The_Admiral Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 How about Washington Monuments for the NBA team? The name kind of brings to mind sizeSo does "Washington Horse Dicks," but nobody's suggesting that. I think we went through the list of possible Redskins/Wizards replacement names and agreed they were all terrible. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 Those names were fine 600 years ago, but if a group of people were just starting a team from scratch today, would they ever say "dude, we should totally call ourselves the Federals." I think not. (Same for Nationals.) The difference between Federals and Nationals is that Nationals has a long major league history behind it, while Federals doesn't. I think it's perfectly appropriate to use Nationals today in the same way it's appropriate to use Yankees or Giants, for example - those are similarly meaningless names but they have baseball history behind them.Right, I'll give Nationals a pass since they're trying to (at least from a marketing standpoint) reprise the former club, but in reality, it's not the same, since Yankees and Giants have had their names since the Coolidge administration, and this version of the Nationals just came about in '05. Hell, if the Yankees were named the New York Polio Fighters I guess it'd be OK. But if they moved and got an expansion team, it probably wouldn't make a lot of sense to bring that back. "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 More sharing options...
AnythingChicago Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 How about Washington Monuments for the NBA team? The name kind of brings to mind sizeSo does "Washington Horse Dicks," but nobody's suggesting that. I think we went through the list of possible Redskins/Wizards replacement names and agreed they were all terrible.I do not want to see the logos to that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 "New York Polio Fighters" presents the same misplaced-modifier ambiguity as Nippon Ham Fighters, though. Are the players fighting against polio or on behalf of it? The latter seems implausible, but what better way to be an evil empire than to paralyze your opponents for life? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatsFan2004 Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 Right, I'll give Nationals a pass since they're trying to (at least from a marketing standpoint) reprise the former club, but in reality, it's not the same, since Yankees and Giants have had their names since the Coolidge administration, and this version of the Nationals just came about in '05. Hell, if the Yankees were named the New York Polio Fighters I guess it'd be OK. But if they moved and got an expansion team, it probably wouldn't make a lot of sense to bring that back.Yeah but it's a little different in Washington because it was the restoration of a tradition that goes back to the earliest days of baseball. Which, I'll point out, many DC baseball fans felt was stolen from the city with the way MLB had jerked around the city ever since the end of the 1960 season.Looked at another way...if the LA Dodgers had changed their name to something else when they moved and Brooklyn could take over the name with a new team today, I'd suggest that most people would be okay with the modern-day "Brooklyn Dodgers" (even though they're not the same franchise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DustDevil61 Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 I think the Washington REDSKINS should remain just that ... and not give in to pressure like Stanford, Miami of O, St Johns and several others did.The WIZARDS should go back to being the BULLETSThe Washington FEDERALS were a USFL team, and one of the worst ones too.I want my team to stay the Redskins no doubt. But the name hit me as a possibility for the Skins if they ever are forced to change it.Without getting too far OT, I've always felt that, should the Redskins be forced to change their name, they need to look no further than their own history and become the Braves again. Drop the Indian Head logo and replace it with either a W or a B (in a circle) or just go back to the Spear logo. In a sense, it's not unlike what the University of Utah has done in dropping just about everything Native American-related besides the Utes name.As for the "Federals" name, I'm not so sure. The Wizards name has grown on me, and I'm a little disappointed that they'll be going Red/White/Blue when the Blue/Black/(Bronze or Gold) has worked so well with their soon-to-be defunct identity. However, I do like the idea of naming a team the Federals and designing their uniforms--to some extent--around the US Currency. It's quirky yet not too far out there. http://i.imgur.com/Pyc5qRH.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/RDXvxFE.gif LED Sig Credits to packerfan21396 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 The Timberwolves were going to move to New Orleans and call themselves "The Louisiana Purchase" with an ahead-of-its-time, bling-based identity. Perhaps it's just not meant to be. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 If either the Redskins or Wizards were to ever change their name, there's a great one staring them right in the face...Potomacs. Doesn't really roll off the tongue all that great, but dammit if that ain't an area-appropriate nickname. It'd be particularly fitting for the Redskins, as it'd allow them to at least maintain some semblance of a Native American-based identity.Washington Potomacs. Or DC Potomacs. Let it sink in a little bit...might not fit with everyone (or even most), but...ehh, screw it--anyway, that's my two-cent contribution to this discussion. *Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. || dribbble || Behance || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 If either the Redskins or Wizards were to ever change their name, there's a great one staring them right in the face...Potomacs. Doesn't really roll off the tongue all that great, but dammit if that ain't an area-appropriate nickname. It'd be particularly fitting for the Redskins, as it'd allow them to at least maintain some semblance of a Native American-based identity.Washington Potomacs. Or DC Potomacs. Let it sink in a little bit...might not fit with everyone (or even most), but...ehh, screw it--anyway, that's my two-cent contribution to this discussion.I thought of the Potomacs before as well. Much better than Redskins or Wizards. "I don't understand where you got this idea so deeply ingrained in your head (that this world) is something that you must impress, cause I couldn't care less"http://keepdcunited.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapeeko Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeFrank Posted April 19, 2011 Author Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'm actually looking at the Potomac river right now. Like out my window. Its not too impressive. The Redskins name won't change, shouldn't change, and anything like Braves, Indians, or Warriors won't be accepted by the city. Neither will the Indian head logo. It doesn't degrade Natives, but respects them, much unlike Chief Wahoo. concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes potd 10/20/12 origin story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'm actually looking at the Potomac river right now. Like out my window. Its not too impressive. The Redskins name won't change, shouldn't change, and anything like Braves, Indians, or Warriors won't be accepted by the city. Neither will the Indian head logo. It doesn't degrade Natives, but respects them, much unlike Chief Wahoo.No, it is a degrading name. Potomacs were an indian tribe in the area, hence the name of the river. "I don't understand where you got this idea so deeply ingrained in your head (that this world) is something that you must impress, cause I couldn't care less"http://keepdcunited.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeFrank Posted April 19, 2011 Author Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'm actually looking at the Potomac river right now. Like out my window. Its not too impressive. The Redskins name won't change, shouldn't change, and anything like Braves, Indians, or Warriors won't be accepted by the city. Neither will the Indian head logo. It doesn't degrade Natives, but respects them, much unlike Chief Wahoo.No, it is a degrading name. Potomacs were an indian tribe in the area, hence the name of the river.The point I bring up always is that today, right now, in 95% of America, if somebody was to say the word Redskin, everybody around would think of a football team, not a native american. Language changes over time concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes potd 10/20/12 origin story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'm actually looking at the Potomac river right now. Like out my window. Its not too impressive. The Redskins name won't change, shouldn't change, and anything like Braves, Indians, or Warriors won't be accepted by the city. Neither will the Indian head logo. It doesn't degrade Natives, but respects them, much unlike Chief Wahoo.No, it is a degrading name. Potomacs were an indian tribe in the area, hence the name of the river.The point I bring up always is that today, right now, in 95% of America, if somebody was to say the word Redskin, everybody around would think of a football team, not a native american. Language changes over timeNot when you combine the logo with the name. I am a (former) Redskins fan (I dont care for the NFL anymore), I grew up with the Redskins too, but gotta call a spade a spade, the name is offensive, and it should be changed. It never will be, theyve fought that battle over years, and with the money Snyder throws behind its defense, itll never be changed. "I don't understand where you got this idea so deeply ingrained in your head (that this world) is something that you must impress, cause I couldn't care less"http://keepdcunited.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC in Da House w/o a Doubt Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I hope they never never never change the name Redskins or consider doing so. Federals would be better than the Wizards though, that's for sure. I would definitely welcome that.I think Generals would have been a nice name for the Wiz, if it weren't for these Washington Generals. I also think the name of the ex-soccer team, the Diplomats (aka the Dips), would be a cool name for the Wizards. "Let's go Dips." "Get it done Dips!" "Oh, did you see the Dips highlights? John Wall looked amazing" "Hey who are the Dips playing tonight?" etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnySeoul Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 The Federals concept on UniWatch was one of my least favorite of that set.Agreed. I think the Hawks was the only one I liked alot. As for the name, Washington Federals, I'll pass. The Washington Nats already own that area....no need for 2. JohnnySeoul's WikipageIF ONE IS CONSIDERED RACIST, THEN BOTH MUST BE CONSIDERED RACIST.BOTTOM LINE: NEITHER ONE IS RACIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 That mock-up was not good. As for the Federals name, if the team and the NBA wanted more legs with a name, choose one which was there longer than two seasons...Diplomats. Especially if the NBA is the most likely North American league to have a team beyond North America in the near future.Plus they can still use the red/ :censored:e/blue color scheme which Leonsis wants to have across all his team brands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnythingChicago Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 The Federals concept on UniWatch was one of my least favorite of that set.Agreed. I think the Hawks was the only one I liked alot. As for the name, Washington Federals, I'll pass. The Washington Nats already own that area....no need for 2.I liked the Grizzlies one in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I also think the name of the ex-soccer team, the Diplomats (aka the Dips), would be a cool name for the Wizards. "Let's go Dips." "Get it done Dips!" "Oh, did you see the Dips highlights? John Wall looked amazing" "Hey who are the Dips playing tonight?" etc... ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC in Da House w/o a Doubt Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Yeah, literally no one would connect that name to gangstas whatsoever. So I'm not sure what you're point with that was. Look, it's been done before. It can be done again. (I hope no one thought of them as gangstas when they were the Dips back in the 70's/80's!!!!) http://www.sportslogos.net/team.php?id=1406 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.