Funky Bunky Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Just curious, but is the reason the Leafs are the Leafs and not Leaves, because the team is technically the Toronto Maple Leaf organization? Leafs would be plural for Maple Leaf in that situation?I'm just curious to know if anybody has any better information on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Hard to say.Is there any team that is named as a plural but which the singular form of it changes spelling (other than to add an -s or -es)?That was always my guess. It's weird to be the Leaves but an individual is a Leaf. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelayedPenalty Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 In February of 1927, Conn Smythe, who had built the New York Rangers franchise but was dismissed in favour of Lester Patrick, raised enough money to buy the St. Pats and prevented the team from moving to Philadelphia. Smythe, a military man, immediately had the Toronto franchise name changed from the St. Pats to Maple Leafs, the name of a World War I fighting unit, the Maple Leaf Regiment. He also switched the uniform colours to blue and white from green and white.From http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=42182 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash61 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Each player is a "Toronto Maple Leaf", therefore a team of them would be "Leafs" On September 20, 2012 at 0:50 AM, 'CS85 said: It's like watching the hellish undead creakily shuffling their way out of the flames of a liposuction clinic dumpster fire. On February 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM, 'pianoknight said: Story B: Red Wings go undefeated and score 100 goals in every game. They also beat a team comprised of Godzilla, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, 2 Power Rangers and Betty White. Oh, and they played in the middle of Iraq on a military base. In the sand. With no ice. Santa gave them special sand-skates that allowed them to play in shorts and t-shirts in 115 degree weather. Jesus, Zeus and Buddha watched from the sidelines and ate cotton candy. POTD 5/24/12, POTD 2/26/17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 And "leafs" is a perfectly acceptable, if less common, plural form of "leaf." The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Each player is a "Toronto Maple Leaf", therefore a team of them would be "Leafs"Then each leaf on a tree would be a "leaf", therefore a bunch of them would be "leafs." However,And "leafs" is a perfectly acceptable, if less common, plural form of "leaf."Since it seams that this is true (here anyway: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leaf), I guess it's a moot point. I wonder whether "leafs" has always been an acceptable plural or if it that was changed after the team name came to be. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmd9 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 How would everyone feel about the Minnesota TimberWolfs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColeJ Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 yeah. i was always under the impression that leafs/leaves was like fish/fishes. both are proper ways to pluralize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phutmasterflex Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 It makes sense because the team name is not named after a pile of leaves. It's named after a specific type of leaf. There is only one kind of Maple Leaf. And since it seems like it's required to add a plural to all team names, they made it Maple Leafs. At least that's what I always thought Go A's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColeJ Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 so googling this issue has taught me something...in canada, "beer" is an acceptable plural for itself? you can drink 6 beer? like deer?that's kinda neato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 so googling this issue has taught me something...in canada, "beer" is an acceptable plural for itself? you can drink 6 beer? like deer?that's kinda neato.I don't know where you're getting your deer from, but I don't where you can drink deer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Doctor Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 It's proper use for the simple fact that Toronto Maple Leaf is a proper name. Each individual player is a Toronto Maple Leaf, thus the collective team are Toronto Maple Leafs.How would everyone feel about the Minnesota TimberWolfs?As awkward sounding as it is, one would get used to it after a few decades. How does everyone feel about a Timberwolve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leaf"Leafs" is an acceptable plural form of "leaf." End of discussion. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 It's a damn name, it can be spelled any way they like./thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uniguy22 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 so googling this issue has taught me something...in canada, "beer" is an acceptable plural for itself? you can drink 6 beer? like deer?that's kinda neato.I've never heard anyone say "I drank 6 beer". But you can say, "I've drank a lot of beer tonight". Or you could say, "I've drank a lot of beers tonight." Both are acceptable. I will be saying one of these statements tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 I think "sox" is goofier than "leafs", even if just as legitimate. "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...
GriffinM6 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Think about it like this, if you had a team named after a cactus. Would you rather have the name be Cacti or Cactuses? Leafs just sounds better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Meningocele Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 I think "sox" is goofier than "leafs", even if just as legitimate.I've always thought that was so anachronistic. You'd think that would be such a 90's or 2000's spelling, it's hard to imagine teams adopted it over 100 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viper Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 How would everyone feel about the Minnesota TimberWolfs?About the same as they feel now about the Timberwolves. That is to say, very, very little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeFrank Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Fishes refer to many fish types, while plural fish refers to a single species. concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes potd 10/20/12 origin story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.