Crusaders Retired

[valpotx]

The  times is looking for replies from athletes, we need to stop these liberals and the get decision reversed.
Email Aaron.ferguson@nwi.com

Rob, did you receive the survey?  What about other football players?  If you are who I think you are, you were in school at the same time as me, and had some mutual friends.

[robg89]

I didn't receive a survey from an official university source. However there was a link to survey monkey in the fb football group, not sure if it's the same.

[valpotx]

Me and several other baseball players, did not receive the survey.  That is interesting.

[usc4valpo]

So if I go to a Valpo sporting event, can I still wear my hoodie with the Crusader logo on it, or will I be removed? What if I wear it when I'm at a game at a school like Drake? Will I be arrested?

[valpo64]

Arrested?  They will probably take your kids too.

[valpotx]

Haha, when Baseball plays at DBU this season, I will be wearing my Crusaders Baseball shirt, and won't change how I cheer

[hailcrusaders]

So if I go to a Valpo sporting event, can I still wear my hoodie with the Crusader logo on it, or will I be removed? What if I wear it when I'm at a game at a school like Drake? Will I be arrested?

It might be a while before I'm next able to go to a game, but y'all can d**n well guess which logo I'll be sporting, and which nickname I'll refer to.

[mp91]

I'm kind of surprised at the animosity on this board. I understand that most people don't understand the entire history of the Crusades or even the perception of the Crusades (which are actually different), but it's hard to believe that so many people were angered that a name which is partially linked to the massacre of Jewish, Muslim, and also different-minded Christians (and has been co-opted by hate groups for years) was changed. The purpose of a university is to attract students, it's hard to do that if a percentage of the population (even if that's 1%) is uncomfortable with the name. It's simple economics & common courtesy. The name change makes total sense and is the right thing to do, in my opinion. Particularly, since Valpo struggles so much with diversity in its student population. This is a logical step to try to expand the University's reach... And, some of you are mad because they are changing the mascot on the sweatshirt? Seems like a small inconvenience compared to the mission of the University.

Also, the "woke" argument is flawed because the name has been reviewed in the 90s, 2000s, and 2010s. This is not new. It's important to note that most of these reviews have been initiated by students, so it's clear the actual people that matter (the students) have a problem with it. Moreover, it's not just liberals that don't like the name. It's not just liberals that don't first think of Crusaders when you think of the University.

So, why not change? We changed our mascot in the 1940s and the University continued to thrive. So why not change now?

For the record, I received the survey and just about everyone I know that is an alumni received the survey via email.

[valpofb16]

It's safe to say mp91 is Knott or Steinheiser .


MP was also an incredibly offensive acronym in the 900s please change it

[mp91]

It's safe to say mp91 is Knott or Steinheiser .


MP was also an incredibly offensive acronym in the 900s please change it

oh you agree with my point about being sensitive to other cultures. Cool

[NotBryceDrew]

Unlikely mp91 is Steinhiser. A join date of 2011 would make her 11-12 years old at the time. That would be incredible amount of foresight.

[NativeCheesehead]

To be clear, I don't really have a problem with them changing it. I have a huge problem with the institution that taught me to be honest and act as God's light lying to me.

[valpotx]

It's safe to say mp91 is Knott or Steinheiser .


MP was also an incredibly offensive acronym in the 900s please change it

oh you agree with my point about being sensitive to other cultures. Cool

Do you tell people experiencing a tough time or that you feel bad, that you will pray for them, without knowing if they are even tied to a religion?  You realize that can be offensive, as well, correct?  I can't tell you how many times I hear such a thing, as people just naturally assume it is ok to say, but I never throw a fit or ask them to not say it.  On the same end, when I am making a comment the is trying to impart my sympathy/condolences, I tell people, 'I will think positive thoughts for you and your family, during this hard time.'

Also, as has been said by multiple posters, it is not just the name change on the sweater.  It is how the university went about making the decision, and how they portrayed the announcement.  You make a reference to the 90s/2000s/2010s, and you are correct, there has always been a small population offended by the mascot name.  There are always going to be people offended about something, regardless of what you do. 

[valpopal]

To be clear, I don't really have a problem with them changing it. I have a huge problem with the institution that taught me to be honest and act as God's light lying to me.

As some have said, including myself, more damaging to the relationship between the university plus athletic department and its fans or alums than the removal of the Crusader mascot is the loss of trust and loyalty that has resulted from the manner the process has taken place. Even those who defend the removal of the Crusader mascot must recognize this harm. Over on Twitter, Oren reports his research of the Valpo Athletics website reveals that "the school intentionally began moving away from the Crusader nickname in its messaging on Sept. 1, 2018. The change appeared to occur almost overnight."


This happened at precisely the same time the inflatable Crusader was removed from the ARC. If you read the list thread messages then, faculty took credit for having the large Crusader taken away and boasted they "had gotten some alums to support their efforts to get rid of the mascot." When asked about this, Mark LaBarbera denied the phasing out of the Crusader and stated the inflatable Crusader was merely wearing out. Based upon trust of his word by some on the message board, those questioning motives for the removal of the Crusader were viewed as conspiracy theorists—jokes were made about a second shooter theory, etc. All were assured nothing would come of it. In fact, the message board thread is mockingly titled "Mascot Removal—was there a collusion."


However, it is clear now that misleading and manipulative actions or words were happening, and what is more hurtful or damaging for VU fans and alumni is a process that has not been perceived as honest or transparent at any point. For years the university has worked behind the scenes toward removal of the Crusader but denied they were doing so. As Paul points out, the deliberate erasure of the Crusader began in earnest in fall 2018, also when the popular inflatable Crusader was removed from the ARC, a phony story about it wearing out offered to fans as the reason. The recent survey merely gave cover for the anticipated announcement. It was a push poll with biased wording toward a predetermined outcome that asked respondents to choose between being "a Valpo person" or "a Crusader." No comprehensive study of it was done or could have been done in the short time between its submission and the announcement.


Despite the ongoing transitional presence of Heckler and the named new president already on board, the decision was announced just a couple weeks before her leaving by an interim president. Obviously, Padilla knew and approved the action, but he avoided making the announcement himself, which seems an inauspicious way to begin one's tenure. The video addressed accusations of Crusader associations with hate groups and the KKK, not once was there recognition of all the good done in its name by alums in the past 8 decades; yet, a vocal opponent of the Crusader was permitted to speak on the video. The video seemed to be warning that those who opposed removal of the Crusader would be shamed.


Already, in the front page story about the announcement from the current issue of the Torch, a Valpo athlete who opposed changing the mascot, and is aware of the cancel culture, spoke only on condition of anonymity, a first sign of the lasting negative impact of this process. At no stage in this series of steps were alumni and fans treated with respect and given transparency. The mascot may be changed but that is not the real issue in this event. The real issue is the process: university relations with many students, fans, and alumni have been damaged by the ways a divisive and costly move unfolded. This should have been handled in a much more positive and constructive fashion.   

[cmack]

I've heard so many times that the name change is less damaging than the lack of transparency and "sham survey".  I'm sorry.   I don't buy that.  The issue here is that a segment of alumni are upset by the name change.  Simple as that.  The cries of a fraudulent process is a smoke screen and justification for the animosity. 

I hate most of all that the new norm is that we claim fraud and lies and deep state tactics when we get an outcome we don't like.  That's disheartening.   

I am in favor of cutting association with a name tied to murder in the name of religion.  I am in favor of dissociating with a name used prominently by the Ku Klux Klan. 

The justifications are there for why the name change would be appropriate.  Using the sham survey and process narrative is gaslighting and takes away from the real concerns about the name, the real social change that is occurring particularly in most recent years and among younger generations.  Feel free to defend the messaging of the Crusades and Crusader on its merits.  Don't bog us down with the manufactured indignity of sham survey and other conspiracy claims. 

[valpotx]

I've heard so many times that the name change is less damaging than the lack of transparency and "sham survey".  I'm sorry.   I don't buy that.  The issue here is that a segment of alumni are upset by the name change.  Simple as that.  The cries of a fraudulent process is a smoke screen and justification for the animosity. 

I hate most of all that the new norm is that we claim fraud and lies and deep state tactics when we get an outcome we don't like.  That's disheartening.   

I am in favor of cutting association with a name tied to murder in the name of religion.  I am in favor of dissociating with a name used prominently by the Ku Klux Klan. 

The justifications are there for why the name change would be appropriate.  Using the sham survey and process narrative is gaslighting and takes away from the real concerns about the name, the real social change that is occurring particularly in most recent years and among younger generations.  Feel free to defend the messaging of the Crusades and Crusader on its merits.  Don't bog us down with the manufactured indignity of sham survey and other conspiracy claims. 

Good to know that you get to decide how other posters feel, and the true reasons behind their feelings.  Should they run their opinions through you first, before posting?  It might save a lot of time and angst.  Sorry, I couldn't help myself .

Though I am not as focused on the actual process to get to this point, as I am the way that the announcement was delivered and the political bias that is inferred with including the SBP and the verbiage utilized, I wouldn't want to speak for those that feel that the process was or wasn't transparent.  It is not my place to infer their reasoning or intent, nor is it yours.  Does that mean that I am also shielding some type of dislike for the social change occurring, even whilst married to a card-carrying Democrat, still fairly young at 39, and a prominent fixture/driver of change in Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion discussions for my company as part of the HR department?  Or, could it simply be that I don't think that my university should show such a political bias in the public eye (whether far right or far left)?  I've enjoyed the more moderate conservative nature of the university ever since I attended, and if the go-forward is more of a moderate or more liberal lean, I have a right to reconsider where my money and support is facilitated.  You are trying to apply your statements to 'older white Republican men,' based on your comments, when there are plenty of us in the Others category, that are also not happy with how this was delivered.

[may know]

Actually, valpopal's post provides pretty compelling evidence. cmack's post doesn't attempt to refute it - it just discards him as a crazy conspiracist without addressing the points he made.

If you have a refutation to the inflatable mascot point valpopal made, then make it. From where I sit, valpopal's post makes a lot of sense, especially the part about the inflatable mascot "wearing out" being dishonest.

[cmack]

Actually, valpopal's post provides pretty compelling evidence. cmack's post doesn't attempt to refute it - it just discards him as a crazy conspiracist without addressing the points he made.

If you have a refutation to the inflatable mascot point valpopal made, then make it. From where I sit, valpopal's post makes a lot of sense, especially the part about the inflatable mascot "wearing out" being dishonest.

Actually, valpopal's post provides pretty compelling evidence. cmack's post doesn't attempt to refute it - it just discards him as a crazy conspiracist without addressing the points he made.

If you have a refutation to the inflatable mascot point valpopal made, then make it. From where I sit, valpopal's post makes a lot of sense, especially the part about the inflatable mascot "wearing out" being dishonest.

So to clarify, all the transparency purists would be just as a free if the process were changed, but the result was announcing that the university was standing by the Crusader name?  Some would still be upset and threaten to withhold donations?

Even if this was a unilateral decision by the interim president, the debate many are making here avoids confronting those concerns.  Or really acknowledges them.  Many want the process debate because they lack a case against the actual merits of the change presented. 

It's a loophole with very real correlation with what is occurring on the political scene. 

I hate the result, so I'll attack the process.

[valpofb16]

cmack, if you have an issue with the name crusaders being tied to KKK then Valpo should move all crosses from campus immediately?

See what we are getting at. People will try to be offended at something no matter what. We teach theology and science classes, some find that offensive.

I think the REAL offense is this decision being made by an INTERIM president. Sending out a sham survey to try and coerce alumni into believing their voice could make a difference. The president taking tuition and donation money to lead a task force (her words) against the mascot. Then posting a BS video with the current president acting like they are saviors of the world.

Was a total. I mean total PR move. and if you want proof why was ESPN! (not the local news) contacted the exact same day. Why was the President tweeting about what a great move it was.

In realty, the Crusader mascot has become something else than a Crusader, it became a symbol of Valpo. If it was turning away students that would be one thing. It was progress for the sake of progress which in realty is a great thing right? Wrong! there are much much larger problems going on at this dying University.

[mj]

I am in favor of dissociating with a name used prominently by the Ku Klux Klan. 

You realize there's an African-American newspaper in Gary and Chicago that's named "The Crusader" right?

The process for this type of decision is important. VU knew that changing the name would be upsetting to some people. Instead of trying to be conciliatory, they stuck their finger in the eye of anyone who would question the decision. That's bad politics, that's bad PR. They took something that, if done right, could bring the school together and instead created division. Would some people be always be upset at the name change? Yes. But a lot less people would be upset if the university didn't lie to them about the direction they were headed.

Again, the entire process reflects poorly on leadership. Time and time again, VU has attempted to avoid facing hard decisions; instead either sticking their head in the sand (ie the law school) or choosing the path of least resistance despite long term harm (cutting profitable programs because of the lack of tenured faculty).

[usc4valpo]

If there is one word recently I have seen misused, it is transparency. I hear about it in business where they praise themselves for being transparent but their actions don't follow their words. Very frustrating indeed.

[mp91]

The transparency argument is weak. As has been stated by several people on this message board, the University has reviewed the name during each of the last three decades. And, there are several newspaper articles that have written about this review. So, this is not something new. The University has been transparent over the last three decades about reviewing the name. Not sure why everyone is suddenly surprised when it is finally changed.

Similarly, part of the reason the actual Crusader symbology was phased out was also because of marketing. The actual crusader symbol is not strongly tied to the University in the same way that  the term Valpo is. 50% of people watching us on ESPN probably don't even know the nickname if asked. It's not like we are the Blue Devils or a nickname that is popularized. Logically, if Valpo is your strongest branding, why not go with that on merchandise?

The so-called "political" argument is also very tired. Not really sure how eliminating a nickname partially tied to religious massacres and hate groups is political. Is there any politician in favor of religious massacre symbology? No. So, it's not political. It's cultural. If the nickname is turning away students, why not change it? Still haven't gotten a good answer. Cmack's points are very valid.

People should check out this article, lots of great points made
https://www.nwitimes.com/sports/college/valparaiso-university/watch-now-valparaiso-alumni-react-to-retiring-of-crusader-mascot-whats-the-problem-with-changing/article_06f06acd-dbe7-5b0f-9a33-253833d7f820.html

[valpo95]

The process for this type of decision is important. VU knew that changing the name would be upsetting to some people. Instead of trying to be conciliatory, they stuck their finger in the eye of anyone who would question the decision. That's bad politics, that's bad PR. They took something that, if done right, could bring the school together and instead created division. Would some people be always be upset at the name change? Yes. But a lot less people would be upset if the university didn't lie to them about the direction they were headed.

Again, the entire process reflects poorly on leadership.

I could not agree more with mj - this is exactly the problem.

Certainly, changing the mascot was going to be controversial. Doing so was controversial at other universities (think North Dakota, Marquette, Wheaton, Miami OH among others), and the timing of the announcement during a presidential transition made sense. Yet given the historic affinity for the Crusader, the President and the University should have been far more thoughtful and respectful.

How about saying something like:

"...I recognize this decision is controversial, yet I remind everyone that the Crusader was not always our mascot. When selected in 1942, President O.P. Kretzmann said, 'The term Crusader... is, I believe, an excellent choice. It connotes the courage and devotion to ideals for which the University stands.' Tens of thousands of students, alumni, athletes and fans have embraced the positive ideals of our University. We seek to be known for our commitment to integrity, truth, faith and our pursuit of excellence; our students strive for that in the classroom and in competition. We all share pride in the courage and devotion to ideals associated with our historic mascot.

Unfortunately, it has become clear that over time the name and imagery associated with being a 'crusader' has changed. This is especially true for those not familiar with Valparaiso University; there are obvious negative associations with religious wars, and I've become aware that certain hate groups have used the name to further their interests. Clearly, we do not wish to be associated with such negative symbolism.

It is now time to retire the Crusader mascot. We do so not because our shared commitment to the ideals of Valparaiso University has changed, but because the old mascot has become less effective in representing those ideals to those outside the University.

In the coming months, you will hear more about the process as we look for a new mascot. Please join me in this process, and thank you for your continued commitment to the shared future of Valparaiso University." 

[78crusader]

Mention has been made on this board - several times - that the Crusader name has been tied to hate groups.  Which ones?  I'd like some specifics. I don't spend my time scouring the internet to see what is has to say about the name "Crusader."

The only hate group I'm aware of that has made mention of the Crusader name is the KKK, which apparently has a newspaper with that name.  But so does a Chicago publication that caters to African-American communities. 

Paul

[a3uge]

The process for this type of decision is important. VU knew that changing the name would be upsetting to some people. Instead of trying to be conciliatory, they stuck their finger in the eye of anyone who would question the decision. That's bad politics, that's bad PR. They took something that, if done right, could bring the school together and instead created division. Would some people be always be upset at the name change? Yes. But a lot less people would be upset if the university didn't lie to them about the direction they were headed.

Again, the entire process reflects poorly on leadership.

I could not agree more with mj - this is exactly the problem.

Certainly, changing the mascot was going to be controversial. Doing so was controversial at other universities (think North Dakota, Marquette, Wheaton, Miami OH among others), and the timing of the announcement during a presidential transition made sense. Yet given the historic affinity for the Crusader, the President and the University should have been far more thoughtful and respectful.

How about saying something like:

"...I recognize this decision is controversial, yet I remind everyone that the Crusader was not always our mascot. When selected in 1942, President O.P. Kretzmann said, 'The term Crusader... is, I believe, an excellent choice. It connotes the courage and devotion to ideals for which the University stands.' Tens of thousands of students, alumni, athletes and fans have embraced the positive ideals of our University. We seek to be known for our commitment to integrity, truth, faith and our pursuit of excellence; our students strive for that in the classroom and in competition. We all share pride in the courage and devotion to ideals associated with our historic mascot.

Unfortunately, it has become clear that over time the name and imagery associated with being a 'crusader' has changed. This is especially true for those not familiar with Valparaiso University; there are obvious negative associations with religious wars, and I've become aware that certain hate groups have used the name to further their interests. Clearly, we do not wish to be associated with such negative symbolism.

It is now time to retire the Crusader mascot. We do so not because our shared commitment to the ideals of Valparaiso University has changed, but because the old mascot has become less effective in representing those ideals to those outside the University.

In the coming months, you will hear more about the process as we look for a new mascot. Please join me in this process, and thank you for your continued commitment to the shared future of Valparaiso University."

Do you do this for a living? This is exactly how the university should have went about this. I do think they have the opportunity to come up with a more unique name that represents the university better than the generic Crusader. It hasn't really been addressed how the university will come up with a new name. Are they taking submissions? Putting it up to a vote? Hearing input from alumni and students? It seems like they didn't really think this all the way through.