Category Archives: Opinion

Greek life springs into second semester with more recruitment events

Caitlin Bailey, Staff Writer

Why Spring Recruitment? Bryon Ecker, a brother of Kappa Alpha, went through Spring Recruitment last year. He has a special perspective on the process this year. He says, “Spring Recruitment can be an untapped market because you’ve got freshman coming in the fall who said no to Greek life but regretted it, or you have people who transfer in.”

Unlike last year,  all four sororities of the National Panhellenic Conference on campus had recruitment events this year. Pi Kappa Phi and KA also held events. Needless to say, Greek life is expanding on campus for 2018.

The first event for Wingate’s Greek life was on Jan. 16th. It was an IFC Info Night Dinner at Laverne where potential new members could meet both fraternities.

The next day on Jan. 17th, Pi Kapp held a dodgeball tournament in McGee. KA had a video game night on the 18th in the DPC. Some of the games they played were Call of Duty and Mario Kart.

Pi Kapp also had a video game night but in their apartment on the 22nd, and they played Call of Duty as well, along with other games. On Jan. 23, KA played capture the flag and football at Campus Lake. On Jan. 24, Pi Kapp had volleyball game planned but due to weather changed it to basketball in McGee.

KA ended their events with a bonfire at Campus Lake on Jan. 25, where they had hamburgers and hotdogs and a bid dinner on the 30th. According to Bryon, KA should know who their bids are on Feb. 5th. After Pi Kapp has their bid dinner, they will vote on who they want to give bids to.

The first event for the sororities was Alpha Xi Delta’s Sip & See on Jan. 18. It was originally scheduled to be in the Fellowship Hall but was moved to Hayes 209 due to weather.

Alpha Omicron Pi had the next event which was on Jan. 24. It was a spa night. Chloe Wellins, a sister of AOPi, said “We talked with the girls, showed our sisterhood video, and sisters talked about their experience in Greek life.” They also had desserts. AOPi gave out four bids on Jan. 29 and will be giving two more out.

Chi Omega had Coffee with the Chi O’s on Jan. 29 in Hayes 113.

The last event was Sigma Simga Sigma’s Donut You Want to be a Sigma. Tri Sigma’s Recruitment Director Kaley Geer said, “I’m very proud of our chapter for putting on a successful recruitment event and can’t wait to welcome our new sisters!” Tri Sigma will hold another recruitment event on Feb. 9.

Wingate’s Greek life definitely stepped up this spring semester and showed potential new members what it has to offer. New members got to see what each organization had to offer in a more relaxed setting than Fall Recruitment. Each new member will add something special to each organization. The future of Greek life at Wingate looks bright.

Edited by: Brea Childs


Hall of Fame inductions spark controversy

Shane Rich, Staff Writer

As a new set of inductees swing their way into the Hall of Fame this year, the controversy over whether players such as Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens should be inducted is stirring. Should they be taken more seriously in this vote, or do they deserve to strike out?

The MLB Hall of Fame requires a player to get at least 317 votes in favor (a total of 75 percent of the voter’s support per article Baseball Hall of Fame adds four new members) to be inducted. This year’s graduating class consists of former Braves 3B Chipper Jones, Expos/Angels DH Vladimir Guerrero, Padres RP Trevor Hoffman, Twins 1B/3B Jim Thome, Tigers SS Alan Trammell and SP Jack Morris. Trammell and Morris were inducted through the Modern Baseball Era Ballot, while others were through the Baseball Writers Association of America Ballot.

Shifting focus back on to Bonds and Clemens, Bonds had a total of 238 votes (56.4 percent) and Clemens with 242 votes (57.3 percent) in this year’s vote. Players who were inducted such as Jones and Thome has 97.2 and 89.8 percent of the vote respectively. The former non-steroid using Mariners DH Edgar Martinez also got 70.4 percent of the vote to be inducted this year, which was only 4.6 percent away from induction. (Baseball Hall of fame adds four new members)

Due to his clean track record, Martinez deserves a spot in the Hall of Fame before Clemens or Bonds. Otherwise, Bonds and Clemens were on a level of dominance during their time of play that is Hall of Fame worthy, but the use of performance-enhancing drugs still pose an issue.

When a player takes a performance-enhancing drug as Bonds and Clemens did throughout their careers, this gives them a clear advantage over their competitors. However, if they did not run into this issue of steroid use, they would be first-year inductees in my book.

It is a shame that Bonds especially holds the record for most home runs in a single season (73), most career home runs (762) and the most walks (2558) and hasn’t been inducted because of his steroid use. It is also a disappointment that Clemens with his 7 Cy Young’s and 1 MVP award hasn’t been inducted for the same reason. Both players are tainted by their history and would have been an easy choice for the Hall of Fame if no steroids were taken.

Even without the drugs, Bonds and Clemens would have been Hall of Fame worthy players. People make mistakes, ones that they definitely regret. To hold all of Bonds and Clemens mistakes against them and prevent their induction to the Hall of Fame would be unfair.

These record-breaking baseball legends do deserve their spot in Cooperstown along with those who were inducted this year, but not at the expense of clean players who deserve to be elected as well. Ultimately, if the election of Bonds or Clemens prevented players like Edgar Martinez or another baseball great with a clean track record from being inducted, I would say that is unjust. If not, I see no issue with voting in two of the greatest baseball players the world has ever seen.

Edited by Brendan Shriver



Review: New album from Indie pop and folk artists Angus and Julia Stone

Aleah Cady, Staff Writer

Snow is the fourth album released by singer-songwriter siblings Angus and Julia Stone. The album was completely written and recorded in Angus Stone’s home over a six month period, a new creation process for the siblings.

The atmosphere was a relaxed environment for the duo to write, and many of the songs were created while playing around on instruments or coming up with simple four-chord melodies.

The first single, sharing a name with the album title, Snow, is a calm-feeling song, using a drum machine and a few strums on an acoustic guitar to create a simple, stereotypical “indie” sound.

Over simple instrumentals, both siblings provide vocals for the song, which has a whimsical type of vibe, but stays true to the duo’s older music. Overall, in my opinion, while Snow is not one of their best songs of their discography, it is a great song from the album.

Other songs I personally enjoyed were Cellar Door, Make It Out Alive, and My House Your House. I would have liked to hear more singing from Julia in the album.

In a lot of songs, she provided “ah” and “oh”s for the bridges or choruses, but because she has a voice that compliments her brother’s so nicely, I would have liked to hear more from her.

The album has received mixed reviews since its release in late September. Personally, out of 5, I would give this album a 3.5 rating.

It’s a good album, but with a bit more ‘push’, it could be a great album. As I mentioned, I would have liked to hear stronger vocals from Julia, and maybe a bit more variation in some of the melodies of the songs.

Edited by: Brea Childs

Cover image from Angus and Julia Stone website

QUESTION OF THE WEEK: What do you think of player protests during the National Anthem at NFL games?

Members of the News Editing class are asking this question on campus this afternoon. We’ll post the responses we get below:


“I am very against it. The NFL should not allow players to do that.  Everybody gets mad that people call baseball America’s game instead of football, but yet the NFL wants to protest.” Connor Grindstaff, a sophomore Business Management Major at Wingate University.


“I don’t have any particular feelings about it. If you want to kneel you can, or you don’t have to.”–Jailyn Spann, psychology freshman at Wingate University.





“I think players are exercising their right to free speech. I think that business and belief should be two different entities, they shouldn’t be one in the same. Players with the platform that they have should have the right to express themselves.” — Tim Myers, senior, Sport Management.


“I think its effective in getting people’s attention, but maybe it could’ve been done in a different way. I understand that they are kneeling for a great cause and I feel like something needed to be done about what is going on in our country. At least this kind of protest is peaceful. We have seen much worse from all different backgrounds of people in recent years.” — Brea Childs, senior, Communication.

alexandrianelson“I know what it’s really about. They aren’t protesting the flag and the troops. They are protesting systematic racism and how black people are mistreated in America. Some people are taking it the wrong way” — Alexandria Nelson, junior Criminal Justice major



“On one side, it’s better than rioting in the street. On the other, for the people that are boycotting the NFL because of what the president said, aren’t you hurting the players too?”–Abel Jorge, sophomore, criminal justice major


“If you want to take a knee, stay in the locker room. I’m not saying that you can’t protest, it’s just some people take offense to taking a knee during the national anthem. There are other ways of protesting. I’m not saying they aren’t right, I’m just saying they don’t have to make a scene about it.” — Trevor Zaruba, senior, management.

Are ‘super teams’ good for the NBA?

By Adam Riley II, Staff Writer 

The National Basketball Association has had a long history of “super teams” since even before the recent addition of NBA forward Kevin Durant to the already high-powered Golden State Warriors.

And for those of you who don’t know what a “super team” is or what is classified as one, allow me to enlighten you on the subject. In the world of sports, a super team is when a team already has MULTIPLE potential Hall of Fame candidates and one or more of them have come from another team. Also, the super team in the making has already achieved a certain level of success prior to adding another superstar player to the roster.

Finally, following the newly acquired superstar player, this team poses a potential “threat” to the equality of competition of the other teams in the league/association.

As previously stated above, this trend dates back to even before my time: starting in  1968 to be exact, with Wilt Chamberlain and his move to the Los Angeles Lakers along with other super star players that were also acquired by the Lakers, Wilt is just one of many. Other super teams soon developed after that. For instance, the 1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks with the additions of Lew Alcindor and Oscar Robertson; and we can’t forget about the 1982-83  Philadelphia 76ers having Julius Erving and Moses Malone.

Over the first 30 years since the league’s existence we see this “super team” trend with just three teams. Some of the most recent super teams of  the 21st century include the 2007-08 Boston Celtics when the organization conjured up trades for both Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, when they already had stardom in the 1st round draft pick Paul Pierce aka “The Truth” and Rajon Rondo.

One of the most famous super teams includes the 2010 Miami Heat, when they acquired Chris Bosh and Lebron James to join Dwyane Wade, which they went on to win back-to-back NBA titles. We have to throw in the Cavs when Lebron went back to Cleveland to join forces with Kevin Love and the immaculate Kyrie Irving. We all know about the most recent super team in the Golden State Warriors with Steph Curry, arguably one of, he greatest shooters in NBA history — if not the greatest — with Klay Thompson and Draymond Green. And this past season they added the former league MVP and 3-time scoring champion Durant.

All this talk about super teams is exciting to hear and everything, but is it really worth the watch?

Is it really worth watching the NBA Finals, supposedly one of the most competitive championship games in sports history, if you already know who’s going to win before the game starts? Or rather you give it the benefit of the doubt in hopes of a really good Finals series that goes to Game 7 where it’s do or die, but instead you get a blowout?

Both of those of those scenarios sound like a waste of time, well at least to me it is. What I’m trying to get at is that all these “super teams” in the league are really making it hard for fans to enjoy watching the game of basketball. Don’t get me wrong —  a lot of fans love the idea of super teams, especially if their team is one or is in the making. I’m just saying as an athlete and fellow sports fan in general, it kind of takes away the fun of the game. Winning is cool and all, but it gets to a point where it becomes boring because of the lack of competition, which will inevitably make winning effortless. And there is a distinct line between beating a team(s) that you’re supposed to beat and just flat out beating EVERY single team.

I love a close game! I love the feeling of knowing you can potentially come back from a deficit and win the game, when all odds are against you there’s still hope; if you still end up losing you lost giving your best and that’s all a coach, player, GM, anyone really, can ask of you.

As you can see, the NBA is no stranger to the super team phenomenon and this isn’t just something that recently occurred. It’s been going on for quite a while, and as you can see if you pay attention to sports news, more teams now are beginning to follow suit and jumping on the “Monstarz” bandwagon (“Space Jam” reference!). I personally don’t agree with it, but hey I’m just one guy and for some players it may be about the money and others about actually winning NBA Titles. Who knows?


Video Game Review: Titanfall 2

Which game is better?

Danny Stueber, Staff Writer

              Titanfall 2 improves on its predecessor on all fronts so much so that the first game does not even matter anymore. In my mind, this is the first game in the series and it’s amazing. Everything from movement, gameplay, unlockables, story, etc. are improved upon completely and it’s the game I have not been able to put down.

The biggest improvement is the story since the first game did not even have a campaign mode. It had some lose dialogue here and there in multiplayer matches but that was it so if you didn’t like playing with other people you were out of luck.

This time you have an entire campaign where you play as a soldier and his robot. The whole gameplay premise of Titanfall is that half the time you are a ground soldier who can wall run, double jump, and many other things that every shooter has ripped off these days since the original and the other half of the time you’re in a giant robot fighting other giant robots. Its every little kids fantasy and it always feels good to do so.

In the story, you take control of the mech you know as BT and are ordered to finish a mission a dead squad mate has already started. In the beginning, it starts slow and feels like any normal shooter but about an hour in the gameplay is cranked up to an 11 and it never stops there.

Amazing set pieces, level design, and humor abound in this 6-7 hour campaign and I enjoyed every second of it. Normally shooter campaigns can be pretty lazy and just reuse maps from the multiplayer but this campaign was built from the ground up with its own themes and levels where you are never doing the same thing twice.

There is a part mid-way through the game that I can’t spoil here but when a button prompt pops up saying “press LB to ___” it was the coolest thing I have done this year in video games.

All the boss fights are fun, the collectables are worth getting since it tests your skills with the controls, and the story (while not the best) has a great set up and ending to where you can’t wait for a Titanfall 3. BT really is the shining light as a form of Optimus Prime and through the campaign his dry robot humor really gets a laugh out of you many times.

My one complaint is that it is kind of short and I feel like they could have added more but that just gives me hope for the next one. Also, the characters do not look too good even if the rest of the game looks stunning and it’s probably because this game is not as big budget as EAs other shooter which just came out, Battlefield 1.

The multiplayer is just as much of a shining star as the single player. It ramped up everything from the first one and as a result it has still kept my attention these past few weeks unlike the first one. We now have 6 titans to choose from instead of 3, we can customize our players and titans with skins and art when you couldn’t do that last time, there are more weapons and abilities than last time, and now skills that don’t run out instead of dumb one use cards for equipment during each battle.

They essentially doubled everything that was in the first game and it’s all for the better. You move so smoothly and fast that it’s hard not to be mesmerized by the character when you hit a good pace but you never feel cheated in death like other shooters. If you die you can see how you messed up and can plan accordingly next time.

I also fairly enjoy the level up system which instead of experience points like every other game you are rewarded merits after each fight. 10 merits normally get you a level and your rewarded for things like having a good match, being helpful to the team, getting creative kills, etc. you are rewarded for playing and improving instead of just how many guys you shoot and that’s a breath of fresh air for a shooter.

My biggest surprise was that all the titans are pretty balanced compared to one another. A few stand out to me (the Tone which can stay far back but cause a lot of damage and the Ronin which is a quick shotgun mech that’s hard to hit) but all in all every titan fight is fun and fair. That’s the best thing about this multiplayer is its fun yet fair. I do not see myself stopping anytime soon with it.

The good news is that Titanfall 2 succeeds on all fronts from fantastic single player to fun, hectic multiplayer with only a few small hiccups here and there. The bad news is that it did not sell well as a result of it being put out so close to the studios other shooter Battlefield 1.

As a result, the servers do not have many people playing that often. On Xbox One, the most people I have seen at once is 10,000 nationwide and about 2,000 on the east coast I could connect to. Those are abysmal numbers for a multiplayer game and hopefully it picks up soon because of the 3 shooters released in the past 3 weeks, this one is the best.

The cherry on top is that all future DLC for the game will be free unlike Battlefield and Call of Duty. No $50 season pass but instead normal free drops of maps and weapons through the games life span which is a giant A+ for me. I love this game and I plead with you all to go buy it and show we still support good single player and free DLC instead of always having to pay extra. Buy Titanfall 2 and you will not be disappointed.

Titanfall 2:   9/10

Edited by: Sara Gunter

Video Game Review: Battlefield

Students takes an in depth look at a Video Game

Danny Stueber, Staff Writer

              The last two Battlefield games, Battlefield 4 and Battlefield Hardline, were missteps in the franchise with shoty online play and bugs galore that really left a sour taste in the mouth of many fans. Then, earlier this year, EA announced the next game would be Battlefield 1, a war game taking place during World War 1 respectively.

Many people were skeptical if something considered to be the worst war in history could be made into a game with respect and dignity while still being fun. After many hours with the single player and the multiplayer, I can say that the people over at Dice who made this game did an excellent job on all those fronts.

The campaign, while short, really shows the respect the war deserves. You play as five different people all living out different situations throughout the war. It shows how normal everyday people were thrown into this horrible event and how they had to cope with it.

You see the struggles of a man who used to be a chauffeur now being made to drive tanks, an experimental technology at the time and you play as a woman trying to stop the invasion of her home by enemy forces wanting to drill for oil in the first time in history for all their war machines.

You never feel like the time period is being disrespected or if anything is a joke. You feel for the characters and the situation they are all thrown into. The campaign also serves as a tutorial of sorts for the main attraction, the multiplayer.

You learn how to drive the tanks, fly the planes, wear the body armor, ride the horses, shoot, and stealth all from the different stories and with how demanding some of those things are it was a smart way of doing so.

My one complaint is that it was really short. Each story is only around an hour long and as a result you never can get to invested with any of the characters. When each story ended I was left wanting more and to know what happened to them which is never a good feeling, especially 5 times in a row.

The multiplayer is as strategic and fun as ever for the battlefield series and unlike Battlefields that came before it, this one had no bugs and bad connections through my hours of play. The massive maps all feel different and allow you to try any of the classes till you know what fits you best.

The old weapons of World War 1 are still fun to use compared to today’s and because a lot of them were experimental it shows even more strategy along the lines of not being sure if you should try to reload now or not, if you should throw the mustard gas to run the enemy out of hiding, etc. it is fun while being true to what I feel the battles were like at the time.

My one complaint for the multiplayer function is the unlock and progression system is just bad. Sometimes when you level up you get some war bonds which can be used to buy new weapons and equipment but it’s never enough from one or two levels. Even after you buy a weapon, you have to make sure your class is a high enough level to use it which is separate from your player level.

I was level 5 and bought a shotgun to use with the assault class but I needed that class to be level 3. Because I like all four classes even after many hours of play, the assault class was not even level 2 yet so I was stuck with wasted money and the same weapons for even longer. It’s very disheartening and does not feel like you are accomplishing anything as a result.

Battlefield 1 is my favorite in the series. The gameplay is fun, it feels good to play, the stories are a great learning tool as well as appropriate for the time period the game portrays, etc.

I will mention however, that if you buy this game on an Xbox One, it is slightly darker for some reason than the PS4 version. I tried it on a 1080p tv and a 4K monitor and it was always darker than the other console for some reason. The PS4 version looks better but the online components handle better on the Xbox so, whichever is more important to you should help in your purchasing decision.

Battlefield 1 is not my favorite shooter this year but it was my biggest surprise. If you’re sick of every shooter being the same these days, pick this game up and I promise you will have fun.