squirrel said:BradleyBrave said:squirrel said:MacabreMob said:Squirrel -
1) It is hard to market or sell for a bad product. (winning teams sell tickets and gear - not mascots)
2) I thought we were off the list. (we have had a generic logo with no mascot for a while to support the generic blanketing of the term Braves)
We are on a "watch list" and they made it clear we needed to be proactive. The status quo does nothing to help us.
And I can argue against point 1 all day long. It is hard to market and sell a generic product. I know mascots are not the only thing that sells. BUT they can help you stand out.
Take a look at the college basketball 2007 game by 2K sports. Two of the unlockables are the Wichita and Indiana St mascots. Not the most popular by any means, but invaluable recognition.
The proactive action was changing the name of the Chiefs Club. It's over and done with.
I don't think it is. Time will tell. The only way I see it ending is if there was a completely different visual symbol.
I will say this...when you say Braves I will and think I always will think of Indians. So to me BU is STILL "hostile and abusive" under the stupid NCAA standards.
My point Squirrel is as long as we are the Braves I don't see a symbol changing the fact that Braves=Indians. Its ingrained in society's mind IMO.
You either drop Braves or simply redesign the logo. You can be the BU Braves with a clock, rocket, gargoyle, Bobcat, etc. Your name still says Scalp em, war paint and all those stereotypes the NCAA wants gone.