Name ch-ch-ch-changes

[DrBear]

Sometimes, teams seeking a new attitude/style/whatever have changed their names. Sometimes they've stuck (the Washington Wizards so far). Other times they haven't (the Marquette Gold).

This was inspired by the thread about logos not matching team names and the discussion therein about the Packers briefly being named the Blues.

Granted, teams often change their names when changing cities. Those don't count in this discussion. So how about some teams that have changed their names (staying in the same place), then gone back? A few:

Green Bay Packers-Blues-Packers

Washington Senators-Nationals-Senators

Philadelphia Phillies-Bluejays-Phillies

Cincinnati Reds-Redlegs-Reds

[Dilbert]

Actually Redlegs was the official team name for a while in the forties and fifties(I think?) They were called the Redlegs instead of Reds because of Communism stuff happening back then.

[OMMF]

Sometimes, teams seeking a new attitude/style/whatever have changed their names. Sometimes they've stuck (the Washington Wizards so far). Other times they haven't (the Marquette Gold).

This was inspired by the thread about logos not matching team names and the discussion therein about the Packers briefly being named the Blues.

Granted, teams often change their names when changing cities. Those don't count in this discussion. So how about some teams that have changed their names (staying in the same place), then gone back? A few:

Green Bay Packers-Blues-Packers

Washington Senators-Nationals-Senators

Philadelphia Phillies-Bluejays-Phillies

Cincinnati Reds-Redlegs-Reds

***

[ColeJ]

when the minnesota north stars announced they were moving to dallas, many publications (including an old encyclopedia i have laying around somewhere) called the team the Dallas Lone Stars.... however, bob gainey, coach and GM at the time, said he hated that name, because it was an oxymoron.

how can something be both "lone" and plural (stars)?

so they dropped the lone, and the north stars became the dallas stars.

not sure if that counts, since they never played a game under the name "lone stars"

[CC97]

Boston Patriots -> Bay State Patriots -> New England Patriots

[ShaftDu]

when the minnesota north stars announced they were moving to dallas, many publications (including an old encyclopedia i have laying around somewhere) called the team the Dallas Lone Stars.... however, bob gainey, coach and GM at the time, said he hated that name, because it was an oxymoron.

how can something be both "lone" and plural (stars)?

so they dropped the lone, and the north stars became the dallas stars.

not sure if that counts, since they never played a game under the name "lone stars"

shame on him, i always wonder why they were not the Lone Stars. Who cares if it doesn't make any sense? Texas is the Lone Star state.

[no97]

What about the Chicago White Stockings? The Cubs started as the White Stockings in 1876, and were known as the Orphans when the White Sox came around in 1901 (The Cubs had abandoned the name in 1889). Does this type of pilfering of a team name count?

Moose

[Brian in Boston]

Boston Patriots -> Bay State Patriots -> New England Patriots

Exactly when was New England's AFL/NFL franchise known as the "Bay State Patriots"?

[TruColor]

when the minnesota north stars announced they were moving to dallas, many publications (including an old encyclopedia i have laying around somewhere) called the team the Dallas Lone Stars.... however, bob gainey, coach and GM at the time, said he hated that name, because it was an oxymoron.

how can something be both "lone" and plural (stars)?

so they dropped the lone, and the north stars became the dallas stars.

not sure if that counts, since they never played a game under the name "lone stars"

shame on him, i always wonder why they were not the Lone Stars. Who cares if it doesn't make any sense? Texas is the Lone Star state.

I always heard that one of the main reasons the Stars didn't become the Lone Stars was that Lone Star Beer threatened a lawsuit if they chose that name. Something about wanting to be the main beer sponsor or something like that.

[CC97]

Boston Patriots -> Bay State Patriots -> New England Patriots

Exactly when was New England's AFL/NFL franchise known as the "Bay State Patriots"?

For about a week in 1970

[Brian in Boston]

Ah, yes... I remember now. Billy Sullivan floated the Bay State Patriots moniker after he had finalized the deal to build Schaefer Stadium in Foxboro, Massachusetts. Then someone pointed out to him that the name could be shortened to BS Patriots and the rest, as they say, was history.

Still, I don't believe that the team ever officially adopted the Bay State Patriots name prior to Sullivan's revelation.

[VitaminD]

For starters, it looks like everyone is missing what I presume to be DrBear's point.

His question was to name teams that have changed from their original name to a new nickname, then reverted to their original name, whil have been in the same city all the while.

Of the examples provided, the Cincinnati Reds is a good one - they became the Reds in 1876, officially changed to the Red Legs on two occasions (1944-45, 1954-1960), and switched back to the name Reds. Never left Cincinnati, using a nickname they dumped and returned to.

Changing cities doesn't count by the parameters DrBear established.

The North Star/Lone Star/Star chain would also not count, unless the Dallas Stars changed to the Dallas North Stars. Dallas North Texas Stars, maybe. But that wouldn't count.

Personally, I am drawing a blank on this most excellent question. Instead, a question for DrBear before I try and think about this some more: does the change have to be officially made by the team to meet your criteria? If so, the Phillies/Blue Jays would be incorrect. When the Carpenter family first took over the team in 1942, a fan write-in contest was held to re-christen the team. Blue Jays won, but the nickname was never officially adopted, and was phased out by 1949. So sayeth phillies.mlb.com, in the decade-by-decade history.

[BallWonk]

Brooklyn tried becoming the Robins, briefly, but reverted to Dodgers. Neither name makes any sense in Los Angeles, although Batman and Dodger is intriguing.

Philadelphia's National League franchise tried switching to Blue Jays, but reverted quickly to Phillies. Ironically, now that Washington has a team again, its closest rival is the Phillies but its official interleague rival is the Blue Jays.

Washington's original American League franchise is an odd case. The franchise might or might not have been officially called the Senators upon its founding in 1901. Either way, folks in Washington called the team the Senators. Then in 1905 the team officially made its name the Nationals, which it kept until the late 1950s, when the team finally pulled a FedEx and changed its name to Senators, which is what everyone had called it all along. Whether the switch to Senators was a reversion is unclear - informed sources differ in their opinions, and I've yet to see definitive evidence proving it one way or another - and the team stuck with the Nationals name for more than 50 years. So it probably doesn't really fit the idea of the thread.

[no97]

Got one:

Boston Red Caps 1876-'82

Boston Beaneaters 1883-1906

Boston Doves 1907-'11

Boston Braves 1912-'35

Boston Bees 1936-'40

Boston Braves 1941-'52

Milwaukee Braves 1953-'65

Atlanta Braves 1966-Present

Moose

[no97]

Brooklyn tried becoming the Robins, briefly, but reverted to Dodgers. Neither name makes any sense in Los Angeles, although Batman and Dodger is intriguing.

I'd hardly call 17 years "briefly." According to Baseball-Almanac.com, the Dodgers chronology:

Brooklyn Bridegrooms

1890 - 1898

Brooklyn Superbas

1899 - 1910

Brooklyn Dodgers

1911 - 1913

Brooklyn Robins

1914 - 1931

Brooklyn Dodgers

1932 - 1957

Los Angeles Dodgers

1958 - present

Moose

[BBTV]

Brooklyn tried becoming the Robins, briefly, but reverted to Dodgers. Neither name makes any sense in Los Angeles, although Batman and Dodger is intriguing.

Philadelphia's National League franchise tried switching to Blue Jays, but reverted quickly to Phillies. Ironically, now that Washington has a team again, its closest rival is the Phillies but its official interleague rival is the Blue Jays.

Washington's original American League franchise is an odd case. The franchise might or might not have been officially called the Senators upon its founding in 1901. Either way, folks in Washington called the team the Senators. Then in 1905 the team officially made its name the Nationals, which it kept until the late 1950s, when the team finally pulled a FedEx and changed its name to Senators, which is what everyone had called it all along. Whether the switch to Senators was a reversion is unclear - informed sources differ in their opinions, and I've yet to see definitive evidence proving it one way or another - and the team stuck with the Nationals name for more than 50 years. So it probably doesn't really fit the idea of the thread.

Like VD said, the Phillies never officially changed to Blue Jays. Their colors changed, I think they even wore a blue jays patch, but never actually changed their name. They market themselves as the oldest one-city one-name team in US pro sports.

[CC97]

Like VD said, the Phillies never officially changed to Blue Jays. Their colors changed, I think they even wore a blue jays patch, but never actually changed their name. They market themselves as the oldest one-city one-name team in US pro sports.

MLB recognises this name change in their official encyclopedias... they switched back to Phillies because nobody called them the Blue Jays, just like the original Washington Nationals.

[BBTV]

Like VD said, the Phillies never officially changed to Blue Jays. Their colors changed, I think they even wore a blue jays patch, but never actually changed their name. They market themselves as the oldest one-city one-name team in US pro sports.

MLB recognises this name change in their official encyclopedias... they switched back to Phillies because nobody called them the Blue Jays, just like the original Washington Nationals.

No one could have realized it at the time, but when the Phillies were formed in 1883, history was in the making. Now, as the 21st century begins, the Phillies are the oldest, continuous, one-name, one-city franchise in all of professional sports

I don't doubt that it recognizes the name change, but that would make their statement totally false. The Phillies organization sucks, but I don't think they'd be dumb enough to put something like that out there without even researching their own historical facts.

Although if Ed Wade was in charge of the website I wouldn't trust a word on it.

[VitaminD]

MLB recognises this name change in their official encyclopedias... they switched back to Phillies because nobody called them the Blue Jays, just like the original Washington Nationals.

CC, that was more or less the question I was pressing DrBear for. While it is widely known that the Phillies were trying to ditch their name, and it is documented in plenty of official history texts, the team never officially adopted the change. That subtle factoid is enough to support what BBTV says, and what the Phils say.

Similarly, the Phillies have been called "Fightin' Phils", "Whiz Kids" ['50], "Wheeze Kids" ['83], and [every other frickin' year except '80 and '93... ]. Fans and even the media refer to teams by any number of names. But if the team doesn't accept the change as official, does it count as valid in DrBear's question?

[Jungle Jim]

Of the examples provided, the Cincinnati Reds is a good one - they became the Reds in 1876, officially changed to the Red Legs on two occasions (1944-45, 1954-1960), and switched back to the name Reds. Never left Cincinnati, using a nickname they dumped and returned to.

Actually, the franchise was originally called the Red Stockings, including 1876.