|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Nov 13, 2019 2:30:41 GMT
Are there cardinals in Arizona?
Is Salt Lake City known for jazz?
They should change it to something regional since it usually is to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Nov 13, 2019 2:45:07 GMT
I am against relocation of sports team. But i don`t think they need to change the team name.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Nov 13, 2019 12:28:42 GMT
It depends. If it's region specific it's kind of silly when they move. The Jazz and the Lakers don't make any sense now that they've moved... but I don't think anyone ever associated Rams with LA, or St Louis, or LA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 12:31:12 GMT
Not really.
Plenty of clubs move, Arsenal, Millwall, etc.
If Forest Green Rovers move to Eastleigh for practical reasons, they'll still be Forest Green. Just outgrown their current ground space... Part of being a village team I guess 🤷♀️ If you start getting some success, you're gonna outgrow the village.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 13, 2019 12:47:51 GMT
They can do what they want but fans in the new city don't get to claim the history and championships that were won elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by screamingtreefrogs on Nov 13, 2019 13:59:14 GMT
Yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Nov 13, 2019 14:13:43 GMT
They can do what they want but fans in the new city don't get to claim the history and championships that were won elsewhere. How do you feel about the way things shook out with the Browns? I kinda like that the new Browns absorbed the old history that the Ravens left behind... but it is weird, because it's technically not the same franchise. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 13, 2019 14:50:31 GMT
They can do what they want but fans in the new city don't get to claim the history and championships that were won elsewhere. How do you feel about the way things shook out with the Browns? I kinda like that the new Browns absorbed the old history that the Ravens left behind... but it is weird, because it's technically not the same franchise. That's the way it should be done. The Browns fans lucked out since the NFL essentially got to use the Ravens as an expansion team while the Browns went on a kind of hiatus for a few years. And while the Browns operated as an expansion team with their reboot, in terms of starting from scratch organizationally, their history was intact and the fans continued to embrace the team. (Ok, it didn't take long for the bags-over-their-heads guys to come out, but still.) As I said earlier, teams can do what they want, but they should probably change their name when relocating if it was specific to that region. (Lakers, Jazz for example. Not sure how many Grizzlies are in the Memphis area, but it's a generic sports team name so whatever.) On a related note, it's worth noting that most fans of hijacked teams don't try to claim the team's previous history as their own. A notable exception are Lakers fans, who like to count 16 titles, even though 5 of them were won in Minneapolis. Of course, LA sports 'fans' couldn't tell you what happened two years ago, let alone the entire history of their team, so that should be expected. As an aside, I remember when Bob Kraft was thinking about moving the Pats to Hartford. I was all for it, at least they were staying in New England and Hartford is less than an hour from me. I guess in the end I'm glad they stayed in my home state and closer to Boston so they can be considered more of a Boston sports team than a Hartford one.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Nov 13, 2019 16:10:48 GMT
That's the way it should be done. The Browns fans lucked out since the NFL essentially got to use the Ravens as an expansion team while the Browns went on a kind of hiatus for a few years. And while the Browns operated as an expansion team with their reboot, in terms of starting from scratch organizationally, their history was intact and the fans continued to embrace the team. (Ok, it didn't take long for the bags-over-their-heads guys to come out, but still.) As I said earlier, teams can do what they want, but they should probably change their name when relocating if it was specific to that region. (Lakers, Jazz for example. Not sure how many Grizzlies are in the Memphis area, but it's a generic sports team name so whatever.) On a related note, it's worth noting that most fans of hijacked teams don't try to claim the team's previous history as their own. A notable exception are Lakers fans, who like to count 16 titles, even though 5 of them were won in Minneapolis. Of course, LA sports 'fans' couldn't tell you what happened two years ago, let alone the entire history of their team, so that should be expected. As an aside, I remember when Bob Kraft was thinking about moving the Pats to Hartford. I was all for it, at least they were staying in New England and Hartford is less than an hour from me. I guess in the end I'm glad they stayed in my home state and closer to Boston so they can be considered more of a Boston sports team than a Hartford one. I agree, as I said above, that regionally specific team names are really lame when they move somewhere that it doesn't make sense, like the Jazz and Lakers, but the Rams and the Colts are perfectly fine by me. With the Rams, what should they do? Like you said, they are LA 'fans' so they don't know what the fuck anything means anyway, but should they count their early LA years, disregard that St Louis period where they were actually good, and resume the history only as of last year? Yeah, I guess, maybe. I like the way the Browns think shook out, but that is indeed a unique circumstance. I remember when the Patriots were supposedly gonna move to Hartford.. That was the beginning of my hatred for Robert Kraft and the Patriots. Kraft never actually had any intention of moving the team, he spent the state of Connecticut's money to start drawing up plans as a ploy to get a new building in Mass. I was a pretty young kid in CT and just sort of beginning my interest in football, and my dad signed us up for to get on the season ticket list, and then it became clear later that it was a sham. So, like how only a few people I know were actual Patriots fans before 2001, I can say I actually hated them before 2001.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Nov 13, 2019 16:24:23 GMT
How many actual Giants are living in New York or San Francisco? Are there still prehistoric Raptors in the skies of Toronto? Do titled monarchs play baseball in Kansas City? Will you see Bengal tigers in Cincinnati?
Names are fanciful. Designed to captured the imagination
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Nov 13, 2019 16:27:35 GMT
How many actual Giants are living in New York or San Francisco? Are there still prehistoric Raptors in the skies of Toronto? Do titled monarchs play baseball in Kansas City? Will you see Bengal tigers in Cincinnati? Names are fanciful. Designed to captured the imagination Sure, except when they're not. Sometimes they're generic, but sometimes they're specific. Like we have all been pointing out.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Nov 13, 2019 16:43:41 GMT
How many actual Giants are living in New York or San Francisco? Are there still prehistoric Raptors in the skies of Toronto? Do titled monarchs play baseball in Kansas City? Will you see Bengal tigers in Cincinnati? Names are fanciful. Designed to captured the imagination Sure, except when they're not. Sometimes they're generic, but sometimes they're specific. Like we have all been pointing out. There are two baseball teams named after socks. Something like the Boston Californians would be idiotic. But, I'm sure you can listen to jazz music somewhere in Salt Lake City. There has to be a lake somewhere on southern California, no matter how small. The Northern Cardinal can be found in Arizona (the team as named after their red jersey anyway).
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Nov 13, 2019 16:44:32 GMT
Sure, except when they're not. Sometimes they're generic, but sometimes they're specific. Like we have all been pointing out. There are two baseball teams named after socks. Something like the Boston Californians would be idiotic. But, I'm sure you can listen to jazz music somewhere in Salt Lake City. There has to be a lake somewhere on southern California, no matter how small. The Northern Cardinal can be found in Arizona (the team as named after their red jersey anyway). Ok...?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 13, 2019 17:00:33 GMT
That's the way it should be done. The Browns fans lucked out since the NFL essentially got to use the Ravens as an expansion team while the Browns went on a kind of hiatus for a few years. And while the Browns operated as an expansion team with their reboot, in terms of starting from scratch organizationally, their history was intact and the fans continued to embrace the team. (Ok, it didn't take long for the bags-over-their-heads guys to come out, but still.) As I said earlier, teams can do what they want, but they should probably change their name when relocating if it was specific to that region. (Lakers, Jazz for example. Not sure how many Grizzlies are in the Memphis area, but it's a generic sports team name so whatever.) On a related note, it's worth noting that most fans of hijacked teams don't try to claim the team's previous history as their own. A notable exception are Lakers fans, who like to count 16 titles, even though 5 of them were won in Minneapolis. Of course, LA sports 'fans' couldn't tell you what happened two years ago, let alone the entire history of their team, so that should be expected. As an aside, I remember when Bob Kraft was thinking about moving the Pats to Hartford. I was all for it, at least they were staying in New England and Hartford is less than an hour from me. I guess in the end I'm glad they stayed in my home state and closer to Boston so they can be considered more of a Boston sports team than a Hartford one. I agree, as I said above, that regionally specific team names are really lame when they move somewhere that it doesn't make sense, like the Jazz and Lakers, but the Rams and the Colts are perfectly fine by me. With the Rams, what should they do? Like you said, they are LA 'fans' so they don't know what the fuck anything means anyway, but should they count their early LA years, disregard that St Louis period where they were actually good, and resume the history only as of last year? Yeah, I guess, maybe. I like the way the Browns think shook out, but that is indeed a unique circumstance. I remember when the Patriots were supposedly gonna move to Hartford.. That was the beginning of my hatred for Robert Kraft and the Patriots. Kraft never actually had any intention of moving the team, he spent the state of Connecticut's money to start drawing up plans as a ploy to get a new building in Mass. I was a pretty young kid in CT and just sort of beginning my interest in football, and my dad signed us up for to get on the season ticket list, and then it became clear later that it was a sham. So, like how only a few people I know were actual Patriots fans before 2001, I can say I actually hated them before 2001. Yeah it was another Kraft-y move (see what I did there?) to get what he wanted. I would've been pissed too if I were a CT resident. He has done a hell of a job with the stadium/museum/shopping complex, I just wish Foxboro wasn't such a pain to get to. As for the Rams, it's an odd situation. I guess as a fan all you can do is embrace the history of your team in your region. They can't count the title won in St. Louis, even though they will because in 5 years they'll forget the Rams were ever gone anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 13, 2019 17:10:13 GMT
They can do what they want but fans in the new city don't get to claim the history and championships that were won elsewhere. Strongly disagree. It's the same team, same franchise, no matter where it plays. The Athletics are a great example, one of the all time great franchises, multiple pennants, WS titles hall of famers, all while playing in multiple locations. The Orioles, otoh, completely fucked up when they effectively deleted their Browns history.
|
|
njcardfan
Sophomore
@njcardfan
Posts: 628
Likes: 353
 
|
Post by njcardfan on Nov 13, 2019 18:49:55 GMT
It depends. If it's region specific it's kind of silly when they move. The Jazz and the Lakers don't make any sense now that they've moved... but I don't think anyone ever associated Rams with LA, or St Louis, or LA. How about Cleveland where they started? Yes, there are cardinals in AZ. Fun Fact: The Cardinals originated in Chicago. And, no, a team doesn't necessarily need to change the name. The Browns had to because Cleveland was retaining the name Browns and their legacy so in a sense the Ravens were an expansion team. In my lifetime here are the teams that moved and what they became: St. Louis Cardinals-Phoenix Cardinals-Arizona Cardinals LA Rams-St. Louis Rams-LA Rams Oakland Raiders-LA Raiders-Oakland Raiders-Las Vegas Raiders* Hartford Whalers-Carolina Hurricanes Quebec Nordiques-Colorado Avalanche Kansas City Scouts-Colorado Rockies-NJ Devils Atlanta Flames-Calgary Flames Atlanta Thrashers-Winnipeg Jets Winnipeg Jets-Phoenix Coyotes-Arizona Coyotes Houston Oilers-Tennessee Oilers-Tennessee Titans Cleveland Browns-Baltimore Ravens Baltimore Colts-Indianapolis Colts Washington Senators-Texas Rangers Seattle Pilots-Milwaukee Brewers Seattle Supersonics-OKC Thunder New Orleans Jazz-Utah Jazz Boston Braves-San Diego Clippers-LA Clippers San Diego Chargers-LA Chargers Montreal Expos-Washington Nationals Here's a couple from off leagues: WFL: NY Stars-Charlotte Stars-Charlotte Hornets(all in the same season) Houston Texans-Shreveport Steamer(same season) USFL-Boston/New Orleans/Portland Breakers *-Move hasn't happened yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 13, 2019 19:06:06 GMT
It depends. If it's region specific it's kind of silly when they move. The Jazz and the Lakers don't make any sense now that they've moved... but I don't think anyone ever associated Rams with LA, or St Louis, or LA. How about Cleveland where they started? Yes, there are cardinals in AZ. Fun Fact: The Cardinals originated in Chicago. And, no, a team doesn't necessarily need to change the name. The Browns had to because Cleveland was retaining the name Browns and their legacy so in a sense the Ravens were an expansion team. In my lifetime here are the teams that moved and what they became: St. Louis Cardinals-Phoenix Cardinals-Arizona Cardinals LA Rams-St. Louis Rams-LA Rams Oakland Raiders-LA Raiders-Oakland Raiders-Las Vegas Raiders* Hartford Whalers-Carolina Hurricanes Quebec Nordiques-Colorado Avalanche Kansas City Scouts-Colorado Rockies-NJ Devils Atlanta Flames-Calgary Flames Atlanta Thrashers-Winnipeg Jets Winnipeg Jets-Phoenix Coyotes-Arizona Coyotes Houston Oilers-Tennessee Oilers-Tennessee Titans Cleveland Browns-Baltimore Ravens Baltimore Colts-Indianapolis Colts Washington Senators-Texas Rangers Seattle Pilots-Milwaukee Brewers Seattle Supersonics-OKC Thunder New Orleans Jazz-Utah Jazz Boston Braves-San Diego Clippers-LA Clippers San Diego Chargers-LA Chargers Montreal Expos-Washington Nationals Here's a couple from off leagues: WFL: NY Stars-Charlotte Stars-Charlotte Hornets(all in the same season) Houston Texans-Shreveport Steamer(same season) USFL-Boston/New Orleans/Portland Breakers *-Move hasn't happened yet. Is a Shreveport Steamer like a Cleveland Steamer?
|
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Nov 13, 2019 19:34:19 GMT
I don’t care what the league officially says, when the Browns became the Ravens, all the players, coaches, ownership went to Baltimore. The Ravens are the legacy Browns. The current Browns are the expansion. So I don’t think that the current Browns can claim the legacies of Jim Brown and those old teams. But that’s just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Nov 13, 2019 19:51:58 GMT
That's something I do not like about American football, and is one reason why I reckon the Packers that highly. If there is one team in the NFL that will never ever move, then the Packers.
In Europe we have (sport) clubs, in the US you have (business) franchises. In Germany (=> Bundesliga) it is even impossible to buy an own a club: 50+1 rule. There is every club like the Packers: owned by the fans/members.
The draft, the salary cap, the lack of a relegation: principles that violates the core ideas of a free market economy - in a country like the US. They are not implemented to serve the sport, but the profits and interests of the owners - a de-facto cartel.
|
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Nov 13, 2019 20:32:08 GMT
They can do what they want but fans in the new city don't get to claim the history and championships that were won elsewhere. How do you feel about the way things shook out with the Browns? I kinda like that the new Browns absorbed the old history that the Ravens left behind... but it is weird, because it's technically not the same franchise. I hate when teams do that. Another example is the Charlotte Hornets moving to New Orleans, eventually becoming the Pelicans, while years later the Charlotte Bobcats became the Hornets and even adopted the Hornets old color scheme. The Charlotte Hornets and the Charlotte Hornes are NOT the same franchise and should not be considered as such. |
|
