The first MLS team to adopt a “City FC” name (outside of DC United) was FC Dallas. In the heart of conservative Texas.
Regardless? You’re forgetting that European naming conventions only work in MLS because soccer fans are, by and large, set in their tastes.
“FC Dallas,” “Toronto FC,” and “DC United” fly because those names are in line with “that’s how it’s done” according to soccer.
“City FC” isn’t the revolution you’re making it out to be. In fact that style of name’s prominence in MLS reflects the failure of the league’s attempt to revolutionise soccer naming conventions.
“City FC” names and their prominence in MLS represent the victory of the status quo over “progressive” naming conventions as far as soccer goes.
Where does this leave hockey? Well again, you’re talking about the NHL. Which, unlike MLS, represents the highest level the sport is played at in the world. Unlike MLS? The NHL “sets the standards” of the sport. I can only think of two non-NA style names in NHL history; the franchise that would become the Maple Leafs and the franchise that would become the Maroons.
Both were officially known as only “Toronto” and “Montreal” at first, but it’s worth noting that we remember them as the “Toronto Arenas” and “Montreal Maroons.” Why? Well it’s because the prodomiennce of North American naming conventions dictates that we do. It just seems off to refer to the pre-St. Pats Leafs as “the Toronto hockey club owned by the Toronto Arena Company.” No, they’re the Toronto Arenas for all intents and purposes.
Now Seattle’s progressivism...forgive me, but I’m finding it hard to see how that matters. Seattle’s just as much a haven for venture capitalism and the upper middle class as it is a hotbed of progressive politics, but that’s neither here nor there.
I’m just saying. The Bay Area has just as much, if not more, of a history when it comes to progressive politics and no one seems put out by a “how it’s always done” name like the San Jose Sharks.
New York is solidly liberal but neither “New York Islanders” or “New York Rangers” seems to be putting off younger crowds there.
So why exactly is “Seattle HC” perfect for “progrsssive” Seattle? Is it because they like soccer? Well Seattle’s MLS team name is a weird hodgepodge of European and NA naming conventions, so I’m not sure what that proves.
Is it because the young, urban fan base likes kitchy things that buck convention? That’s the only real answer I can seem to wrap my head around to be honest.
Even then...I’m not sure how well that would work. I’m not sure how confident the NHL would be at marketing that name outside of a niche group of Seattle fans.
Not to mention the very good point BBTV brought up. Team names used to develop organically among fans or the press.
That’s impossible this day and age. Every colour commentator, journalist, hack blogger, and fan group knows the game from the get-go with a name like “Seattle HC.” Broadcasts, blogs, “official” fangroup sites, and Twitter are going to be flooded by people attempting to make their idea the “organic” fan choice.
If the brass behind the Seattle NHL team wants a fan-coined nickname? They can run a name the team contest.