Dan Wetzel article on Interlocking Logo
- Thread starter MSUDC11-2.0
- Start date
Remember when we used to make fun of UMiss fans for desperately clinging to their “traditions“ (confederate flag, colonel reb, etc)? That’s us now with the MSJ logo…
one of those things is not like the other...
Fanbase hyper focused on the wrong things and missing the big picture is eerily similar…
Why can’t we have multiple or at least more than one helmet logo? How hard would it be for the equipment guys to switch it out every game or every other game? Make everyone happy.
Again, nothing about these things is remotely similar. One is attachment to a helmet logo. The other is attachment to racist imagery.
Dear gosh this man really just equated the interlocking logo to the confederate flag.
I'd rather have a good DC and players but that logo is our football logo.
We were a ton more dominating with the Banner M, dumb take.
Not quite!
Attachments
-
download.png -
download (1).png
Are you saying the segment of our fan base advocating for the return of the interlocking MSU is actually clinging to a century’s worth of racism, bigotry and intolerance?
No, they’re just clinging to a window in time that really wasn’t that great to live through the first time.
If the interlocking on the helmet means we can get rid of &tate and get the banner M back as our official logo everywhere else except the helmet and maybe a few jerseys and merch, I’m all for it.
Matter of fact….its the easiest and logical thing to do. Satisfies everybody and keeps our university brand consistent.
Matter of fact….its the easiest and logical thing to do. Satisfies everybody and keeps our university brand consistent.
Have we considered the possibility that the $3 million donor really wants to keep the script State?
Not sure if you are old enough to remember the 99 team but they were pretty bad ***. Don't remember State script being much of anything. Instead of saying banner M you could just say Mullen era.
That was a much better team than the 98 team. 98, 80 & 14 are the best teams in my memory.
Then salmon should turn the logo civil war into a bidding war between the factions with the proceeds going to NIL.
If it takes a mere $3M dollars to persuade our leadership to certain visual identity standard, i have ZERO confidence in that leadership.
Again, you’re missing my point. We laughed at them when they were longing for and focusing on meaningless, insignificant images (logos) instead of focusing on the important things. That’s us now.
Once they started forcing on the important things, look what’s happened. That should be us, but we can’t get out of our own way….
The interlocking guys always seem to forget ‘93, 94, 95, etc… sure, ‘98 and ‘99 were pretty fun (and ‘92 to some extent), there were a LOT of bad years under the interlocking…
Absolutely not! I’m saying they’re clinging to the “glory days” of MSU football that, in hindsight, really weren’t that great.
Sounds kinda familiar…
Last edited:
That’s what’s so great about this thread…
To be clear, I’m not advocating for one logo or another. I’m pretty much ambivalent to them all (Cromm’s version of Banner-M can die in a fire). However, when I used it as an example of fans being focused on the small things, Most everyone went one of two paths:
1) We‘re better than UMiss because they’re racist…
2) Defense of their “favorite” logo
If we truly have fans withholding support (financial, attendance, etc) because they’d rather the team wear a different logo, then we’ve become a fanbase that’s focused on the WRONG things.
Script state is the uglier than the banner Mississippi state by far.
also this explains why our football program is screwed up. I would say it's par for the course. Our brass and people leading the charge as our big boosters for football are clueless about football and what a majority of the fan base want.
Latest posts
-
first football transfer window- Latest: Hugh's Burner Phone
-
-
Is this the least nervous you have been about an Egg Bowl?...
- Latest: Called3rdstrikedawg
Get unlimited access today.