GW Hoops

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



2/17/2023 12:04 pm  #561


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Mentzinger wrote:

Florida Colonial wrote:

Lets me make this clear. I would have just kept Colonials. But lets be honest Colonials wasn't this great moniker. 

But we're not keeping it so lets move on!!

For all the complaining on here I'm not sure I have seen any recommendations that are not on the list. So how about we stop complaining, especially if you dont have any better ideas. If you had better ideas maybe you should have engaged with GW with all those great ideas.  

Do I love most of our choices NO! Revolutionaries is fine. We can go by Revs.
 
I really think all the hate for the choices is not so much that all of them are terrible (yes some definitely are) its that most people on here just don't want the change because its what we are used to.

I'll cheer for GW no matter what and will give to the program no matter what.  I'll also support the new name.  
Take a deep breath and just consider what is going on in the world at the moment and just enjoy supporting GW.

This is a board for discussion of the team all of us have known all our lives as the Colonials. It's perfectly appropriate to discuss and criticize and worry about this here, given the admin and AD have shown a severe, tone deaf lack of acuity when it comes to the school's flagship program (and, well, the university in general). I think you can do this while still being concerned about war in Europe, the inverted yield curve and the ongoing fascist US government takeover.

  Mentz has a very good point here. Let's talk about other teams and all the stuff we talk about and ignore a very central issue related to our own sports and university program.
    And perhaps the students and those in the faculty pushing this should have had different priorities,like what is happening in Washington and around the globe, whatever their beliefs. We're spending millions on stupidity while the university lays off janitors and other working people. What a great social justice priority, if that's their concern. Also, a history/English course taught might clear up the understanding. Colonials isn't a great sports name, but it shouldn't be retired because some students, half of whom probably won't even graduate from GW, don't understand a very simple language concept.
    Having said that, since this idiot train is already going down the tracks, actually Revolution is a good idea. It sounds cool and players could be Revolutionaries. 
   D.C. Native's suggestion improves the name.
   Now, historically, unless we make it clear that it is the American Revolution, the Revolutionary thing is a mixed bag,to say the least. But that dichotomy is lost on people who don't understand the different between Colonials and
Colonialism. So, maybe Revolution is the best choice in an unpalatable situation fostered on us by people who probably shouldn't be in an academic or any other learning environment.
    But for some reason, the process is being rushed and don't think new ideas are being accepted. Imagine also some people on the board made reasonable suggestions that were rejected or never considered.
  After all,we only bleed Buff and Blue, many actually graduated from GW and many people here contribute
money and/or volunteer resources to the university. So we count less, of course, than a sophomoric actual sophomore who will transfer out of GW next year.

     
 

Last edited by jf (2/17/2023 12:11 pm)

 

2/17/2023 12:05 pm  #562


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

1) Very well said Mentzinger.

2) Florida Colonial, here's another thought...maybe all of the hate isn't because we are used to the Colonials and don't want change, but instead because we can't understand why the change is being made in the first place.  Maybe one wanted to keep Redskins for reasons dealing with history or loyalty, but you'd have to be comepletely tone-deaf if if you didn't understand why there was opposition to keeping the name.  Seems like here's a good time to again point out that Colonials and Colonialism are two very different things.

3) While Blue Fog has a certain vibe to it, it would be completely inexplicable to anyone outside of the Washington area.  And, to many inside the Beltway as well.  

4) How does the same sensitivity that one may have towards Colonials not apply to Revolutionaries, with an obvious connotation towards guns and violence?  Seriously, am open to heraing an explanation.

5) Rising, I've heard from my share of folks as well.  This is making national news for all of the wrong reasons.

6) Of the finalists, I can get behind The Truth.  At least there's a direct link to George Washington, who famously could not tell a lie.

 

2/17/2023 12:55 pm  #563


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

This Twitter thread has explanations on some of the names - apparently a survey emailed to select students

https://twitter.com/rothsteinabe/status/1626349754354479108?s=46&t=uLINzIkLfjD4NKVaZ9JYIQ

 

2/17/2023 1:02 pm  #564


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Revs is my favorite of these but Blue Fog is gaining for me. It’s unique, it’s local, kind of mysterious.

Think about it, lots of team names are silly or don’t make sense. Orange? Even if it’s an Irish political reference, who cares? Cardinal, the color not the bird? Billikens, Bonnies, Zips etc. I’m ok with unusual.

Do wish they included Hounds or River Horses though.

 

2/17/2023 1:05 pm  #565


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Oh, I guess Orange is a reference to the Netherlands since they colonized the area, not the Protestant Irish thing. See, it’s just a name!

 

2/17/2023 3:06 pm  #566


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

I get it. I understand the frustration . Like I said I think the name should stay. I'm not changing my name on here either lol.

Honestly just got a bit sick of the bitching without adding any solution. But yes everyone has the right to voice there thoughts and yes that's what the board is for.

And my comment about the world was really just me showing my frustration. I agree with your point Mentz

lets talk recruiting

 

2/17/2023 3:27 pm  #567


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Steve Urkel wrote:

This Twitter thread has explanations on some of the names - apparently a survey emailed to select students

https://twitter.com/rothsteinabe/status/1626349754354479108?s=46&t=uLINzIkLfjD4NKVaZ9JYIQ

I am going to go out on a limb and guess that the appointed branding agency came up with these definitions and explanations of the various nicknames.  Perhaps in honor of this, we can consider one more nickname:

The George Washington Spendthrifts.

 

 

2/17/2023 3:41 pm  #568


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

The "definitions" were also in the survey. I think if you answered the initial call for suggestions you were "invited" to offer an opinion on the finalists. I gave several a flat-out zero out of 10 rating, the best way of warning that idiotic finalists (like "Truth" and "Squad") are not acceptable. When UC Santa Cruz switched to "Banana Slugs" in the mid-1980´s it was cute, but... there are banana slugs on their campus and they were a NAIA DII school at the time with zero athletic scholarships, so who cared? 40 years on, and it is a tired, trite and old-fashioned cop out to go with cute, especially at a school trying to get itself taken seriously. The kids that chose the Banana Slugs are now setting up trusts for grandkids to use to pay for college-- think a copy-cat idea 40 years on will be alluring to them?
 

Last edited by GW Alum Abroad (2/17/2023 3:42 pm)

 

2/17/2023 4:34 pm  #569


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Almost gave a 1 for Revolutionaries. But they all rated a zero. George Washington Rebels actually sounds a lot better. But that would also be frowned upon because of the 1860 Rebels, unlike the 1776 Rebels. Like I said before, it probably took a long time to come up with Colonials in the first place. Better than Hatchets.

 

2/17/2023 5:44 pm  #570


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Just thinking about this: the branding and overall cost of the whole nonsensical shebang, the distraction to fandom and recruiting ("Let's go??????," Or "I'm going to be a ??????? at GW", our six-year swoon to the bottom, the catering to university students who don't know or don't want to know basic history or English who are driving this train, the fears of the idiotic name choice that can and given past history will prevail, etc., etc.
    Is there any more enthusiasm-sapping fresh hell that GW can heap on its very small and quite beleaguered fan base?

 

 

2/17/2023 8:01 pm  #571


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Free Quebec wrote:

What a disgrace. These names suck. All of them.

I agree we will wind up with revolutionaries, which is boring and unoriginal.

As usual the administration has botched this from the start, and embarrassed all of us who try to rep our GW fandom.

I don't agree that the name change is a good idea, but I'd say calling the choices a disgrace is just not nice. The university is doing their best.  I can't see any other option other than being supportive.  I think we should get on board or get off the train.

 

2/17/2023 8:24 pm  #572


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

jf wrote:

Just thinking about this: the branding and overall cost of the whole nonsensical shebang, the distraction to fandom and recruiting ("Let's go??????," Or "I'm going to be a ??????? at GW", our six-year swoon to the bottom, the catering to university students who don't know or don't want to know basic history or English who are driving this train, the fears of the idiotic name choice that can and given past history will prevail, etc., etc.
    Is there any more enthusiasm-sapping fresh hell that GW can heap on its very small and quite beleaguered fan base?

 

It’s your 6th word BRANDING I’m really struggling with. If the moniker has a role beyond team name how do any of these work or help reach anyone outside of GW?

Sorry if I mentioned this before, but they don’t understand their stated goals or hopes for the new moniker. They use words like:

Energy
Community
Connection
Fun

So how are any of these bad car names (anyone remember the AMC Ambassador?) gonna work? Plus when the name of the university gets changed within 10 years they’ll make that situation worse by doing this all over again. Just pick a cat!

 

2/17/2023 8:38 pm  #573


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Oxford languages second meaning for “fog”

“something that obscures and confuses a situation or someone's thought processes”

Based on that, Blue Fog should be the winner because  it most accurately describes this whole process. Every time I read about the moniker change, I get ticked off.

 

2/18/2023 3:33 am  #574


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

How could we ignore Federals and Presidents within the top 10 ?  I gave Ambassadors the highest mark altho I don't really care for it either ("Here we go Ambos, here we go!") and would prefer Diplomats.   I like Monuments better than Monumentals.   Commanders is better than any of them.  Revolution is better than adding -aries.  How about G-Men and G-Women ?  I fear this won't end well.........

 

2/18/2023 7:08 am  #575


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

With these choices, how can we possibly say that the university is doing their best? Obviously, they never consulted anyone over 40 in this process. The GW Fireworks. Gimme a break! 

 

2/18/2023 1:01 pm  #576


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

I agree whole heartedly with everyone here about the names being terrible.  I’ve been complaining since day one that if you can’t use Colonials because of potential misinterpretation, there is no way that you can use Revolutionaries.  The rest of the names are awful, with the exception of Sentinels, but I’m not really sure how that fits the university.

I feel like the school is missing the really obvious choice.  Just be the “Buff and Blue” and be done with it.  It’s already associated with the University, is tied to George Washington and his army and is even in the fight song.  The name gives continuity and is tied to tradition.  Should make more people happy than picking something that some marketing firm selected.

 

2/18/2023 1:45 pm  #577


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

porter71 wrote:

I agree whole heartedly with everyone here about the names being terrible.  I’ve been complaining since day one that if you can’t use Colonials because of potential misinterpretation, there is no way that you can use Revolutionaries.  The rest of the names are awful, with the exception of Sentinels, but I’m not really sure how that fits the university.

I feel like the school is missing the really obvious choice.  Just be the “Buff and Blue” and be done with it.  It’s already associated with the University, is tied to George Washington and his army and is even in the fight song.  The name gives continuity and is tied to tradition.  Should make more people happy than picking something that some marketing firm selected.

This is the answer

 

2/18/2023 2:22 pm  #578


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Did I miss where we go to vote on the least bad choice?

 

2/18/2023 2:30 pm  #579


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

It was an email sent by the school or The Hatchet.

 

2/18/2023 2:49 pm  #580


Re: GW New Moniker Discussion

Mine came from Patty Carocci from the gwu alumni email. Strange since the whole world can vote on this horrible thing. Alumni said why even bring the subject up. Naw, the administration just wanted to bring disunity to GW. And waste money. Good job.

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum