SFGiants58

MLB: The Defunct Saga - Portland Stags Updated

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

Seeing my favorite baseball team wearing gear reptesenting the city I proudly call home makes me feel some kinda way. 

 

Thanks! I like dipping into the uncanny valley every now and then. Part of my logic with this concept was to think, "What if the River Cats had a brain fart and decided to do a parent club rebrand?" I think I demonstrated that it could work well enough. It's certainly better than this:

 

Sactown_Uni_x13j0y9d.jpg

 

I do like the mid-century placement of the trim, but the whole design is a mess (I detect IFC Hardball, when I'm sure the River Cats can easily afford Ocean Beach Major - the one I use, which is a far better approximation of the Giants' lettering font). Also, Tower Bridge in orange just looks weird. 

 

17 hours ago, Frylock said:

Really love the crazy history regarding the failed ARCO stadium. From a design standpoint, any thoughts on an interlocking SG instead of SF?

 

Thanks! It was a fun rabbit hole in which to dive. I do get that it's weird to see the Giants without an interlocking logo, so I've designed an SG!

 

0n4Y1k5.png

 

I'm not a big fan of team names appearing in interlocking logos (with the exception of the BiG, the A's and White Sox's insignias, and the Angels), but it doesn't look all that bad. Besides, it'll give me an opportunity to create a recreation/modernization of the prototype Toronto Giants hat!

 

zTpBcMd.png

 

16 hours ago, seancarter said:

love see  Sacramento  Solons concept

 

I might do that down the line.

 

15 hours ago, NicDB said:

This is pretty much exactly what I'd expect had the Giants moved to Sacramento, which I mean in the best way possible. They've always been one of MLB's "glamour" franchises, so I wouldn't expect them to change much.

With that in mind, your primary logo feels very unnecessary.  I think your tertiary is much closer to what they'd actually go with if they needed a logo to mark the Sacramento era of the franchise.  Just make the ball white, and the S black with an orange outline.  And make the roundel plain black (without the triple stripe) with orange lettering for color balance.  Plain and simple is how the Giants have always done it.  If you need a tertiary, just use the actual Giants logo.

 

Thanks! I get where you're coming from with the primary logo concern, but I beg to differ. Part of my philosophy with designing Giants concepts is to demonstrate what's so "Giant" about the team. The current primary that the Giants use is one of my least favorite primary marks in baseball. I think that the California flag (the most "Giant" of the states, as far as population goes) fits that aesthetic. It's kind of akin to how my Toronto Giants mark used the maple leaf.

 

r7cX4kw.png 

 

That being said, your suggestion for the roundel looks pretty good. I just wouldn't use it as a primary.

 

0euSDkt.png

 

15 hours ago, Dalcowboyfan92 said:

Is this mystery Sacramento team the Athletics?

4 hours ago, coco1997 said:

Nice job on the Sacramento Giants! Pretty straightforward concept, so I have no real suggestions or complaints.

 

 

Yep, I'm betting it is. ;)

 

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/csn/kings/Sacramento_Raiders___It_was_a_done_deal_.html

 

Thanks! You're both correct!

 

SACRAMENTO ATHLETICS - Green and Gold Rush

 

The idea of having the A’s move to Sacramento is not a recent one. The first discussions of a proposal appeared in 1978, nearly a decade before ARCO Park discussion started. According to Gregg Lukenbill in an NBC Bay Area interview from 2018:

 

Quote

Ironically, I talked to Charlie Finley in 1978 and he was willing to sell the A's to me for $10 million dollars," Lukenbill said. "In the 70's, $10 million was more than I had, I can tell you. He said, ‘listen, when you get real, give me a call, I'm willing to deal.1

 

Official, yet far vaguer, interest appeared again during the 2010s, with sex fiend/former Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson expressing interest during the battles between the Giants and A’s for San Jose. The project detailed, to quote Susan Slusser:

 

Quote

...exploring the viability of major-league baseball at this point, with particular emphasis on the Railyards site, a 244-acre area just north of downtown and next to the Sacramento River. Johnson said Monday that the River Cats' home in West Sacramento, Raley Field, is an option, too.2

 

Since Dave Kaval took over as team president, the question of Sacramento hasn’t appeared since. However, some (such as @Bucfan56) believe that moving to Sacramento could be a decent move for the franchise. While I am steadfast in maintaining that an Oakland solution should be given preference, Sacramento does sound intriguing. It keeps the A's in roughly the same market, while also allowing for them to take back their "small market" claim.3

 

Let’s assume that Charlie O. offloaded the A’s to Lukenbill and Sacramento developers in 1978, or the team managed to get a deal for a stadium at some point in the past few years. What would the A’s look like now?

 

The primary logo features the detailed elephant rendering from my Denver and Phoenix A’s concepts. It sits atop a mound, above the wordmark and the team’s striping pattern (g/y/g/w/g/y/g), all within a baseball diamond. I figured alluding to the California flag would be a good technique. The secondaries include the “A’s” logo from the Seattle and Tampa Bay variants (I like the narrower “apostrophe s” of Market Deco which makes the design easier to center) and an “S” monogram that modernizes one of the Sacramento Solons' late-1940s/early-1950s cap and jacket insignias. The tertiary is the elephant on its own.
 

tHcQShJ.png

 

The uniforms feature many of the same aesthetic trappings as my previous A's designs, with contrasting front numbers and the elimination of the road cap. The road script uses the Solons' S as the first letter. The sleeve stripes follow the same pattern as the socks and primary logo.

 

to0qAn6.png

 

Alternate uniform options include both Athletic Gold and a Forest Green jerseys, with both sets using the "A's" insignia and placket trim.

 

h86C0vV.png

 

The second set of alternates includes a white cap for a home alternate and my attempt to A's-ify this Sacramento Solons uniform. The solo elephant is on the sleeves, while the cap is an all-green design with a yellow-gold "S."

 

eM2WRYJ.png

 

The jacket uses the same template as my Seattle Athletics design.

 

POzAk4G.png

 

If the Athletics had moved to Sacramento either during the ARCO Park period or in response to the territory rights issue, they would still look fantastic. It would also work well if the River Cats had done a parent club rebrand during their time as an A's affiliate. C+C is appreciated, as always!

 

Up next, get ready for an suburban boondoggle!

 

1 James Ham, “Sacramento Raiders? ‘It Was a Done Deal,’” NBC Bay Area, February 28, 2018, http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/csn/kings/Sacramento_Raiders___It_was_a_done_deal_.html.

2 Susan Slusser, “Owner Dismisses Idea of A’s in Sacramento,” San Francisco Chronicle, July 10, 2012, https://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/Owner-dismisses-idea-of-A-s-in-Sacramento-3694640.php.

3 Author's Note: You want to know the reason why the Oakland stadium goal is getting more traction now? MLB told the A's to get off of revenue sharing because they aren't a "small market" team. Jane Lee, “New CBA to Impact Oakland Athletics’ Revenue | MLB.Com,” MLB.com, December 2, 2016,  https://www.mlb.com/news/new-cba-to-impact-oakland-athletics-revenue/c-210142632.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to see your takes on the "one-year wonder" Seattle Pilots. Always love your work, keep it up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the Sacramento rivercats were still the A's affiliate and the Fresno grizzlies were still the giants affiliate. Giants really left Fresno out to dry by becoming their rivals parent club. Fresno now not being a Californian teams affiliate is a shame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Olde English S logo is really cool, a tad bit muddled because of the stripe going back through the letter, but that's a minor nitpick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Topherlee2 said:

Can't wait to see your takes on the "one-year wonder" Seattle Pilots. Always love your work, keep it up!

He could do it again, but he did a take on them in his project 32 series.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your taste level (for lack of a better term) and technical ability are both incredible, every concept of yours is a winner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sactown A's look great! As much as I'd love to see them adopt something like this if this move ever happens, I'm almost positive they'd just replace the "Oakland" with "Sacramento" in their current primary. I'm super excited to see you take on the Greensboro Twins, whenever that happens. (Has to be soon, right?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love what you did with the interlocking SG logo! Exactly what I had hoped to see. And then the updated Toronto Giants "G" looks great, too. I never noticed that little serif at the bottom before. It looks out of place, but it's there, plain as day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, the white “Fury” wordmark didn’t work as well as I expected. Honestly, of all the options I think the original is the best.

 

The Sacramento Giants and Athletics look great! I particularly love the striping and the away wordmark on the Athletics, to echo @coco1997. Great job as always!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2019 at 2:23 PM, SFGiants58 said:

Thanks! It was a fun rabbit hole in which to dive. I do get that it's weird to see the Giants without an interlocking logo, so I've designed an SG!

 

0n4Y1k5.png

 

That being said, your suggestion for the roundel looks pretty good. I just wouldn't use it as a primary.

 

0euSDkt.png


I actually like your version with the SG more.  I don't mind the nickname appearing in the monogram as long as it looks good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2019 at 2:32 PM, Topherlee2 said:

Can't wait to see your takes on the "one-year wonder" Seattle Pilots. Always love your work, keep it up!

On 3/9/2019 at 6:45 PM, Andrew_Gamer_NZP said:

He could do it again, but he did a take on them in his project 32 series.

 

 

Thanks! That's my plan, to end with the Seattle Pilots with two different takes. 

 

On 3/9/2019 at 2:36 PM, plobrien said:

I wish the Sacramento rivercats were still the A's affiliate and the Fresno grizzlies were still the giants affiliate. Giants really left Fresno out to dry by becoming their rivals parent club. Fresno now not being a Californian teams affiliate is a shame. 

 

Same. 

 

On 3/9/2019 at 4:54 PM, Dalcowboyfan92 said:

The Olde English S logo is really cool, a tad bit muddled because of the stripe going back through the letter, but that's a minor nitpick.

 

Thanks! I totally see where you're coming from, but I wanted to do enough to separate them from the White Sox. The line I used in the Seattle concept was way too wimpy. 

 

On 3/9/2019 at 7:01 PM, alexandre said:

Your taste level (for lack of a better term) and technical ability are both incredible, every concept of yours is a winner.

 

Thank you!

 

On 3/10/2019 at 12:17 PM, QueenCitySwarm said:

The Sactown A's look great! As much as I'd love to see them adopt something like this if this move ever happens, I'm almost positive they'd just replace the "Oakland" with "Sacramento" in their current primary. I'm super excited to see you take on the Greensboro Twins, whenever that happens. (Has to be soon, right?)

 

Thanks. As for the Carolina Twins, look no further than the next post!

 

On 3/10/2019 at 12:55 PM, coco1997 said:

Man, that "Sacramento" script...

 

giphy.gif

 

On 3/10/2019 at 7:44 PM, MJD7 said:

Yea, the white “Fury” wordmark didn’t work as well as I expected. Honestly, of all the options I think the original is the best.

 

The Sacramento Giants and Athletics look great! I particularly love the striping and the away wordmark on the Athletics, to echo @coco1997. Great job as always!

 

Thanks!

 

On 3/10/2019 at 12:55 PM, Frylock said:

I love what you did with the interlocking SG logo! Exactly what I had hoped to see. And then the updated Toronto Giants "G" looks great, too. I never noticed that little serif at the bottom before. It looks out of place, but it's there, plain as day.

On 3/11/2019 at 4:17 AM, NicDB said:


I actually like your version with the SG more.  I don't mind the nickname appearing in the monogram as long as it looks good.

 

Thank you! I'm rather fond of how the "SG" turned out. I'm also surprised that the Toronto Giants' "G" never surfaced beyond this one photo. You'd think at least a few of them were made, eventually becoming a Hat Club exclusive or something like that. 

 

On 3/12/2019 at 12:30 PM, coco1997 said:

Here's one that was definitely new to me.

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/washington-nationals/padres-debated-relocating-dc-1973-briefly-discussed-pandas-nickname

 

Apparently when the Padres were to move to D.C., one of the names they mooted was "Pandas."

 

I found that in The Washington Post's article about the move, but wrote it off due to the interviewees maintaining that "Nationals" was the most likely name. It'd be an interesting identity to evolve, especially if there was a mid-'90s "aggressive Panda."

 

On 3/13/2019 at 9:21 PM, Mvdbutler said:

What If The Montreal Expos Move To New Orleans In 2005 After 2004 Season 

 

I found zero evidence of this.

 

Anyway, the Carolina Twins are going up now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I found that in The Washington Post's article about the move, but wrote it off due to the interviewees maintaining that "Nationals" was the most likely name. It'd be an interesting identity to evolve, especially if there was a mid-'90s "aggressive Panda."

 

I think there's some potential there with a black/white/green color scheme. Maybe once you finish the series you can revisit the idea? :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

CAROLINA TWINS - Triad Troubles

 

We’ve reached the mid-1990s. The Tampa Bay Sweepstakes have played out, with both St. Petersburg and Phoenix getting expansion teams. However, relocation remained an option for many of the cities left out (as we’ve seen with the Virginia Fury and Sacramento).

 

One of these regions was North Carolina. From 1996-1998, businessmen and politicians in the Piedmont Triad area of NC (Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and High Point) made a big gamble: instead of building new minor-league stadiums, why not try to lure a major-league club with a new stadium? They came up with a plan for a $210 million stadium, one situated at the Interstate 40-Interstate 40 Business interchange in between Guilford and Forsyth County. This site was under dispute leading up to the referendum, but the general area of the site would have been in the area highlight below. 1

 

NorthCarolina_1999.jpg0UsjkiI.pngmlb%20in%20nc%20blueprint_1499792318606_10017030_ver1.0.JPG

 

Don Beaver, a North Carolina businessman (and then-owner of the Charlotte Knights), would have paid for a third of the stadium, with the other two-thirds coming from taxpayers in Guilford and Forsyth County through a $0.50 tax on baseball tickets and a 1% tax on prepared foods. Of course, this tax proved unpopular, with restaurateurs and citizens organizing Citizens Against Unfair Taxes (spending $33,000 on their campaign, compared to the $899,000 spent by the “Say Yes Baseball” campaign).2

 

Beaver also entered into negotiations to buy the Twins from Carl Pohlad, who was having financial problems with the Twins. He reported that he’d lost roughly $26 million since 1994 (over half of his reported losses since 1984), while team revenue was 40% below league average ($70 million) at $42 million. He had been trying for some time to extort the Minnesota Legislature to buy him a new venue to replace the barely 15-year-old Metrodome (I get that it was a crummy stadium, but still!), to no avail. However, he saw an opportunity with Don Beaver to put pressure on the state government. Pohlad signed a letter of intent on October 3, 1997, to sell the team to Beaver for $150 million, contingent on the Twins failing to get a stadium deal in Minnesota and the stadium tax measure passing.3

 

Unfortunately for Beaver, the Guilford and Forsyth County voters had different ideas. The May 5, 1998 referendum for the taxes failed hard. The two-county election ended with “no” defeating “yes” by 96,433 to 55,262 votes. The votes were 59% to 41% in Forsyth and 67% to 33% in Guilford. While Beaver investigated a stadium opportunity in Charlotte, talks stalled out. The North Carolina effort was so defeated, Beaver admitted that Charlotte had no interest in the Expos’ relocation.4

 

Pohlad and his successors, who reportedly had little interest in North Carolina, continued in their pursuit of a Minnesota stadium (which included failed public ventures and a threat to contract the team that fell flat), eventually getting Target Field in 2010.5

 

Of course, this plan was a horrible idea. Quotes from the period showed concern from residents about traffic near the exurban complex. I’d say that @sc49erfan15 summed up the problem here:

 

On 2/18/2019 at 3:05 PM, sc49erfan15 said:

 

I live in Greensboro, and yes, that would've been a horrendous idea. That particular site is just outside of Kernersville, a suburb of just under 25,000, between Winston-Salem and Greensboro. It's a 20-25 minute drive from both downtown Winston-Salem and downtown Greensboro.

 

The Piedmont Triad (Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point) is home to upwards of 1.5 million residents, which isn't anything to sneeze at, but it's entirely too spread out to get the daily type of attendance you'd need for an MLB team. And, as we've seen, rural/suburban baseball stadiums aren't exactly optimal for attendance. There would be absolute minimal draw from Charlotte (~90 minutes), Durham (~1 hour), and Raleigh (~90 minutes), especially for weekday/weeknight games.

 

On 2/18/2019 at 3:35 PM, sc49erfan15 said:

It's not quite that rural, but it's suburban at best.

 

Put it this way - the airport is closer to Greensboro's city center than that stadium would've been. The Twins would've been trying to leave within 5 seasons.

 

Even if the vote went the other way, the results would still be terrible. You can best sum up what happened with this over-referenced moment from Fred Ottman’s wrestling career:

 

tumblr_inline_o8frs5DR6k1qg8qtz_500.gif

 

The voters should be commended for refusing to pay for two-thirds of Beaver’s stadium.

 

However, what if the Guilford and Forsyth County voters went the other way and Pohlad wasn’t bluffing?

 

I figured that the name should stay, with the identifier of “Carolina.” The titual Twins would be each of the Carolinas. Navy and red would also remain with the addition of flesh/tan for outlines and the twin men (taken from the Twins’ 1972 roundel alternate).

 

Part One - Dome-style Design

 

The first approach is an attempt to merge the Metrodome era look with the new setting, while incorporating pieces of the 2010 typeface cleanup. The primary is a direct riff on the ‘87-’09 design, while the secondary incorporates both twins representing their respective states (modified versions of Wikipedia's North/South Carolina state outlines), a three-pointed star for the Triad, and the cap logo. The insignias include a “C-underline” and an “NCSC” design (a localized version of the “TC”). Rockwell Bold is the lettering font.

 

EDIT: I've adjusted the secondary and insignia logos, per C&C by @sc49erfan15, @coco1997, and @BellaSpurs. The original is here.

 

H9nT3fg.png

 

The uniforms feature a new “Carolina” wordmark, with the secondary on the home uniform and the primary on the road. The big change from the Twins’ 1987-2009 uniforms is that the NoB’s are direct-sewn and red with navy outlines. The “NCSC” is on the socks. 

 

EDIT: The original is here, since I replaced the "NCSC," the home sleeve patch, and the cap insignia.

 

2xZkpYb.png

 

The alternates include a navy top and a red-billed “NCSC” cap, along with a fauxback. This one uses the janky 1960s “Twins” script with an all-navy “NCSC” cap and the secondary as a patch.

 

EDIT: The "NCSC" is now a "C" on the red-billed cap, while the new "C" replaces the old one. The "C" from the second part is now on the throwback. The original is here.

 

0owsR3k.png

 

The jacket features the home wordmark, the “C-underline” on the back, and white and red stripes on the trim. EDIT: The original is here.

 

hCpq1Uq.png

 

Part Two - A 1960s Revival, with contrast!

 

The second approach modernizes the 1960s Twins set (what the 2010 Twins should have done) with a contrasting color style (inspired by the first secondary logo). The primary places the other secondary in a roundel, along with the team script (which I debuted in the current MLB thread on the Sports Logos section - using the 1959-60 Washington Senators’ tail design). The secondary/insignia features the “C” from my custom “TC.” A roundel with the “C” and a red border form the tertiary.

 

EDIT: I've simplified the primary, per @BellaSpurs and @sc49erfan15's suggestions. The map logo is now the tertiary. The original is right here.

 

i2exYLP.png

 

The uniforms follow my Project 32 Twins concept, except for a few key tweaks. The most notable among these is that the front numbers, cap logos, and sock stripes are dominantly red with navy or white outlines. I figured that it gave the uniforms a bit more “punch.” The primary is a sleeve patch for both sets.

 

EDIT: The tertiary is on the home uniform, while the primary resides on the road jersey's sleeve. The original is in here.

 

ty3EgMJ.png

 

The alternates also develop the co-dominance approach by alternating each Friday. The red jersey includes a matching cap, while the navy jersey features white front numbers (for contrast as a lighter element).

 

EDIT: The patches have been updated to match the new set, with a recolored tertiary. The original is here.

 

ruf6aVm.png

 

The jacket now has red sleeves and the “Carolina” script.

 

EDIT: The primary is on the sleeve, while the tertiary is on the back. The original is here.

 

XXZr9Xn.png

 

This move would have been an utter boondoggle had the voters and team gone through with it. While the Twins could have had some fantastic looks there, it’s for the best that it didn’t happen. C+C is appreciated, as always!

 

Up next, we start another long project - Expos Agnoistes!

 

1 Justin Catanoso, “Architects Present Ballpark Options,” News & Record, April 2, 1998, sec. Triad/State; Meghann Mollerus, “MLB in NC? It Struck Out 19 Years Ago | Wfmynews2.Com,” WFMY News 2, July 17, 2017, https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/mlb-in-nc-it-struck-out-19-years-ago/455758206; John A. Nagy, “The Baseball Question,” News & Record, May 5, 1998, sec. General News; Eric Okurowski, “StadiumPage.Com - North Carolina 1999,” accessed March 16, 2019, http://www.stadiumpage.com/concepts/NC1999_R.html.

 

2 Mollerus, “MLB in NC?;" Nagy, “The Baseball Question;" Jim Schlosser, “One Year Later, Opinions Remain Firm on Stadium - Land Set aside for a Triad Big-League Baseball Park Remains Vacant, and - Proponents of Big-League Ball for the Area Remain Convinced an Opportunity Was - Missed.,” News & Record, May 4, 1999, sec. General News.

 

Compiled from reports by staff writers Stan Olson and Michael Whitmer, Associated Press and Knight Ridder/Tribune., “Twins Sale Was Never Intended, Book Says,” Charlotte Observer, April 3, 2000, sec. Business Monday; Justin Catanoso, “Was Baseball Deal Charade? `Well, Sort of’ - Triad Business Journal,” Triad Business Journal, May 3, 1999, https://www.bizjournals.com/triad/stories/1999/05/03/tidbits.html; Nagy, “The Baseball Question.”

 

Dana Damico, “Stadium Site, Not Tax, Was Key in Kernersville,” Winston-Salem Journal, May 6, 1998, sec. A; Scott Dodd, “Charlotte and Baseball: Nothing Major League yet - City’s Sports Promoters Quite Happy with the Minor-League Knights,” Charlotte Observer, September 22, 2002, sec. Metro; David Rice, “Triad Says No to Baseball Decisive: Voters in Forsyth, Guilford Reject Food Tax,” Winston-Salem Journal, May 6, 1998, sec. A; Schlosser, “One Year Later, Opinions Remain Firm on Stadium;” Patrick Sweeney, “N. Carolina Voters Vote down Stadium Tax//as Triad Area Says No, Charlotte Group Makes Move to Lure Twins,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 6, 1998, sec. Main; Jay Weiner, “N.C. Voters Reject Taxes to Help Build Twins Ballpark - Now the Attention Falls to Charlotte,” Star Tribune: Newspaper of the Twin Cities, May 6, 1998, sec. News.

 

5 Catanoso, “Was Baseball Deal Charade? `Well, Sort of’ - Triad Business Journal;” Compiled from reports by staff writers Stan Olson and Michael Whitmer, Associated Press and Knight Ridder/Tribune., “Twins Sale Was Never Intended, Book Says;” Foon Rhee, “Twins Tentatively Agree to Deal Keeping Them in Minnesota,” Charlotte Observer, July 23, 1998, sec. Metro.

 

Edited by SFGiants58
Updated images

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all looks fantastic! Although I think for the “Dome design” the alternate logo that has both states would be better without the ball. Just leave it as the states. Same with the 1960s revival primary logo. It looks really awkward in my opinion. Maybe try an attempt at the current twins logo (which is their best they’ve ever had) but have cursive scripts, bc that Carolina script is gorgeous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not feeling the underscored "C" logo from the first set...I think it worked on the "M" logo because the underscore follows the curve of the bottom of the "M," but the "C" doesn't have that same curve. The "Carolina" script from the second set, on the other hand, is superb! 

 

Looking forward to finally getting to the Expos!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to the expos, probably more renaming involved I would think. That said, will we see a Washington Expos?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.