great article from Cleveland

[FlabLoser]

<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">Grover</span> Governor Cleveland has some good mascot stuff pertaining to....wait for it......Mississippi Southern.

http://www.clarionledger....ORTS/Folks-it-s-a-mascot

I did not know that USM's mascot used to be General Nat, named for General Nathan Bedford Forrest, founder of the KKK.

Thank God one D-1 school in this state has never represented themselves through a racist symbol.

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

in this state. It has worked for ole miss for a long, long time. And all the fans that are so bent out of shape about the mascot thing now, are the ones it attracted.

 

[ckDOG]

If the Colonel has a bad image, then what image is the nickname "Rebels" portraying? You have to change all, or none. Make a honest, genuine change, or give the middle finger and stay the course - at least people know how you stand on the matter.

Are people just desensitized to the word "Rebel" that they fail to remember what it represents also? If "Colonel Rebel" is offensive because it bring up images of a past most want forgotten, then how does "Rebel" not do the same? If one has to go, it seems as though the other must go also - by default. If you really want to make a genuine change in the name of political correctness, reasonableness, decency, or whatever, get rid of the nickname as well. Otherwise, it's half-assed and a waste of time. I'd rather them just say "17 it" and not bend rather than change a part of the image and hope the rest gets swept under the rug unnoticed.

Unreasonable?

.

 

[Mr Meoff]

or 'Progressive Enlightenment', basically the same thing.

 

[STATEgrad04]

I fail to see how they can logically keep the "Rebels" name in association with the mascot. I also think that it would make more sense to go ahead and change the nick name to fit whatever the mascot becomes...ala Southern Miss Golden Eagles...
It just seems to me that the transition from one mascot to the other is more greatly accepted when the entire association to the old nick name and mascot is removed all together.

The perfect example of this is USM....I also had no idea that they used to be named for nathan forest....because they changed their name and symbol all together it is an afterthought about what they used to be...If ole miss decides to keep rebels then they will not be getting rid of anything...People are not gonna like this change to start off with no matter what you decide to go with, but it seems to me that if they become the "black bears" or the "the bruins" or whatever that it will go over better in 10-20-30 years as opposed to trying your hardest to hold on to something that shouldnt be held onto!

Just go ahead and assume a new identity and be done with this whole saga and in a few years it will be an afterthought that they were ever the rebels.

 

[RebelBruiser]

but not in the normal way. I mean it in the way that if you take a Band-Aid off, you want to rip it off quickly, which causes less pain in the long run. If you do it slowly, it hurts more and takes longer.

I don't know where you stop, but I think we should've sat down in about the mid-90s when they first started this process. They should've gathered all the best marketing minds the school had to offer and had a complete re-branding plan. Whether you re-brand to include the name Rebels or not. Whether you kept the name Ole Miss or not, whether you changed the mascot, whatever, it should've been done in one swoop. Make the decision on what needed to change. Change it with an immediate implementation plan and move on. However, for years we've been miserable at marketing. I think we're starting to make strides in a positive direction on that front, and I feel like for the first time in a while, we're on the right track with our marketing plan for athletics.

I can live with just about any of the changes personally, because the symbols aren't that important to me, and I can understand if things are an issue that they need to be changed for the better of the university in the long run.

I just wish there had been more thought to the process along the way, instead of having an issue come up every few years and re-hashing the same sentiments over and over. Just my opinion. I don't think the term "Ole Miss" has any negative connotations these days, and therefore I see no reason why that should ever have to change. I could see an argument for "Rebels" being changed. However it is done though, I don't think it makes sense to do it in pieces here and there. It should've been done as part of one process. Re-define what needs to be re-defined and then move forward.

 

[Mr Meoff]

not because they're doing this whole mascot thing now, but the way they've dragged the process out for - what - 10 years or more (I guess the stick thing was first)? Some people think changing it a little at a time makes it less painful or less noticeable, but in the long run, like you said, this is worse.

I would be like you -- if you're gonna change everything eventually anyway, rip that f'er off now.

 

[RebelBruiser]

If this is the last thing, then fine, get it done and move on. If it's not, then it should all be done now.

Most of the things we've done needed to be done, but the problem with it is that if you keep bringing something else up every few years, you re-hash it in the media and call attention to the fact that you were behind on the times.

I have less problem with this mascot search because it's a completely student-led initiative. We were going to go on without an on-field mascot and not ever bring it up. The students decided they wanted one, so they are being allowed to pursue it.

 

[FlabLoser]

The natives won't stand for wholesale changes. Rebels everywhere raised hell about Col Reb being banned from the football field. Col Reb, as an official mascot still roamed the grove and on Ole Miss apparel. You think the whole fanbase raising hell about that wouldn't have gone completely apeshit if the entire re-branding had been sprung on them at once?

I also agree the Ole Miss needs completely rebranding. But I also think the fanbase and supporters wouldn't stand for wholesale rebranding. I think meoff is on to something with this gradual enlightenment theory.

 

[RebelBruiser]

The natives won't stand for wholesale changes. Rebels everywhere raised hell about Col Reb being banned from the football field. Col Reb, as an official mascot still roamed the grove and on Ole Miss apparel. You think the whole fanbase raising hell about that wouldn't have gone completely apeshit if the entire re-branding had been sprung on them at once?

I also agree the Ole Miss needs completely rebranding. But I also think the fanbase and supporters wouldn't stand for wholesale rebranding. I think meoff is on to something with this gradual enlightenment theory.

A lot of people would've gone nuts if we went through a complete re-branding. I agree with that. However, most of them would've gotten over it with a little bit of time, and the ones that couldn't get over it are the type of fans that we don't need anyway.

Trimming the fat would be fine with me, because I believe in the long run it would grow the fanbase more than it would shrink it.

Anyway, they didn't go with my idea of a complete re-branding, and I think they're either done or pretty close to done with any re-branding that needs to be done now, so it's a nearly moot point anyway at this point in time.

 

[OneParticularHarbor]

Not sure how that name has stuck. When I was in school, the band played "Dixie" when they came on the field. General Nat used to wave a black and gold stars and bars, too.