The 2011 NCAA Football Mascot Challenge

So while in Nashville for a bachelor party this past weekend and attending a football game where some sort of bird of prey appeared to attempt to intercept a long field goal in mid-flight, my hungover compatriots and myself launched into a conversation concerning the effectiveness of actual mascots in an NCAA football game. This is an important topic that needs to be expanded upon, and what better place than here, on these esteemed virtual pages?

First, let's set up the rules. Here's the scenario: a college team gets to use their literal mascot for one play per quarter. By literal mascot, I mean not whatever wears a suit on the sideline, but what their mascot literally is. I.e., the Ohio State Buckeyes would get to use a buckeye, the nut, rather than Brutus, the hulking quasi-creepy buckeye-headed weirdo. The Miami Hurricanes get to play one play per quarter 10 on 11 in a Hurricane, but they get the wind. The Alabama Crimson Tide play one play per quarter 10 on 11 in a flood, and so forth. The team gets to use what the mascot actually is, not what they choose to throw in a creepy suit and/or embroider on "official" gear. While most mascots are just pluralized forms of singular objects clearly inferring that they are a group of said items, some mascots actually ARE plural, inferring that each member of the team is actually a group of something. So for the Nevada and NC State Wolfpack, they actually get to have a pack of wolves as their mascot.. up to 11. Theoretically, those two teams could line up with 11 wolves in place of their defense. Or 9 wolves and 2 humans, etc. Additionally, the mascots get to use any abilities or weaponry that naturally come with WHAT they are. I.e., a tiger is able to maul or pounce on someone, warriors get their traditional weapons.. a pirate comes with traditional pirate gear, etc. This being said, the mascots are still bound by the rules of the game. So while a bear or lion may be able to maul and kill a quarterback during the sack, if they hit the quarterback late or eat the quarterback after he's down, those would be penalized. Finally, all mascots, regardless of their beast status, must lineup onsides and wait for the ball to be snapped. With that being said, let's rank the top 10 (.. and bottom 5) FBS football mascots. This ranking is determining which teams would be most helped by the addition of their mascot, and which mascots would be most effective at the game of football. Here goes the dumbest thing ever to be attempted on this blog.

TOP 10

10. Cavaliers (University of Virginia)
Most people believe that Cavaliers are simply pirates by a fancier name. This is not the case. A cavalier in fact was a 17th Century cavalryman and Royalist in the English civil war. Being on horseback and armed with a sword and muzzle loading single shot weapon, they basically hold a man's life in their hands. Cavaliers were reputed for all manner of violence, and could potentially be quite effective on the defensive side of the ball. I'd say the ideal position for a Cavalier would be middle linebacker. Their mobility on horseback would allow for sideline to sideline coverage and their complement of weaponry would allow for effective stopping power. Pros: Armed, mounted, angry, military training. Cons: English (ever seen an English football player? (I mean actual football, smartass)), small (it was the 17th Century, after all), concerned with feats of bravado and chivalry over team play, 450 year old firearms weren't exactly "accurate".

9b. Trojans (USC, Troy)
A trojan warrior would have been a hoplite.. an armored infantryman armed with a short sword, long spear, heavy wooden shield and wearing a helmet, breastplate and shinguards. Hoplite battle was conducted by massing into lines and attempting to break opposing lines by pushing opposing lines until their morale broke and slaughter could commence. This description is not unlike B1G 10 football. Ideally, a Trojan would line up on the defensive line, where his armor, shield and weaponry would allow him to wreck maximum havoc on the offense. Pros: Armed, armored, military training, some acclimation towards using leverage and "field position". Cons: Being from thousands of years ago, they probably weigh 130 lbs and would get absolutely steamrolled, having weapons made of iron, it's uncertain whether said weaponry would be effective against a modern football player.

9b. Spartans (Michigan State, San Jose State)
Insert description of hoplites above, only consider another 500 years of military and technological advances and insert elite navy seal-esque training. Basically, a Spartan was trained for war for the entirety of his life.. bred for it even. Spartan armies numbering in the hundreds regularly routed armies that outnumbered them 5 or 6 to one. So basically everything that's good about a Trojan is good about a Spartan, only more so. Death in battle is the highest honor a Spartan warrior could achieve. Pros: armed, armored, determined, vast amounts of military training, familiarity with pushing and shoving, skilled at armed combat. Cons: probably completely psychotic from a life of brutal "lessons" and institutionalized torture and abuse, at least 2400 year old technology, 2400 year old genetics and nutrition = probably tiny.

8. Seminoles/Fighting Illini/Utes/Chippewas (Florida State, Illinois, Utah, Central Michigan)
I'm just going to group all native American based mascots into one group here. It took basically 400 years for a vastly technologically and numerically superior group (Europeans) to defeat native Americans to the point that they no longer posed a "threat" despite having advances in weapons, tactics, science and having a massive disease outbreak on their side. (hold discussions over what "threat" they may have posed on your own time) That should tell you all you need to know of their military prowess. Effective warriors, survivors and hunters, when armed with firearms and mounted on horseback Native American warriors were a deadly fighting force. Due to the mobility horseback allows, ideally suited for safety or linebacker in a zone coverage scheme, to allow for their advantages in weaponry over regular football players to hold true. Pros: skilled horsemen, trained in warfare and hunting techniques. Cons: undersized, unfamiliar with the game and concepts involved, may play for blood and cost your team penalty yards.

7. Large Herd animals (Texas - Longhorns, South Florida & Buffalo - Bulls, Colorado - Buffalos, Broncos - Boise St, Western Michigan) I took the slightly cop-out approach on this list of grouping together similar mascots in order to generally describe the class or type. So sue me. Large, aggressive herd animals would be virtually unstoppable in the trenches, but their complete lack of any kind of "reason" or ability to distinguish between friend and foe pretty much relegates them to the offensive line. A Buffalo/Bull/Longhorn/Bronco would basically be the best run blocking guard in the history of run blocking guards. A simple run behind a 2000 lb creature would basically guarantee a touchdown, and 4 automatic TDs a game will go a long way towards winning your game. Unfortunately, there's no way to guarantee they'll run in the right direction or lead you all the way to the end zone, so there's that to consider. Pros: massive, powerful, angry. Cons: inability to comprehend rules of the sport or distinguish between friend and foe.

6. Knights (UCF, Army - Black Knights, Rutgers - Scarlet Knights)
Knights combine the advantages of being on horseback with being covered from head to toe in steel plate while wielding weapons that were designed to cleave through metal plate, let alone football pads. A fully armorered knight and mount could weigh well over 2000 pounds, and would prove to be completely unstoppable on the football field. There are a number of positions where a knight would excell.. offensive line would be obvious, as well as a linebacker, defensive back or ballcarrier. The advantage of combining an armored beast with an armored warrior means they'd pretty much have their run of the field. I'd say an ideal spot for a knight would be outside linebacker rushing off the edge or offensive guard runblocking straight ahead. Also probably underrated as a safety, the horse's closing speed would be great for covering for teammate's mistakes, and the broadsword would help ensure they don't happen again. Pros: armed, armored, trained, used to charging lines of men. Cons: chivalrous, undersized, all that armor can be unwieldy.

5. Wolfpack (Nevada, NC State)
A wolf in and of itself is pretty badass, but not as badass individually as the mascots above. Wolves are basically big, mean dogs.. they average about 80 lbs, hunt in packs, and are extremely fast, especially over distance. Their size makes them relatively ineffective individually (a wolf, even a large wolf, isn't particularly scary to a 200+ lb man wearing football pads), but in a group of 3-4? Say a defensive backfield? A wolfpack would have unparalleled full field coverage and the ability to blanket an offense. This is the one mascot that is, by very definition, plural, and so these teams get the advantage of having more than one of their featured mascot on their team. So a couple of wolves would really help a squad on the defensive side of the ball. A wolf hunting is not completely unlike a defender tackling.. so serious skill overlap here. Pros: fast, hunt in packs, alpha predators used to taking down larger prey. Cons: undersized, susceptible to play fakes, unable to grasp rules and concepts of the game, overly aggressive.

4. Bears (UCLA - Bruins, Baylor - Bears, Cal - Golden Bears)
So bears are bears, right? They are giant raccoons basically. Powerful, fast (even the largest bears can outsprint humans in short distances), more or less unstoppable and massive, bears are basically your prototypical defensive linemen. Fun little known fact: over short distances, bears are nearly as fast as Tigers and Lions. Yeah, think about that for a second. Would you rather have a giant human being who tops out at 350 lbs and benches 500 or so pounds or a bear who tops out at 1,000 lbs, can run a 3.5 40 and if he could be trained to bench could probably bench 900+ lbs? Yeah, I thought so. So for one play per quarter, those teams lucky enough to have a bear as a mascot would have an amazing version of Ndamukong Suh, utterly unblockable and the ultimate disruptive force on the defensive line. Bears are rather trainable as far as wild beasts go, and could surely be trained to attack a certain color or design, particularly if honey or peanut butter was offered as a reward. So basically, teams lucky enough to have a bear would have the benefit of the Tecmo Super Bowl "Jerry Ball trick" and be unable to run a play. Pros: massive, powerful, aggressive, unblockable. Cons: wild beast, not familiar or able to become familiar with the rules, might rampage and kill 10+, easily bribed with high calorie or sweet foods.

3. Birds of Prey (Falcons - BGSU, Air Force, Eagles/Golden Eagles - Eastern Michigan, Southern Miss, Redhawks - Miami University)
Note: Despite popular conception and depiction, "Jayhawks" are not birds, rather, "Jayhawker" was a term for pro-free state militias in the 1850's during "Bleeding Kansas" and generally became applied to Kansas residents in general. Birds may not be the most imposing creatures on the planet (although an Eagle with an 8 foot wingspan diving at your face would be really scary), but closer examination reveals a skill-set ideally suited for the game of football, and here's why: birds that are agile enough in flight to catch other birds could certainly be trained to catch a football. Hence, we're talking about utterly unstoppable wide receivers, kick/punt returners and the secret weapon: blocking field goals. Line up a falcon at wide receiver and give your team 4 free touchdowns. The difficult part of course would be training the bird to fly over the end zone line before going out of bounds, but falcons at least are capable of being trained. The opposing team would have no recourse to this aerial assault unless they possessed their own birds or a mascot with firearms. Yes, only another mascot can possibly counter this mascot. That's the kind of thing that gets you in the top 3. Pros: can fly to impressive heights at blinding speed, can intercept objects (read: a football) mid-flight. Cons: unable to comprehend rules, the vastness of their natural range means they'd be susceptible to going out of bounds and wasting their play.

2. Tigers (Auburn, LSU, Clemson, Missouri, Memphis)
A male tiger can weigh in excess of 600 lbs, run at nearly 40 miles an hour, and kill a fully grown human with one strike. You may look at a Tiger and see a fearsome creature, indeed, one of the only that hunts man for sport. I look at a Tiger and see the most fearsome pass rusher imaginable. DeMarcus Ware on wild animal rage and every steroid you've ever heard of. Stronger, faster, quicker and deadlier than any human, a Tiger rushing off the edge would decimate an opposing passing attack.. likely resulting in serious injury from a single play. Film of a tiger hunting is virtually indistinguishable from defensive football play, a tiger would be an absolute natural at OLB or DE. Quick enough to get around the edge, fast enough to close, powerful enough to overwhelm any blocker. I think Bill Parcells just creamed the shorts he has pulled up over his FUPA. Pros: strong, big, fast, aggressive, skill set that fits well with defensive play. Cons: deadly, aggressive, inability to comprehend rules, may hurt own teammates.

1. Dragons (UAB)
Note: follow up research has revealed that UAB are actually the "Blazers", but since no one knows what that means and I thought they were dragons and I want to write about dragons, I'm going to proceed anyway. So a dragon is, of course, a mythological beast that never actually existed. However, as commonly depicted, a dragon is a gigantic beast (often depicted as able to consume horses more or less whole) capable of flight, with armored scales and capable of breathing fire. So let's get this straight: a giant reptile that breathes fire, is very aggressive and is capable of stomping out groupe of humans with little to no effort? Um.. sounds like the most badass mascot ever. A dragon could play defense 1 on 11 and prevail. Also, this is the single mascot that can pretty much own every other mascot with very little effort. Have you seen that shitty McConaughey/Bale movie? Yeah.. dragons are basically unstoppable. That's how you earn the top spot. Pros: huge, aggressive, fire breathing, capable of flight. Cons: incapable of learning rules and team play, may eat everyone in the stadium or start a firestorm that destroys the stadium. Caution required.

The Bottom 5
This inglorious list is a group of schools that for a littany of reasons likely lost to history chose to name their sports teams after a bunch of nonsensical, unintimidating items. Sadly for them, when the contest of the mascots opens up, they will find themselves at a severe disadvantage. To keep it fair, I'm going to stick to the mascots that are actually quantifiable things. I.e., sorry North Texas, but no one knows what the "mean green" is/means. This goes for you too, Stanford. Your mascot is nonsense.. so you don't count.


5. Ducks (Oregon)
A duck? Really? The meanest duck in the world gives no quantifiable advantage to a football team. They quack and waddle around. They fly, but not particularly gracefully. Their purpose seems to be obnoxious and inspire clown ass cartoon characters. Needless to say, lining up a duck in lieu of a football player puts your team at a serious disadvantage.

4. Cardinals (Louisville, Ball State)
Have you ever seen a cardinal? What do they weigh? 3 ounces? Unlike Ducks, they are at least small flyers, but a songbird tweeting around and looking handsome isn't intimidating anyone or helping anyone in any way. I can think of one thing they could do to help the team: sacrifice their life by flying directly into the path of a hail-mary pass or field goal. So kudos, Cards, in death you could potentially positively impact the outcome of a football game.

3. Horned Frogs (TCU)
A horned frog is a little toad with some horns/thorny protusions sticking out of it. That's it. It's not big, it's not mean, it's not even poisonous. Its defense is: get this: standing still to avoid detection. Certain species can also secrete blood from its tear ducts. Man, the Tigers might want to be careful, there's a 3 ounce toad hopping around. If your mascot can be inadvertantly crushed by an opponent, you know your mascot just isn't cutting it. Your only hope, TCU, is that you run into an opponent with an amphibian phobia.

2. Buckeyes
A buckeye is a tree (in the Chestnut family) that has a nut that's round and poisonous. And also about the size of a quarter. But it's not poisonous in the "drop dead" way. It's poisonous in the "go to the hospital and get your stomach pumped 15 hours later" way. Basically, the only way a buckeye could be helpful is with a well-aimed throw to the eye or by forcing an opponent to eat one, which would maybe make his stomach hurt by the second half. Great mascot, OSU.

1. Orange
Syracuse was once the Orangemen, who historically were supporters of William of Orange, who took the English throne in 1688 and became William III. Well, some dumbass somewhere decided that was offensive, and they have since become simply the orange. Yes, an orange. A fruit, approximately baseball sized, and rather tasty. Regardless of its agricultural worth, its football worth is approximately 1 X 0. Maybe an opponent could step on an orange and slip. That could help. If your mascot is as likely to nourish your opponent as destroy it, you have the worst mascot.

Honorable mention: Hoosiers/Sooners/Tar Heels/Jayhawks/Aggies and every other mascot that simply represents a regular person.

Well, there's your mascot challenge folks. Feel free to disagree, but I don't know how you could.