Jump to content

Unpopular Opinions


Recommended Posts

The whole changing-names-when-relocating thing just got more interesting considering we are going to have a "Las Vegas Athletics" eventually. That's gonna sound really weird, but the Athletics have been around for over 120 years, wearing that name in three different cities. Do we keep that 120 years of history alive into city number four, or find a name to fit Vegas better? (I think "Athletics" is generic enough you can put that anywhere, personally)

 

  • Like 1

oBIgzrL.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, maz said:

The whole changing-names-when-relocating thing just got more interesting considering we are going to have a "Las Vegas Athletics" eventually. That's gonna sound really weird, but the Athletics have been around for over 120 years, wearing that name in three different cities. Do we keep that 120 years of history alive into city number four, or find a name to fit Vegas better? (I think "Athletics" is generic enough you can put that anywhere, personally)

 

Hot take, but if your team's name is generic enough to work in any location, then your team has a bad name.

  • Meh 1
  • Dislike 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2023 at 10:57 PM, mahnkej said:

Overall, I'm a fan of the Seattle Mariners uniforms. Especially their teal alternates, easily one of my favorite looks in the AL.

People really dunk on these online, I guess I never quite understood the hate.

 

ratio3x2_1000.jpg

 

Overall yeah, but serif wordmarks look kinda dated imo.

  • Facepalm 1

spacer.png

Last updated 2/26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2023 at 9:56 AM, maz said:

The whole changing-names-when-relocating thing just got more interesting considering we are going to have a "Las Vegas Athletics" eventually. That's gonna sound really weird, but the Athletics have been around for over 120 years, wearing that name in three different cities. Do we keep that 120 years of history alive into city number four, or find a name to fit Vegas better? (I think "Athletics" is generic enough you can put that anywhere, personally)

 

I say Las Vegas Athletics should work.

 

La’s Vega’s? No? 

  • Like 1

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the A's really need  to keep green and gold once they move to Las Vegas. 

 

Ditching their current color scheme would be unfortunate from an aesthetic standpoint, because it's unique to the MLB, and generally looks good. Despite that, I think that there are a handful of legitimate reasons for them to change their color scheme.  Past moves have seen them change colors, so I think that there is a bit of precedence for it. Additionally, moving to a color scheme (like black and gold for example) would allow them to match the shared visual identity that existing Vegas teams have created. Switching to black and gold would create a visual identity that is distinct from their past, making the team seem a bit more like the "Las Vegas A's", instead of just being the "Oakland A's who happen to play in Las Vegas now".

 

I fully admit that I am relatively uninformed on the A's situation though, so if anyone has a different perspective on this, I'd love to hear it.

Edited by fortunat1
Initially implied they were moving to Oakland
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vegas embraced the Raiders after 4 moves. No doubt they'll do the same with the A's after their 4th move. And it's not like the moniker 'Athletics' is specific to any city or region like Phillies or Rockies.

  • Like 3

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2023 at 4:00 PM, DTConcepts said:

 

Hot take, but if your team's name is generic enough to work in any location, then your team has a bad name.

How many names in the Big 4 match their location? Not enough to make this a valid argument, IMO.

  • Like 5
  • Applause 1
  • Yawn 1

It's where I sit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

How many names in the Big 4 match their location? Not enough to make this a valid argument, IMO.

Yeah, like there's not really any tigers or lions in Detroit, Hamilton or Cincinnati (outside of zoos, anyways), giants/titans in either New York, San Francisco or Nashville, no pirates in Pittsburgh, no grizzlies in Memphis, no kings in Los Angeles or Sacramento...definitely aren't any Velociraptor running around in Toronto, either.

 

Trying to force local ties into name branding is how you get :censored: like the Baby Cakes.

  • Like 5
  • Yawn 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

How many names in the Big 4 match their location? Not enough to make this a valid argument, IMO.

 

I think you guys are misjudging my argument. I’m not saying that every team needs to be named like the Toronto Six. What I am saying is that teams like the Colorado Rockies, Detroit Pistons, New York Islanders, San Francisco 49ers, etc. all have more inspired names than the Brooklyn Nets, Dallas Stars, Las Vegas Raiders, and/or Oakland Athletics.

 

 

I mean hell, the Baltimore Ravens, Colorado Avalanche, Denver Nuggets, Houston Rockets, Philadelphia Phillies, San Francisco 49ers, etc. all have what I would call location-specific names. And from what I could see with a quick Google search, about 1/3 of the big four uses some sort of a location-specific name, which is more than enough to warrant a discussion.

 

 

All I’m saying is that I’d prefer a team’s name make reference to its home instead of being a generic label that any city can get behind. It’s not 1952, and teams don’t need to keep the same identity after a move so they can save money on uniforms. There’s no reason for the Las Vegas Athletics to exist in the 21st century. Make a real brand or get off the pot.

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DTConcepts said:

All I’m saying is that I’d prefer a team’s name make reference to its home instead of being a generic label that any city can get behind. I understand the historical precedence of a team like the Dodgers, but there’s no excuse for the Las Vegas Athletics to exist. Make a real brand or get off the pot.

Wait wait, so you understand the historical precedence of the Dodgers...but somehow the franchise that's had the same name in every city since it was founded in 1901 needs to "make a real brand"?

 

If history applies to keeping the Dodgers, it also applies to keeping the Athletics.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ridleylash said:

Wait wait, so you understand the historical precedence of the Dodgers, but somehow the team that's had the same name since 1901 needs to "make a real brand"?

 

yeah i reread my comment and edited it before you commented this. i’m not the most familiar with mlb brands and i used a bad example, my b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.