Jump to content

Arizona/Phoenix Dbacks


cyandlux

Recommended Posts

When I was growing up I always thought that the tradition in baseball was that some AL

teams named their team after the state and NL always after the city. So heres a concept

that pobably has been done before:

Phoenix-D-backs.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not bad. I'd like to see a little more style in the P though. Maybe not as much as the D-Backs' original A, but something that would set it apart and not have it look like a common font that everyone might have on their computer (don't take that the wrong way, I just couldn't think of a better way to put it). Maybe if the P didn't quite close in the middle or something. It's a good start, for sure.

BTW, does the stitching alternate green and purple like that in the D-Backs' actual snakehead logo, or is that something you added in? Just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Florida was changing on its own, and they're just waiting to see about getting themselves a stadium. They have the BP logo with the fish around the "M", which I guess stands for Marlins. Uh... yeah - and the Phillies, Pirates and Cubs' cap logos stand for the team name as well. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. ^_^

"Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."

2007nleastchamps.png

In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it, but I also like the Diamondbacks' A.

I don't think this is an AL-NL thing about being named after the state rather than the city. I think, and I may be wrong, that it's basically up to whoever owns the team.

I am, though, against naming a team for the state when there is another major league team in that same state. Thus, I have serious problems with the Marlins being called Florida. Likewise, I had problems with the Angels being called California.

On the other hand, sometimes the state is better. Look at the Minnesota teams, for example. Can you imagine the ire in St. Paul if they were called the Minneapolis Twins, the Minneapolis Vikings or the Minneapolis Timberwolves? Or the ire in Minneapolis if they were the St. Paul Wild?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but it sounds wrong saying the Arlington Rangers. And don't say it's Dallas' team, because we built the stadium.

It should be Arlington Cowboys instead.

But then they'd have been the "Irving Cowboys" all these years...

"Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."

2007nleastchamps.png

In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it, but I also like the Diamondbacks' A.

I don't think this is an AL-NL thing about being named after the state rather than the city. I think, and I may be wrong, that it's basically up to whoever owns the team.

I am, though, against naming a team for the state when there is another major league team in that same state. Thus, I have serious problems with the Marlins being called Florida. Likewise, I had problems with the Angels being called California.

On the other hand, sometimes the state is better. Look at the Minnesota teams, for example. Can you imagine the ire in St. Paul if they were called the Minneapolis Twins, the Minneapolis Vikings or the Minneapolis Timberwolves? Or the ire in Minneapolis if they were the St. Paul Wild?

by that logic, we would have the Dallas/Ft.Worth/Arlington Rangers. Ouch, and you thought the Angels have problems.

I don't mind an team is named after state. Heck in the NFL, the Panthers are named for two states. And don't ge me started with the Patriots. They are named after an region. And you know it wouldn't sound right if they were called the Boston Patriots.

and I just thought of something while reading this. They don't call the Skins or Nationals, The Washington DC Redskins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind an team is named after state.  Heck in the NFL, the Panthers are named for two states.  And don't get me started with the Patriots.  They are named after an region.  And you know it wouldn't sound right if they were called the Boston Patriots.

It sounded right for 11 seasons . They became the New England Patriots in 1971, when they stopped playing games in Boston/Cambridge and moved to Foxboro, which is actually closer to Rhode Island than it is to Boston.

This sort of thing is done for marketing. By being New England's team, they can draw fans from 6 states. Same with the Panthers - Charlotte sits on the NC/SC border, and by using the name "Carolina" without distinction to either state, they embrace the other half of metro Charlotte that doesn't live in North Carolina. The Panthers are the team for the entire region of the Carolinas.

Why it was done by teams like the Marlins and Angels (among others) is strange, since there were already teams in those states when the teams were created, as winghaz already said.

"Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."

2007nleastchamps.png

In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it, but I also like the Diamondbacks' A.

I don't think this is an AL-NL thing about being named after the state rather than the city. I think, and I may be wrong, that it's basically up to whoever owns the team.

I am, though, against naming a team for the state when there is another major league team in that same state. Thus, I have serious problems with the Marlins being called Florida. Likewise, I had problems with the Angels being called California.

On the other hand, sometimes the state is better. Look at the Minnesota teams, for example. Can you imagine the ire in St. Paul if they were called the Minneapolis Twins, the Minneapolis Vikings or the Minneapolis Timberwolves? Or the ire in Minneapolis if they were the St. Paul Wild?

by that logic, we would have the Dallas/Ft.Worth/Arlington Rangers. Ouch, and you thought the Angels have problems.

I don't mind an team is named after state. Heck in the NFL, the Panthers are named for two states. And don't ge me started with the Patriots. They are named after an region. And you know it wouldn't sound right if they were called the Boston Patriots.

and I just thought of something while reading this. They don't call the Skins or Nationals, The Washington DC Redskins.

I tend to like cities over states (and I am a Minnesota fan).

But I am getting used to states. New Jersey pretty much has to use the state. I know that when the Twins and Vikes were coming up the "Minnesota" was chosen so as not to alienate St. Paul (the teams were playing in the suburbs, but if they chose a city name it would have to be Minneapolis). So I can live with it.

The one that really bothers me is Golden State.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it, but I also like the Diamondbacks' A.

I don't think this is an AL-NL thing about being named after the state rather than the city. I think, and I may be wrong, that it's basically up to whoever owns the team.

I am, though, against naming a team for the state when there is another major league team in that same state. Thus, I have serious problems with the Marlins being called Florida. Likewise, I had problems with the Angels being called California.

On the other hand, sometimes the state is better. Look at the Minnesota teams, for example. Can you imagine the ire in St. Paul if they were called the Minneapolis Twins, the Minneapolis Vikings or the Minneapolis Timberwolves? Or the ire in Minneapolis if they were the St. Paul Wild?

by that logic, we would have the Dallas/Ft.Worth/Arlington Rangers. Ouch, and you thought the Angels have problems.

I don't mind an team is named after state. Heck in the NFL, the Panthers are named for two states. And don't ge me started with the Patriots. They are named after an region. And you know it wouldn't sound right if they were called the Boston Patriots.

and I just thought of something while reading this. They don't call the Skins or Nationals, The Washington DC Redskins.

I tend to like cities over states (and I am a Minnesota fan).

But I am getting used to states. New Jersey pretty much has to use the state. I know that when the Twins and Vikes were coming up the "Minnesota" was chosen so as not to alienate St. Paul (the teams were playing in the suburbs, but if they chose a city name it would have to be Minneapolis). So I can live with it.

The one that really bothers me is Golden State.

Golden State is the coolest name. Besides, who wants to be readily identified with Oakland? That place is a dump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.