Stupid UM Mascot Article at Detroit News

Submitted by StephenRKass on August 3rd, 2011 at 12:33 PM

There is another stupid mascot article over at the Detroit News, calling for Michigan to relent and add a Mascot. (Link:  http://detnews.com/article/20110803/OPINION03/108030411/1131/sports0201/What%E2%80%99s-the-fuss-Michigan?-Just-get-a-mascot-already) I hope Dave Brandon doesn't cave to this idiocy, and that Michigan gets back to its regular winning ways. I wish there was some way for the alumni base to make clear their feelings on this.

Comments

Wolverine Devotee

August 3rd, 2011 at 12:44 PM ^

The thing that pisses me off is he's talking down to the Michigan program. This isn't minneblowta. Michigan has a GREAT hockey program that is a national power, an on the rise basketball program and a recovering football program. All 3 sports combined have 21 NCs.

I wouldn't mind a mascot, as long as it doesn't look stupid. But I don't want one for the reasons he listed. If you look around every national power has one. Oklahoma,Texas,Bama,LSU,Kentucky,Duke,UConn (MBB) etc.

psychomatt

August 3rd, 2011 at 12:54 PM ^

Someone had the idea of a zoo-like habitat at/near the stadium featuring a couple of live wolverines. That's the only decent idea I've heard thus far.

M2NASA

August 3rd, 2011 at 12:58 PM ^

We need a mascot so that kids grow up to be Michigan fans?

I think we're doing just fine.

Michigan Stadium is unimpressed by your lack of intelligent writing.

BlueHills

August 3rd, 2011 at 1:28 PM ^

A Minnesota guy doesn't understand UM traditions. That's fine; it's to be expected.

Let's face it - a football mascot is a taste thing. Those with good taste are against it.

Those with lowbrow tastes and a burning need to have a mascot are free attend MSU games and revel in watching Sparty. As far as I'm concerned, Dave Branding's last day on the job at Michigan can't come too soon.

Yostbound and Down

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:16 PM ^

Thanks for the info, I just wasn't sure if it was something MDen or whoever designed in the last few years to look retro. Apparently it is legit.

It would make for an interesting costume I guess. I'm not really moved in either direction by the mascot debate.

Clarence Beeks

August 3rd, 2011 at 5:17 PM ^

Probably because they are navy and yellow, at least according to Adidas' idea of colors.  I didn't see the "navy" shirt in person, but I did see the "yellow" one and it is most definitely a distinctly different color from the neon yellow that Adidas is trying to pass off as maize that is only almost everything else that the M Den sells.  The kind of funny (read: sad) thing is that the color of the "yellow" shirt is actually much closer to what someone would actually consider maize to be, but Adidas lives in this weird world where maize is actually neon yellow and yellow is actually maize.

jmblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 1:35 PM ^

wish there was some way for the alumni base to make clear their feelings on this.

The Detroit News itself had a poll on this issue, and it was 2-1 opposed. Brandon confirmed that there are no plans for a mascot. People can relax.

hart20

August 3rd, 2011 at 1:38 PM ^

Me why we don't have a mascot. My immediate answer, without even thinking, was "Because we're not douchebags." That's all that needs to be said about getting a mascot.

Bobby Digital

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:09 PM ^

"A mascot can bring hope. A 48-28 home loss to Wisconsin sits better when (insert name) Wolverine and Bucky Badger troll the sidelines waiting for the chance to throw down."

 

Oh yeah.... this guy gets it all right.

dlcase1708

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:11 PM ^

I think that's what attracts most people to Michigan in the first place - we don't need a mascot as our identity. "Michigan" is our identity, and that, in and of itself, is more than enough. Maybe that's arrogant, but I know that's how I felt in middle and high school, before I was lucky enough to attend this fine institution.

moredamnsound

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:16 PM ^

Paraphrasing the article, then my opinion.
<br>
<br>You should have a mascot because he'll make the game more exciting.
<br>-I am already over-excited when I'm in the Big House.
<br>
<br>The Phanatic makes Phillies games more fun.
<br>-Baseball is a generally less eventful game, even then I don't feel the need for Paws at Comerica.
<br>
<br>Mascots are awesome.
<br>-No, no they are not. As far as mascots go for me, the only lasting stunts that mascots pull are the ones that embarrass the school.
<br>
<br>It would be awesome to lift the mascot and carry them around the stadium after a win.
<br>-How about we continue the whole "the team, the team, the team" idea and not put anyone above the team.

Engin77

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:20 PM ^

Let's Face It, Playing For A Little Brown Jug is No Longer Relevant to Today's Players

Maize and Blue are so last-century; suggested new UM colors: Taupe and Teal

Yost Fieldhouse: Why Continue To Renovate That Space When You Have a Fantastic Joe Louis Arena Just Down the Freeway.

kurpit

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:45 PM ^

i didn't have a problem being a michigan fan when i was a kid despite the lack of a mascot. in fact, i hated people dressed up in costumes all together. never sat on santa's lap or posed with the easter bunny and i'm sure i would have steered clear of a guy in a wolverine costume just the same.

swamyblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

DB (our Beloved "ADocious" Marketing Extrodianaire) should strike a cross promotion with Marvel and use Wolverine "The Man Beast" for our masoct.  And this guy below is ready to report for duty!

(snapped @ Comicon a couple of weeks ago)

Photoshop away boys and girls.

 

superstringer

August 3rd, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^

I am block-copying the email I just sent as a response to the author of that column.  (Detroit News doesn't seem to allow for "comments."  Hmm.  Good thing.)  I did it before reading everyone's reactions here, but I think, we are all on the same page.

====

     You wrote, "Children, for the most part, don't understand tradition."

     So, that means, just using your own words, you are a child too.

     Look, I went to Michigan, not Minnesota, so I won't pretend to understand the "other" U of M's traditions.  Like the boring and, let's be honest, downright ugly school colors.  That's a kind of a tradition the Gopher fans seem to like, so there it is.  I’m not in position to mock it.

     But you didn't go to Michigan, so you DON'T understand OUR traditions.  And our tradition includes no stupid mascot.  You know, maybe the fact that everyone else has them is precisely why it IS a tradition at Michigan.  We won't go there just because everyone else has one.  Maybe we like not having one, as a tradition that separates us from that school in Ohio, that Catholic school in Indiana, Sparty, and everyone else we face.

      And the argument that "childen" love mascots?  Michigan has over 100 years of football success, and frankly, I don't see any waning of attention of children over 100 years regarding the program.  Maybe your point is that, had Michigan had one for 100 years, we'd have had MORE fans than we already did.  But is the lack of a mascot holding back kids from being Michigan fans?  Maybe really your point is, at Minnesota games, kids are bored and want to high-five the mascot.  Go to a UM game, please -- try to find any bored kids.  Good luck to you.  I think kids at UM games would rather high-five Denard Robinson instead of some zit-covered kid in a smelly costume.

     I think someone who went to a school where athletic success was relatively non-existent doesn't understand Michigan football tradition -- or Kentucky basketball, etc.  Michigan's traditions are the HELMET, the FIGHT SONG, the BANNER, and all of the success.  Those are what kids are taught are meaningful.

     Minnesota doesn't have those traditions, so stop importing yours on ours and claiming you know what's best for us.

      And I won't retort that maybe you weren't smart enough to get into Michigan in the first place.

 

Max Power

August 3rd, 2011 at 4:23 PM ^

I cant argue with your points. But I will say this. What harm will it do? Will it destroy Michigan Football? Will it make us lose games? No and no. All the traditions we have today started out as either an innovative or mold breaking idea. At the time of their inceptions many of our traditions were met with resitance. Arent we glad today that the people who made those decisions years ago had the balls to do so?

Why do we have the biggest stadium in the country? Because one man had the vision to set the ground work decades before it was logistically possible to 100k-200k people in one place for a football game.

Why do we talk about "the team, the team, the team!"? Because one man had the vision to hire an unpopular coach from ohio to lead the Michigan football program.

Is a mascot on the same level as these things. No. But it wont destroy what Michigan footbal is. If RR cant do it, a mascot cant either.

Its sad to think that so many alumni think that it can.

HAIL2V

August 3rd, 2011 at 4:23 PM ^

My son is 7 and has never wanted to hug a mascot.  Quite frankly, when he was younger, mascots scared him.  Now, he kind of thinks their stupid.  He's a good Michigan Fan!

MichiganPhotoRod

August 3rd, 2011 at 4:37 PM ^

It would be unbearably hot for the person inside considering the warm-climate bowl games in which we consistently play.

Let State have their blow up doll and all the Pizza Bowls they can play.