With respect to the Kingfisher, I disagree. I believe that group 100% wants a name change. Once again, I don't believe name change is the goal of Blocky or Alma supporters (more likely, quite the opposite).
That said, I wouldn't use the word sinister to describe the Kingfisher movement. I think it's a stretch to agree the Chief needed to go but then defend everything else commonly associated with the Chief. So in that sense,
I agree with Kaufman. For me, the 3 in 1 and Fighting Illini are all co-mingled with the Chief and the Chief logo. If the Chief was wrong, then it's all wrong. Of course, then there's the "where does it stop?" argument, which I fully embrace. We've stopped at the Chief, and lots of people still aren't happy. Will everyone ever all be happy at the same time? Nope. But we're not going back, so I'm in favor of stopping here.
To summarize:
1. I think mascots are stupid, with very rare exceptions. As long as they don't get in the way of the game, I couldn't care less if they exist.
2. The Chief was not a mascot. He was part of the halftime show but never on the sidelines, engaged in hijinks with other mascots, or cuddling kids. For people who want a mascot, I would suggest they stop referring to the Chief as a mascot and instead emphasize the super fun and goofy things their new mascot will do, i.e. lean into the difference.
3. I think getting rid of the Chief was a missed opportunity for a win/win, and I'm not sure there have been any tangible benefits from his demise.
4. If you just want a mascot without a name change, stop drawing logos. Do we really think in this day and age that you can't render what a mascot costume would look like without drawing a logo? Teams have logos that match their team names, and they incorporate the mascot in logos when it's synergistic.
5. Lack of branding opportunities is not a reason to have a mascot. I've lived in the Chicago area all my life, and I can't recall ever seeing anyone wearing Southpaw gear. If it's out there, it's very uncommon. Is
Michigan hurting because they don't sell a lot of mascot gear? Just stop with this one, please.
6. Mascots should be intentionally stupid looking, with some combination of a big head, bulging eyes, and/or massive belly. The Kingfisher is unintentionally stupid looking, IMO. It's like they want something worthy of being a primary symbol of the university, along with a kids photo op. It doesn't work. Next, please.
7. I'm resigned to the fact that there will be a complete re-branding in my lifetime. I will probably still go to games, as long as we're competitive, but I'll spend halftime on the concourse.
I totally agree with point 3. Unfortunately, the people who demanded the elimination of the Chief are a bitter lot. If Chief Osceola can exist at FSU, why can't Chief Illini exist at Illiniinquirer? Apparently the Native Americans who negotiated the retention of Chief Osceola are more business like and recognized the opportunity.
en.m.wikipedia.org
