A Digression

From: lotus@staff.uiuc.edu (Matthew Ivaliotes)
Newsgroups: uiuc.general
Subject: Re: University of Illinois/Urbana-Champaign Mascot
Date: 15 Mar 1998 01:07:12 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 23
Distribution: uiuc
Message-ID: <6ef9k0$4c8$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
References: <350603FB.7A09@uillinois.edu> <35060E11.99ABAE66@cu-online.com> <Pine.SOL.3.96.980310224904.6634A-100000@ux9.cso.uiuc.edu> <6e56n2$78i$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <3506A611.2333@nsgsun.aae.uiuc.edu> <350B4418.61E5@NOSPAM.uiuc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: staff1.cso.uiuc.edu
Xref: vixen.cso.uiuc.edu uiuc.general:60767

Kyle Levenhagen <levenhag@NOSPAM.uiuc.edu> writes:

>Who says we have to have the Chief as a mascot? I mean, we can have a
>different mascot and still be the Fighting Illini. Possibly the best
>example would be the Kansas City Chiefs in the NFL... they have a WOLF
>as a mascot, for cryin' out loud. Why can't we have a big, plush
>squirrel (I'm thinking of Rocky, from "Rocky and Bullwinkle" here), or
>something? It would make some sense, too, considering how many of those
>damned things we've got running around here.

I could live with us being the Fighting Illini and getting rid of the dork in the costume and the music from a cowboy movie. Then again, I am of the very strong opinion that all team names with gerunds in them are inherently dorky. If the name itself doesn't strike fear into your opponents' hearts, adding 'fighting' to it won't help, and just points out how unintimidating you are.

And for fashion considerations, I'd like something a bit more aesthetically pleasing than that round, physically improbably head-in-a-headress symbol which is in ever-waning use on merchandise.

Matt I.
speaking only for me

16 March, 1998 << Journal Index >> 23 March, 1998
H O M E