Marquette Warrior: Nickname Conspiracy?

Friday, June 03, 2005

Nickname Conspiracy?

The choice of the new nickname and (eventually) a new mascot has engendered a huge about of speculation and conjecture — which of course was to be expected, given the way the process that dumped “Warriors” and adopted “Gold” was entirely closed and highly manipulative. Our e-mail has brought this interesting piece of conjecture from an alumnus:
As an alum who was present during the 1994 DiUlio debacle, whereby a pre-determined mascot was named before the end of student voting on the final choice (remember Lightning vs. Golden Eagles), I wonder if we’re not headed down that same road with this vote.

The existence of an independent polling firm notwithstanding, the inclusion of Golden Knights on the ballot makes me wonder. Is this the dark horse candidate that may end up winning? Why? Because (a) the Knight figure would represent what many of us believe a new Warrior would represent: strength, honor, valor, pursuit of right ideals, goodness (something this process and BOT lack at this point), and (b) this would allow Wild and the BOT an “out,” should Golden Eagles advance to the final round, or should the second round end up pitting Golden Avalanche or the Hilltoppers vs. GEs. While I don’t subscribe to Grassy Knoll theories in general, knowing the history with the process of “selecting” a nickname (which it isn’t, because everyone wants Warrior back), does Golden Knights actually make sense from the Board of Trustee’s point of view?

It: (a) allows the board to disconnect itself from Golden Eagles/DiUlio.

(b) puts out a mascot that embodies the Warrior ideals without going back to the Warriors (and yes this would be awfully patronizing), and

(c) gives Wild some marketing potential, because there are not many schools with Golden Knights.

I have talked to several people — alums and MU staffers (academic and non) who seem to think the result has been pre-ordained and the votes will be “tailored” to this outcome.
We aren’t big believers in conspiracy theories. Indeed, we like the maxim “never resort to conspiracy to explain anything that can be adequately explained by mere incompetence.” The second premise is: “the two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and incompetence.”

Thus it follows that the best argument against an Administration plot to choose “Golden Knights” is that it’s such a good choice!

Those who haven’t voted might want to consider the writer’s arguments in favor of Golden Knights, and perhaps vote for it — as well as casting a write-in vote for Warriors!


Post a Comment

<< Home