Jump to content

Worst Team Names (Big League)


OnWis97
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, rob4671 said:

The bay that separates Tampa and St Pete is called Tampa Bay so they named the teams after that to include the metropolitan area as a whole. 

Or did they maybe name it that because Buccaneers are typically on boats / on the water? Then the Lightning just blindly jumped onto he same train with no reason whatsoever? Even the Rays make sense to use the actual bay, but not the Lightning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, smzimbabwe said:

I know someone who says naming a team something like "Tampa Bay" is like naming a Seattle team something like "Puget Sound Seahawks" or a Portland team "the Willamette River TrailBlazers". He's not a big fan of Arizona, Minnesota, Golden State, or New England as well...

 

There was once a team in the USISL (today's USL) called the San Francisco Bay Blackhawks.

 

The MLL had a team called the Baltimore Bayhawks, which then became the Washington Bayhawks for a few years, before settling on its current name Chesapeake Bayhawks. The current name does not refer to a city called "Chesapeake", but rather to the Chesapeake Bay.

 

I flunk both of these.

 

Also, the idea that baseball and football fans in St. Paul would have refused to support Major League Baseball and NFL teams called "Minneapolis" strikes me as unrealistic. Though I have to concede that the football Giants' very real hold on Connecticut was probably a motivation for renaming the Patriots from Boston to New England. (I understand the reasoning; but I don't condone the move.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WavePunter said:

Or did they maybe name it that because Buccaneers are typically on boats / on the water? Then the Lightning just blindly jumped onto he same train with no reason whatsoever? Even the Rays make sense to use the actual bay, but not the Lightning

Not that it matters in the naming, but the Lightning are the only team to have had its home on both sides of the bay, moving from now Tropicana Field before coming to this side in 1996. Actually held a North American single game attendance record for a while in the old Thunderdome.

 

 

 

I rarely ever see a business or anything branded just 'Tampa'. Most stuff is Tampa Bay but you also see the occasional 'St. Pete' as well. Purely anecdotal, but I'd wager the Tampa Bay moniker out scores just Tampa by a four or five to one ratio. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Minnesota vs Minneapolis/St. Paul argument is totally off-point. The teams are called Minnesota to include the rest of the state. The big difference is between those who live in "the Cities" and those who do not. No one in the state even defines there being a difference between Minneapolis and St. Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, the team names I think are at the bottom of the barrel are ones where the name and identity just don't mesh usually for being too abstract.

 

- Oklahoma City Thunder

- LA Clippers

 

LA Lakers seems to be OK only for the alliterative name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with singular names beyond ''Thunder'' ''Wild'' and ''UTAH Jazz'' The Magic is one my favorite identities in all of sports tbh

 

Pretty sure Bills is named after Buffalo Bill, a guy who killed thousands of Buffalo in an attempt by the goverment to drive out the natives, who relied on the Buffalo (my wild west knowledge is a little shaky though) So yeah, no good. Might as well consider it on par with Indians and Redskins. I don't thing the guy was even from the state of New York.

 

Carolina, Minnesota, Arizona etc are all fine IF and ONLY IF they are the only team in the state. :censored: the Florida Panthers, Texas Rangers and ''Golden State Warriors''

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, twi said:

Not that it matters in the naming, but the Lightning are the only team to have had its home on both sides of the bay, moving from now Tropicana Field before coming to this side in 1996. Actually held a North American single game attendance record for a while in the old Thunderdome.

 

 

 

I rarely ever see a business or anything branded just 'Tampa'. Most stuff is Tampa Bay but you also see the occasional 'St. Pete' as well. Purely anecdotal, but I'd wager the Tampa Bay moniker out scores just Tampa by a four or five to one ratio. 

I don't doubt that, I was just suggesting that perhaps claiming the "bay" as home due to the fact that buccaneers "live" on the water, rather than on land.. Then all the other franchises basically just hopped on the same train, perhaps without even really knowing why.. Just because the buccaneers made the area famous for sports as "Tampa Bay"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brooklyn Swamp Dragons > Brooklyn Nets

 

The Swamp Dragons had one of the best '90s logos as well. Nets is just so bland and uncreative whoever came up with the name wasn't even trying. That's like naming a football team the New York Helmets or a hockey team the Toronto Sticks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ark said:

Florida Marlins >>> Miami Marlins in every way

 

Nope. Miami Marlins has semi-alliteration, connections to the baseball history of the city of Miami, and takes into account the Rays' existence. It also reflects their current location (Miami proper, as opposed to the Miami Gardens suburb), and their current identity. In every way, Miami Marlins is a better name. 

 

Also, here's a @the admiral post to clear up why Miami Marlins is a better name.

 

On 10/11/2015 at 10:40 AM, the admiral said:

The Marlins were named for Florida because Wayne Huizenga is one of those Broward County snobs who thinks Miami is just a cesspool of drugs and ethnics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2016 at 3:17 PM, WSU151 said:

 

Foxboro's way too outside the city to have the team be called "Boston".  The Patriots are within the cultural orbit of the region...so New England works fine.  

 

IMO, New England is a relatively small and somewhat homogeneous geographic region.  Using the regional name for branding makes sense to me.  It's been awhile since I've been to Foxboro, but last time I went to a game there, I remember tailgating with folks from all the states of New England.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stanford Cardinal. Dumb.

 

And this is the reason why it exists: "On November 17, 1981, school president Donald Kennedy declared that the athletic teams be represented by the color cardinal in its singular form"

 

Dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mitch B said:

 

IMO, New England is a relatively small and somewhat homogeneous geographic region.  Using the regional name for branding makes sense to me.

No, it still looks weird next to a bunch of city names. They should have stuck with Boston Patriots all along. It's not like Foxborough is a world away from Boston, and no one feels left out by the other three teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, fl00dsm0k3 said:

I cannot stand the name of several MLS Teams

Atlanta United

DC United

Sporting Kansas City

Real Salt Lake(The worst offender of them all)

All of these team just copy the names of bigger European clubs.

 

Thank you for your great post. I wanted to post the exact same comment but I didn't want to get flamed by European soccer(Football) fans. This is not to say that European brands are bad but this is North America and our sports culture, traditions and terminology shouldn't be compromised.

 

Give me the NY Cosmos, LA Aztecs, Toronto Blizzard, Kansas City Wizards and  the "Salt Lake City Royals" over NYCFC, LAFC, TFC, Sporting KC and RSL any day, anytime. It's still "The Beautiful Game".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, rob4671 said:

The bay that separates Tampa and St Pete is called Tampa Bay so they named the teams after that to include the metropolitan area as a whole. 

 

but, but Tampa is on Hillsborough Bay.

 

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

No, it still looks weird next to a bunch of city names. They should have stuck with Boston Patriots all along. It's not like Foxborough is a world away from Boston, and no one feels left out by the other three teams.

 

I first started following the New England Patriots over 30 years ago and have always known them as what they currently are. Not being from your part of the world i never knew they were so close to Providence or Boston until a few years back, not saying i think they should or shouldn't change just don't think i'd follow them if they did though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hoops McCann said:

The whole Minnesota vs Minneapolis/St. Paul argument is totally off-point. The teams are called Minnesota to include the rest of the state. The big difference is between those who live in "the Cities" and those who do not. No one in the state even defines there being a difference between Minneapolis and St. Paul

I think that's probably behind the state names in places like Arizona and Colorado.   It the Twins were the first team to do it and not alienating with city was why.  

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, the admiral said:

No, it still looks weird next to a bunch of city names. They should have stuck with Boston Patriots all along. It's not like Foxborough is a world away from Boston, and no one feels left out by the other three teams.

Agreed. I have no problem with them embracing New England as a whole as their market, given that it's a compact region with a very cohesive and proud identity, but they can do that while still being the "Boston Patriots." Just ask the Red Sox, who very much market to all of New England. Or any other team that markets to an entire metro area or region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unpopular Opinion:  I don't mind that some sports franchises bypass traditional naming conventions in their branding.  

 

The Minnesota Twins makes sense to me, as does the Texas Rangers.

Carolina v. Charlotte, Boston v. New England ... I've lived thru them all and I am fairly indifferent to each.

I think the Golden State Warriors is a unique and cool sounding name.  I fondly miss the California Angels.

I don't really care if Nevada's new hockey team is called Las Vegas or Vegas.

The MLS works fine with some teams using American naming conventions and others choosing European-style monikers.

 

That's just one man's opinion.

 

If there is one name out there that I am not fond of it's the Utah Jazz.  It doesn't sit well with the musician in me, but I've learned from my Utah friends that they love the name of their team as is, and that's good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.