interesting viewpoint on cardinals modernization

[bipolarbear]

It's a sign, in our view, of how pathetic the organization was, is, and possibly always will be. After decades of sporting a mildly perturbed burgundy house bird on their helmet, the Chicago/St. Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals finally have cracked open the wallet of owner Bill Bidwill for a relatively minor makeover.

Whoop-dee-freakin'-doo.

Based on the hoopla regarding the new logo, a neutral observer might conclude that the Cards actually have done something significant, such as reaching a point where their roster consists of more than a handful of players with actual NFL talent.

Owner Bill Bidwill called the new logo "[a] tough bird," which "[h]opefully . . . will be worn by tougher and faster and meaner players."

Keep hoping, Bill.

If Bidwill truly was hoping to parlay change into a better on-field product, perhaps he should have dumped the whole "Cardinals" concept and picked a new name for the team -- something that, I don't know, better meshes with the concept of one group of grown men pounding the tar out of another group of grown men.

And we're still having trouble with the notion that anyone should be afraid of a little red bird.

"As they say, it's not the size of the bird in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the bird," coach Dennis Green said. "The cardinal is a small bird, but it can be a very aggressive bird. That's the idea."

Sounds like a guy who's trying too hard to come up with something good to say.

Added quarterback and apparent world traveler Josh McCown: "The only birds I know about are the duck and the dove and the quail, birds that you shoot,. You're not really supposed to shoot cardinals. I don't know if I'd shoot this bird. It looks pretty mean.

"This bird might pull a gun out and shoot right back at you."

There's a healthy image for the National Football League at a time when Jamal Lewis is getting ready to become the Prom Queen of Cell Block H.

Really, image in the modern NFL is everything. Sure, the "Cardinals" have been a significant part of pro football history, dating all the way back to the league's inaugural season.

But for the same reasons that there's no longer a team named the "Staleys" or the "Triangles" or the "Panhandles" or the "Maroons" or the "Kardex" or the "Jeffersons" or the "Brecks" or the "Kelleys" or the "Stapletons," the Bidwills should've done something far more dramatic by ditching, once and for all, a name that in today's version of pro football has become more synonymous with "suck" than "success."

If a guy like Jerry Jones or Dan Snyder were to acquire the franchise, the over-under on the name change would be 3.5 days. It's not intimidating, it's not memorable and, far more importantly, it's not marketable.

Still, the Bidwills are opting instead to make cardinal salad. A "revolutionary" change in the team's uniform is coming, including (we're told) black helmets.

Apart from the possibility that a black hat might cook a few guys' brains in September, the whole Darth Vader look is stale. Our guess is that the remainder of the uni will include a smattering of all of the tacky, trendy features of the past decade, including (ooo) futuristic numbers and (ahhh) shirts with different colored side panels.

If the Bidwills really wanted to shake things up, they'd now own the "Vultures" or the "Scorpions" or the "Sidewinders" or the "Black Widows" or something/anything that my kid and every other eight-year-old in the country would respond to with a dropped jaw and one or two "awesome"'s before bogarting the Visa card and ordering a jersey and a helmet at NFL.com.

So nice try, Cards. Maybe it's for the best that you're staying the way you are. After all, every good drama needs a good guy, a bad guy, and a little comic relief.

[jjezioro225]

From an outsider's point of view, I think a complete name and theme makeover would be awesome!

But, I doubt I'd feel that way if I were a Cards fan. I know I would never want someone to buy the Bills or the Sabres and change their name.

[Stronso]

It's a sign, in our view, of how pathetic the organization was, is, and possibly always will be. After decades of sporting a mildly perturbed burgundy house bird on their helmet, the Chicago/St. Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals finally have cracked open the wallet of owner Bill Bidwill for a relatively minor makeover.

Whoop-dee-freakin'-doo.

Based on the hoopla regarding the new logo, a neutral observer might conclude that the Cards actually have done something significant, such as reaching a point where their roster consists of more than a handful of players with actual NFL talent.

Owner Bill Bidwill called the new logo "[a] tough bird," which "[h]opefully . . . will be worn by tougher and faster and meaner players."

Keep hoping, Bill.

If Bidwill truly was hoping to parlay change into a better on-field product, perhaps he should have dumped the whole "Cardinals" concept and picked a new name for the team -- something that, I don't know, better meshes with the concept of one group of grown men pounding the tar out of another group of grown men.

And we're still having trouble with the notion that anyone should be afraid of a little red bird.

"As they say, it's not the size of the bird in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the bird," coach Dennis Green said. "The cardinal is a small bird, but it can be a very aggressive bird. That's the idea."

Sounds like a guy who's trying too hard to come up with something good to say.

Added quarterback and apparent world traveler Josh McCown: "The only birds I know about are the duck and the dove and the quail, birds that you shoot,. You're not really supposed to shoot cardinals. I don't know if I'd shoot this bird. It looks pretty mean.

"This bird might pull a gun out and shoot right back at you."

There's a healthy image for the National Football League at a time when Jamal Lewis is getting ready to become the Prom Queen of Cell Block H.

Really, image in the modern NFL is everything. Sure, the "Cardinals" have been a significant part of pro football history, dating all the way back to the league's inaugural season.

But for the same reasons that there's no longer a team named the "Staleys" or the "Triangles" or the "Panhandles" or the "Maroons" or the "Kardex" or the "Jeffersons" or the "Brecks" or the "Kelleys" or the "Stapletons," the Bidwills should've done something far more dramatic by ditching, once and for all, a name that in today's version of pro football has become more synonymous with "suck" than "success."

If a guy like Jerry Jones or Dan Snyder were to acquire the franchise, the over-under on the name change would be 3.5 days. It's not intimidating, it's not memorable and, far more importantly, it's not marketable.

Still, the Bidwills are opting instead to make cardinal salad. A "revolutionary" change in the team's uniform is coming, including (we're told) black helmets.

Apart from the possibility that a black hat might cook a few guys' brains in September, the whole Darth Vader look is stale. Our guess is that the remainder of the uni will include a smattering of all of the tacky, trendy features of the past decade, including (ooo) futuristic numbers and (ahhh) shirts with different colored side panels.

If the Bidwills really wanted to shake things up, they'd now own the "Vultures" or the "Scorpions" or the "Sidewinders" or the "Black Widows" or something/anything that my kid and every other eight-year-old in the country would respond to with a dropped jaw and one or two "awesome"'s before bogarting the Visa card and ordering a jersey and a helmet at NFL.com.

So nice try, Cards. Maybe it's for the best that you're staying the way you are. After all, every good drama needs a good guy, a bad guy, and a little comic relief.

The guys who write profootballtalk.com are a bunch of pikers and they can go fluff themselves. They are a joke - not the Cards and I am happy with the Arizona Cardinals - not something else

[walkerws]

You don't change your identity to keep up with every sideline sitting guy. With the history behind it, I don't think anyone would change the team's name just because of how long they've been around.

[PhilaLogos]

that's the dumbest thing ive ever read. The Celtics have had one the of the greastest franchises in sports while their logo has remained a leprichaun. The only undefeated team in NFL history is the Dolphins, can u think of a much more friendlier animal than a dolphin? For cryin out loud, the defending MLB champions are named after a color sock! The name is fine, the logo is cool, and from what other stuff ive heard (in addition to this) this site is negative and bias.

[sc49erfan15]

Yeah, that's seriously the dumbest thing ever.

What I don't understand...is why does a team name have to be fierce or tough or whatever? Some of what I consider the best team names aren't necessarily something you need to be scared of. Sure, for school teams, rec leagues, and some college teams...you might want to come off as fierce. But come on, Lions, Tigers, Wildcats, Bulldogs...gets old!

I think that what differentiates a "amateur-sounding" nickname from a "professional-sounding" nickname is that "step up" from gratuitous ferociousness...or whatever. Sure, sometimes it works, but every team name doesn't need to be something that's going to gnaw you to death. I like team names a lot more when they represent the city, the people, the history of that area...or all three.

49ers...it's a gold miner with a pickaxe and a gold pan. Sure, they could impale you with the axe and beat you with the pan...but it's a look back at the area's history.

Packers...it's a worker in a meat factory!

Yankees...could be taken many different ways, but I don't think people are clamoring for them to change it.

Red Sox...a red stocking for Christ's sakes!

Trail Blazers...oh no, run!

Haha, I could go on...but you get my point.

[Pharos04]

that's the dumbest thing ive ever read. The Celtics have had one the of the greastest franchises in sports while their logo has remained a leprichaun. The only undefeated team in NFL history is the Dolphins, can u think of a much more friendlier animal than a dolphin? For cryin out loud, the defending MLB champions are named after a color sock! The name is fine, the logo is cool, and from what other stuff ive heard (in addition to this) this site is negative and bias.

definitely sounds that way. I think i'm gonna stick to ESPN and ESPN.com for my sports updates and opinions. at least they have a good sense of humor

[jamesjduncan]

This is bogus, I have to agree. As long as the Atlanta Thrashers exist, there is no argument here.

[kelvarnsen]

As an Arizonan, the fan base here has always resented the fact that Birdwell didn't change the nickname coming out of the chute, something that more reflects it being an Arizona-based football team, not a St. Louis baseball team.

[appleclock]

Utah Jazz anyone?

[schwep76]

If this guy is going to criticize the Arizona Cardinals for having a non-fearful nickname, why isn't he doing the same thing for the St. Louis Cardinals?

[BBTV]

that's the dumbest thing ive ever read. The Celtics have had one the of the greastest franchises in sports while their logo has remained a leprichaun. The only undefeated team in NFL history is the Dolphins, can u think of a much more friendlier animal than a dolphin? For cryin out loud, the defending MLB champions are named after a color sock! The name is fine, the logo is cool, and from what other stuff ive heard (in addition to this) this site is negative and bias.

Well said.

Also, did anyone note that this guy was supposedly told that the new helmets would be black? F'n black?

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I think he's right.

Most of the names in the NFL represent something that is a reference (NY Giants, Houston Texans, SF 49ers, etc.) or is fierce sounding (Falcons, Eagles, Jaguars, Raiders)..

Cardinals is neither..it has no ties to the state of Arizona and it's not fierce.

It was an ok name back when they wore leather helmets, but that's been a few years (read "decades") ago.

Why does he not attack the Thrashers or the Stl. Cardinals?

Simple, really: The NHL is dead and Baseball=Tradition.

[FiddySicks]

I think he's right.

Most of the names in the NFL represent something that is a reference (NY Giants, Houston Texans, SF 49ers, etc.) or is fierce sounding (Falcons, Eagles, Jaguars, Raiders)..

Cardinals is neither..it has no ties to the state of Arizona and it's not fierce.

It was an ok name back when they wore leather helmets, but that's been a few years (read "decades") ago.

Why does he not attack the Thrashers or the Stl. Cardinals?

Simple, really: The NHL is dead and Baseball=Tradition.

wait what? falcons and eagles? you might as well keep the cardinals then. the only reason the falcons and eagles are "fierce" and a cardinal isnt is because they are so much damn bigger than a cardinal.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

Exactly.

Falcons and Eagles are (*sigh*) big birds..

Cardinals are not..Blue Jays are very territorial, yet everyone always picks a pair of blood-stained foot warmers over them..

[FiddySicks]

Exactly.

Falcons and Eagles are (*sigh*) big birds..

Cardinals are not..Blue Jays are very territorial, yet everyone always picks a pair of blood-stained foot warmers over them..

hey man cardinals fight hard for that bird seed too

[Cashcleaner]

This guy is a tool.

And I hate him.

Seriously, there's no harm in having a football team named after a bird. No is it a terrible thing to have your logo represent a bird head. I like the new look to the Cards and who is this guy to say what team names and images are cool or not? I mean, I haven't seen him on this board, so what sort of opinion does he have?

Tool.

[devilray2k1]

Texans - Someone from texas

Browns - Old nickname used in the Cleveland area for bulldogs

Cubs - Freakin baby bears

Dolphins - Fear the teal and orange!

Penguins - "They're gonna poke ya!"

Gamecocks - Fancy way of saying chickens!

Celtics - a 1 foot tall skinny bald leprachaun in a fighting stance

Ravens - "Crows" just didn't sound right

Saints - wow

Blues - Surprised their mascot isn't a characature of B.B. King

Ducks - quack quack

I think my point was made

The damn name is FINE

logo is okay, just wish they had refined it more and went a step or two further...it just looks kinda generic to me that's all

[Gary]

I think he's right.

Most of the names in the NFL represent something that is a reference (NY Giants, Houston Texans, SF 49ers, etc.) or is fierce sounding (Falcons, Eagles, Jaguars, Raiders)..

Cardinals is neither..it has no ties to the state of Arizona and it's not fierce.

It was an ok name back when they wore leather helmets, but that's been a few years (read "decades") ago.

Why does he not attack the Thrashers or the Stl. Cardinals?

Simple, really: The NHL is dead and Baseball=Tradition.

Cardinals do have ties to Arizona, they are located in the North and Central part of Arizona. Alot of people do not know that

[NJTank]

I think that may have been a good idea the new logo s nice but they need to start from scratch and I have been syaing that for a while. I mean 72 years 12 winning season tahst beyond bad.