MLB 2009

[dahatman]

Anaheim drops lawsuit trying to restore team name to "Anaheim Angels":

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/11259485

So, does this mean that they can finally be called the "Los Angeles Angels" and reintroduce the LA style hat they worn in the early 60's?

[JamieRose]

Anaheim drops lawsuit trying to restore team name to "Anaheim Angels":

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/11259485

So, does this mean that they can finally be called the "Los Angeles Angels" and reintroduce the LA style hat they worn in the early 60's?

We could only be so lucky.

[Gothamite]

As much as I'd like to see Moreno get to use his preferred "Los Angeles Angels," he's stuck with the compromise name for now. That's what was upheld in the decision.

Soon, maybe. But it can't come soon enough.

[sacker12]

I apologize if this has already been posted, but it looks like the Twins will be wearing a throwback alternate at home next season. Here it is from the website from a store near the 3-H Dome.

[The_Admiral]

We've talked about it, but I don't think we've seen it yet. Cool.

I wish the Twins would clean up that old style of script so it's not as flawed. The script they have now doesn't do it for me. It's too slick, yet they use those tacky nameplates which are the opposite of slick. Oh Twins.

A change to "Los Angeles Angels" sans Anaheim can't come soon enough. Selig should best-interest-of-baseball the "of Anaheim" out of existence so we never have to hear that joke again.

[KJTALBOT]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

[tBBP]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

And they'll always be the California Angels to me.

But I'll digress.

[McCall]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

[Milo Meningocele]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

Seconded, except for the option of going back to "California". Even though that's the way I knew them in my formative years, I find it ridiculous when there are four other teams in the state.

[dahatman]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

Seconded, except for the option of going back to "California". Even though that's the way I knew them in my formative years, I find it ridiculous when there are four other teams in the state.

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

[Milo Meningocele]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

Seconded, except for the option of going back to "California". Even though that's the way I knew them in my formative years, I find it ridiculous when there are four other teams in the state.

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

I see your point, but even at that time there were two other California teams. Why not just represent your region? I think it's kind of pompous to try to claim to be an entire state's team, when there are more than one. And for such a big state, too...I don't care for the Rangers and Marlins doing it, either.

[The_Admiral]

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

Actually, it's because upon departing Dodger Stadium, they were originally slated to move to Long Beach, a city that was similarly butthurt about hosting a Los Angeles-named team, so the California Angels they became. The Angels aren't even the most popular team in Greater Los Angeles, let alone the entire state of California. Los Angeles is their territory; California is not. Large quantities of people aren't coming down from Sacramento to catch an Angels game.

The only way anyone can justify "California Angels" is a sentimental attachment to the heartwarming Christopher Lloyd/Danny Glover masterpiece that was the remake of Angels in the Outfield.

[LMU]

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

Actually, it's because upon departing Dodger Stadium, they were originally slated to move to Long Beach, a city that was similarly butthurt about hosting a Los Angeles-named team, so the California Angels they became. The Angels aren't even the most popular team in Greater Los Angeles, let alone the entire state of California. Los Angeles is their territory; California is not. Large quantities of people aren't coming down from Sacramento to catch an Angels game.

The only way anyone can justify "California Angels" is a sentimental attachment to the heartwarming Christopher Lloyd/Danny Glover masterpiece that was the remake of Angels in the Outfield.

And the ultimate irony is that Long Beach is actually a larger city now than Anaheim, and actually has its own skyline. Anaheim's only separation from any other suburb is a theme park and a couple sports venues.

[DallasSports]

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

Actually, it's because upon departing Dodger Stadium, they were originally slated to move to Long Beach, a city that was similarly butthurt about hosting a Los Angeles-named team, so the California Angels they became. The Angels aren't even the most popular team in Greater Los Angeles, let alone the entire state of California. Los Angeles is their territory; California is not. Large quantities of people aren't coming down from Sacramento to catch an Angels game.

The only way anyone can justify "California Angels" is a sentimental attachment to the heartwarming Christopher Lloyd/Danny Glover masterpiece that was the remake of Angels in the Outfield.

And the ultimate irony is that Long Beach is actually a larger city now than Anaheim, and actually has its own skyline. Anaheim's only separation from any other suburb is a theme park and a couple sports venues.

Wow. Might as well name the Rangers the Dallas Rangers of Arlington.

[McCall]

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

Actually, it's because upon departing Dodger Stadium, they were originally slated to move to Long Beach, a city that was similarly butthurt about hosting a Los Angeles-named team, so the California Angels they became. The Angels aren't even the most popular team in Greater Los Angeles, let alone the entire state of California. Los Angeles is their territory; California is not. Large quantities of people aren't coming down from Sacramento to catch an Angels game.

The only way anyone can justify "California Angels" is a sentimental attachment to the heartwarming Christopher Lloyd/Danny Glover masterpiece that was the remake of Angels in the Outfield.

And the ultimate irony is that Long Beach is actually a larger city now than Anaheim, and actually has its own skyline. Anaheim's only separation from any other suburb is a theme park and a couple sports venues.

Wow. Might as well name the Rangers the Dallas Rangers of Arlington.

The Rangers are named after the Texas Rangers law enforcement agency. They get a pass, unless you'd like to see the "Dallas Texas Rangers".

[Armadillo]

Maybe the love for "Anaheim" has something to do with them winning the World Series as the Anaheim Angels?

[KJTALBOT]

I didn't mean to open this old can of worms.

I just said that I would think of them as the Anaheim Angels. ME. Not everyone. I don't care what other people think.

It's just like Comisky Park in Chicago. If people want to be brainwashed into calling it U.S. Cellular Field, then go for it. When a company buy the naming rights, it doesn't buy the right to control your thoughts.

[Eye]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

Seconded, except for the option of going back to "California". Even though that's the way I knew them in my formative years, I find it ridiculous when there are four other teams in the state.

But when they became the California Angels in 1965, the San Diego Padres and Oakland A's did not exist yet. The Padres came into the league in 1969 and the A's relocated in 1967. So maybe they were trying to building a brand as a "California" team and not specifically Los Angeles or San Francisco.

I see your point, but even at that time there were two other California teams. Why not just represent your region? I think it's kind of pompous to try to claim to be an entire state's team, when there are more than one. And for such a big state, too...I don't care for the Rangers and Marlins doing it, either.

The Rangers don't claim to be Texas' entire team even though they are called the Texas Rangers; they are named after the law enforcement agency in Texas. The Rangers and the Florida Panthers are the only teams I can think of who can get away with having the state's name included in their team name.

EDIT: Nevermind, look a few posts up, I was beaten to the punch.

[Gothamite]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

No can do, under the restrictions of the contract. If Moreno could drop "of Anaheim", he would have.

Nobody thinks the name is a good one. Arte's just waiting out the life of Disney's amateur contract until he can give the team its proper name.

[TheOldRoman]

They will always be the Anaheim Angels to me.

Yes, because a team having it's 3rd designation for only 8 years before switching to it's 4th, and mainly a revert back to it's original, is always the more nostalgic choice.

Either drop "of Anaheim" or go back to "California".

No can do, under the restrictions of the contract. If Moreno could drop "of Anaheim", he would have.

Nobody thinks the name is a good one. Arte's just waiting out the life of Disney's amateur contract until he can give the team its proper name.

Does anyone know when the contract expires? I thought it was something like a 30 year, or the length of the lease signed when the city of Anaheim rebuilt their park.