M4One

Potential CFL Halifax Names

Recommended Posts

The 4 names I listed are the only ones being considered and don't be surprised if it gets "fixed" so that Atlantic Schooners win.  The potential ownership group already has already trademarked the name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sucks because Halifax is such a nice, snappy name. s'got an X in it! And HFX is a cool three-letter abbreviation, too. And most of all, it's an actual place that means something. "Atlantic," that can be anything. I know it's not so bad for Canadian football because Canadians will understand that it's a team for all of Atlantic Canada (and not just the Maritimes, god forbid we alienate Newfoundland), but "Atlantic" still looks dopey next to Toronto and Montreal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2018 at 3:49 PM, the admiral said:

"Atlantic Storm"? That's not a sports team, that's a lifestyle brand. I'd go with something Halifax over "Atlantic," which looks stupid alongside other location names because it's an adjective and not a noun. The old AHL Halifax Citadels was a perfect name, but likely out of play. "Halifax Maritimers" gets around feeling like PEI is left out but it's a mouthful. "Privateers" just says we're out of all the other pirate words. Taking the good old Schooners out of mothballs might be the best bet after all.

 

Off-the-wall idea: on the heels of the Ottawa Redblacks, where we're just taking two words and car-crashing them together, what about the Halifax Newscots?


Halifax Maritimes would work for me.  Even if it sounds a bit baseball-ish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, appleclock said:

Halifax Atlantics has a nice ring to it.

There you go, think you nailed it. It was right in front of me all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, the admiral said:

There you go, think you nailed it. It was right in front of me all along.

I know right? Kills two birds with one stone. Brands Halifax as a top tier Canadian city, and includes the region it represents in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we're talking about the name here (sorry, I keep commenting on the stadium) but I think this of note. Check out this interview from yesterday:

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/590/prime-time-sports/nov-8-hall-of-fame-broadcaster-joe-bowen-joins-the-show/ You can go to the 1 hour 18 min mark to hear an interview with Anthony LeBlanc (part of the ownership group).

 

What I hear is that they aren't really looking at putting money into building the stadium. Doesn't sound good to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mr.negative15 said:

I know we're talking about the name here (sorry, I keep commenting on the stadium) but I think this of note. Check out this interview from yesterday:

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/590/prime-time-sports/nov-8-hall-of-fame-broadcaster-joe-bowen-joins-the-show/ You can go to the 1 hour 18 min mark to hear an interview with Anthony LeBlanc (part of the ownership group).

 

What I hear is that they aren't really looking at putting money into building the stadium. Doesn't sound good to me. 

 

I'm not surprised that the potential ownership group wasn't going to put any money or very little into building the stadium.  It was always going to be the city and province that was going to put up all or most of the cash.  I don't trust Leblanc, though his partner seems legit.  CEO of AMJ Campbell Van Lines, a moving company.  Don't know what his net worth is, though, and whether he really has the finances to run the team long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, M4One said:

 

I'm not surprised that the potential ownership group wasn't going to put any money or very little into building the stadium.  It was always going to be the city and province that was going to put up all or most of the cash.  I don't trust Leblanc, though his partner seems legit.  CEO of AMJ Campbell Van Lines, a moving company.  Don't know what his net worth is, though, and whether he really has the finances to run the team long term.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see this happen for the CFL but if it'son the city/province to fork up the money then just forget it. I've hear they are talking about increasing the "bed tax" for hotels and adding an extra tax for car rentals so the people in the area won't see a tax increase but I really don't know how much money that can generate. 

It's too bad. Just seems like the wrong people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halifax seems like a neat little town and I want to visit one day. It'd be cool if they got a sorta-major team. But I don't trust the Ice Edge clowns to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mr.negative15 said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see this happen for the CFL but if it'son the city/province to fork up the money then just forget it. I've hear they are talking about increasing the "bed tax" for hotels and adding an extra tax for car rentals so the people in the area won't see a tax increase but I really don't know how much money that can generate. 

It's too bad. Just seems like the wrong people

 

Honestly, I hate the idea that the Flames (even though I don't live in Calgary) trying to get money from the city for a new arena when they are owned by a bunch of billionaires.  However, in general, CFL owners aren't that rich, though I don't know how much about the AMJ Campbell Van Line guy and his net worth.  But, he's probably in no rush to spend a boat load of his own money on a stadium.  The city/province paying most, if not all, for the stadium is the only way it's going to happen, and as long as the city/province gets a fair deal, I'm fine with it.  Actual taxpayers not paying for the stadium should be enough to get support from citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say don't expand and just have one table of 9 teams. Play everyone twice for 16 games. Top 4 make the playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2018 at 4:30 PM, M4One said:

 

Honestly, I hate the idea that the Flames (even though I don't live in Calgary) trying to get money from the city for a new arena when they are owned by a bunch of billionaires.  However, in general, CFL owners aren't that rich, though I don't know how much about the AMJ Campbell Van Line guy and his net worth.  But, he's probably in no rush to spend a boat load of his own money on a stadium.  The city/province paying most, if not all, for the stadium is the only way it's going to happen, and as long as the city/province gets a fair deal, I'm fine with it.  Actual taxpayers not paying for the stadium should be enough to get support from citizens.

 

I can't find anywhere what Bruce Bowser is worth, seems he's keeping that quiet (don't have an issue with it, just saying).

 

Not to be contentious, but if he's in no rush to spend a boat load of money on a stadium, then he's probably not the right man to own a team. Those things just go hand in hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2018 at 4:07 PM, mr.negative15 said:

There was a conditionally approved team that was going to go with that name. You probably saw this logo:

AtlanticSchooners.png

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Schooners 

 

Yeah, if they don't at least use the name "Atlantic Schooners," given the history?  They'll have made at least a small mistake in branding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2018 at 1:05 AM, Wings said:

I say don't expand and just have one table of 9 teams. Play everyone twice for 16 games. Top 4 make the playoffs. 

 

 

The 10th team I'd now say is inevitable - Ambrosie's intended it as his legacy since the day he signed his employment contract as Commissioner.  He wants to do what countless predecessors have been unable to pull off - and I think barring something really odd, he's going to do it.

 

And the 10th team will help alleviate a lot of logistical issues the CFL has had for years.  Two divisions of five teams each.  I'd unbalance the 18 game regular season schedule though... each team would play the four in its division 3 times each (for 12 games), play each of the five teams in the other division once with the home site rotating each year (e.g., Montreal at Edmonton in one year, Edmonton at Montreal the other) for five, and then have a 6th interdivisional game based on previous regular season standing (the East's 1st place finisher plays the West's, the 2nd's play each other, the 3rd's, etc.) - with the game site determined so that it works out to a home-and-home between the teams that meet each other twice.  Each team plays 12 games within its division, 6 without, creating less griping about how the western teams are stronger and fewer way below .500 eastern teams making the playoffs.

 

The only other significant change I'd make?  I'd ditch the cross-over due to the new schedule format.  If you can't finish third among five teams in an environment where you're playing 17 of your 18 games against common opponents?  You don't deserve to make the playoffs, no matter how bad another team in the other division stinks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schooners would be my bet in the way they go although I don't mind any of the others really...the BIG one though is they need to come up a different color scheme. Something we haven't seen in the CFL and honestly I'd like to see something outside the box that isn't represented in the NFL either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mac the Knife said:

 

 

The 10th team I'd now say is inevitable - Ambrosie's intended it as his legacy since the day he signed his employment contract as Commissioner.  He wants to do what countless predecessors have been unable to pull off - and I think barring something really odd, he's going to do it.

 

And the 10th team will help alleviate a lot of logistical issues the CFL has had for years.  Two divisions of five teams each.  I'd unbalance the 18 game regular season schedule though... each team would play the four in its division 3 times each (for 12 games), play each of the five teams in the other division once with the home site rotating each year (e.g., Montreal at Edmonton in one year, Edmonton at Montreal the other) for five, and then have a 6th interdivisional game based on previous regular season standing (the East's 1st place finisher plays the West's, the 2nd's play each other, the 3rd's, etc.) - with the game site determined so that it works out to a home-and-home between the teams that meet each other twice.  Each team plays 12 games within its division, 6 without, creating less griping about how the western teams are stronger and fewer way below .500 eastern teams making the playoffs.

 

The only other significant change I'd make?  I'd ditch the cross-over due to the new schedule format.  If you can't finish third among five teams in an environment where you're playing 17 of your 18 games against common opponents?  You don't deserve to make the playoffs, no matter how bad another team in the other division stinks.

 

 

Disagree with the schedule.  There's no reason not to play every team in a home and away each year when there's only 10 teams.  The NHL kinda did the same thing after the last lockout where teams in a western division would play teams in an eastern division only once a year and that was stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, M4One said:

 

Disagree with the schedule.  There's no reason not to play every team in a home and away each year when there's only 10 teams.  The NHL kinda did the same thing after the last lockout where teams in a western division would play teams in an eastern division only once a year and that was stupid.

Well, a double round-robin against all other 9 teams would be acceptable as well, but if you go that far you may as well blitz any distinction between East/West and go single table.  That'd be fine from a competitive aspect.  But from a financial perspective, imagine a scenario where the five current Western teams are joined by a Halifax in a six-team playoff format.  No Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton or Montreal.  It'd absolutely kill television ratings for that year's playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mac the Knife said:

Well, a double round-robin against all other 9 teams would be acceptable as well, but if you go that far you may as well blitz any distinction between East/West and go single table.  That'd be fine from a competitive aspect.  But from a financial perspective, imagine a scenario where the five current Western teams are joined by a Halifax in a six-team playoff format.  No Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton or Montreal.  It'd absolutely kill television ratings for that year's playoffs.

 

Just keep the way it is now, with a west and east division.  The playoffs remain the same, with the cross over.  If adjustments are needed down the road, then Randy Ambrosie seems like he will do what is needed.  I agree needing to keep the interest of the fans in the east, which is probably one of the reasons they haven't completely abandoned divisions already and certainly won't if Halifax becomes the 10th team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now