The Undefeated and the Winless

[John Gleich]

The Eastern Nazarene Crusaders find the Holy Grail and fall off the winless list as they defeat Daniel Webster 62-55. The Crusaders score the game's first basket and are never headed the entire 1st half outscoring the Eagles 13 to 3 over the final 4 minutes to go into the break up 34-21. They stretch their lead to 17 early in the 2nd half but Daniel Webster goes on a 25-2 run over the next 7 minutes to take a 46-40 lead. Still down by 6 at 50-44 with 10 minutes left to play the Crusaders end the game on an 18-5 run to claim the victory.

They're not the Crusaders anymore; they've unveiled a new mascot this year, which I refuse to acknowledge.  I'm not too upset about losing the old one, but my impassioned plea to just go without a mascot like McMurry does was vetoed by the current crop of varsity athletes.

So my winless pick is gone, but my alma mater has won a game.  Not too bad a night.

What was wrong with the Crusaders nickname that made the powers that be decide to change it? D3hoops regional page is still showing their nickname as the Crusaders, instead of the Lions.

Pat needs to do an update.

The Crusaders did a lot of unsavory things in the Middle Ages, things that in retrospect Christian colleges would be better off condemning rather than celebrating by using the Crusader nickname and mascot. (The nickname actually tends to be derived more from the tendency to refer to revivalist and/or evangelistic meetings as "Crusades," a la Billy Graham, than from the military invasions of the Middle East that took place in the eleventh thru the thirteenth centuries A.D., but since a knight on horseback is a more potent mascot than a pompadoured preacher wildly waving a King James Version of the Bible, the connection to the medieval Crusades was thus made tangible.) Numerous schools have changed from "Crusaders" to something else over the past few years, most notably Wheaton (IL) and ENC. Other schools, such as Maranatha Baptist, continue to maintain their status as the Crusaders.

Personally, I'm with Hoops Fan on this one. "Lions" is a boring and commonplace nickname. Why be just another one of the thousands of sports teams in America that take their moniker from Panthera leo? There's no pride in that pride, so to speak. At least "Thunder" is somewhat unusual; Trine is the only other D3 school besides Wheaton to use that nickname, although it doesn't lend itself well to mascot possibilities.

I think that ENC should've re-dubbed itself the Nazz.

Not to get in any kind of debate about the true nature of the faith of the Christians who attacked the Middle East in the Middle Ages, but it seems odd to me that the name of the Lions would be chosen... After all, the Romans put undefended Christians in the ring with lions several hundred years prior...

Maybe that's too much of a stretch, I dunno, but it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the switch!

[Mr. Ypsi]

The Eastern Nazarene Crusaders find the Holy Grail and fall off the winless list as they defeat Daniel Webster 62-55. The Crusaders score the game's first basket and are never headed the entire 1st half outscoring the Eagles 13 to 3 over the final 4 minutes to go into the break up 34-21. They stretch their lead to 17 early in the 2nd half but Daniel Webster goes on a 25-2 run over the next 7 minutes to take a 46-40 lead. Still down by 6 at 50-44 with 10 minutes left to play the Crusaders end the game on an 18-5 run to claim the victory.

They're not the Crusaders anymore; they've unveiled a new mascot this year, which I refuse to acknowledge.  I'm not too upset about losing the old one, but my impassioned plea to just go without a mascot like McMurry does was vetoed by the current crop of varsity athletes.

So my winless pick is gone, but my alma mater has won a game.  Not too bad a night.

What was wrong with the Crusaders nickname that made the powers that be decide to change it? D3hoops regional page is still showing their nickname as the Crusaders, instead of the Lions.

Pat needs to do an update.

The Crusaders did a lot of unsavory things in the Middle Ages, things that in retrospect Christian colleges would be better off condemning rather than celebrating by using the Crusader nickname and mascot. (The nickname actually tends to be derived more from the tendency to refer to revivalist and/or evangelistic meetings as "Crusades," a la Billy Graham, than from the military invasions of the Middle East that took place in the eleventh thru the thirteenth centuries A.D., but since a knight on horseback is a more potent mascot than a pompadoured preacher wildly waving a King James Version of the Bible, the connection to the medieval Crusades was thus made tangible.) Numerous schools have changed from "Crusaders" to something else over the past few years, most notably Wheaton (IL) and ENC. Other schools, such as Maranatha Baptist, continue to maintain their status as the Crusaders.

Personally, I'm with Hoops Fan on this one. "Lions" is a boring and commonplace nickname. Why be just another one of the thousands of sports teams in America that take their moniker from Panthera leo? There's no pride in that pride, so to speak. At least "Thunder" is somewhat unusual; Trine is the only other D3 school besides Wheaton to use that nickname, although it doesn't lend itself well to mascot possibilities.

I think that ENC should've re-dubbed itself the Nazz.

Not to get in any kind of debate about the true nature of the faith of the Christians who attacked the Middle East in the Middle Ages, but it seems odd to me that the name of the Lions would be chosen... After all, the Romans put undefended Christians in the ring with lions several hundred years prior...

Maybe that's too much of a stretch, I dunno, but it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the switch!

Besides, you wanna risk association with Detroit's (alleged) football team?!

My understanding of Wheaton's primary motivation for change was that it was not so much disassociation with medieval excesses as that it might put missionaries at increased risk.  True?

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

They came awfully close to choosing "The Bay Lions" so plain lions is better than some of the crazy alternatives that came down the pipe.

The Crusaders were obviously not the nicest people on the planet, and I suppose that a Christian school might want something less violent.  That makes sense.  However, what made me a little perturbed was that most of the reasons they tried to give involved a real lack of historical perspective; essentially judging the Crusades through a modern lens of morality and ethics.  I think they eventually got around to the idea that Christians are supposed to be loving and Medieval warriors really don't give that impression.  That's when I stopped putting up a stink about getting rid of the mascot.

I did petition the committee to go nickname-less.  From what I hear, they were ready to endorse that idea (I know a lot of alums liked the idea) and having McMurry as an example didn't hurt.  However, they asked for the varsity athletes to vote and overwhelmingly they said they'd feel uncomfortable not having a mascot.

[Pat Coleman]

Thanks for the heads-up. Not surprisingly, no word from ENC on the subject.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Not to short-circuit the theological/historical discussion, but I have a different 'oddity' to raise: how did the two premier scientific schools (MIT and Caltech) diverge so dramatically in their athletic fortunes (or at least men's bball - I know nothing about either school's fortunes otherwise)?  One is still on the undefeated vs. d3 list; the other is still (and seems destined to remain) on the winless list.  Their overall student bodies are drawn from the same (small) pool; why such a dramatic difference in their men's bball pool?

[Hugenerd]

Not to short-circuit the theological/historical discussion, but I have a different 'oddity' to raise: how did the two premier scientific schools (MIT and Caltech) diverge so dramatically in their athletic fortunes (or at least men's bball - I know nothing about either school's fortunes otherwise)?  One is still on the undefeated vs. d3 list; the other is still (and seems destined to remain) on the winless list.  Their overall student bodies are drawn from the same (small) pool; why such a dramatic difference in their men's bball pool?

Both schools are extremely competitive to get into.  With that said, MIT has many more students apply to the university, and although they have somewhat comparable acceptance rates, MIT carries more students per class.  Caltech's total undergraduate enrollment is under 1000, meaning class sizes of no more than 250.  MIT on the other hand has yearly classes of 1000+ (which is supposed to expand by 10% or so over the next few years with the construction of a new freshman dormitory).  I would say that is probably the largest obstacle for Coach Eslinger.  Neither school is going to give the Coach picks, but Caltech is even more difficult to be accepted to (although it can vary because each school has slightly different things they look for in students, so it is not imperceivable to be accepted to one and not the other).

On top of that, both schools are competing for the same pool of highly accomplished academic students (along with the Ivies) and now that MIT has made quite a big splash on the d3 scene, more players seem to be interested in the program.  For example, MIT has two freshman from the Southern California area this year: Wil Tashmen, who is their starting power forward and Devin Dee, who is seeing very limited minutes.  

In addition to that, MIT recently changed their finanacial aid structure which makes tuition essentially free if your household income is below six figures.  I am not sure if that has swayed any potential players yet, as it was just in the last year or two that that change was made, but it could potentially attract some students who in the past would not have the opportunity to afford an MIT education.

It also cannot be understated that Coach Anderson is a really great coach and recruiter.  He is a master at defensive coaching and really stresses that aspect of the game, because for years his teams didnt have very much offensive talent.  Now that he is starting to get some more complete players, you are seeing what kind of things they can accomplish.  Coach Eslinger has much of the same qualities as Coach Anderson and learned a lot by being on his staff for almost a decade.  I am sure with more time he will get things turned around, he is only in his second year and this class is the first one he had an opportunity to recruit.

I am sure there are some other reasons but they are not coming to me right now.  Caltech also has some things going for them.  In terms of locations, Pasadena is amazing.  Boston,  though, is an amazing sports and college town in general, so some students may be looking for that.

[Ralph Turner]

They came awfully close to choosing "The Bay Lions" so plain lions is better than some of the crazy alternatives that came down the pipe.

The Crusaders were obviously not the nicest people on the planet, and I suppose that a Christian school might want something less violent.  That makes sense.  However, what made me a little perturbed was that most of the reasons they tried to give involved a real lack of historical perspective; essentially judging the Crusades through a modern lens of morality and ethics.  I think they eventually got around to the idea that Christians are supposed to be loving and Medieval warriors really don't give that impression.  That's when I stopped putting up a stink about getting rid of the mascot.

I did petition the committee to go nickname-less.  From what I hear, they were ready to endorse that idea (I know a lot of alums liked the idea) and having McMurry as an example didn't hurt.  However, they asked for the varsity athletes to vote and overwhelmingly they said they'd feel uncomfortable not having a mascot.

University of Mary Hardin-Baylor went from Crusaders to The Cru and Lady Cru.

Most accurately, McMurry dropped its Indian mascot in the 1990's.  We failed in our appeal to retain the nickname when the NCAA said that there was no evidence of a hostile or disrespectful environment on campus, but we were unable to guarantee that one might not arise.

[hopefan]

Maine Maritime over UMPI,  78-68        UMPI stays winless!!!!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Thanks for the heads-up. Not surprisingly, no word from ENC on the subject.

You must not be on the school's current mailing list.  I got about fifty seven surveys regarding it, plus two email announcements when they made the change.  I wouldn't be surprised if the Athletic Department is less than on top of the information; I don't think this was their idea.

[magicman]

Maine Maritime over UMPI,  78-68        UMPI stays winless!!!!

Yes, but the countdown to their 1st victory has begun. 14 days till that MAGIC moment.

[magicman]

As news of my early exit from the winless pool comes out, I'll both antagonize and console myself with the fact that the team I didn't choose in the survivor pool (RMC) is #1 in the nation and one of only two teams still undefeated.

Plus k for still trying to find a way to hang in there and claim some semblance of a victory.

[hopefan]

Bethany Lutheran comes off Winless list, Beating Crown 93-78

Winless list now down to 8


and Magicman,   Canton beats Johnson State???

[toooldtoplay]

I agree with your answer to the Cal Tech / MIT question. In addition I would add that the proximity to the IVY league schools, and to the prep schools of the Northeast give MIT an advantage. Consider Carraker and Kates went to Exeter in New Hampshire (1 hour away from Boston) and Hollingsworth transfered from Brown (also 1 hour away).  I am sure Anderson was instrumental in all of their decisions.

[Gregory Sager]

My understanding of Wheaton's primary motivation for change was that it was not so much disassociation with medieval excesses as that it might put missionaries at increased risk.  True?

No, it was the former reason -- although the constant use by militant Muslims of the term "Crusaders" to refer to American, Canadian, Australian, and European troops in the Middle East and South Asia no doubt gives an added incentive to people of good judgment to stop using what is increasingly an inflammatory and loaded word that's hard to defend from a historical perspective as being a term of pride.

[Gregory Sager]

Not to get in any kind of debate about the true nature of the faith of the Christians who attacked the Middle East in the Middle Ages, but it seems odd to me that the name of the Lions would be chosen... After all, the Romans put undefended Christians in the ring with lions several hundred years prior...

Maybe that's too much of a stretch, I dunno, but it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the switch!

It's the same image that a lot of people would immediately conjure up in the context of a Christian college, I suspect: "Aren't you rooting for the animals that devoured your spiritual ancestors in the Colosseum two thousand years ago?" I suspect that a conversation that involved some of the matters brought up in this article took place on the ENC campus. I wouldn't discount the importance of Aslan from C.S. Lewis's Narnia series as an important influence in ENC's decision -- especially since the Narnia movies that have come out in recent years have been quite popular.