This doesn't have to do with Buffalo or its sports teams. The link to them has and never will be associated to them. It's about New York City, not Buffalo. As for the MetroStars/Red Bulls franchise, think about this and it applies to all of the local teams except for the Devils. The "New York" moniker has always been in reference to New York City. That is unless you don't feel the Islanders misused it all these years, which in itself I feel they did. That name makes a difference in marketing, branding strength and identity. And using the New York City name is of a much wider reach and building potential fan base. It is a place were many people identify themselves to be from its metropolitan area by name if they didn't live within the city's five boroughs. For example, if I said I was from Paramus, New Jersey... would someone from Nebraska know where that really is? Would they know it's an NYC suburb? Unless they are very geographically savvy, very highly unlikely they would know. The New York Giants and New York Jets play just 5 miles from Manhattan. Yeah, it's across the Hudson River in East Rutherford, but so what? The two NFL teams have fans across southeastern New York State, in northern New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut. Marketing to the metropolitan area. Northern New Jersey simply doesn't have the marketing power to compete on its own. Look at the Devils. They won 3 Stanley Cups, but how many people actually have cared? Some do, but nowhere near as much to the Rangers. Just a fact. That part of New Jersey will always be in New York City's shadow based on the city's size and market. Just how it is. Much like how southern New Jersey is mainly marketed and linked to Philadelphia. We could argue the Philadelphia Union should rebrand too since that MLS team doesn't technically play in Philadelphia and is in Chester, Pennsylvania. I know, same state but not in that city it brands to. If the Red Bulls could have built a stadium within New York City, I'm very sure they would have. Same with the Giants and Jets. But it didn't happen. But they are not obligated to go with a New Jersey name. And if you are trying to broaden your brand reach as much as you can, would you be confident enough corporate sponsors would be on board with that New Jersey identity? Would there be enough New Jersey based fans to support a franchise? The Devils have survived long enough to have a fan base and still be in Newark, New Jersey... they never have been a New York City team and never will be as such. But as we know, they have to live with being in NYC's shadow from a market share standpoint. Same hate it, some don't care. The Nets weren't even relevant in New Jersey. In 2002 and 2003, some fans jumped on the bandwagon, but once the team fell back to mediocrity, well, you saw how much they were supported. The Red Bulls are the original MLS team to the New York City area market. Note I said area. Because that's what leagues are thinking about... markets. Soccer fans that have been supporting that franchise understand this. When NYCFC came into existence, I get why such an argument you made was raised. But remember the mindset of those in charge of the MLS marketing department in what would they would want. Appeal to the whole large market that northern New Jersey is PART OF or try to do it as a separate one? Brooklyn only can do just so much and you see how that's not working for the Nets. And the Islanders have a mammoth uphill climb if they even think they can put a dent into the Rangers home territory. And that's despite them having that "New York" name for their team. If you don't want the New York name for the Red Bulls franchise, then going back to simply the MetroStars is the only way to satisfy as many people as possible without the "New York" in the name.