Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ChrisUND1

Students Spearhead Effort for Fighting Hawks Mascot

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

So......getting back to the mascot.  Rickabaugh Graphics, who is designing the mascot, has done mascots for other scools like Ohio St, Iowa, and UCF to name a few.  You can check out their portfolio:

https://www.rickabaughgraphics.com/portfolio

One of their clients is the Marquette Golden Eagles.  Possibly a sneak peak as to what a real life Fighting Hakws mascot will look like.  Looking at the picture below, looks like the arms/wings that the Golden Eagle has in the pic are similar to what was proposed for our mascot.  Perhaps a sneak peak of the fighting Hakws mascot.

mascot.jpg

ah yes those Marquette Golden Eagles.... no nickname issues there, right?   Everyone just jumped on board on day one and accepted the big yellow bird, never uttering the word "Warriors" ever again....

Please everyone, join me for a trip down memory lane and let's see how force feeding lame names and/or logos has gone over historically...

https://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/nickname/start

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

I think we can all agree that the committee failed big time following their own directives in picking a nickname.  That being said, There is no chance they they are going to scrap the whole thing and start again from scratch.  Given the time, resources, and most importantly money it would take to develop and implement a new nickname and logo, I don't see that happening.  

Did the committee screw up?  Yep.  Is the nickname bland and unoriginal?  Yep.  Could the logo have been better?  Yep.  But That is the reality we are living in right now.  Focusing our efforts accepting what we have goes a lot further than resisting something we can't change.  

If a small group of hand-wringing, mouth-breathing, bed-wetters could convince the NCAA to ban Fighting Sioux, it should be more than possible to get UND to change Fighting Hawks to something THAT MEETS THEIR OWN GUIDELINES!!!  The objection to Fighting Hawks is very much more legitimate, appropriate and defensible than the aforementioned group's objection to Fighting Sioux.  And as a disclaimer for the "Fighting Hawks Forever" crowd - yes, I understand why Fighting Sioux had to go (and I supported that decision), and that it will never be coming back.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DamStrait said:

If a small group of hand-wringing, mouth-breathing, bed-wetters could convince the NCAA to ban Fighting Sioux, it should be more than possible to get UND to change Fighting Hawks to something THAT MEETS THEIR OWN GUIDELINES!!!  The objection to Fighting Hawks is very much more legitimate, appropriate and defensible than the aforementioned group's objection to Fighting Sioux.  And as a disclaimer for the "Fighting Hawks Forever" crowd - yes, I understand why Fighting Sioux had to go (and I supported that decision), and that it will never be coming back.

You downvote way to f'n much.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UND1983 said:

You downvote way to f'n much.  

I bet he'll downvote your comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DamStrait said:

If a small group of hand-wringing, mouth-breathing, bed-wetters could convince the NCAA to ban Fighting Sioux, it should be more than possible to get UND to change Fighting Hawks to something THAT MEETS THEIR OWN GUIDELINES!!!  The objection to Fighting Hawks is very much more legitimate, appropriate and defensible than the aforementioned group's objection to Fighting Sioux.  And as a disclaimer for the "Fighting Hawks Forever" crowd - yes, I understand why Fighting Sioux had to go (and I supported that decision), and that it will never be coming back.

How much do you think this would cost?

Private donors would foot bill, I assume?

Who would get to choose the new name and logo?

I'll hang up and listen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:

ah yes those Marquette Golden Eagles.... no nickname issues there, right?   Everyone just jumped on board on day one and accepted the big yellow bird, never uttering the word "Warriors" ever again....

Please everyone, join me for a trip down memory lane and let's see how force feeding lame names and/or logos has gone over historically...

https://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/nickname/start

Last sentence:

"Regardless, and likely a direct consequence of the university's failure to commission a new 'Warriors' logo, the Native American logos used in the past continue to be seen in excess at every Marquette sporting event. Even current students, who were youngsters when the original decision to change the nickname was announced, continue to chant 'Let's Go Warriors' during men's basketball games."

2005 to 2018 is 13 years. So, does the SF crowd get a few more years? ;)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, DamStrait said:

If a small group of hand-wringing, mouth-breathing, bed-wetters could convince the NCAA to ban Fighting Sioux, it should be more than possible to get UND to change Fighting Hawks to something THAT MEETS THEIR OWN GUIDELINES!!!  The objection to Fighting Hawks is very much more legitimate, appropriate and defensible than the aforementioned group's objection to Fighting Sioux.  And as a disclaimer for the "Fighting Hawks Forever" crowd - yes, I understand why Fighting Sioux had to go (and I supported that decision), and that it will never be coming back.

Tough to put it all on the committee when students, faculty and staff (including retirees), alumni, donors and season ticket holders were the ones who actually picked it. Complain all you want that the committee (chaired by former hockey player Karl Goehring) failed by leaving it in the finalist group, but the blame lies on those that voted for picking it over Nodaks, North Stars, Roughriders and Sundogs. 

Looking at how the committee actually ranked the 7 original finalists using the criteria you mentioned, they preferred Roughriders (48 points) followed by Sundogs and North Stars (46 points), Nodaks (42), Fighting Hawks (41), Green Hawks (35) and no nickname (21).

The people that voted had two different chances to eliminate Fighting Hawks, when the list was narrowed from 5 to 3 and the final vote. Yet it came out on top both times. Again, the committee may have left it on there but it wasn't them that picked it.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

I bet he'll downvote your comment.

:D  Cratter beat him to it.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Looking at how the committee actually ranked the 7 original finalists using the criteria you mentioned, they preferred Roughriders (48 points) ...

No comment.

 

Oh what the < bleep >: I told you so.
Despite the protestations of our resident Abe Vigoda devotee (Abe's dead, HA!), I still say that would've been the one to meet all stated criteria. And so what about GFRRHS; see: Ames, IA. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Sicatoka said:

No comment.

 

Oh what the < bleep >: I told you so.
Despite the protestations of our resident Abe Vigoda devotee (Abe's dead, HA!), I still say that would've been the one to meet all stated criteria. And so what about GFRRHS; see: Ames, IA. 

That's what I voted for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So since I have no vote, Hopefully I can encourage any current students on here as to my opinion.  I think option Y is the best option of the 3.  Option X looks too much like a bald eagle, and option Z has a head that is too narrow and tall.  Option Y has a beak and head that IMO resembles a hawk the most.  The black lefs are also an added kicker which make it better.  So to all the students out there...Vote Y

Y.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FH should not have been on the list.  Only 1 person submitted it from the stakeholder group.  It didn't meet any of the criteria, while Nodaks, Sundogs, RR, Northstars met some of the requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, UND1981 said:

FH should not have been on the list.  Only 1 person submitted it from the stakeholder group.  It didn't meet any of the criteria, while Nodaks, Sundogs, RR, Northstars met some of the requirements.

Change the record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, UND1981 said:

FH should not have been on the list.  Only 1 person submitted it from the stakeholder group.  It didn't meet any of the criteria, while Nodaks, Sundogs, RR, Northstars met some of the requirements.

 

11 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Change the record.

He's got a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UND1983 said:

We got the point.  

Haha this entire thread (myself included) has gone in circles for days. It happens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, UND1981 said:

FH should not have been on the list.  Only 1 person submitted it from the stakeholder group.  It didn't meet any of the criteria, while Nodaks, Sundogs, RR, Northstars met some of the requirements.

I don't see how that's still on the stakeholders for voting it the top choice twice and making the actual selection. They had two chances to remedy what the committee missed and didn't do so. They pretty much had to do a top 5 to include Nodaks in the vote after the backlash about removing "no nickname" (which should have never been considered in the first place). However even if they would have just went with the top 3 choices, I can't imagine there still isn't at least a similar type of argument going on today because if we're being honest, for a large contingent of those opposed, whatever was picked wasn't going to matter, they were going to hate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

No comment.

 

Oh what the < bleep >: I told you so.
Despite the protestations of our resident Abe Vigoda devotee (Abe's dead, HA!), I still say that would've been the one to meet all stated criteria. And so what about GFRRHS; see: Ames, IA. 

It's a great name for a school in New Mexico, or a condom.   For the millionth time, the actual Roughriders had nothing to do with North Dakota, so I don't see how it met the criteria at all.  

In this world of political correctness, no one can tell me with a straight face "Roughriders" would not at some point be construed as old indian hatin' wild west cowboys, and we'd face backlash at some point and have the same nickname dilemma all over again.  No nickname was the correct choice as it was supported by the majority of the public.  After that, Nodaks.

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Last sentence:

"Regardless, and likely a direct consequence of the university's failure to commission a new 'Warriors' logo, the Native American logos used in the past continue to be seen in excess at every Marquette sporting event. Even current students, who were youngsters when the original decision to change the nickname was announced, continue to chant 'Let's Go Warriors' during men's basketball games."

2005 to 2018 is 13 years. So, does the SF crowd get a few more years? ;)

The name Golden Eagles has been around since 1994, so depending which grudge they're concentrating on, 13-24 years they've been dealing with it.  :blink:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:

The name Golden Eagles has been around since 1994, so depending which grudge they're concentrating on, 13-24 years they've been dealing with it.  :blink:  

Wonder if there are fans in Marquette telling the Warriors Forever crowd to "get over it"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 5:08 PM, ChrisUND1 said:

I keep hearing a lot if what ifs, buts, if only...

If only I had asked Mary to the prom back in high school.  If only I had scored that touchdown in the big game in 82...

Sioux forever people and their arguments remind me of the Hillary supporters who say Trump is not their president.  "Hawks is NOT my logo!" Haha.  *Disclaimer: not a political post

That is funny!

And just like the HRC campaign and the DNC rigged the primary against Crazy Bernie, the UND administration removed "North Dakota" as an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...