Location Name Changes

[IceCap]

All of the Washington DC teams going with the "District of Columbia" name. Legally speaking the capital of the United States hasn't been known as "Washington" since 1871.

I don't like it.

District of Columbia Wizards, District of Columbia Nationals, District of Columbia Capitals and District of Columbia Redskins just don't sound right.

in before "Anything Redskins doesn't sound right". We know. That's another topic.

Take it up with the government of the United States

Seriously, I get what you're saying, but I figured I would throw this out there. It seems on topic.

[speedy]

Naming your team after the state your in is only ok in select circumstances, in my opinion. Naming your team after six just comes off as silly.

Maybe, but if you go back and look at the circumstances, it was a good PR move.

Everyone causes a stink about the Jets and Giants playing 5 minutes from NY. For those of you wanting a Boston Patriots name, they play in Foxborough. That's 40 minutes from Boston, and they ain't moving anytime soon. I think New England works over Boston because it allows states without a pro team in any sport (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island) to claim allegiance, and they certainly do. Connecticut is really more of Giants country though. All things considered, while I'm a Packers fan and generally have no satisfaction from anything Patriots, New England is a helluva lot better than Boston.

I get that, but wouldn't fans in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island claim allegiance if they used the Boston name too? I may be wrong, but I doubt there are very many fans in those states that refuse to root for the Celtics, Red Sox, and Bruins because they use "Boston" over a more regionally inclusive nickname.

That's a valid point, can't really argue it so I won't try.

Anyways, I just personally like the sound of "The New England Patriots" over "The Boston Patriots." It just sounds more revolutionary (war, not ground-breaking).

[IceCap]

Good point. I hadn't considered that.

[LetsGoOakland9]

I'd prefer San Fransisco Warriors. It jsut sounds better. They can still rock this logo, too.

They play in Oakland...

As a big Warriors fan, I would be really, really disappointed if they went with the SF name. I was even upset when I saw that SF logo in their new package. I personally love the Golden State name because its so unique, what other team in the four major sports uses their states nickname? And it just sounds so much better than "San Francisco" or "Oakland"

[IceCap]

"Golden State" sounds like the name of a lower tier NCAA school. Also, it's silly to name your team after the state when there are three other teams that play in that state.

"San Francisco Warriors" just has a nice flow to it. "Oakland Warriors" would work nicely alongside the Oakland Raiders.

[Mingjai]

"Golden State" sounds like the name of a lower tier NCAA school. Also, it's silly to name your team after the state when there are three other teams that play in that state.

"San Francisco Warriors" just has a nice flow to it. "Oakland Warriors" would work nicely alongside the Oakland Raiders.

At least they're not the San Francisco Bay Warriors...

[WSU151]

Colorado Rockies is better than Denver Rockies. The mountains themselves are obviously much more regional than city-centric.

To that point, though, not everything mountain-related sounds better with "Colorado" in front of it. Denver Nuggets sounds better than Colorado Nuggets, and Colorado Avalanche sounds better than Denver Avalanche, IMO.

[Viper]

The Edmonton Oilers went by the name "Alberta Oilers" for part of their early WHA history.

[DookieMercury]

All of the Washington DC teams going with the "District of Columbia" name. Legally speaking the capital of the United States hasn't been known as "Washington" since 1871.

I don't like it.

District of Columbia Wizards, District of Columbia Nationals, District of Columbia Capitals and District of Columbia Redskins just don't sound right.

in before "Anything Redskins doesn't sound right". We know. That's another topic.

It could work. instead of saying the "District of Columbia" just say "D.C."

DiC Wizards, DC Nationals, DC Capitals or DC Redskins. There already exists a DC United.

Also, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim -> California Angels. KISS

[The_Admiral]

I get that, but wouldn't fans in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island claim allegiance if they used the Boston name too? I may be wrong, but I doubt there are very many fans in those states that refuse to root for the Celtics, Red Sox, and Bruins because they use "Boston" over a more regionally inclusive nickname.

Yeah, exactly. And they're in Foxborough only because it was and is impractical to build an NFL stadium in or near Boston (though I'm sure they could've done better than they did). Boston Patriots sounds snappy.

my list is:

Boston Patriots

San Francisco Warriors

Charlotte Panthers

Phoenix Cardinals

Phoenix Diamondbacks

Miami Marlins

Denver Rockies

Denver Avalanche

Los Angeles Angels fullstop

Dallas Rangers

um pretty much everything else that's not a Twin Cities team?

[winghaz]

I've said this before: A team should only carry a state's name if it's the only team (in that sport) in that particular state. So, for example, Minnesota, Colorado, Arizona and others work well. Florida Marlins never worked, and neither did California Angels.

Geographical areas present different challenges. I would say it would be OK if it's named for a readily identifyable (or is it identifialble?) area. So, in this case, Tampa Bay works, and so does New England. (One could argue about which is better -- Boston Patriots or New England Patriots, but I think they both sound good. How's that for being wishy washy?)

Golden State, as in the Golden State Warriors, is horrible. Golden State implies all of California, but what else would you call them? San Francisco Bay Warriors -- yuck. San Francisco Warriors -- too much of a slam to Oakland. Oakland Warriors -- too much of a slam to San Francisco. Northern California Warriors -- not as long as there are the Sacramento Kings. I don't know the answer here, but Golden State does suck.

[The_Admiral]

The funny thing about Tampa Bay is that practically everyone has at some point thought there was a city in central Florida called Tampa Bay. I don't know if this makes their sports team nomenclature a success or a failure.

"San Francisco Warriors" works despite the arena's Oakland location because San Francisco is the straw that stirs the drink as far as northern California goes, even though Oakland is a substantial satellite city in its own right. Also, since they were called the San Francisco Warriors when they played in Daly City, you could just argue that they've been representing the greater Bay Area since day one without actually playing in the city (or The City as they like to call it). They'll probably move to the city itself if they get their way, obviating any ambiguity.

[speedy]

I get that, but wouldn't fans in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island claim allegiance if they used the Boston name too? I may be wrong, but I doubt there are very many fans in those states that refuse to root for the Celtics, Red Sox, and Bruins because they use "Boston" over a more regionally inclusive nickname.

Yeah, exactly. And they're in Foxborough only because it was and is impractical to build an NFL stadium in or near Boston (though I'm sure they could've done better than they did). Boston Patriots sounds snappy.

my list is:

Boston Patriots

San Francisco Warriors

Charlotte Panthers

Phoenix Cardinals

Phoenix Diamondbacks

Miami Marlins

Denver Rockies

Denver Avalanche

Los Angeles Angels fullstop

Dallas Rangers

um pretty much everything else that's not a Twin Cities team?

They could've done much better than they did. Kraft had a plan in place to build a Revs stadium in Somerville near the interstate, but god knows what happened to that. I'm sure they could've squeezed Gillette in or around the Metro Boston area. But Kraft wanted an outdoor shopping mall and various other attractions which he never would've been able to implement in the City. Let us not forget they had a plan ready for signatures (maybe it got further than that) to move the team to Hartford, even though that was just a ploy to squeeze some tax payer money out of Massachusetts.

[DeFrank]

All of the Washington DC teams going with the "District of Columbia" name. Legally speaking the capital of the United States hasn't been known as "Washington" since 1871.

Yea I'm pretty sure I'm not doing the wrong thing when I title my address "Washington, D.C."

[The_Admiral]

What was the impetus behind the foolishness of building the first stadium all the way out there? Why couldn't they have done better?

[speedy]

What was the impetus behind the foolishness of building the first stadium all the way out there? Why couldn't they have done better?

I don't know. I think the land was cheap and the owners were even cheaper. Sullivan/Foxborough Stadium was a dump when it was new. I don't get why they never built upon Boston University's field or improved Harvard Stadium. Both options seem more logical than dropping a slab of concrete in a forest. But then again, logic is something the early Patriots didn't have.

[DCDuck]

While we're at it, technically the Redskins play in Landover, MD.

[hawk36]

TEXAS RANGERS

Texas Rangers works since there are, Texas Rangers. I guess if you added Dallas you could call them the Dallas Texas Rangers but what a mess.

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS

Didn't New England change it's name from Boston when they moved to Foxboro? They don't play in Boston.

GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS

I like Oakland Warriors much better. Golden State (happy shiny) and Warriors (tough) doesn't mix. Oakland and Warriors fits.

NEW YORK JETS/GIANTS

Horrible. It's one thing if they played in the STATE but to not be in New York City or New York State and call yourself New York is lame. It's like moving to the suburbs but still telling everyone you live downtown... Dude, you live in the burbs, deal with it.

[UnclearInitial]

NEW YORK JETS/GIANTS

Horrible. It's one thing if they played in the STATE but to not be in New York City or New York State and call yourself New York is lame. It's like moving to the suburbs but still telling everyone you live downtown... Dude, you live in the burbs, deal with it.

So should it be the Maryland Redskins too? New York has much more of a brand appeal, and they still play in the NEW YORK metro area, most of their fans are NEW YORKERS, and it takes less time to go from Boston to Foxborough than from New York to East Rutherford

[IceCap]

All of the Washington DC teams going with the "District of Columbia" name. Legally speaking the capital of the United States hasn't been known as "Washington" since 1871.

Yea I'm pretty sure I'm not doing the wrong thing when I title my address "Washington, D.C."

It's fine because everyone acknowledges the metro area as "Washington, D.C." Technically speaking though, the area has only had one legal name since 1871, and that's the "District of Columbia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Organic_Act_of_1871