Let’s play a fun game. A few weeks ago, a couple of us in the Carty Free Slack channel discussed a game called “pervert or not”. The game was this: you’d look at an anthropomorphized logo or graphic design element of some sort and decide if that logo looks like it’s staring at your ass. Much giggling ensued, as well as a exasperated debate about how whatever corporate or academic committee okayed his logo didn’t see how it comes across (or, why they didn’t care).
This is a particularly fun game to play with college athletic logos. They change over the years, but almost every college or university has an athletics program, and those programs all have logos. I thought this would make a fun ratings theme, so I headed to Sidearm Sports for, uh, research purposes.
I want to be clear — I am focusing here on athletic LOGOS rather than the poor college students who dress up like furries and entertain college football crowds. There are plenty of pervy-looking physical mascots (looking at you, Stanford Tree and also you, Lourdes University Gray Wolf) but it takes some doing to create an institutional logo that gives off decidedly off-color vibes.
So scour those college campuses and give your favorite pervy athletic logos in the comments. These, however, are my favorites. Here are your player ratings for Tottenham Hotspur’s scoreless draw with Everton to the theme of college athletics logos that look kinda pervy.
5 stars: Auburn Tiger
I’m breaking my own rule here a bit by going with two historic mascots rather than sticking with logos that are still in use today, but these two are so good I can’t not use them. Auburn University’s mascot is a tiger, and apparently in the early 20th century, this tiger was an absolute LAD. What’s interesting is that these two graphics are decades apart, but they’re still giving the same lecherous side-eye. That tiger is undressing me as I write this, and I don’t even think I’m its type.
No Tottenham players were this good.
4.5 stars: Wichita State Shocker
I’m just gonna put this here — same energy.
No Tottenham players were this good either.
4 stars: Loyola Chicago Wolf
As linked above, Ohio’s Lourdes University carries the torch (figuratively speaking) for “lecherous wolf mascots”) but Loyola Chicago needs some recognition here. Just look at that thing’s eyes. It’s a wolf so you don’t know what it’s thinking, but come on, you KNOW what that wolf is thinking.
Emerson Royal (Community — 3.5): I have been pleasantly surprised by Royal in two matches under Antonio Conte. He’s not the fastest player, he doesn’t have the best cross on him, but he is just an exceptionally well-rounded fullback who does not look out of place in Conte’s high wingback position, on both sides of the ball.
Hugo Lloris (Community — 3.5): Hugo wasn’t called into action all that much, but he commanded his area very well. He was quick off his line on a number of occasions to snaffle up loose balls. You can start to see a difference in how he plays under Conte. And yes, he got a touch on the ball.
3.5 stars: Purdue Fort Wayne Mastodon
Gotta wonder whether “mastodon” was a typo.
Oliver Skipp (Community — 3.5): I continue to dislike the Skippbjerg midfield, but I concede on rewatch that Skipp was more solid than I first gave him credit for. He’s not especially creative, but he’s also not supposed to be. He broke up play, kept things simple, and did a pretty capable job in a hostile away environment.
Cuti Romero (Community — 3.5): I got worried after Cuti picked up a cheap yellow for dissent midway through the second and as the match got punchy, but he kept things mostly civil. Solid at the back, he will be exceptional under Conte.
Antonio Conte (Community — 3.5): Eyes went askew when the lineup came out, but I’m giving Conte a pass until he has an extended time to work with this team. Playing Nuno’s XI with his tactics has mostly worked thus far and you can tell he’s already gotten Spurs to play with an actual PLAN. It hasn’t been perfect, but at least it’s coherent.
Giovani Lo Celso (Community — 3.0): I don’t know why Gio keeps getting crap from Spurs fans. I thought he was quite good overall in his sub appearance, and that line splitting ball he played to Kane in transition deserves this ranking on its own. Smacked the post with one of Spurs’ best chances of the game. Not everything came off, but Spurs looked better after he came on. But I guess he screwed up one corner kick, so.
3 stars: Regis University Ranger
I don’t know about you, but while the Regis Ranger is wearing a hat, he doesn’t look much like a ranger to me. What he DOES look like is someone whom if you saw them outside the bar you’d probably call campus security to walk you home.
Ben Davies (Community — 3.0): Look, I’ve been harsh on Ben for the past year or so because, frankly, he’s been mostly bad. On Sunday, playing as a wide CB in the back three, he was pretty good. Interesting to see him taking liberties by pushing up into midfield at times… that has to be coaching.
Eric Dier (Community — 3.0): Conte has placed Dier as the center of his back three and it’s mostly worked. Dier is probably the least mobile of the three centerbacks, but he has decent positioning and did well against Richarlison, who can be a load to handle. I question as to whether he’s the long-term solution Conte wants.
Matt Doherty (Community — 2.5): I have no idea where to put this guy. He played for the first time in forever out of position and didn’t trip over his own feet or make any huge mistakes. I can’t say he was bad exactly. He certainly wasn’t great. Three stars? Sure, that sounds fine.
2.5 stars: Dalton State College Roadrunner
I don’t know what a Dalton State College is, but I know that Roadrunner is definitely peepin’ around the DS logo like some sort of creep.
Pierre-Emile Hojbjerg (Community — 3.0): Pretty profligate on the ball. Worked hard and had four tackles, but if you’re playing alongside Skipp in midfield it’s up to you to be more creative and Pierre just wasn’t. He’s playing like he’s gone 18 months without a break, so I’m inclined to be kind, but I’m not sure he’s the answer in midfield under Conte.
Son Heung-Min (Community — 2.5): I kind of thought Sonny could feast on this Everton defense, but he didn’t have any shots on the day. He did create one big chance, but on a day when Kane was off, we needed Sonny to be on. He was not.
Lucas Moura (Community — 3.0): Another Lucas match where he spent more time dribbling himself into trouble than actually creating chances, and he lost the ball on several occasions. Frustrating match.
Sergio Reguilon (Community — 2.5): Not great, Sergio. Picked up a cheap yellow early in the game and bundled his best chance over the bar. Pretty poor around the box. I think he can be great under Conte, but his inconsistency can be pretty maddening.
2 stars: John Jay College Bloodhound
I thought dog mascots were supposed to be either terrifying or cute. This one looks like a dirty old man sitting on a college campus park bench outside the library.
Harry Kane (Community — 2.5): A pretty miserable afternoon for Harry. Just two shots, both of them blocked, and he looked labored and off the pace the entire match.
1 star: Greys Harbor College Choker
Look, there are mascots that simply look pervy, and then there are the ones that actually show you their weapons. According to Greys Harbor College’s website, “Charlie the Choker” is a logger who uses that rope and hook in his hands to corral felled trees. Just a coincidence that in this older version he’s heavily muscled, shirtless, and smiling at something he seems to like very much just off screen.
Tom Carroll Memorial Non-Rating
Erik Lamela Memorial Shithouse Award
Richarlison — Normally I give these to Tottenham players, but I have to tip my hat at Everton’s Brazilian attacker. Dude put on a shithouse clinic — screaming for non-existent handballs, flopping over at every opportunity, and arguing with the match official for reasons beyond me. You could definitely tell he had some Copa America history with Cuti, because that match-up was SPICY.