sc49erfan15 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Charlotte Panthers sounds terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 How so? "Charlotte" is a sonorous word. It's no "cellar door," and really, what is, but I think it sounds nice. It's also more immune to drawling than "Carolina" is. I can say "Charlotte Hornets" and "Charlotte Bobcats" with ease, "Charlotte Panthers" sounds fine to me too. Is it because it's too feminine a name for too masculine a sport? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Plus, Carolina sounds a little to all-encompassing. Aside from their names I thought North and South Carolina were to totally different places. One's the old south and the other's kind of like Virginia. It seems disingenuous to claim you represent two distinct states. 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...
The_Admiral Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 They're both firmly Southern states, but South Carolina is the part that the rest of America really likes to point and laugh at. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJMorris3 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 The Panthers "on-the-state-line" idea has some credence to it. They could have built the stadium near the Carowinds amusement park (which does straddle the state line!)Besides, I have no problem with calling them Carolina. It's not like they never played home games in South Carolina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norva Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 I always have thought that the Indiana Colts would sound so much better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sc49erfan15 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 How so? "Charlotte" is a sonorous word. It's no "cellar door," and really, what is, but I think it sounds nice. It's also more immune to drawling than "Carolina" is. I can say "Charlotte Hornets" and "Charlotte Bobcats" with ease, "Charlotte Panthers" sounds fine to me too. Is it because it's too feminine a name for too masculine a sport?I can't pinpoint why, it just sounds awful to me. It's not the syllables, because all three names you mentioned have two.They did play their 1995 season in South Carolina, and I remember a proposal that called for the stadium to be placed with the state line at the 50. Would've been cool, but that's not really why either. I guess I just don't like the way it sounds.They're both firmly Southern states, but South Carolina is the part that the rest of America really likes to point and laugh at. I'd get mad...if you weren't right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewPF Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 They're both firmly Southern states, but South Carolina is the part that the rest of America really likes to point and laugh at. I'd get mad...if you weren't right. http://i.imgur.com/4ahMZxD.png koizim said: And...and ya know what we gotta do? We gotta go kick him in da penis. He'll be injured. Injured bad. COYS and Go Sox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I totally agree that Indiana Colts sounds much better. Less cluttered.And there's nothing wrong with Carolina Panthers. It seems as if they use the word Carolina in both states quite often (you always see both the U. of North Carolina and U. of South Carolina being referred to as Carolina), and the Panthers ownership wanted the team to represent both states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 San Fran Warriors makes no sense...team plays in Oakland. Just like Tampa Rays makes no sense...hometown in St. Pete.I get that team sometimes use brand name value of larger city as their moniker (hello, New York Giants) but usually that name is a carryover from an older location. When teams reach into thin air to grab a geographically incorrect name (I'm talking to you, LA Angels of Anaheim...and yes, I know they were originally from LA, but the team became California and then Anaheim before reaching back into it's past) they're ususally mocked and ridiculed.The Warriors were originally based in San Francisco... And they're still based in The San Francisco Bay Area. And hell their next home may just be back in SF proper again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash61 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Raleigh Hurricanes, Minneapolis Wild, and Miami Panthers sound bad. 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...
The_Admiral Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 So do their state-name counterparts. I mean, if you're called the "Wild" and you're not a youth soccer team, you're in a bad place. I guess we'd be better off without all three teams.I always thought "Dallas Chaparrals" would've been a better name for their baseball team than "Texas Rangers." The Chaps. No attempt to claim all of Texas when Houston's been fielding a team for years, no overlap with the New York Rangers. I don't think I like these sort of pseudo-clever gestalt names like "Texas Rangers" or "Colorado Rockies." I prefer clearly delineated cities and nicknames. It'd be like if "No, you can't call them the Portland Trail, you have to call them the Oregon Trail, because get it?" Or the supposed fridge wisdom of the "Brooklyn Knights." Too bad they can't have a heated rivalry with the New York Ers, it would blow more minds than Scanners. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetsGoOakland9 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 San Fran Warriors makes no sense...team plays in Oakland. Just like Tampa Rays makes no sense...hometown in St. Pete.I get that team sometimes use brand name value of larger city as their moniker (hello, New York Giants) but usually that name is a carryover from an older location. When teams reach into thin air to grab a geographically incorrect name (I'm talking to you, LA Angels of Anaheim...and yes, I know they were originally from LA, but the team became California and then Anaheim before reaching back into it's past) they're ususally mocked and ridiculed.The Warriors were originally based in San Francisco... And they're still based in The San Francisco Bay Area. And hell their next home may just be back in SF proper again.Actually they were originally based in Philadelphia. Their first home was on the west coast was SF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altosax29b Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Raleigh Hurricanes, Minneapolis Wild, and Miami Panthers sound bad.Raleigh Hurricanes-that just made me gag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarf Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 The biggest problem in teams name is the Carolina Panthers and Carolina Hurricanes. They don't play in the same place, how can they both use the location name? I don't care if the Hurricanes used Raleigh or the Panthers used Charlotte, just one them should go with a different name. I really don't like teams using the state name if there are other teams in that state. The Florida Panthers and Texas Rangers get a pass, but good to see the Marlins going to Miami. Now it is time for the Golden State Warriors to follow suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxmc89 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Raleigh Hurricanes, Minneapolis Wild, and Miami Panthers sound bad.Especially since the Wild play in St. Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Well, yeah, Minnesota Wild sounds awful just because Wild as a team name is awful. But that's another issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrejeff Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 'Raleigh Hurricanes' sounds bad, but I like how 'Raleigh-Durham Hurricanes' sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjrbaseball Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 The Panthers "on-the-state-line" idea has some credence to it. They could have built the stadium near the Carowinds amusement park (which does straddle the state line!)Besides, I have no problem with calling them Carolina. It's not like they never played home games in South Carolina.It would have been interesting if the stadium had been built literally straddling the state line. Align the field so the 50-yard line is the border. A long run or pass play would go from one state to another. Or if the ball is spotted on the 50, each team would line up in a different state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjrbaseball Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I'm also with all the Washington teams changing to "D.C." since there is already a state named "Washington". I know it may seem weird at first but I think people will get adjusted to it quicker than you think. The D.C. Wizards, the D.C. Redskins, the D.C. Capitals, and the D.C. Nationals...that works.When the Expos moved, I always thought they should have been named the D.C. Nationals. Still do. The interlocking DC on the caps would have been much better than the curly-cue W that is a leftover from the old Senators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.