Jump to content

Jets-Giants


NoHoJoe

Should The JNew York Jets and New York Giants be required to be called the New JerseyGiants and New Jersey Jets in after the new stadium opens in 2009 ?  

39 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I think that the New York Jets should still be called "the New York Jets" and that the New York Giants should still be called "the New York Giants" because they both represent the New York City metropolitan area, which is of course the 5 boroughs of New York City, Westchester, Rockland County, Long Island, Northern New Jersey, and Southwestern Connecticut.

YOZXkBG.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My belief on sports naming is that a team should be named based on the media market in which they reside. For instance, Angel games are broadcast on Los Angeles television and radio stations, therefore the Los Angeles name is warranted. I'm assuming that East Rutherford receives New York signals, so in that case it's fine that the Jets and Giants call themselves "New York."

VmWIn6B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My belief on sports naming is that a team should be named based on the media market in which they reside.  For instance, Angel games are broadcast on Los Angeles television and radio stations, therefore the Los Angeles name is warranted.  I'm assuming that East Rutherford receives New York signals, so in that case it's fine that the Jets and Giants call themselves "New York."

East Rutherford does receive its media from New York City (6 miles), so you're correct there.

The only difference as far as I can tell between the Giants/Jets and the Angels is that nobody in North Jersey is pushing for a name change. No one minds being within the NYC sphere of influence, and being NYC's suburb. On the other hand, it seems that some people in Anaheim resent being in LA's shadow, and have taken steps to try and be seen as their own place - whereas people like Arte Moreno see aligning themselves within the LA market as strategically beneficial.

East Rutherford isn't as large as Anaheim in terms of population, and lacks the tourist destinations aside from the Meadowlands complex, whereas Anaheim has Disneyland and Knott's Berry Farm (IIRC). They've never sought to be anything more than what they are. If anyone's ever pushed, it's been the state of New Jersey, and it was never pursued as vigorously as what the city of Anaheim and the Angels just went through.

And while I think you have fairly good criteria for how a city should be named (along media market lines), that still leaves gray areas. For example, Atlantic City has 1 TV station of its own, and a few radio stations. The rest of their media comes through Philadelphia, 60 miles northwest. But AC's teams are named for their home city, even though some consider AC within Philadelphia's media market. Maybe it's because "Atlantic City" is recognizable enough on its own, which may be the exception to your rule.

"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

My belief on sports naming is that a team should be named based on the media market in which they reside.  For instance, Angel games are broadcast on Los Angeles television and radio stations, therefore the Los Angeles name is warranted.  I'm assuming that East Rutherford receives New York signals, so in that case it's fine that the Jets and Giants call themselves "New York."

East Rutherford does receive its media from New York City (6 miles), so you're correct there.

The only difference as far as I can tell between the Giants/Jets and the Angels is that nobody in North Jersey is pushing for a name change. No one minds being within the NYC sphere of influence, and being NYC's suburb. On the other hand, it seems that some people in Anaheim resent being in LA's shadow, and have taken steps to try and be seen as their own place - whereas people like Arte Moreno see aligning themselves within the LA market as strategically beneficial.

East Rutherford isn't as large as Anaheim in terms of population, and lacks the tourist destinations aside from the Meadowlands complex, whereas Anaheim has Disneyland and Knott's Berry Farm (IIRC). They've never sought to be anything more than what they are. If anyone's ever pushed, it's been the state of New Jersey, and it was never pursued as vigorously as what the city of Anaheim and the Angels just went through.

And while I think you have fairly good criteria for how a city should be named (along media market lines), that still leaves gray areas. For example, Atlantic City has 1 TV station of its own, and a few radio stations. The rest of their media comes through Philadelphia, 60 miles northwest. But AC's teams are named for their home city, even though some consider AC within Philadelphia's media market. Maybe it's because "Atlantic City" is recognizable enough on its own, which may be the exception to your rule.

Yea but AC's teams are minor league teams. Minor League teams are different.

Although, I think there is some wiggle room. Tkae the New Jersey Devils and Nets for example. They are well within New York's sphere of influence but are called New Jersey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea but AC's teams are minor league teams. Minor League teams are different.

Although, I think there is some wiggle room. Tkae the New Jersey Devils and Nets for example. They are well within New York's sphere of influence but are called New Jersey.

True about minor league teams. But I remember back in the mid-'80s when Donald Trump grabbed headlines for trying to move a couple MLB teams to AC (whether he was ever serious or not, we'll never know).

The Devils and Nets are easier to refer to by the "New Jersey" affiliation because NYC already had a team in the NHL and the NBA when New Jersey got its teams inthose leagues. Putting a team in NJ to court that fan base, but then calling it "New York" wouldn't be the wisest move from a marketing standpoint since New York already had teams and was drawing fans from the very population the NJ teams coveted. But since the New Jersey-based football teams represent the entire larger market of New York City, and there is no (expansion) New Jersey team, the "New York" affiliation is appropriate.

This would also hold true were AC to get a major-league team of its own. Even if AC is considered within Philadelphia's sphere of influence, Philadelphia already has a team in all 4 of the major leagues. And Atlantic City is recognizable enough that were they to get a team, the "Atlantic City" affiliation would be feasible.

"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

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.