Bernd Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hartford isn't right on the ocean, but it's close enough to it that it the name isn't that much of a stretch. Los Angeles Clippers kinda works because a clipper's a boat and LA's on the ocean. L.A.'s not on the water at all. It's a landlocked city except for half of the port complex (which it shares with Long Beach), which didn't come into existance until 1909.San Diego, on the other hand, has a natural deep water port that has been used as such since Juan Cabrillo sailed into San Diego Bay in 1542. Clipper ships were regular visitors to the bay in thy 19th century and the name "Clippers" speaks to the city's deep maritime history. In fact, a clipper ship is still moored in the harbor: the Star of India, which has been a highlight of the San Diego waterfront since 1926. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnapHook Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Not only do they need a name change, but a complete "Tampa-Bay-Bucs-style" overhaul...Los Angeles Freeways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 The Boston Braves were indeed named after Tammany Hall, the political machine in New York, which used the word "braves" for its people. The team got this name after they were bought in the early 1910s by a lawyer named James Gaffney, who had NYC-Tweed connections. Before "Braves", the team had mostly been known by the name "Beaneaters" or "Boston Nationals" since its inception in the 1880s.But, it is reasonable for someone to assume that the "Braves" name refers to the Boston Tea Party. Still, even if the Tea Party had really been the reason for the name "Braves", that name would pretty much work equally well in any city.The Boston area had yet another team whose name seemed to evoke the Boston Tea Party even more strongly than did that of the Braves -- the NASL New England Tea Men. But, like the Braves, this team had also been named for another reason entirely: the Tea Men were owned by the Lipton Tea Company.The Tea Men also left the Boston area; and, as the Braves had done, they kept their nickname. But, contrary to the Braves' situation, this team's name did not work too well in their new city, when they became known as the Jacksonville Tea Men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyandlux Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hartford isn't right on the ocean, but it's close enough to it that it the name isn't that much of a stretch. Los Angeles Clippers kinda works because a clipper's a boat and LA's on the ocean.The worst has got to be the Utah Jazz. Utah's a land of mountains, salt flats and Mormons. If there's one jazz musician in that entire state I'd be surprised. The Connecticut River had major ports on it for WHALING....one of which is HARTFORD!!!!Research = wikipedia.....use it sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyandlux Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hartford isn't right on the ocean, but it's close enough to it that it the name isn't that much of a stretch. Los Angeles Clippers kinda works because a clipper's a boat and LA's on the ocean. L.A.'s not on the water at all. It's a landlocked city except for half of the port complex (which it shares with Long Beach), which didn't come into existance until 1909.LA the city is a sprawling city....(RED below)Parts of LA are most deffinatlely on the water.Wikipedia baby, wikipedia.Long Beach is that bay to the bottom right of LA county and touches Orange where that zigzag is.LA touches water at least 4 different times!!!!!And I'm sure theres a thing called LA Harbor....here it isThe Port of Los Angeles is located on San Pedro Bay in the San Pedro neighborhood of Los Angeles, approximately 20 miles (30 km) south of downtown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernd Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 ^ I mean't that historically it wasn't a maritime city, irregardless of the fact that a few small beaches are part of the city limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyandlux Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Whats a PORT?Youre right not much history here....Phineas Banning greatly improved shipping when he dredged the channel to Wilmington in 1871 to a depth of 10 feet. The port handled 50,000 tons of shipping that year.Anyway....LA Clippers is F****ing here to stay!!!!! Nothing you say will make it go away.Utah Jazz is more serious of a problem, I'd say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your Name Here Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Actually, the Braves were one of the charter clubs of the National Association of Professional Base Ball Clubs - precursor to the National League - in 1871. They were popularly known as the Red Stockings, which is not a coincidence; they were almost directly descended from the Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869. Right on about James Gaffney. To quote the Globe, he was "a former political brave of Tammany Hall." This is what bugged me when the Brewers switched to the National League. Someone said that it was out of nostalgia for the Braves. And I think that's just bull roar. Their tenure in Milwaukee was a cup of coffee compared to Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Some names of teams that actually work well where the team has relocated to:MLBAtlanta Braves: Braves can be used pretty much anywhere.Oakland Athletics: Although the team was named for Philadelphia Athletic Clubs, Athletics can be used pretty much anywhere.NFLArizona Cardinals: Cardinals is generic enough that it can be used anywhere.San Diego Chargers: Also generic enough.NBAAtlanta Hawks: Also generic enough.Detroit Pistons: Probably the best kept name. Moved from Fort Wayne to the Motor City, where pistons are put into cars.Golden State Warriors: Formerly Philadelphia Warriors, probably fits better in California than in Philly.L.A. Clippers: Both L.A. and San Diego are on the Pacific Coast, so no big deal.Sacramento Kings: Although Kings fits better with Kansas City, the name is generic enough to work with Sacramento.NHLCalgary Flames: The name fit great for Atlanta, but then it fit Calgary especially well in 1988 when Calgary hosted the Winter Olympics. And being Calgary will always be an Olympic city, Flames works quite well.Dallas Stars: Yes, they should have been changed to the Lone Stars. But count your blessings -- if this had been an NBA team, they would be called the Dallas North Stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernd Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Whats a PORT?Youre right not much history here....Phineas Banning greatly improved shipping when he dredged the channel to Wilmington in 1871 to a depth of 10 feet. The port handled 50,000 tons of shipping that year.Anyway....LA Clippers is F****ing here to stay!!!!! Nothing you say will make it go away.Utah Jazz is more serious of a problem, I'd say! Ooh, 10 feet! Call the navy...they should move the fleet!!! As I said before, it wasn't until the '00s that the L.A. Port became a serious shipping facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 NHL - Calgary Flames - formally the Atlanta Flames, which refered to when Sherman and company torched Atlanta during his march south towards the end of the civil war (or "the war between the states" i'm told) They did solicit fan suggestions, and Flames was one of the top choices, the point of reference changed to gas/oil well flames. Gas or oil well flames? Thats not usually a good thing. Hmm, odd, kind of a negative thing to call a team if you ask me. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jewbanpimp Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Though it's their original nickname, New York Rangers seems a bit geographically out of place also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Lone Stars? LONE Stars? Lone StarSThat's an oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmm Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Though it's their original nickname, New York Rangers seems a bit geographically out of place also.The Rangers' first owner was nicknamed Tex, and the sportswriters called the team "Tex's Rangers."As for the Dallas Lone Stars, I liked that name, too. I don't see any problem with it being plural. If you're at a Halloween party and a group of guys are dressed as the Lone Ranger, then there are a bunch of Lone Rangers--plural--at the party. Since it's possible to have Lone Rangers, it's possible to have Lone Stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeaks4 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Arizona Cardinals (Chicago Cardinals, cardinals in Arizona?) Northern Arizona actually does have Cardinals...Just an FYI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Sacramento Kings: Although Kings fits better with Kansas City, the name is generic enough to work with Sacramento. Once again, the Kings franchise began in Rochester, NY as the Rochester Royals. I'm assuming that alliterative concerns changed the team's name to the "Kings" when the franchise moved to Kansas City, but I'm not positive. Therefore, the Sacramento team should probably be called the Sultans, the Shahs, or something equally stupid. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Sacramento Kings: Although Kings fits better with Kansas City, the name is generic enough to work with Sacramento. Once again, the Kings franchise began in Rochester, NY as the Rochester Royals. I'm assuming that alliterative concerns changed the team's name to the "Kings" when the franchise moved to Kansas City, but I'm not positive. Therefore, the Sacramento team should probably be called the Sultans, the Shahs, or something equally stupid. It might also have had something to do with the presence of a baseball team with the name "Royals" On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Sacramento Kings: Although Kings fits better with Kansas City, the name is generic enough to work with Sacramento. Once again, the Kings franchise began in Rochester, NY as the Rochester Royals. I'm assuming that alliterative concerns changed the team's name to the "Kings" when the franchise moved to Kansas City, but I'm not positive. Therefore, the Sacramento team should probably be called the Sultans, the Shahs, or something equally stupid. It might also have had something to do with the presence of a baseball team with the name "Royals" Ha ha...touche. Probably also had something to do with the multiple Cardinals of St. Louis. I guess the good people of Kansas City didn't want the entire state to be considered completely unoriginal. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youcan'tseeme Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Lone Stars? LONE Stars? Lone StarSThat's an oxymoron. true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Houston Rockets was the opposite of this as are the Detroit Pistons, wern't they the Ft. Wayne Pistons before going to Detroit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.