Jump to content

Oklahoma City .....


jhans203

Recommended Posts

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.

It wasn't really a diversion. If considering several names, you need to make sure a web domain is available for your final choice. Therefore, all of them need to be protected.

shysters_sm.jpg

"One of my concerns is shysters show up and take advantage of people's good will and generosity".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 685
  • Created
  • Last Reply
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.

Did you know that the Kings also played in Omaha for the first few years after moving from Cincinnati, therefore being known as the "Kansas City-Omaha Kings"?

YOZXkBG.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I actually like this hypothetical. It really does make you think...

As he mentioned: the Sonics moved to OKC, but truthfully, the fans just wanted a basketball team. Besides, the team is getting a new look name, colors, everything. However, the Sonics aren't so rich in history that it's like, "o my god we just landed the Sonics." It's more like "Wow, we just landed a pro team"

Then you look at the Dodgers. When Brooklyn lost their team to LA, LA fans thought wow, we're getting a team, but also, wow we're getting the Dodgers. They were a big name team, so there was that identity to it. The Sonics, tucked away in Seattle for 41 years, never became a big, big pro franchise, so for Oklahomans, its not wow, we just landed a 41 year old franchise, it's we just got our first pro team. Another thing worth noting is the fact that the Sonics were REBUILDING to begin with, so they were sort of starting over anyways. If you had, say a Gary Payton and Shawn Kemp coming from Seattle (in their prime) to Oklahoma City this move would be looked at differently.

That's why I think the Yankees moving to Tampa would be "wow, we've got the Yankees!" instead of just any team. Though the Yankees are so recognizable by Yankee Stadium, so it would be weird to imagine them play their home games elsewhere.

High Quality Entertainment for the masses.

DiamondbacksSig.pngsuperbowlxliii-1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go that far but I'd love there to be a rule that if a team moves, it is required to pick a new name, colors, brand, etc. In my mind, the city is as much a part of the name as the mascot. So, in my perfect world, you could not separate Charlotte from the Hornets or New Orleans from the Jazz or even the Lakers from Minneapolis or the Dodgers from Brooklyn.

If you want to move, fine, you can keep the players, but leave the brand, history, name behind. Only seems fair.

I completely agree with this statement.

If this were the case, we wouldn't have such rediculous names that we have now. What the hell does Utah have to do with jazz? While we're at it, what does L.A. have to do with lakes?

The culture of a sports franchise is entwined with the city it's located in.

As far as the name is concerned, I think that Barons or Landrunners are my favourite.

:)

p.s. I'm new here, just saying hello!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's now rumblings that the CHL's Wichita Thunder are going to raise a stink. However, looking at their filing in TESS, it applies only to professional ice hockey exhibitions. The don't have anything to stand on should they pursue it, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's now rumblings that the CHL's Wichita Thunder are going to raise a stink. However, looking at their filing in TESS, it applies only to professional ice hockey exhibitions. The don't have anything to stand on should they pursue it, correct?

If it prevents OKC from using Thunder, then God I hope so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Give them the unused Dragons nickname and artwork and be done with it. It's already in the can and the NBA doesn't have the 2-year lead time to tinker with any other name choices. Plus, the league has been dying to use the name since they pitched it to New Jersey as a name in 1994, then to Toronto in 1995, then to Charlotte in 2003.

Oklahoma City Dragons sounds perfectly acceptable, albeit generic to the city and the state. I could see the unused dragon shield logo selling well on merch.

NJFireDragons94ALT.GIF

oakqb4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The name 'Dragons' sounds entirely unprofessional, being the reason why the Nets, Raptors, and Bobcats turned it down.

Why the hell would a team in 2008, accept it, especially Oklahoma City of all locations.

'Dragons' is a name to turn to should all else fail. Which is a rare occurrence, that all else fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like its the Oklahoma City Thunder...

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/536...knamed_thunder/

I won't believe it until I see it.

Believe it. ESPNEWS had it all over their Bottom Line this morning.

Eventhough I liked 'Barons' better, I can live with with this nickname. It's too bad that OKC can't borrow the logo used by former NFL Europe team in Berlin with the same name. That logo was pretty sick, and in a way, the colors come close to matching the Oklahoma region if you ditch the green.

okc_thunder.gif

:rolleyes:

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like its the Oklahoma City Thunder...

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/536...knamed_thunder/

And somewhere in his dream world, Ball Wonk is having a major league temper tantrum.

MofnV2z.png

The CCSLC's resident Geelong Cats fan.

Viva La Vida or Death And All His Friends. Sounds like something from a Rocky & Bullwinkle story arc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan, despite the fact it means my hometown CBA team name has been promoted to the NBA.

Someone mentioned that the team had to make sure that all options have a web address, but does "okcthunderbasketball.com" really count? They couldn't get anything shorter? I'm surprised they didn't stuff nba in there just because. It reads like one of those options that comes up on Network Solutions when you can't get the name you really wanted. Maybe they typed in okcbarons.com and it said, "no but okcthunderbasketball.com is available -- and .net!" Can't believe they fell for that.

Oh well, I'm sure they'll just use nba.com/thunder for marketing purposes anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really a fan of Thunder, at least not at the expense of other, better names like Barons. I guess it could be worse, like the Rattlers or something. Whatever, it'll probably grow on me soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate when you have match ups of historic teams (Boston Celtics, Detroit Pistons, etc.) vs minor-league sounding teams like Oklahoma City Thunder. Barons (or almost anything ending with an s) would have been far better.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

korea's KBL has a team named the Thunders, never thought the NBA would chose a name like Thunder...anyways...here's their logo....let's hope OKC comes up with a better one than this. :)

04_img_01.jpg

avatareuz.png

My Korean baseball website [MyKBO.net]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like its the Oklahoma City Thunder...

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/536...knamed_thunder/

I won't believe it until I see it.

Believe it. ESPNEWS had it all over their Bottom Line this morning.

Eventhough I liked 'Barons' better, I can live with with this nickname. It's too bad that OKC can't borrow the logo used by former NFL Europe team in Berlin with the same name. That logo was pretty sick, and in a way, the colors come close to matching the Oklahoma region if you ditch the green.

okc_thunder.gif

:rolleyes:

Yeah I just saw it on the bottom line. Even though its on ESPNEWS its still not official. Do I believe it will be Thunder? Yes. But, until its announced its still not confirmed. Oklahoma City Thunder has a nice ring to it. I would have liked a more traditional nickname, but it will do. I am looking forward to the logo.

rbze43.jpg

23vhpba.jpg11r3n9f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legit question:

Has there ever been a relocated/expansion/changed name that you liked the moment you heard it?

Not even saying I like the name Thunder, but I'm sure we as NBA fans will get used to it soon enough, just like sports fans have gotten used to every other crappy name. I hated the name Wild for the longest time, but I actually kind of like it now. I'm sure OKC fans will feel the same way eventually.

You used to hold me

Tell me that I was the best

Anything in this world I want

I could posses

All that made me want

Was all that I can get

In order to survive

Gotta learn to live with regrets

-President Carter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legit question:

Has there ever been a relocated/expansion/changed name that you liked the moment you heard it?

Not even saying I like the name Thunder, but I'm sure we as NBA fans will get used to it soon enough, just like sports fans have gotten used to every other crappy name. I hated the name Wild for the longest time, but I actually kind of like it now. I'm sure OKC fans will feel the same way eventually.

I think the thing I don't like about the nickname is that it doesn't fit the OKC/Midwest theme. Something like Outlaws, Wranglers, or Cavalry would have fit OKC much better. But, yeah it will probably grow on me.

rbze43.jpg

23vhpba.jpg11r3n9f.jpg

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.