The Kingfisher

Status
Not open for further replies.
North Bethesda, Maryland
Realistically, what do you all see as the timeline for the change? It sounds, from multiple articles, that the (former) student who proposed it, Spencer Hulsey, says the alumni have to have their chance to speak. Personally, I don't think we see anything until at least next Fall.
 
It's just a mascot, it runs around and entertains children, no reason to get up in arms about it. We are still the Fighting Illini.
The name “fighting Illini” is definitely going to be the next thing on the chopping block. The university will do everything it can to erase the memory of the chief in the name of inclusion and anti-racism.

While the name “fighting Illini” might not be directly related to an Indian tribe, that was our nickname while we had the chief. People will cry that “Illini” brings up painful memories. It will be gone soon enough.

Better get used to the name Illinois Kingfishers...
 
While the name “fighting Illini” might not be directly related to an Indian tribe, that was our nickname while we had the chief.
And it was our nickname before the Chief too. The whataboutism is getting tiring; The original referendum explicitly stated that there is no intention of altering the name, and I've seen absolutely zero support for changing the name amongst the members of this board, or among other alumni.

It's fine to not like the mascot (obviously many don't). I'd prefer to see discussion on the immediate matter rather than hypotheticals.
 
Likes: redbeard7278
I'll bring them in all day. The NCAA made selected schools get rid of their "hostile and offensive" imagery, but didn't force their will on FSU because they had support (read: gives lots of money) of the Seminole tribe. The NCAA could have taken a stand and said there will be no Native American imagery AT ALL, but they didn't. Because FSU has money and is a big name program, they got by with it. In the mean time, I've NEVER heard about any protests or complaints about their use of the name and mascot. In the meantime, the Cleveland Indians are getting away from most of the imagery and retired Chief Wahoo. The Washington Redskins are now the Washington Football Team. It's hypocritical, and I think indicative of our administration not having the guts to stand up to the NCAA. I'm not saying that FSU having Osceola is right or wrong, just hypocritical.
Seems out of character for the NCAA...
 
The advocates for banning all things Chief “related” already took a swing at the 3 in 1.

And the fact that the university (and other news sources) had to lay out just how the moniker “Fighting Illini” predated the Chief shows someone has already been gunning for the name.

Why is it so far fetched for folks on here to think they could be targeted again?

Appeasement is a real thing. History shows that the people being appeased don’t simply stop once they achieve their current goal.

They went after those two things before, and the University stopped it. I sincerely hope they stop it again when the next effort to remove them comes around.
 
And it was our nickname before the Chief too. The whataboutism is getting tiring; The original referendum explicitly stated that there is no intention of altering the name, and I've seen absolutely zero support for changing the name amongst the members of this board, or among other alumni.

It's fine to not like the mascot (obviously many don't). I'd prefer to see discussion on the immediate matter rather than hypotheticals.
And yet, I seem to remember them saying back in 2007 that we didn't need a symbol or mascot after the Chief was retired, and they had no intention of creating a new one........
 
Also, that drawing of the kingfisher bird isn’t a mascot. It’s a logo. Pretty obvious where we are headed going down this road. But.. it’s just a new mascot right?

Give me a break...
 
North Bethesda, Maryland
performing a dance that was created by Native Americans?
Sorry to nitpick...but that’s not entirely accurate. The dance was created by student Lester Leutwiler, based on his studies of “Indian” dances, around 1926. True, it was loosely based on actual dances, but the Chief‘s dance was not one specifically created by Native Americans. However, it‘s probable that the various pieces that comprise the dance were all parts of some real Native American dance, just like the outfit was a more or less authentic representation...just of a Lakota Sioux.

Let’s call it a draw.
 
Sorry to nitpick...but that’s not entirely accurate. The dance was created by student Lester Leutwiler, based on his studies of “Indian” dances, around 1926. True, it was loosely based on actual dances, but the Chief‘s dance was not one specifically created by Native Americans. However, it‘s probable that the various pieces that comprise the dance were all parts of some real Native American dance, just like the outfit was a more or less authentic representation...just of a Lakota Sioux.

Let’s call it a draw.
Well, if the Peoria adapted regalia and dance trial didn’t work
 
Likes: Retro62
Chicago, IL
You mean kinda like now?
I mean exactly like now.

No recruit has ever picked a school because of the mascot. It comes down to winning. We seem to be on that trajectory with basketball and maybe even football. *knocks on wood*

Get this hokey kingfisher bs out of here. It just makes us look stupid in my opinion. Let sleeping dogs lie.
 
I mean exactly like now.

No recruit has ever picked a school because of the mascot. It comes down to winning. We seem to be on that trajectory with basketball and maybe even football. *knocks on wood*

Get this hokey kingfisher bs out of here. It just makes us look stupid in my opinion. Let sleeping dogs lie.
I think the kingfisher is a wonderful choice for our mascot. It will be fun like the ones at MSU, UM, UW, Neb., etc.
 
Likes: Stevegarbs
I think the kingfisher is a wonderful choice for our mascot. It will be fun like the ones at MSU, UM, UW, Neb., etc.
I'm sure that there are many that think the kingfisher will be fun or add to the gameday environment, when we return to those. The issue is that there will be a LOT of fans that do not like it, and see it as a push away from something they held dear. It will create division and any positive momentum will be erased by the irritation it creates. Many other schools are just fine without a mascot, as already mentioned. The very best option from a marketing standpoint for Illinois athletics, is to leave it alone. Just leave it alone. Those of us that want to remember the Chief can continue to do so, without causing any harm to those that would like a bird, or rodent, or soldier playing with the cheerleaders. We just need to win, and any concerns about gameday will be gone. Leave. it. alone.
 
Won't it be fun to watch all the tailgaters at away games frying up fake Kingfishers on their grills.
 
I mean exactly like now.

No recruit has ever picked a school because of the mascot. It comes down to winning. We seem to be on that trajectory with basketball and maybe even football. *knocks on wood*

Get this hokey kingfisher bs out of here. It just makes us look stupid in my opinion. Let sleeping dogs lie.
Speaking of hokey - VATech loves their hokey Hokie Bird - so there's that. I think it all depends on how this is created - more true to life type replication of the bird or more 'lovable'(for lack of better word) facsimile version thereof - like the Hokie Bird.

Honestly its kind of like Disney - they get you when you are young with lovable characters so that you'll stay a fan for life.
 
Chicago, IL
Speaking of hokey - VATech loves their hokey Hokie Bird - so there's that. I think it all depends on how this is created - more true to life type replication of the bird or more 'lovable'(for lack of better word) facsimile version thereof - like the Hokie Bird.

Honestly its kind of like Disney - they get you when you are young with lovable characters so that you'll stay a fan for life.
I've been a sports fan all my life. Whether it was profesional or college, mascots have never been the reason for it. And Benny the Bull is the s***. If it would have been because of any mascot, it would have been him.

People stay fans because the teams give them good memories, not the mascot/symbol. If the team is terrible, it doesn't matter how cute it is once the kid is 7+. In my opinion, we just need to win and stuff the conversation about mascot. We don't need it.
 
I mean exactly like now.

No recruit has ever picked a school because of the mascot. It comes down to winning. We seem to be on that trajectory with basketball and maybe even football. *knocks on wood*

Get this hokey kingfisher bs out of here. It just makes us look stupid in my opinion. Let sleeping dogs lie.
Except for the kid that picked SLU because he had a dream with a Billiken in it.
 
Likes: VAIllini35
I've been a sports fan all my life. Whether it was profesional or college, mascots have never been the reason for it. And Benny the Bull is the s***. If it would have been because of any mascot, it would have been him.

People stay fans because the teams give them good memories, not the mascot/symbol. If the team is terrible, it doesn't matter how cute it is once the kid is 7+. In my opinion, we just need to win and stuff the conversation about mascot. We don't need it.
Been a sports fan all my life as well and I don't think the idea of a mascot is to carry the team / fandom nor did i mean to imply that. Rather they can be a source of entertainment and for some people it does provide fond memories, feelings and pride. You can both be a die hard x's and o's fan and also enjoy the entertainment factor - minor league baseball sure seems to think it helps.

It is a part of the experience a good athletic (ie entertainment) program should be trying to create as they look to capture every dollar they can from the local public. The music, the scoreboard, Grange Grove, team walk, mascot (if so inclined) etc.

I get that you personally don't need/like it - but there are many kids, young adults, and not so young adults that, if done right, can find some enjoyment, pride from it.

I am taking a wild guess you also don't enjoy DisneyWorld. However, that type of draw (how I wish my kids didn't want to stand in line to get an autograph with a character) can be pretty emotional when done right. For example, many fell in love with a white guy performing the role of a native American and dancing around on a hardwood floor.
 
North Bethesda, Maryland
I'm sure that there are many that think the kingfisher will be fun or add to the gameday environment, when we return to those. The issue is that there will be a LOT of fans that do not like it, and see it as a push away from something they held dear.
Agree with your whole post. And there are going to be a lot of fans who don't like it on its own merits (or lack thereof), regardless of it being a replacement of what they hold dear.
 
Likes: IllGuardU
Chicago, IL
Been a sports fan all my life as well and I don't think the idea of a mascot is to carry the team / fandom nor did i mean to imply that. Rather they can be a source of entertainment and for some people it does provide fond memories, feelings and pride. You can both be a die hard x's and o's fan and also enjoy the entertainment factor - minor league baseball sure seems to think it helps.

It is a part of the experience a good athletic (ie entertainment) program should be trying to create as they look to capture every dollar they can from the local public. The music, the scoreboard, Grange Grove, team walk, mascot (if so inclined) etc.

I get that you personally don't need/like it - but there are many kids, young adults, and not so young adults that, if done right, can find some enjoyment, pride from it.

I am taking a wild guess you also don't enjoy DisneyWorld. However, that type of draw (how I wish my kids didn't want to stand in line to get an autograph with a character) can be pretty emotional when done right. For example, many fell in love with a white guy performing the role of a native American and dancing around on a hardwood floor.
Don't get why there was a comment about Disney World. I watch Disney and go to the parks for movie magic. I want a different kind of magic at a sporting event. They're not analogous in my mind which is probably why your example isn't moving me.

If it's a matter of pride for some, please detail how the kingfisher specifically inspires pride in the State/university. I've lived in Illinois all my life and never heard or cared about kingfishers. They're not like the ISU Redbirds; that one makes sense because they're playing off the State bird, not just a bird who happens to be native to the State.

I'll say it as plainly as I possibly can. I find the kingfisher to be a poor prospective mascot because the reasoning behind it is overly cerebral. If it takes more than a sentence to explain, you probably need to go back to the drawingboard on mascot ideas. (I'll say that my preference for the doughboy falls into this category as well, even though you can explain it in a single sentence.)

Am I totally shut down on a mascot? No. I am shut down on the kingfisher because I think we could do better. This feels like a desperation option instead of a good one.
 
Last edited:
Ordained Dudeist Priest
Johns Creek, GA
On every other mascot-related adventure in the last 10 years, you could draw a straight line from the proposers to an anti-Chief organization. I haven't found that to be true yet (although wouldn't be surprised), but nothing yet has felt organic at all, it's been manufactured, contrived or explicitly stated as a replacement for the Chief.

And to echo what others have said, I don't need some costumed nitwit roaming the sidelines to help me enjoy the gameday experience--in fact most of them are just plain annoying to this 50-something old grump. And don't get me started on that ridiculous caricature in South Bend.

And finally....Get off my lawn!!!!
 
Don't get why there was a comment about Disney World. I watch Disney and go to the parks for movie magic. I want a different kind of magic at a sporting event. They're not analogous in my mind which is probably why your example isn't moving me.

If it's a matter of pride for some, please detail how the kingfisher specifically inspires pride in the State/university. I've lived in Illinois all my life and never heard or cared about kingfishers. They're not like the ISU Redbirds; that one makes sense because they're playing off the State bird, not just a bird who happens to be native to the State.

I'll say it as plainly as I possibly can. I find the kingfisher to be a poor prospective mascot because the reasoning behind it is overly cerebral. If it takes more than a sentence to explain, you probably need to go back to the drawingboard on mascot ideas. (I'll say that my preference for the doughboy falls into this category as well, even though you can explain it in a single sentence.)

Am I totally shut down on a mascot? No. I am shut down on the kingfisher because I think we could do better. This feels like a desperation option instead of a good one.
Why do we need an animal? Why not Illini Lightning or something else?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.