Cleveland Indians become the Cleveland Guardians

[TenaciousG]

37 minutes ago, burgundy said:

Spiders is the obvious answer. Anything else is overthinking it.

 

 

Shameless plug for my Spiders concept:

 

This is ridiculously good. Way better than the old brand and the current one.

[selgy]

13 minutes ago, TenaciousG said:

This is ridiculously good. Way better than the old brand and the current one.

It does look really good. My only critique would be that the red C with the white inner from afar looks similar to the Chattanoga Lookouts logo

 

[BBTV]

The imagery doesn't need to be "IN YO FACE".  Considering the main point of design these days is to sell stuff to fans, the webbing could be navy but textured so it'd look cool up close, but not be that noticeable on the field (you'd still get the C, so it would at the least be where we are today.)

 

Or the C could be white (so max contrast vs thet navy) and the webbing red, so more subtle.  

[Marlins93]

1 hour ago, burgundy said:

Spiders is the obvious answer. Anything else is overthinking it.

 

 

Shameless plug for my Spiders concept:

 

 

Easily the best Spiders concept art I've seen so far.

[O.C.D]

2 hours ago, Walk-Off said:

 

If "Spiders" is too generic, too interchangeable, and not specific enough to be a good nickname for a sports team, then "Indians" is equally unworthy for all of the same reasons.  Among all of the people across the Americas that have been lumped together as "American Indians" by Europeans and descendants thereof for multiple centuries, one will find hundreds of ethnic groups ("nations" or "tribes"), each with discernibly separate languages and cultures.

 

In the Southwestern United States, the Diné ("Navajo") live in a reservation that encircles the Hopi people's reservation, yet the Diné and the Hopi differ widely in their languages, cultures, and even economies.

 

In the 19th century, the US federal government forced the five "civilized tribes" (the Cherokee, the Chickasaw, the Choctaw, the Muscogee ("Creek"), and the Seminole) of the Southeastern United States to move hundreds of miles west to what is known now as Oklahoma -- a place whose established Indigenous groups (e.g. the Arapaho, the Cheyenne, the Kiowa, the Osage, the Quapaw) had languages and cultures that were distinct from one another and were definitely different from what any of those freshly exiled newcomers had.

 

Even the Aztec and the Maya, pre-Columbian Mexico's two best known ethnicities, are known to have spoken languages that differed enough to be classified by most linguists as belonging to completely separate lingual families.

 

In short, I think that any belief and/or claim that "Indian(s)" refers to a specific enough and unique enough kind of human being, let alone a more specific and more unique kind of life form than "spider(s)," is naïve at best, and arrogant and insensitive at worst.

There are roughly 40,000-45,000 species of spider.

 

Human beings break down into about 4 major groups. Within those groups exist a plethora of different ethnic groups. A North American Indian/Native American (The basis of the identity of the Cleveland Indians) is a very specific and unique group of human beings. Granted, within that group there exists probably hundreds of different tribes and unique cultures. Genetically they still represent a very specific and unique subgroup within the human family.

 

The Cleveland Humans =/= The Cleveland Indians. The Cleveland Spiders =/= The Cleveland Tarantulas.

 

Hypothetically lets say there was a team that wanted to be the The Ants. I'd make the same argument. Ants is generic whereas Fire Ants is more specific and not generic.

[panthers_2012]

9 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

The Cleveland Humans

Greendale Community College has already claimed the least controversial mascot

[O.C.D]

1 hour ago, Cujo said:

 

Engines. A word that sounds exactly like a slur for Indians.

 

What is your malfunction?

 

An Engine is not an Indian. The idea was to have a name that was phonetically similar as a gesture to the fans while being something completely different.

[Ridleylash]

1 minute ago, O.C.D said:

An Engine is not an Indian. The idea was to have a name that was phonetically similar as a gesture to the fans while being something completely different.

It also sounds very much like "Injuns", which is a pretty well-known offensive term for Native people. After all the :censored: they've had with Wahoo, that screams "PR suicide".

[selgy]

9 minutes ago, O.C.D said:

Hypothetically lets say there was a team that wanted to be the The Ants. 

No one would want to name a team The Ants or Ants. It's flat and boring. 

A spider isn't

This name game could have been played 110 years ago when the Highlanders were changing their name. Or when the Beaneaters were changing their name. Or the Trolly dodgers/Superbas, etc. 

This holier than thou and team names is funny. There have been terrible names over time and now many of them are considered "classics" because we've had them for decades.
 

[O.C.D]

1 minute ago, Ridleylash said:

It also sounds very much like "Injun".

I've been made aware of that several times by several people. I understand. It wasn't my intention to do that. I literally thought "Hey engines kind of sounds like Indians and it would be cool to have a baseball team with a mechanical identity package". A page or two later I also suggested Engineers and Conductors and the idea of using train imagery.

[selgy]

The integrity of a name...Orphans, Quakers,  Rustlers, Beaneaters, Bridegrooms, etc
 

Name
Atlanta Braves (1966–present) Milwaukee Braves (1953–1965) Boston Braves (1941–1952) Boston Bees (1936–1940) Boston Braves (1912–1935) Boston Rustlers (1911) Boston Doves (1907–1910) Boston Beaneaters (1883–1906) Boston Red Caps (1876–1882) Boston Red Stockings (1871–1875)

 

Name
Los Angeles Dodgers (1958–present) Brooklyn Dodgers (1932–1957) Brooklyn Robins (1914–1931) Brooklyn Dodgers (1913) Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers (1911–1912) Brooklyn Superbas (1899–1910) Brooklyn Bridegrooms (1896–1898) Brooklyn Grooms (1891–1895) Brooklyn Bridegrooms (1888–1890) Brooklyn Grays (1885–1887) Brooklyn Atlantics (1884) Brooklyn Grays (1883)

 

Name
New York Yankees (1913–present) New York Highlanders (1903–1912) Baltimore Orioles (1901–1902)

 

Name
Baltimore Orioles (1954–present) St. Louis Browns (1902–1953) Milwaukee Brewers (1901)

 

Name
Chicago Cubs (1903–present) Chicago Orphans (1898–1902) Chicago Colts (1890–1897) Chicago White Stockings (NL) (1876–1889)

 

Name
Philadelphia Phillies (1890–present) Philadelphia Blue Jays/Phillies (1944–1949) Philadelphia Quakers/Phillies (1884–1889) Philadelphia Quakers (1883)

[O.C.D]

3 minutes ago, selgy said:

No one would want to name a team The Ants or Ants. It's flat and boring. 

A spider isn't

This name game could have been played 110 years ago when the Highlanders were changing their name. Or when the Beaneaters were changing their name. Or the Trolly dodgers/Superbas, etc. 

This holier than thou and team names is funny. There have been terrible names over time and now many of them are considered "classics" because we've had them for decades.
 

A Spider is unique in the animal kingdom. There also happen to be about 45,000 different species of them. If they don't pick a specific type of spider they'll end up creating a generic avatar meant to symbolize the basic elements of a spider. The name Spiders could work just fine. The name Spiders also happens to be, by definition, the most generic (adj. Relating to or descriptive of an entire group or class.) version they could choose within that order.

[O.C.D]

1 minute ago, selgy said:

The integrity of a name...Orphans, Quakers,  Rustlers, Beaneaters, Bridegrooms, etc
 

Name
Atlanta Braves (1966–present) Milwaukee Braves (1953–1965) Boston Braves (1941–1952) Boston Bees (1936–1940) Boston Braves (1912–1935) Boston Rustlers (1911) Boston Doves (1907–1910) Boston Beaneaters (1883–1906) Boston Red Caps (1876–1882) Boston Red Stockings (1871–1875)

 

Name
Los Angeles Dodgers (1958–present) Brooklyn Dodgers (1932–1957) Brooklyn Robins (1914–1931) Brooklyn Dodgers (1913) Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers (1911–1912) Brooklyn Superbas (1899–1910) Brooklyn Bridegrooms (1896–1898) Brooklyn Grooms (1891–1895) Brooklyn Bridegrooms (1888–1890) Brooklyn Grays (1885–1887) Brooklyn Atlantics (1884) Brooklyn Grays (1883)

 

Name
New York Yankees (1913–present) New York Highlanders (1903–1912) Baltimore Orioles (1901–1902)

 

Name
Baltimore Orioles (1954–present) St. Louis Browns (1902–1953) Milwaukee Brewers (1901)

 

Name
Chicago Cubs (1903–present) Chicago Orphans (1898–1902) Chicago Colts (1890–1897) Chicago White Stockings (NL) (1876–1889)

 

Name
Philadelphia Phillies (1890–present) Philadelphia Blue Jays/Phillies (1944–1949) Philadelphia Quakers/Phillies (1884–1889) Philadelphia Quakers (1883)

The Cleveland Spiders as a team name would work fine. I don't hate the name and I think the design possibilities are strong. It's just more than likely going to be a fairly generalized representation of the basic elements that make a spider a spider. Non descript and non specific.

[sportsfan7]

37 minutes ago, selgy said:

No one would want to name a team The Ants or Ants. It's flat and boring. 

The Fort Wayne Mad Ants would like a word.

[selgy]

5 minutes ago, sportsfan7 said:

The Fort Wayne Mad Ants would like a word.

 

That isn't "ants" 

Mad Ants clearly sound like they are mad and would tear labels off of mattresses 

[habsfan1]

I'm not too crazy about the name, but some of these Cleveland Spiders concepts are solid designs.

[chcarlson23]

3 hours ago, O.C.D said:

Human beings break down into about 4 major groups. Within those groups exist a plethora of different ethnic groups.

What specific groups are you talking about??

 

As for the name, Spiders I think is the best, because there is history behind it, and the semi-generic name of Spiders sounds like Lions, Tigers, or Bears, so it works out. It will still let the team keep the feel of being a 100+ year old franchise will scrubbing it clean of a lot of the offensiveness of the previous identity. 
 

Sure the original Cleveland Spiders sucked, but the Indians have too at times. I think the name Cleveland Spiders being associated with the worst losing team is pushing it a little. I mean it makes sense that people and Clevelanders do think of that, but it’s by no means the same feeling like when the 98’ playoffs are mentioned to a Vikings fan or the 2016 Super Bowl to a Falcons fan. Those moments leave bad tastes in your mouth and you’ll probably remember them for the rest of your lives. 
 

Maybe Spiders fans thought that too, but they probably didn’t care that long... If anything Spiders being remembered for having the worst season in baseball is an interesting fact more than a good reason not to choose the name. 

[JayMac]

20 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Not long ago I took a shot at a Spiders concept with the color scheme of brown and red.  I think the name is awesome, and a great chance to transition off navy blue.

 

This is a great concept. Though, I am wondering how it would look if the spider were white and the C was red (or navy on the red hat).

[gosioux76]

10 hours ago, O.C.D said:

There are roughly 40,000-45,000 species of spider.

 

Human beings break down into about 4 major groups. Within those groups exist a plethora of different ethnic groups. A North American Indian/Native American (The basis of the identity of the Cleveland Indians) is a very specific and unique group of human beings. Granted, within that group there exists probably hundreds of different tribes and unique cultures. Genetically they still represent a very specific and unique subgroup within the human family.

 

The Cleveland Humans =/= The Cleveland Indians. The Cleveland Spiders =/= The Cleveland Tarantulas.

 

Hypothetically lets say there was a team that wanted to be the The Ants. I'd make the same argument. Ants is generic whereas Fire Ants is more specific and not generic.

 

I want to make sure I understand this: The name "spiders" is too generic because there are a lot of different kinds of them (most of which nobody could name if they tried.) There are also "hundreds of different tribes" of Indians, yet somehow it's not too generic. 

 

Seems a bit arbitrary. By this logic, you could also make a case for the Chicago Grizzly Bears, the Philadelphia Bald Eagles, or the Oregon Wood Ducks.  

 

Your hypothetical also misses the mark  Ants, on its own, is a terrible name for a lot of reasons, but not because it's too generic. Adding a modifier to it doesn't make it better, it makes it minor league, which is exactly how it's used. 

[spartacat_12]

13 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

That, and you just know they'd screw it all up with some kind of silly cartoon spider logo somewhere in their logo set and gimmicky web patterns on the jersey to make it look "fresh". It's a deep rabbit hole of bad design ideas I have zero faith the Dolans would avoid.

 

It feels like the current trend with sports branding is minimalism. Teams like the Raptors, Nets, Jaguars, and Chargers have all come out with fairly bare-bones rebrands recently.

 

Look at the Kraken brand. When the name was just in the rumours stage people complained that we'd get some cheesy, minor league look featuring a stick wielding squid. What we actually got was a clean look that emphasizes nautical imagery, and has enough restraint to limit the squid to a negative-space tentacle.