UnclearInitial Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 I’d say Philadelphia has to be the Phillies since that’s what it means. 76ers would be close though. New York I’d say either Knicks or Yankees. Los Angeles would be Angels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 27 minutes ago, anythinglogos said: I’d say Philadelphia has to be the Phillies since that’s what it means. 76ers would be close though. New York I’d say either Knicks or Yankees. Los Angeles would be Angels. Phillies and 76ers are dumb names. There's no such thing as a "76er", and I've never heard "Phillie" used in any context. They're old names made up by old people that would never be used today. Eagles is a far better name than either of those, although rather generic by contemporary standards. Seriously - what the hell "76er"? Maybe that term was used in the early years after the war, but it's just contrived nonsense. Their minor league team the "87ers" is even worse. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said: Phillies and 76ers are dumb names. There's no such thing as a "76er", and I've never heard "Phillie" used in any context. They're old names made up by old people that would never be used today. Eagles is a far better name than either of those, although rather generic by contemporary standards. Seriously - what the hell "76er"? Maybe that term was used in the early years after the war, but it's just contrived nonsense. Their minor league team the "87ers" is even worse. Glad to hear a Philadelphian say this. I've never liked 76ers or the abbreviation to "Sixers". They could've accomplished the same thing if they'd name the team the Philadelphia Founders and then they'd have a nice alliterative harmony with the Flyers and Phillies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4_tattoos Posted January 21, 2018 Author Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said: So pretend there was a mandate to consolidate franchises in each city and pick one name for all of them. The name has to be one that's already in use by one of the teams. For this exercise, it's limited to cities with 3 or more out of MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL, and the teams names originated in the city (rather than mismatches created by franchise relocation), or if they are as a result of relo, still make sense. I'll start with a few: Philadelphia = Eagles Pittsburgh = Steelers New York = Knicks? Jets? Not sure (also not sure how to handle multiple teams in the same sport.) Boston = Celtics Seattle (I'm counting the Sonics still) = Sonics (maybe Mariners would be more appropriate?) Denver = Rockies OK, I'm bored now. In this scenario, I think Red Sox would get the nod over Celtics in Boston. Even with the Celtic's being more successful in terms of championships, I always had the feeling like the Red Sox were a slightly bigger deal to Boston. And no way Rockies get's selected over Broncos. Hotter Than July > Thriller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 hour ago, 4_tattoos said: In this scenario, I think Red Sox would get the nod over Celtics in Boston. Even with the Celtic's being more successful in terms of championships, I always had the feeling like the Red Sox were a slightly bigger deal to Boston. And no way Rockies get's selected over Broncos. That's not how my game works. It's what name best represents the city, since we're essentially saying that the teams are like branches of one club that is based in the city. Neither Broncos nor Red Sox qualify, IMO. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 1 hour ago, McCarthy said: Glad to hear a Philadelphian say this. I've never liked 76ers or the abbreviation to "Sixers". They could've accomplished the same thing if they'd name the team the Philadelphia Founders and then they'd have a nice alliterative harmony with the Flyers and Phillies. I'm just so used to SIXERS that I don't even think about it, but yeah it's stupid and unprofessional. I like the idea of "Founders" like was just suggested. I'm kinda tired of name suggestions that sound like they were made by old white people way back in the day, and don't resonate with anyone young today. Someone made a point that the average NFL fan is 50 and they are struggling to attract younger people. Well maybe if team names weren't so hokey, that would be different. Not suggesting "Philadelphia Stuntaz" or Ballers or like that, but "Los Angeles Six Fours" is way better than "Philadelphia Seventy Sixers", if anyone wanted to force numbers into team names. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFGiants58 Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 13 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said: I like the idea of "Founders" like was just suggested. The solids have strange naming traditions. To the larger point of the thread, teams sharing a name in their city isn't a good practice. I do wonder what would have happened had the baseball Giants remained in New York. Would either the baseball or football team have changed their name? MLB: Project 32 (Complete), MLB: The Defunct Saga (Complete) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4_tattoos Posted January 21, 2018 Author Share Posted January 21, 2018 38 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said: To the larger point of the thread, teams sharing a name in their city isn't a good practice. I do wonder what would have happened had the baseball Giants remained in New York. Would either the baseball or football team have changed their name? Guess the same could be asked regarding St. Louis having the Cardinals in both baseball and football. Hotter Than July > Thriller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Either would certainly have been grandfathered in. Each team would have had too much brand equity to change on its own, and neither baseball club could force the football clubs to change after decades of allowing it. I do wonder if the Busches would have ended up buying the football Cardinals at some point, keeping everything in-house. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 The football Cardinals seemed to go by "the Big Red" almost as much as "the Cardinals" in St. Louis. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.