KungFuPanda Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 The marketing and mascots are a large part of the team image, and generally those are cartoonish. If you think athletes are placing any sort of emphasis on the intimidation level of their mascot or on the mascot of the opposing team, well I can't really help you. Athletic competitions are a competitive struggle, and using a word like "battle" is sensible. However, when the Miners take on the Ducks, there is not a serious martial element to the contest. But what about the Mine Wars??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 It is not. The formation of the sports organization pre-dates the affiliation with the school. It was started as a homeschool football and cheer team organization, but my kid's private school also does not have a football or cheer team. So they buddied up in the sense that some kids at this private school join the team and the school hosts the medical check and concussion baseline for kids on Crusaders. The school's logo is the Lamp of Learning or whatever. And the mascot for the school is the yellowjackets. I wonder which killed more people? Bee stings or the Crusades? Hmmmmm . . . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Yes. I think team names should reflect the level of sportsmanship and leadership we want to see from participants. And if you want to reflect quality leadership "The Crusaders" is really not the way to go. After taking a class on the Crusades last semester, I would probably laugh at the name.* I'd tell their opponents that The Crusaders would probably win the first game, the second game would have some big names, but ultimately they would lose. The third game might have a great leader, but hey, don't play in the desert and watch out for that team from Hattin High school, their leader, Saladin, would kick their butts. The fourth game would probably get diverted and they'd end up playing a team they thought was on their side. The fifth game would be a disaster, while the sixth game wouldn't even happen really because someone from sweep in and negotiate the end of the game before it even really started. Those side games with other Christian schools wouldn't end up well and they'd probably all end up in the principal's office before it was over. *tongue-in-cheek, sarcasm :coolgleamA: 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 And if you want to reflect quality leadership "The Crusaders" is really not the way to go. After taking a class on the Crusades last semester, I would probably laugh at the name.* I'd tell their opponents that The Crusaders would probably win the first game, the second game would have some big names, but ultimately they would lose. The third game might have a great leader, but hey, don't play in the desert and watch out for that team from Hattin High school, their leader, Saladin, would kick their butts. The fourth game would probably get diverted and they'd end up playing a team they thought was on their side. The fifth game would be a disaster, while the sixth game wouldn't even happen really because someone from sweep in and negotiate the end of the game before it even really started. Those side games with other Christian schools wouldn't end up well and they'd probably all end up in the principal's office before it was over. *tongue-in-cheek, sarcasm :coolgleamA: You're the best! :D 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I do think fashions just change over time with team names. I don't necessarily think that means we need to change them - sometimes, yes, but I also think we should be a little broadminded in the sense that we can accept that our own sensibilities have their own quirks, and so did those of the past, without it being some serious moral issue. I would be surprised to see a tem name itself The Crusaders today, but not to see an older team with that name. Team names aren't meant to be deep reflections on anything, now or then, they are usually just trying to give a kind of overall concept, in this case I think of warriors who feel righteous (which really is a little silly with reference to sports but that is kind of the point I think. Just like its a little silly to think of a game in terms of real war, but if you are in the game, part of it is taking it, for that moment and within the rules, very seriously. You will righteously get that ball and put it in the net.) I would much prefer the Olympics in the nude I think. Actually, I find the Olympics much more offensive than most of the controversial team names, which are basically just changes in fashion - the Olympics today not only contradicts the spirit of the Greek's view of sport, it directly undermines the ideas it was meant to support when it was revived. It's not an old organization. I don't think it is even 10 years old. I just don't think the original leaders (and probably not the leaders involved since) have any sensitivity to the idea of Crusaders. A Christian group of warriors is how they see it, no doubt. And nude Olympics...*shudder* I always thought wrestling had unappealing sexual and animalistic undertones (DH was a wrestler), but if it were played nakkie? Good grief. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 For me, team sports are in many ways a formalization, and way to make safe, physical competition. The language of battles and war are used a lot by teams and players. It is probably one reason team sports don't appeal to me a lot, but I don't think it's dishonest or untrue to say they are to an extent a outlet for agressive competitivness. Naming teams after historical warriors of any kind isn't to me that odd, within that context. No such group is ever going to be lily-white, because war isn't that way. I don't see much need to expunge the language of war or its symbols, though - I think what is far more important is games that keep things in perspective for players. I don't think the Crusades were more evil or far-out than other wartime periods. They all have a lot of similarities, to my mind. This does not bother me about sports; in fact, I think sports can provide a much more civilized outlet for the (IMO) natural desire to conquer, to display one's prowess, and to exercise in a meanful way. I am not one who thinks all battle/competative metaphor should be removed from games and we'll all just play parachute games. ;) All of my kids have played various sports since they were 3/4 years old. I think Farrar has it right up-thread; that the time of naming teams after people groups has trended out. I just think - there are a bazillion perfectly suitable team names; why choose one that has (at least for some) connotations of a group of peple harming other groups of people? If the team must seem "fierce," by all means, choose a tiger or a wildebeast or a tasmanian devil. But clearly, mascots arise that are not even fierce and people make it work. They just go forth with their Terapins and Blue Hens and Labradors. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I have wondered this for a long time, but have not mentioned it IRL or here, because I know many lovely homeschoolers who are members of this organization. There is a Christian homeschool/private school sports organization here with this name; The Crusaders. The team affiliates with the Christian school DS attends and many hsers in my co-op participate and are in leadership positions in this organization. My son even has a Crusaders sweatshirt that he wears every week; it is within the uniform guidelines at his school because of the affiliation, though he is not and never has been on the team. I just wonder if everyone is A-Ok with this name. Am I hypersensitive? I feel like this is glorifying/justifying a hideous aspect of Christian history. I'm not A-Ok with it, but I wouldn't say it bothers me if people want their team called that. To me, it's a tip off that it's probably a fundie christian type of team and we wouldn't have any use for being involved with something of that ilk. I'd exercise my freedom to choose to go elsewhere, but they're still free to have their own team and team name. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I wonder which killed more people? Bee stings or the Crusades? Hmmmmm . . . Yellowjackets are wasps. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 We still have "crusades" like the current Crusade against Drunk Drivers. I don't think most kids see it as a bad word. It's a word with its own meaning apart from history. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm not that into sports. My high school had Blue Devils as our mascot. That's probably why I ended up so weird... I was on the winter track team (keeping in shape for summer). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 We still have "crusades" like the current Crusade against Drunk Drivers. I don't think most kids see it as a bad word. It's a word with its own meaning apart from history. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm not that into sports. My high school had Blue Devils as our mascot. That's probably why I ended up so weird... I was on the winter track team (keeping in shape for summer). Well, I'm not a big fan od the term "crusade," however it's meant; some words are just tarnished by history, like "segregation." I can say I prefer a grocery store that segregates the organic produce from the non-organic, but I probably wouldn't choose that word because of its connotations. Having said that, the name combined with the logo (cross, shield, and sword) does suggest the holy war type of meaning, not merely "to passionately fight for your position to be upheld." Blue Devils holds no meaning for me. AFAIK, there aren't any such things as blue devils. It is a mythical idea that has no historical meaning. The same cannot be said of a Crusader, particularly one with a shield bearing a cross and a sword. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Well, I'm not a big fan od the term "crusade," however it's meant; some words are just tarnished by history, like "segregation." I can say I prefer a grocery store that segregates the organic produce from the non-organic, but I probably wouldn't choose that word because of its connotations. Having said that, the name combined with the logo (cross, shield, and sword) does suggest the holy war type of meaning, not merely "to passionately fight for your position to be upheld." Blue Devils holds no meaning for me. AFAIK, there aren't any such things as blue devils. It is a mythical idea that has no historical meaning. The same cannot be said of a Crusader, particularly one with a shield bearing a cross and a sword. I still have no problem with it - or Pirates - or whatever. If there's one team name I would change, I suspect it would be the Redskins. I found elegantlion's assessment of it all quite cute though. Anyone opposed to the team on a historical basis might want to get permission to copy that and distribute it to parents. :lol: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 This does not bother me about sports; in fact, I think sports can provide a much more civilized outlet for the (IMO) natural desire to conquer, to display one's prowess, and to exercise in a meanful way. I am not one who thinks all battle/competative metaphor should be removed from games and we'll all just play parachute games. ;) All of my kids have played various sports since they were 3/4 years old. I think Farrar has it right up-thread; that the time of naming teams after people groups has trended out. I just think - there are a bazillion perfectly suitable team names; why choose one that has (at least for some) connotations of a group of peple harming other groups of people? If the team must seem "fierce," by all means, choose a tiger or a wildebeast or a tasmanian devil. But clearly, mascots arise that are not even fierce and people make it work. They just go forth with their Terapins and Blue Hens and Labradors. No, I don't think it's abad thing about sports. But it does suggest that it isn't all that serious. I would say that some of the silly names for teams were meant to be a little funny or ironic, in contrast to the more fierce sounding ones. I mean - that was the whole premise behind the Ducks, it was a joke, and it was recognizable as a joke because it was not a fierce sort of creature. Others have more to do with some other association, Penguins I think are notable for their relation to ice, or some are regional. I don't really mind any of them. Though - if there start to be a lot of ironic animal team names, I wonder if it will then no longer be ironic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 I guess not since one of my kids is on a swim team that is the Crusaders. I never even thought about the name and a relationship to the Crusades until this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.