New Marlins Ballpark Renderings

[bosox]

It's not a bad looking stadium. The Marlins need something that will bring the fans in for a fun experience, not just the game itself. That is the only way they will make some money, and this stadium has all of that.

[The_Admiral]

Should the New England Patriots be called the Boston (Foxboro?) Patriots?

Of course they should be the Boston Patriots. They're Boston's NFL team, and play in a suburb of Boston because it's not exactly easy to plunk an NFL facility right in town.

Foxboro isn't a suburb of Boston. In fact, it's closer to Providence, RI than it is to Beantown.

No, it's part of the greater Boston area.

If that's Foxborough right above that little diagonal line there, I don't see how it's not. The Patriots have their parades in Boston, their media flagships are based in Boston, and their primary television market is Boston. Don't make this harder than it is, McCall.

[patsox]

Should the New England Patriots be called the Boston (Foxboro?) Patriots?

Of course they should be the Boston Patriots. They're Boston's NFL team, and play in a suburb of Boston because it's not exactly easy to plunk an NFL facility right in town.

Foxboro isn't a suburb of Boston. In fact, it's closer to Providence, RI than it is to Beantown.

No, it's part of the greater Boston area.

If that's Foxborough right above that little diagonal line there, I don't see how it's not. The Patriots have their parades in Boston, their media flagships are based in Boston, and their primary television market is Boston. Don't make this harder than it is, McCall.

You are all right. It's closer to Providence, it is part of the Boston Media Market, and it is part of the greater Boston area.

[McCall]

Should the New England Patriots be called the Boston (Foxboro?) Patriots?

Of course they should be the Boston Patriots. They're Boston's NFL team, and play in a suburb of Boston because it's not exactly easy to plunk an NFL facility right in town.

Foxboro isn't a suburb of Boston. In fact, it's closer to Providence, RI than it is to Beantown.

No, it's part of the greater Boston area.

If that's Foxborough right above that little diagonal line there, I don't see how it's not. The Patriots have their parades in Boston, their media flagships are based in Boston, and their primary television market is Boston. Don't make this harder than it is, McCall.

You are all right. It's closer to Providence, it is part of the Boston Media Market, and it is part of the greater Boston area.

I'm not saying it's not part of the Boston media market, I'm saying it's not a suburb of Boston. There's a difference. And they go by New England because they're more or less centrally located between Boston and Providence.

[Gothamite]

I'm not saying it's not part of the Boston media market, I'm saying it's not a suburb of Boston. There's a difference. And they go by New England because they're more or less centrally located between Boston and Providence.

Really? Where did you read that?

I always presumed that they went by "New England" in a boneheaded attempt to pull in fans from Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and Rhode Island. I've never heard that it was specifically to play up their proximity to Providence.

I'm not convinced that Foxborough isn't a Boston suburb, either. But that's probably not a subject for these boards.

[McCall]

I'm not saying it's not part of the Boston media market, I'm saying it's not a suburb of Boston. There's a difference. And they go by New England because they're more or less centrally located between Boston and Providence.

Really? Where did you read that?

I always presumed that they went by "New England" in a boneheaded attempt to pull in fans from Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and Rhode Island. I've never heard that it was specifically to play up their proximity to Providence.

I'm not convinced that Foxborough isn't a Boston suburb, either. But that's probably not a subject for these boards.

I didn't mean it was specifically tied to Providence, but rather that they weren't necessarily just in Boston.

Wait...

I'm getting lost myself just trying to explain what I meant. I'm just gonna forget it.

So the Fish are getting some new dugs, huh? Fancy that.

[TFoA]

They always should've been the Miami Marlins. They're the greater Miami area's baseball team. That they share Dolphin Stadium with a team that uses Miami in its name invalidates the "it's not in the city" argument, and they might as well get a jump on the branding and become the Miami Marlins for 2010.

Should the New England Patriots be called the Boston (Foxboro?) Patriots?

Of course they should be the Boston Patriots. They're Boston's NFL team, and play in a suburb of Boston because it's not exactly easy to plunk an NFL facility right in town.

And what, take each female taxpayer out for tapas and cocktails?

They each get gang banged by the starting infield.

Dan Uggla's errors could really prove costly in this venue.

[patsox]

You are right that it is just about equidistant to Boston and Providence and that it is not exactly a suburb of Boston. It's more a suburb of Attelboro than anything (not that Attelboro has any real suburbs, but its the closest city of a decent size). Also, they couldn't really call them the Boston Patriots, because of the fact that they are so close to both Boston and Rhode Island (and CT for that matter). New England is just the best solution, because they are in neither Boston, Providence, Hartford, or anywhere else like that but they still cater to that area.

[McCall]

You are right that it is just about equidistant to Boston and Providence and that it is not exactly a suburb of Boston. It's more a suburb of Attelboro than anything (not that Attelboro has any real suburbs, but its the closest city of a decent size). Also, they couldn't really call them the Boston Patriots, because of the fact that they are so close to both Boston and Rhode Island (and CT for that matter). New England is just the best solution, because they are in neither Boston, Providence, Hartford, or anywhere else like that but they still cater to that area.

Yes. That's what I was trying to say (except for the whole Attelboro stuff). I can't believe I'm thanking Patty for clarifying what I mean.

[Gothamite]

they couldn't really call them the Boston Patriots, because of the fact that they are so close to both Boston and Rhode Island (and CT for that matter).

Why the heck not? Boston's the major city in the market, and they play in its neighboring county.

[IceCap]

Out of curiosity, why? It's not like having a team named after the state and another team named after a city within that state is unheard of. The Astros and Rangers immediately come to mind and the Angels were the California Angels while there were the LA Dodgers, SF Giants, and SD Padres.

I don't think that "Miami Marlins" is a bad name, but I don't think that they should change their name simply because the Rays happen to play in the same state.

Just because it's been done doesn't make it right. I don't have an issue with the "Texas" Rangers (since they are named after the Texas Rangers, and the Dallas Texas Rangers would just be stupid) but the other examples just ain't right.

Personally, I'm not too big on alliteration - and I like the way the name "Florida Marlins" sounds... however, I'm totally in favor of dropping the state designation in favor of the city.

Exactly. The "Texas Rangers" and "Florida Panthers" are ok, because their full names actually mean something. Excluding examples such as those, the only time a team should name themselves after a state is when they're the only team in the state.

[The_Admiral]

People in Providence (and cities all over New England) likely root for the Boston Celtics, Boston Red Sox, and Boston Bruins with no qualms about the place name. Surely they wouldn't be offended by the Boston Patriots. If the Pats could play in Boston, they would. That's where they started play in the AFL, playing in a variety of venues that would be laughed out of the NFL. Then they got a good deal on a bunch of land off Route 1 by a racetrack, where they erected one of the dumpiest and logistically insane sports venues ever, and stuck around there for the new one because they still couldn't build one in Boston or Hartford. So based on all that, just call them the Boston Patriots, I say. It's one thing to draw fans from a wide area, but to explicitly claim six states and all their major cities strikes me as presumptuous and annoying. You wouldn't have the Former Confederacy Braves.

In the cases of "Texas Rangers" and "Florida Panthers" meaning something, they also happen to mean "years of quiet futility and redundancy," so no better time than now to rename them something with Dallas and Miami in their names.

[McCall]

In the cases of "Texas Rangers" and "Florida Panthers" meaning something, they also happen to mean "years of quiet futility and redundancy," so no better time than now to rename them something with Dallas and Miami in their names.

That makes no sense. What they mean by those names meaning something, is that they're actually named after the "Texas Rangers" Law Enforcement Agency, and the "Florida Panther". It's the same as the Baltimore Orioles being named after the state bird of Maryland, the "Baltimore Oriole", although in that case, it's the city, rather than the state, that creates the name. Never will or should the Texas Rangers be renamed the Dallas Rangers. Same with the Panthers. If you can create that type of moniker, where both the location and nickname create the actual name of that which you are named for, why change it simply to please a few people who don't like to see states used in team names?

[The_Admiral]

I get that the Texas Rangers are named for the authority figures. However, the name "Texas Rangers" also connotes a baseball team that has done butteffingnothing in its ignominious history but extort some land from the state and get a no-hitter or two for Nolan Ryan. I say start the whole thing over again, from a branding standpoint, while noting that there's another team in your state, and they're more popular than you.

[patsox]

The Pats could easily call themselves the Boston Patriots, but they would be slightly alienating Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Rhode Island by doing so (especially were they to do it now). While it is true that the Sox, Bruins, and Celtics all use Boston as their location and have followers from all around New England the fact is that they are IN Boston as opposed to 30 or so miles south of Boston.

[The_Admiral]

If that alienates you as a fan, you're a bad fan.

[patsox]

If that alienates you as a fan, you're a bad fan.

I'm not saying everyone in those states would stop being fans.

I'm saying that it could possibly make those fans feel excluded or rejected if they were to suddenly become the Boston Patriots tomorrow.

[The_Admiral]

THEY REPRESENTED ME ALL THE WAY HERE IN FACKIN' BAH HAHBAH! NO ONE DENIES THIS!

[McCall]

I get that the Texas Rangers are named for the authority figures. However, the name "Texas Rangers" also connotes a baseball team that has done butteffingnothing in its ignominious history but extort some land from the state and get a no-hitter or two for Nolan Ryan. I say start the whole thing over again, from a branding standpoint, while noting that there's another team in your state, and they're more popular than you.

So if a team doesn't win, they should change their name? How about change management, players, etc., cuz the name is NOT the reason they're losing.

[The_Admiral]

Well, this isn't a fun argument at all.