Looks Like Jim McMahon touched the proverbial third rail

[NYWarrior]

....and stirred the echoes of Warriors past.  Huge threads here and the other board, not McAdams is chronicling it all........and now there's a grass roots effort to wear headdresses to the game tonight.

how ironic....by trying to muzzle this kid, McMahon might actually ensure that there is more 'offensive' Native American imagery in the crowd tonight than MU has had in more than two decades.  I am a 1991 graduate -- I can honestly say that I never saw Willie Wampum or any fan dressing in a headdress at a game. 

Time for TiVo.

http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2007/03/indian-headdresses-at-tomorrows.html

[mutpm]

These tactics always surprise me.  These are educated people who think that by covering something up, it will go away.  10-15 years ago, that was fine, but not in this day and age.  Between message boards, blogs, YouTube, email, etc.., you end up with the opposite of the intended goal.  In this case, instead of 1 person in a headress, I'm assuming we will see 100's.

[LastWarrior]

In a letter I wrote to Father Wild during the nickname fiasco, I stated that by not returning to the Warriors nickname and an alternative, non-native american mascot would only cause more people to wear Warriors Forever shirts and headdresses.  I said it would only be a matter of time before people started the tomahawak chop!  The best play for the administration would have been for the University to return to the Warriors nickname but with a new mascot (Joan of Arc?).  How such "intelligent" people missed this is beyond me.  As long as we don't have the Warriors nickname, people will continue to wear the native american gear - the school will never disassociate itself from the Warriors nickname.  Their best bet is to disassociate from the native american mascot.

[mwbauer7]

LastWarrior, That is a great point. I hadn't thought about that before but it certainly seems it would work that way. It seems we see all of these warrior demonstrations (headdresses, banners, etc) in protest of Golden Eagles. If we were to revert to Warriors with no association to Native Americans you may see many more people with simply Warriors Apparel, rather than Warriors, AND with Wampum or the Old logo, etc. I would like to see a blind survey of American Citizens of the first thing that comes to mind when they hear "warrior" not in context with NCAA Athletics or Marquette. I would be interested to see what percentage polled would reply "Native Americans"

[muwarrior87]

I've been saying that since the Gold fiasco. We can still be the Warriors without being a Native American. And in regard to the tomahawk chop, during the ND game, some fans did start that. We'll see if it turns up tonight or not.

[Marquette84]

How such "intelligent" people missed this is beyond me.  As long as we don't have the Warriors nickname, people will continue to wear the native american gear - the school will never disassociate itself from the Warriors nickname. 

The notion that college educated people couldn't figure out how to start using Joan of Arc imagery on their own--without some sort of administration blessing--still amazes me.  

Why can't all those people who feel intellectually superior to the administration figure out that if they want a Joan of Arc mascot, they should simply adopt it?  In five years, if you have 18000 people solidly behind a Joan of Arc theme the board will realize that they were mistaken about the ability of MU fans to separate themselves from the old Indian images.  

Why can't those intellectually superior people consider for just a moment that if they dress up like an Indian, those board members will simply say "See, we told they would never be able to separate the Indian images."  

The intelectual bargain people seem to be making is one better suited to a toddler throwing a temper tantrum:  "If you don't give us what we want, we'll do our best to embarass you."

It seems to me that if the goal is to get a Joan of Arc mascot, instead of wearing Indian stuff in an attempt to embarass the board into giving into you, you should just start wearing the Joan of Arc stuff and prove that you're serious what you say.  

It also avoids the nasty logistical question of  how you're going to get people to give up the Indian stuff once the board does adopt the Joan of Arc Warrior mascot.

The administration feels that you can't disassociate the Warrior name from the Indian image.  Every game they see Indian motifs, they gain more confidence that they were correct in that belief.  

If you want the Warrior name back with a different mascot, you're going to have to prove them wrong--not make some intellectually bankrupt argument that you can't possibly adopt the new Joan of Arc mascot until the Warrior name is returned.  

Sometimes YOU have to make the first concession.  Sometimes your best negotiating position is to make the first move ("We'll switch to a Joan of Arc mascot")--not make threats  ("You'll see even MORE indian gear unless we get our way").

You apparantly KNOW what you want the new mascot to be--just start using it and just maybe you'll start to turn some heads.

[LastWarrior]

How such "intelligent" people missed this is beyond me.  As long as we don't have the Warriors nickname, people will continue to wear the native american gear - the school will never disassociate itself from the Warriors nickname. 

The administration feels that you can't disassociate the Warrior name from the Indian image.  Every game they see Indian motifs, they gain more confidence that they were correct in that belief. 

If you want the Warrior name back with a different mascot, you're going to have to prove them wrong--not make some intellectually bankrupt argument that you can't possibly adopt the new Joan of Arc mascot until the Warrior name is returned. 

Sometimes YOU have to make the first concession.  Sometimes your best negotiating position is to make the first move ("We'll switch to a Joan of Arc mascot")--not make threats  ("You'll see even MORE indian gear unless we get our way").

ding, ding, ding!!  If there was only an organization back during the nickname fiasco that promoted this concept and tried to convince the administration that this was the right path...     Have you ever heard of the the new-warriors.com site?  It promoted this exact concept.  The nickname without the native american imagery is what we tried to promote.  We discouraged use of the native american imagery. 

During the nickname fiasco, you saw very little native american imagery at the games.  It was not until after the decision to go with the golden chickens that you saw more and more native amercian imagery re-appear.  You can call all the people wearing warriors forever t-shirts and headdresses toddlers but I think you need to focus on how little of the native american imagery you saw during the nickname decision.  The alumni and fans made a statement during the voting process that they could stay away from the native american imagery but the school choose to ignore this.  The current people that wearing the warriors t-shirts and headdresses are only keeping the nickname debate alive.

BTW, I never said to make Joan of Arc as our mascot but it's a good idea.  Imagine that positive press we could get by having a strong woman as our mascot... ummhhh the marketing possibilities.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

I've been saying that since the Gold fiasco. We can still be the Warriors without being a Native American. And in regard to the tomahawk chop, during the ND game, some fans did start that. We'll see if it turns up tonight or not.

DO NOT do the tomahawk chop.  I'm all for the Warriors, but the chop is the worst chant in sports.

[IAmMarquette]

I've been saying that since the Gold fiasco. We can still be the Warriors without being a Native American. And in regard to the tomahawk chop, during the ND game, some fans did start that. We'll see if it turns up tonight or not.

DO NOT do the tomahawk chop.  I'm all for the Warriors, but the chop is the worst chant in sports.

Agreed. The Braves can have that one.

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

Interestingly enough this morning, Bilas was conversing with a group of fans while signing autographs about the Warrior issue.  He was asking why they weren't the Warriors, and there were a variety of explanations tossed out.  More or less, he pretty much agreed up the position of many fans that Warriors is not a solely American Indian term, and asked why Marquette couldn't just change the mascot to a non-Indian image and be done with it.

I pretty much told him it's a matter of willingness of the university to do it, and they weren't willing to do it and define the terms of Warriors in another context.  If a Duke law grad can figure this out, why can't the rest?