaul.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: StillAWarrior on April 09, 2018, 12:28:37 PM
A fisherman in Belarus was bitten to death by a beaver, and all he was doing was trying to take its picture.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/04/11/newser-beaver-kills-man/2074145/

I've heard it told that beavers have been known to bite off a man's nipple (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjerEk16b7w).
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on April 09, 2018, 12:34:11 PM
"Ducks" and "Beavers" have connections to the state of Oregon.  Beavers because Oregon is the Beaver State, Ducks actually evolved from "Webfoots" originally applied to a group of fishermen from the coast of Massachusetts who had been heroes during the American Revolutionary War. When their descendants settled in Oregon's Willamette Valley in the 19th century.  The student body voted for "Webfoots" but over time the media began referring to them as "Ducks" and it stuck.

Banana Slugs was voted in as a joke by the UCSC students.

Look at others. A "Buckeye" is a kind of acorn.  A "Hoosier" is merely a resident of Indiana (and a derogatory term for certain people in Illinois and Missouri). An "Aggie" is merely a nickname for students at an agricultural school. Golden Gophers derives from Minnesota being nicknamed as "the Gopher State" by a political cartoonist. Cornhuskers? Boilermakers? Terrapins? Blue Jays? None of those names are particularly "terrifying" but they work.  In the end, it's the name of the university that matters.

The most "terrifying' name in the Big East may be the Blue Demons. How's that working out for DePaul in instilling fear and terror in opponents?

Well, they have beat us three out of the last four years so perhaps we should tone down the chest thumping?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on April 09, 2018, 12:37:14 PM
Well, they have beat us three out of the last four years so perhaps we should tone down the chest thumping?

Marquette has won 4 of the last 5. So a two year blip when MU was rebuilding, then back to business as usual.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on April 09, 2018, 12:38:47 PM
                might as well add these to the bonfire-

Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: MU82 on April 09, 2018, 12:39:35 PM
Jumpin’ Jesuits would have been catchy.

I always pushed for Scalpin' Savages.

I mean, if you're gonna go with the negative Injun imagery, go all the way!
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on April 09, 2018, 12:41:06 PM
                might as well add these to the bonfire-
Why?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 09, 2018, 12:47:46 PM
Why?

You need to pay more attention to the whack-job media and their latest outrage.

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2018/04/marquette-liberals-believe-university-seal-of-namesake-a-microaggression/

http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/marquette-forum-calls-university-seal-a-microaggression/

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10697
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on April 09, 2018, 12:49:45 PM
Marquette has won 4 of the last 5. So a two year blip when MU was rebuilding, then back to business as usual.

And DePaul wasn't rebuilding?  The fact remains, MU has lost to DePaul in three out of the last four seasons.  Hardly worth getting a fan hard-on over a lame school mascot. 

Hopefully, we have turned the corner and the team plays like Warriors as you state.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: warriorchick on April 09, 2018, 12:58:01 PM
When Wojo or anybody else talks about "playing like Warriors," the context isn't violence and destruction. To be a warrior is to be strong, to show courage, and to persevere no matter what. Granted, that may be too nuanced of an interpretation. Maybe the Marquette Pioneers would have been a more fitting nickname from the very beginning, acknowledging Father Marquette's dedication to exploration and the pursuit of knowledge.

Regardless, none of that matter now. I'm fine with Golden Eagles.


I agree.  Nonetheless, that is not what the name "Warriors" paired with Native American imagery has traditionally suggested due to the historical depiction of Native Americans as "savages".

I had hoped that we could have switched to a more positive warriors theme - someone on this board suggested Joan of Arc, which I thought was brilliant - but unfortunately, that's not going to happen.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: 4everwarriors on April 09, 2018, 01:37:25 PM
What's terrifying about ducks,  beavers,  or banana slugs?



Sum dudes are terrified of beavers. Can't understand der apprehension. Kinda enjoy seein' 'em in der natural habitat, hey?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on April 09, 2018, 01:52:16 PM
You need to pay more attention to the whack-job media and their latest outrage.

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2018/04/marquette-liberals-believe-university-seal-of-namesake-a-microaggression/

http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/marquette-forum-calls-university-seal-a-microaggression/

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10697
Ahhhhh, World Nut Daily.  How could I leave that off my reading list?  Without WND I never would have known that gays were behind the holocaust and Obama was a gay, secret Muslim, foreign born imposter.  The folks who think Breitbart is waayyyyyyy too liberal.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: rocket surgeon on April 09, 2018, 02:20:25 PM
What's terrifying about ducks,  beavers,  or banana slugs?

well not really terrifying but when the banana slugs meet the beavers, gotta keep those 2 separated-not a made for tv event, eyn'er?
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Pakuni on April 09, 2018, 02:22:59 PM


Sum dudes are terrified of beavers. Can't understand der apprehension. Kinda enjoy seein' 'em in der natural habitat, hey?

Ricky's on State is not their natural habitat, 4ever
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Billy Hoyle on April 09, 2018, 03:12:19 PM
Well, they have beat us three out of the last four years so perhaps we should tone down the chest thumping?

I'm referring to overall - one winning record in 13 seasons, five seasons with single-digit wins, eight seasons finishing last in the Big East.  I don't think a couple of upset victories make up for overall horrendous results over a significant period of time. Every other team in the Big East has made the tourney at least twice, since DePaul rode our coattails to the Big East.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: buckchuckler on April 09, 2018, 04:45:40 PM
Marquette has won 4 of the last 5. So a two year blip when MU was rebuilding, then back to business as usual.

Yeah well, that one out of 5 they got probably kept MU out of the tourney, so I take little solace in winning at an 80% clip.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on April 09, 2018, 04:51:50 PM
Yeah well, that one out of 5 they got probably kept MU out of the tourney, so I take little solace in winning at an 80% clip.

Whatever. Feel however you want to feel.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: naginiF on April 09, 2018, 05:28:35 PM
Whatever. Feel however you want to feel.
This should be the title of this thread
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: f/k/a humanlung on April 11, 2018, 09:58:17 AM
Wah, wah, wah.

It is about time MU fans man up on this subject.

I loved the Warrior nickname and still call them that ofttimes. But it ain't coming back, so quit whining.

And the answer is very simple to find if you'd stop crying long enough to do so.

For us old-timers, it wasn't the name change itself, it was the complete scam run by the administration in doing it that has many (including me) so bitter.
Title: Re: Why Is It Ok For Golden State To Be Warriors But Not MU?
Post by: GGGG on April 11, 2018, 10:01:03 AM
For us old-timers, it wasn't the name change itself, it was the complete scam run by the administration in doing it that has many (including me) so bitter.


I agree.  But that administration is long-gone.