Oklahoma City .....

[Cibivxx]

Another interesting thing is how the Rockets nickname stayed (and became even more) appropriate eventually when they moved to Houston from San Diego.

An odd one is the Sacramento Kings. They started out having the City and Team Name match (Rochester Royals). Then moved to Cincinnati (Royals) and kept the name which would be fine if they left it at that. But then when they moved to Kansas City, they changed it to Kings to match again.

So I guess the moral of the story is, if the Kings do end up moving to Las Vegas, they will change their name to something starting with L.

[jhans203]

Another interesting thing is how the Rockets nickname stayed (and became even more) appropriate eventually when they moved to Houston from San Diego.

An odd one is the Sacramento Kings. They started out having the City and Team Name match (Rochester Royals). Then moved to Cincinnati (Royals) and kept the name which would be fine if they left it at that. But then when they moved to Kansas City, they changed it to Kings to match again.

So I guess the moral of the story is, if the Kings do end up moving to Las Vegas, they will change their name to something starting with L.

I don't get your logic? I think you are reaching a bit too much. But, to each their own.

[kc51design]

Another interesting thing is how the Rockets nickname stayed (and became even more) appropriate eventually when they moved to Houston from San Diego.

An odd one is the Sacramento Kings. They started out having the City and Team Name match (Rochester Royals). Then moved to Cincinnati (Royals) and kept the name which would be fine if they left it at that. But then when they moved to Kansas City, they changed it to Kings to match again.

So I guess the moral of the story is, if the Kings do end up moving to Las Vegas, they will change their name to something starting with L.

Las Vegas Loyals (for people that can't pronounce R)

[Cibivxx]

Another interesting thing is how the Rockets nickname stayed (and became even more) appropriate eventually when they moved to Houston from San Diego.

An odd one is the Sacramento Kings. They started out having the City and Team Name match (Rochester Royals). Then moved to Cincinnati (Royals) and kept the name which would be fine if they left it at that. But then when they moved to Kansas City, they changed it to Kings to match again.

So I guess the moral of the story is, if the Kings do end up moving to Las Vegas, they will change their name to something starting with L.

I don't get your logic? I think you are reaching a bit too much. But, to each their own.

Well yes because i was so obviously being 100% serious.

[Discogod]

The Kings changed from "Royals" when they moved to Kansas City in '72 because of the MLB Kansas City Royals. They went with "Kings" both because of the illiteration and to keep the royalty theme.

[isleguy78]

I just thought of an interesting hypothetical situation that might make some people re-think their opinion on a teams legacy. Now granted this may be a little over the top and will probably never happen, but give it a thought anyway. Twenty years from now George Steinbrenner is long since passed away and Hank and Hal are tired of the sports business, since they never really seemed to want it anyway. They are approached by a group of investors from Tampa who offer 3 Billion dollars for the Yankees and the right to do whatever they want with the team. For this example to work you need to assume that in twenty years that the rays are no longer playing in tampa, where they are is not important they just aren't in Tampa. So now the question is when $3 Billion is spent to buy the NY Yankees and they are moved to Tampa does the history, the championships, the brand, and all of that come with it or did the investors pay $3 Billion for an expansion team. I believe the history in this case would travel since it is the Yankees, however for the other cases it would have to be examined on a case by case basis. People in OKC are not going to the games to see the Seattle Sonics or the team that used to be the Sonics. They will be going to see their new Nba team. That is the bottom line how the new city feels about it and how rich the history of the team was before the sale and move. How much does the legacy and history factor in to the price paid to buy the team? This is a case by case issue folks.

[BlueSky]

I just thought of an interesting hypothetical situation that might make some people re-think their opinion on a teams legacy. Now granted this may be a little over the top and will probably never happen, but give it a thought anyway. Twenty years from now George Steinbrenner is long since passed away and Hank and Hal are tired of the sports business, since they never really seemed to want it anyway. They are approached by a group of investors from Tampa who offer 3 Billion dollars for the Yankees and the right to do whatever they want with the team. For this example to work you need to assume that in twenty years that the rays are no longer playing in tampa, where they are is not important they just aren't in Tampa. So now the question is when $3 Billion is spent to buy the NY Yankees and they are moved to Tampa does the history, the championships, the brand, and all of that come with it or did the investors pay $3 Billion for an expansion team. I believe the history in this case would travel since it is the Yankees, however for the other cases it would have to be examined on a case by case basis. People in OKC are not going to the games to see the Seattle Sonics or the team that used to be the Sonics. They will be going to see their new Nba team. That is the bottom line how the new city feels about it and how rich the history of the team was before the sale and move. How much does the legacy and history factor in to the price paid to buy the team? This is a case by case issue folks.

Why would they pay $3 billion for the Yankees just to move the team? The only way someone would by the Yankees is to own the New York Yankees. Just wouldn't be the same team in Tampa no matter what. And no offense, Tampa...but you get my drift.

In this scenario they'd just buy another franchise for far less and move it to Tampa or wherever. I know I'm older than a lot of people here but to me it matters. Arizona Cardinals? No, St. Louis. St. Louis Rams? Nope, L.A. - though to be fair, if I was even older I guess I'd be saying, L.A., no - it's the Cleveland Rams and the Chicago Cardinals. And so on. Come to think of it, when the Browns moved, it was the 2nd time Cleveland fans got shafted.

A team and its city go together and always should. If anything, this scenario boosts the argument for the legacy/nickname/logos to always stay in the original city.

[eRay]

Another interesting thing is how the Rockets nickname stayed (and became even more) appropriate eventually when they moved to Houston from San Diego.

An odd one is the Sacramento Kings. They started out having the City and Team Name match (Rochester Royals). Then moved to Cincinnati (Royals) and kept the name which would be fine if they left it at that. But then when they moved to Kansas City, they changed it to Kings to match again.

So I guess the moral of the story is, if the Kings do end up moving to Las Vegas, they will change their name to something starting with L.

So the Las Vegas Lions? That way they can stick with their royalty imagery and theme. Perfect. Now we won't have to deal with that issue when they move, we can all just refer back to my post right here. Las Vegas Lions.

[Arts11]

I just thought of an interesting hypothetical situation that might make some people re-think their opinion on a teams legacy. Now granted this may be a little over the top and will probably never happen, but give it a thought anyway. Twenty years from now George Steinbrenner is long since passed away and Hank and Hal are tired of the sports business, since they never really seemed to want it anyway. They are approached by a group of investors from Tampa who offer 3 Billion dollars for the Yankees and the right to do whatever they want with the team. For this example to work you need to assume that in twenty years that the rays are no longer playing in tampa, where they are is not important they just aren't in Tampa. So now the question is when $3 Billion is spent to buy the NY Yankees and they are moved to Tampa does the history, the championships, the brand, and all of that come with it or did the investors pay $3 Billion for an expansion team. I believe the history in this case would travel since it is the Yankees, however for the other cases it would have to be examined on a case by case basis. People in OKC are not going to the games to see the Seattle Sonics or the team that used to be the Sonics. They will be going to see their new Nba team. That is the bottom line how the new city feels about it and how rich the history of the team was before the sale and move. How much does the legacy and history factor in to the price paid to buy the team? This is a case by case issue folks.

No. Just no. Hypothetical scenario be damned, that would never happen. In the present time, there are a few teams in each league that are simply immovable in terms of city and legacy. They are too irrevocable linked to each other, based on "culture" or longevity, that changing cities/regions (I'm not counting "minor" location name shifts like the Anaheim Angels to LA thing) would effectively kill the franchise. In the old days, it probably wasn't as much of a problem since the teams weren't as ingrained as they are currently (not to say local fans weren't in a fervor or anything), but now you just can't. That's why, at the very least, it's good to hear OKC left the name and colors back in Seattle; those will never truly be theirs. However, I'm still leery about this "history-sharing" thing they have. Personally, I see no reason to claim it b/c it has absolutely nothing to do with OKC. I mean, what's the point in having a replica trophy and banners?

[hawk36]

I think Bennet would have a better argument to the history, trophy, etc. if he had at least owned the team when they won the Championship. In effect, it would be his trophy that he and his teams earned and he could take it with him.

But, to move the team, and think that you also have the right to it's past glory which you had absolutely nothing to do with, is wrong. You can't have it both ways. You're either Seattle or your not.

[TwinsTerritory]

And the winner is....

Oklahoma City Thunder.

The registrar for all of the NBA's Internet domain names reserved okcthunderbasketball.com and okcthunderbasketball.net on July 10, according to information gleaned from whois.net.

CSC Corporate Domains describes itself as a domain name management company for corporations, law firms and intellectual property professionals. It is the registrar of record for nba.com and all other domains managed by NBA Media Ventures, LLC.

We'll find out for sure eventually....

[FiddySicks]

I just thought of an interesting hypothetical situation that might make some people re-think their opinion on a teams legacy. Now granted this may be a little over the top and will probably never happen, but give it a thought anyway. Twenty years from now George Steinbrenner is long since passed away and Hank and Hal are tired of the sports business, since they never really seemed to want it anyway. They are approached by a group of investors from Tampa who offer 3 Billion dollars for the Yankees and the right to do whatever they want with the team. For this example to work you need to assume that in twenty years that the rays are no longer playing in tampa, where they are is not important they just aren't in Tampa. So now the question is when $3 Billion is spent to buy the NY Yankees and they are moved to Tampa does the history, the championships, the brand, and all of that come with it or did the investors pay $3 Billion for an expansion team. I believe the history in this case would travel since it is the Yankees, however for the other cases it would have to be examined on a case by case basis. People in OKC are not going to the games to see the Seattle Sonics or the team that used to be the Sonics. They will be going to see their new Nba team. That is the bottom line how the new city feels about it and how rich the history of the team was before the sale and move. How much does the legacy and history factor in to the price paid to buy the team? This is a case by case issue folks.

No. Just no. Hypothetical scenario be damned, that would never happen. In the present time, there are a few teams in each league that are simply immovable in terms of city and legacy. They are too irrevocable linked to each other, based on "culture" or longevity, that changing cities/regions (I'm not counting "minor" location name shifts like the Anaheim Angels to LA thing) would effectively kill the franchise. In the old days, it probably wasn't as much of a problem since the teams weren't as ingrained as they are currently (not to say local fans weren't in a fervor or anything), but now you just can't. That's why, at the very least, it's good to hear OKC left the name and colors back in Seattle; those will never truly be theirs. However, I'm still leery about this "history-sharing" thing they have. Personally, I see no reason to claim it b/c it has absolutely nothing to do with OKC. I mean, what's the point in having a replica trophy and banners?

Seriously now, take your New York biases and put them aside for just one short second. Saying "No, just no, it'll never happen" is a waste of key clicks. (Almost) Sad truth of the matter is money speaks FAR louder than an legacy ever could, yes even the New York's cute little baseball dynasty. If enough money is thrown down on the table you could buy the Yankees and move them to Idaho if you really wanted, yet still keep that sense of legacy. The point of what I'm trying to say is that historically far more powerful "Dynasties" have been bought off and have been essentially torn to pieces for less, yet their legacy still remains. While I agree that this isn't a likely event, in all intents and purposes its possible. Just look at the San Francisco Giants and Los Angeles Dodgers for example. Sure they've both made their history out west, but before that they had an enormous impact in New York, and the history of past success remains fairly intact, regardless of location. So really, yes the Yanks are historically the best team to play the game and come from New York, but you're sadly mistaken if you think the Yankees are an immovable object.

[J23P]

i agree with that. $ persuades.

[rams80]

I think Bennet would have a better argument to the history, trophy, etc. if he had at least owned the team when they won the Championship. In effect, it would be his trophy that he and his teams earned and he could take it with him.

But, to move the team, and think that you also have the right to it's past glory which you had absolutely nothing to do with, is wrong. You can't have it both ways. You're either Seattle or your not.

Unlees you can actively recollect the late 1970s...neither do you (under that logic).

I still wonder, why would you want to put the team's name and legacy on ice for possibly decades on the off chance another team shows up? Wouldn't it be preferable to see the team be allowed to add to its already glorious history as opposed to starting from scratch?

[habsfan1]

And the winner is....

Oklahoma City Thunder.

The registrar for all of the NBA's Internet domain names reserved okcthunderbasketball.com and okcthunderbasketball.net on July 10, according to information gleaned from whois.net.

CSC Corporate Domains describes itself as a domain name management company for corporations, law firms and intellectual property professionals. It is the registrar of record for nba.com and all other domains managed by NBA Media Ventures, LLC.

We'll find out for sure eventually....

You sure that's gonna be their name? Those sites are nothing.

[AAO]

A) an nba team's website will never end with .net.

TESS is what matters . If it is on TESS, it's believable.

The reason OKC Sonics is on TESS is that it is more than likely the only certain way they can preserve the name Sonics should another NBA team arise in Seattle.

[TwinsTerritory]

No, it's not official, but it's being reported by some people on OKC. I guess we'll see. I think the .net is simply so others can't come in and take the URL. For example, they own the URL www.minnesotatimberwolves.net they just have it so it doesn't go anywhere.

[TwinsTerritory]

It looks like it will be Thunder. People have comfirmed it. It's not official, but take it for what it is:

A source close to the NBA ownership group tells SportsXtra's Mark Rodgers the city's franchise, formerly known as the Seattle Supersonics, will be called the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Calls to team officials were unreturned Friday afternoon and evening. However, KOCO.com confirmed that the registrar for all of the NBA's Internet domain names reserved okcthunderbasketball.com and okcthunderbasketball.net on July 10.

CSC Corporate Domains, an offshoot of Corporation Service Company, describes itself as a domain name management company for corporations, law firms and intellectual property professionals. It is the registrar of record for nba.com and all other domains managed by NBA Media Ventures, LLC.

[mfoster]

Watch this be a diversion just to get all the potential trademark/cyber squatters to relax thinking the name has been decided.

I remember finding the Houston Toros registered in TESS, only to see the name become the Texans.

[AAO]

Interesting article:

OKC Branding