Sign in to follow this  
Brian in Boston

MLS Seattle To Choose Name Via On-Line Voting

Recommended Posts

MLS Seattle has officially announced that soccer fans are invited to vote for the name of the team in on-line voting that will take place between 12:01 AM on Thursday, March 27th and 11:59 PM on Monday, March 31st.

The three naming options - which, based upon recent applications to the United States Patent & Trademark Office, are thought to be Seattle FC, Seattle Alliance and Seattle Republic - will be officially unveiled on Tuesday, March 25th. They were chosen through fan groups, internal committees and fan suggestions.

"The names which will be announced next Tuesday include one traditional soccer name, while the other two are representative of the inclusive relationship we want to build with our fans with an emphasis on democracy in sports," said Vulcan Sports & Entertainment President Tod Leiweke. "The final vote rests with our fans."

Notably absent is Seattle Sounders, a name synonymous with professional soccer in Seattle for 24 seasons. MLS Commissioner Don Garber commented, "I have great respect for the Sounders and the club's history. While we should celebrate the past, we believe the MLS Seattle team should be about where we are headed tomorrow and help position the club globally."

The team's general manager - Adrian Hanauer - said, "We are confident one of the three choices will resonate with our fans throughout the Northwest. We spent a great deal of time analyzing and debating possible names. Now it is up to the fans."

http://www.mlsinseattle.com/article.aspx?id=1092

In my honest opinion, both league and team officials "screwed the pooch" on this one. When MLS in Seattle originally asked fans to submit team name ideas via the club's website, Seattle Sounders outstripped any other candidate.

Further, Commissioner Garber's suggestion that adopting the Seattle Sounders brand for the region's new MLS franchise precludes the team focusing on where it is "headed tomorrow" or being able to "position the club globally" is without merit. As long as the team's leadership is committed to building a successful franchise on and off the pitch, success in both areas will follow. There's absolutely no reason to believe that maintaining the historic Seattle Sounders brand would adversely impact the franchise's ability to build such an organization.

As for Mr. Leiweke's comments, it doesn't strike me that ignoring the wishes of the significant block of fans who supported the Sounders brand represents the ideal of "the inclusive relationship" the club supposedly wants to build with the fan-base. Given the overwhelming support it garnered in the initial call for team names, one would think that Sounders had earned a place in the final voting. As for one of the club's name choices - we can assume, Republic - putting "an emphasis on democracy in sports", someone ought to remind Mr. Leiweke that a true democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in all of the people. By contrast, a republic is government by elected representatives. No one "elected" the ownership of MLS Seattle, yet said ownership unilaterally chose to eliminate the team name choice supported by a majority of "all the people" who took part in the team's earlier name-the-team suggestion drive.

Finally, I think that Adrian Hanauer is kidding himself when he so confidently predicts that one of these three uninspired choices will "resonate with our fans throughout the Northwest".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm partial to Seattle Alliance. If I were to rank the 3, I'd go:

- Alliance

- Republic

- FC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit disappointed "Seattle Cattle" isn't an option.

I do like "Alliance" as an option though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle Alliance doesn't make any sense. Who is the team allying with? Portland? Tacoma? Vancouver? If this were a "Tri-Cities"-type deal, that name would make sense. Or if George Lucas were backing the team.

I think all three are pretty bad, but I'd like to vote for Seattle Republic. It sounds so Stalinist, and I'm sure there are several people that would consider that name to be very appropriate for this town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a wasted golden opportunity to emphasize the historical and current USL 1st Division Soccer Club, the Seattle Sounders! FC is too generic, Alliance and Republic are more of the lines of some localized bureaucracy. And I thought MLS was trying to be unique!!!

By the way, I don't hear anyone b****ing about the San Jose Earthquakes being rejuvenated once again! (ie, from the NASL days).

Sheesh MLS, where's the creativity? :cursing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seattle Alliance doesn't make any sense. Who is the team allying with? Portland? Tacoma? Vancouver? If this were a "Tri-Cities"-type deal, that name would make sense. Or if George Lucas were backing the team.

I think all three are pretty bad, but I'd like to vote for Seattle Republic. It sounds so Stalinist, and I'm sure there are several people that would consider that name to be very appropriate for this town.

I think "alliance" would pertain more to the alliance of players on the team, rather than the city's alliance with another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alliance or Republic are beeter choices than FC. I'd be fine with either of those two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the write-in option?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's the write-in option?

No chance of that happening. The investor/operators of the franchise are scared witless that Seattle Sounders would come-out on top in the voting and then they wouldn't get their faux "traditional" soccer identity. You know, as opposed to the actual tradition and history that are tied-up in a team name that has graced professional soccer in Seattle for 24 seasons.

So many supporters of soccer in the United States - MLS officials and team owners included - piss and moan about the sport's lack of tradition here, yet when given the opportunity to embrace the aspects of the sport in America that actually speak to the history of "the beautiful game" in this country, they turn their back on them. It's pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's Seattle FC, all is not lost for the team being known as the Sounders. Yes, it would have to be un-official at first, but then have to work it's way into the fiber of MLS Seattle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's the write-in option?

No chance of that happening. The investor/operators of the franchise are scared witless that Seattle Sounders would come-out on top in the voting and then they wouldn't get their faux "traditional" soccer identity. You know, as opposed to the actual tradition and history that are tied-up in a team name that has graced professional soccer in Seattle for 24 seasons.

So many supporters of soccer in the United States - MLS officials and team owners included - piss and moan about the sport's lack of tradition here, yet when given the opportunity to embrace the aspects of the sport in America that actually speak to the history of "the beautiful game" in this country, they turn their back on them. It's pathetic.

MLS continues to be a joke. A bad joke. Every time I think they're starting to head in the right direction, they blow it. Pathetic.

At least the owner of the Portland Beavers kept the traditional name as an entry in his "rename the team" voting, and agreed not to rebrand when the 100+ year-old name won handily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it's Seattle FC, all is not lost for the team being known as the Sounders. Yes, it would have to be un-official at first, but then have to work it's way into the fiber of MLS Seattle.

I agree totally, there's no reason they can't be known as the Sounders the same way Man Utd are the Red Devils. I'll call them the Sounders from now on if it helps!

I don't mind "FC" at all, and it would be my choice, but my god, the other options are embarrasing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about they call them the Seattle Denny's after a local landmark. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it's Seattle FC, all is not lost for the team being known as the Sounders. Yes, it would have to be un-official at first, but then have to work it's way into the fiber of MLS Seattle.

I agree totally, there's no reason they can't be known as the Sounders the same way Man Utd are the Red Devils. I'll call them the Sounders from now on if it helps!

I don't mind "FC" at all, and it would be my choice, but my god, the other options are embarrasing.

Make that 2 in agreement with realmo. Toronto FC was to be named Toronto Inter FC before there was an outcry from non-Inter Milan fans in the Toronto are (which there are alot) and so they threw out the Inter and kept the FC. There have been 'nicknames' floating around like 'Reds', 'Redcoats', 'T-Men'...etc. None have taken hold but it may take time. I believe Seattle FC will win in the voting and the fans will insert 'Sounders' where they can. It's a win/win situation for all. The club will not have the 'Sounders' name/history attached to it, the fans will vote on the name, and if FC wins out then the fans will make sure 'Sounders' is put into play.

Brilliant marketing on SeattleMLS part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

Brilliant marketing on SeattleMLS part.

No....Boneheaded marketing on their part. Brilliant marketing would have involved them adopting the Seattle Sounders identity without the fans needing to do the legwork to make it an "unofficial" nickname. They have done everything within their power to ensure the Sounders identity will not be used, and have repeatedly mishandled the entire "name the team" process to comical levels. (Anybody remember "Emerald City FC"?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Naming the team the Sounders would have given the MLS a legitimate team name with American soccer roots. I don't mind the Euro-type names currently in the league , but an opportunity was really missed here..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What a wasted golden opportunity to emphasize the historical and current USL 1st Division Soccer Club, the Seattle Sounders! FC is too generic, Alliance and Republic are more of the lines of some localized bureaucracy. And I thought MLS was trying to be unique!!!

By the way, I don't hear anyone b****ing about the San Jose Earthquakes being rejuvenated once again! (ie, from the NASL days).

Sheesh MLS, where's the creativity? :cursing:

I'd just like to point out my first post against the three b.s. "names"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They missed such an obvious option, EMERALD CITY. It has the euro flair (Manchester City, etc.) but is uniquely Seattle. Too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also very Wizard of Oz, and it's bad enough that we have one team in MLS that uses Wizard of Oz imagery.

Also, I thought everyone decided that fan votes for names were a terrible idea after the Houston 1836 fiasco?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this