clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

One Concept the Mascot Selection Committee Left Off

Conceptual design of "Rebel the Titan Cardinal"
Conceptual design of "Rebel the Titan Cardinal"

No, it's not what's pictured above. That was just to scare you. I'm assuming it worked. But, in earnest, I do feel that the Student Mascot Committee of Tradition Destruction and Bureaucratic Shadowboxing (I'm just being a jerk here) left a very important option or possibility off of the list of new Ole Miss Rebel mascot concepts thus far, released yesterday.

And, no, it's not Ackbar. If that's what you were expecting, sorry, but this post isn't about the Admiral. As an aside, I had drinks with the Ackbar for mascot campaign's founder last night and he told me that he received numerous emails, Facebook messages, and Tweets from confused, annoyed, and even angered supporters of the Mon Calamari leader of Star Wars' ingergalactic rebellion. They were legitimately bummed that he was not at all considered as a potential mascot concept.

But I digress.

The option entirely neglected by the Student Mascot Committee was (yes, there's a jump; you're not getting off that easy)...

...the maintenance of the status quo. That is, not bothering to introduce a new mascot at all.

There are many arguments which have been presented which suggest that the success of a collegiate football program is enhanced by the presense of an on-field mascot. Most of these areguments are batshit stupid. Some are somewhat logical. But all can be diffused with one, singluar counter argument: The University of Michigan does not have a mascot.

They have a team name which lends to the presence of a guy in a fuzzy critter suit walking around, engaging in goofballery, and wandering into your tailgates to take sorta-creepy photos with your children. But there is nary an anthropomorphic wolverine to be found in Ann Arbor. And this doesn't seem to be a detriment to their football program, nor their university, one bit. The young and dying Rich Rodriguez "era" aside, Michigan has been one of the most successful football programs of all time and is, in fact, the winningest of all time. They have national titles, Heisman Trophy winners, a longstanding tradition of putting players in the NFL, and even had a then President of the United States of America-to-be on their football team a while back. And they did all of this without a mascot.

They recruit well without a mascot. Their fans fill the Big House regularly without a mascot. They sell plenty of merchandise without a mascot. And they maintain a solid football tradition without a mascot.

No, I'm not suggesting the lack of a mascot leads to a successful football program--I'm simply pointing a blatantly obvious contradiction to the conviction to the contrary possessed by so many (stupid) members of our Rebel fan base.

Folks, we don't need a mascot. We simply don't. It's a novelty and an accessory to a football program--not an integral cog in the works thereof. If the options presented to us by the administration, Student Mascot Committee, or whoever is going to be handling this frivolous use of time and resources are options that we do not like, then why shouldn't we have the option of saying "none of the above, thank you"?