London Rippers

[bosrs1]

That (Jack The Ripper) is not our story," said Martin, when told about the reaction.

"Ripping a ball is used in baseball all the time."

Martin said the character's name is Diamond Jack, a frustrated hockey player who found he could "rip" the cover off baseballs. Despite his talent, teams grew weary of the expense of replacing balls so Diamond Jack decided to form his own team in London, Ontario.

"It's Phantom of the Opera meets baseball. He's a mysterious character who is somewhat edgy," said Martin.

i TOTALLY believe every word that dude says...diamond jack is CLEARLY a frustrated hockey player rather than an 18th century serial killer (/sarcasm)

the logo isn't bad, though...the nose is a bit misshapen...no doubt to further pronounce his former hockey days

The only reason I think they're denying it is because as I said earlier you cannot win a media war against a battered women's shelter. Sometimes its better to come off as an idiot then argue with a group who will always have the moral high ground on you.

Obviously a situation where a couple of guys were sitting around having a few beer throwing a few ideas around and this is the one that stuck but they didn't bother to consult a woman, or do any kind of vetting on the idea. And now they're back tracking and trying to cover their asses. I give it through this season at the most, until next week more likely and they'll change it quietly.

[andrewharrington]

As far as I'm concerned, they never caught the guy, so he never existed. The whole persona was rumored to be a hoax when he was active anyway. He's just as much a romanticized legend as any pirate or movie character.

[CityOfWalrus]

In the sense of saying you don't see "DC Snipers" or "San Francisco Zodiacs" as far as I am concerned I've NEVER heard a legend/story of a guy that goes by Jack The Ripper in LONDON, ONTARIO. I've heard stories about a "Jack The Ripper" in London, England but that's the big difference between that side of the argument. Yes they're from a city that shares the namesake but that's different. I think people need to stop nitpicking at every thing that "offends" them.

[bosrs1]

As far as I'm concerned, they never caught the guy, so he never existed. The whole persona was rumored to be a hoax when he was active anyway. He's just as much a romanticized legend as any pirate or movie character.

The 5 women he killed in Whitechapel would disagree with you but he kinda murdered them. Just because they didn't catch him doesn't mean he didn't exist. I'd suggest your read up on it.

As for it being "nitpicky" you can make that argument. But there is no denying what it was meant to allude to (as they're now trying to because even they know it was a dumb idea in the first place). And the fact is they chose a serial murderer, even if from their namesake city, as their mascot. Real fan and family friendly that.

[Dexter Morgan]

As far as I'm concerned, they never caught the guy, so he never existed.

Zodiac killer was never caught.. did he exist?

[bosrs1]

As far as I'm concerned, they never caught the guy, so he never existed.

Zodiac killer was never caught.. did he exist?

Exactly. People have become so jaded in their views in the CCTV, DNA, CSI, NCIS, Law and Order era. They think everyone gets caught now even though that's not true even now.

Also it may end up being a moot point. The City council who invited the team up to Ontario and who are allowing them to play in Labatt Park have basically told them the name sucks and have told them to reconsider. It won't be long before the team is forced to change the name. This however has proven to be a good attention grabber if nothing else as any attention is good in the end which frankly was probably the goal.

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/11/16/18975986.html

[Gfonk04]

In the sense of saying you don't see "DC Snipers" or "San Francisco Zodiacs" as far as I am concerned I've NEVER heard a legend/story of a guy that goes by Jack The Ripper in LONDON, ONTARIO. I've heard stories about a "Jack The Ripper" in London, England but that's the big difference between that side of the argument. Yes they're from a city that shares the namesake but that's different. I think people need to stop nitpicking at every thing that "offends" them.

I was going to make this point, half-facetiously. A team called the "New York Sons of Sam" ("Son of Sams?") is offensive, a soccer team in York, England, called the "York FC Son of Sam," that's creative.

I think this logo and name is just lame, not offensive or over the line or whatever, it just kinda sucks. Regardless, it continues to highlight the line in the sand where people have to just decide whether or not it's really worth the effort. I say it's just sports and an independent baseball league in Canada, pretty easy to ignore if you don't like it. If we remove every name we don't like from sports, all our teams will be "North American Regional Baseball Club 1."

At the risk of opening a whole new can of worms, Rush Limbaugh (and I'm not endorsing his views or asking for opinions, he's just the guy I heard doing this) has mocked this trend by picking football games based on how offensive the names are. The 49ers will obviously lose to the Eagles since the 49ers represent the exploitation of the planet for its resources. Or will they? The eagle, after all is the symbol of the hyper-aggressive American hegemon. Everything offends someone somehow. It's ridiculous to parse sports teams names on this level. Either you like it or you don't.

[Pete1418]

Should of just brought back the Werewolves

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

What's next?

Boston Stranglers?

L.A. Nightstalkers?

Tallahassee Bundys?

Milwaukee Dahmers?

D.C. Snipers?

Waco Branchers or Dividians?

And people could add to it like the, "We all are..." death mentions.

Some of those are actually solid names.. too bad they couldn't be used.

I've always thought Boston Massacre had a nice ring to it.

[BigMac12]

Should of just brought back the Werewolves

I was thinking the exact same thing yesterday.

[Brian in Boston]

This would be akin to the SF Giants changing their names to the San Francisco Zodiacs...

Not so much. While one of the Zodiac Killer's victims was actually shot and killed in San Francisco, California, none of Jack the Ripper's victims were murdered in London, Ontario. Further, while the one San Francisco-based Zodiac Killer murder took place 42 years ago, the Jack the Ripper murders occurred 123 years ago.

Stretching the bounds of good taste? Sure... I can see someone saying that. Still, the brouhaha currently surrounding this strikes me as much ado about nothing.

For what it's worth, if you're going to go with the London Rippers sobriquet, this logo strikes me as solid. Quality work from, what I'm guessing is, Keith Flynn at Flynnagain Productions.

[andrewharrington]

As far as I'm concerned, they never caught the guy, so he never existed. The whole persona was rumored to be a hoax when he was active anyway. He's just as much a romanticized legend as any pirate or movie character.

The 5 women he killed in Whitechapel would disagree with you but he kinda murdered them. Just because they didn't catch him doesn't mean he didn't exist. I'd suggest your read up on it.

As for it being "nitpicky" you can make that argument. But there is no denying what it was meant to allude to (as they're now trying to because even they know it was a dumb idea in the first place). And the fact is they chose a serial murderer, even if from their namesake city, as their mascot. Real fan and family friendly that.

I've read up plenty on it. I'm sure the women murdered in Whitechapel would not like this identity. I'm sure they wouldn't have liked 'From Hell' starring Johnny Depp, either. Stories and legends of crime and disaster are moneymakers, plain and simple, That's why we have movies and books and sports teams named for them. I'm not saying this is a great idea, but the owners should be able to do what they want. If people want to protest, do it at the box office. The owners will get the hint and change the identity if nobody comes and supports it.

How about a real disaster that killed hundreds and decimated one of our largest cities? I'm sure the people who died or lost their family members or businesses wouldn't have liked it, yet we have the Chicago Fire, a highly supported team, with a highly successful identity based on one of the city's darkest times. Honestly, I think the amount of time that has passed allows people to see events and people such as the Great Chicago Fire and Jack the Ripper more as legends than as fact, just like those romanticized versions of Vikings, Raiders and Pirates you say are A-okay.

The Oklahoma City Bombers? That's fresh in people's minds. That crime has a face (two faces) attached to it. Same with the Boston Stranglers, to a lesser degree, although police think those crimes may have been committed by more than just Albert DeSalvo. Jack the Ripper is a romanticized legend at this point in time. There's no name or face to go with his crimes. There's three mysterious letters, along with the extremely stereotypical image of an evil Londoner in a cape and top hat, looking very Mr. Hyde-esque. It doesn't get much more romanticized than that.

[pcgd]

I think time is the difference here and that's why I don't understand the uproar.

And Andrew mentioned, the Chicago Fire is fine (at least I've never heard anything about it). There aren't any survivors or anyone who lived through it to be truly offended. (You insensitive bastards! My great great grandfather died in the fire!)

But this event which took place a long time ago, in Europ,e is as offensive as "San Francisco Zodiacs" or "Milwaukee Dahmers?" (I'd prefer Chicago Gacey's with a Clown Logo but I digress...) Come on! Those events happened in the last 25-30 years. there are millions of people still alive that lived through that. This is a completely different situation.

[slapshot]

For what it's worth, if you're going to go with the London Rippers sobriquet, this logo strikes me as solid. Quality work from, what I'm guessing is, Keith Flynn at Flynnagain Productions.

Either Flynnagain or Studio Simon. My first instinct says Simon.

[bosrs1]

I think time is the difference here and that's why I don't understand the uproar.

And Andrew mentioned, the Chicago Fire is fine (at least I've never heard anything about it). There aren't any survivors or anyone who lived through it to be truly offended. (You insensitive bastards! My great great grandfather died in the fire!)

But this event which took place a long time ago, in Europe is as offensive as "San Francisco Zodiacs" or "Milwaukee Dahmers?" (I'd prefer Chicago Gacey's with a Clown Logo but I digress...) Come on! Those events happened in the last 25-30 years. there are millions of people still alive that lived through that. This is a completely different situation.

The thing you guys keep missing or choosing to ignore is that this name with the mascot glorifies a serial killer. Period. THAT is why people are in an uproar.

It's not a faceless and unfortunate city wide disaster like the Chicago Fire that was started by a cow that the city is now proud for having survived. It's not a generic group of less than reputable sailors that robbed and looted in the Caribbean in the 1700's like the Pirates, Raiders, Bucs, that have been romanticized to death (and frankly who were not all bad as many had letters of marque to do what they did) and it's not group of people who have been the subject of racist misconceptions for centuries like Braves and Vikings. It's a single man, who murdered 5 or more women. Period. That's what they chose as their mascot, a cold blooded sicko killer. Doesn't matter if it was 5 years ago, or 500 years ago. It's going to get some flak and it's justified. I can't think of any other team off hand that is named for a serial killer, and with good reason... it glorifies what that sicko killer did. Time doesn't change that. Remember there is no statute of limitation on murder so what he did was very wrong and prosecutable then and remains very wrong and prosecutable now.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

What's next?

Boston Stranglers?

L.A. Nightstalkers?

Tallahassee Bundys?

Milwaukee Dahmers?

D.C. Snipers?

Waco Branchers or Dividians?

And people could add to it like the, "We all are..." death mentions.

well we do have Jeffrey Dahmer's Horse...just sayin.

[BrandMooreArt]

logo looks cool, but the negative connotations that come along with this should have killed the project from the start. its a terrible mascot/name for a sports team.

[JQK]

Make Ripper Owens the mascot.

Problem solved.

[bosrs1]

Make Ripper Owens the mascot.

Problem solved.

The solution is real easy. They don't even need to change the name of the team. Just change the mascot from Jack the Ripper to what they're claiming he is, this "Diamond Jack" character, by putting him in a hockey uniform, hockey helmet and hockey style jersey with a bat. That would solve the problem. The issue isn't even the London Rippers name, it's that they combined that name with imagery of the typical portrayal of Jack the Ripper in the logo. And then to pile it on they've been disingenuous about it. They need to fess up, admit their mistake, and correct it. The public loves apologies. Just ask Jason Giambi and Barry Bonds.

[andrewharrington]

I think time is the difference here and that's why I don't understand the uproar.

And Andrew mentioned, the Chicago Fire is fine (at least I've never heard anything about it). There aren't any survivors or anyone who lived through it to be truly offended. (You insensitive bastards! My great great grandfather died in the fire!)

But this event which took place a long time ago, in Europe is as offensive as "San Francisco Zodiacs" or "Milwaukee Dahmers?" (I'd prefer Chicago Gacey's with a Clown Logo but I digress...) Come on! Those events happened in the last 25-30 years. there are millions of people still alive that lived through that. This is a completely different situation.

The thing you guys keep missing or choosing to ignore is that this name with the mascot glorifies a serial killer. Period. THAT is why people are in an uproar.

It's not a faceless and unfortunate city wide disaster like the Chicago Fire that was started by a cow that the city is now proud for having survived. It's not a generic group of less than reputable sailors that robbed and looted in the Caribbean in the 1700's like the Pirates, Raiders, Bucs, that have been romanticized to death (and frankly who were not all bad as many had letters of marque to do what they did) and it's not group of people who have been the subject of racist misconceptions for centuries like Braves and Vikings. It's a single man, who murdered 5 or more women. Period. That's what they chose as their mascot, a cold blooded sicko killer. Doesn't matter if it was 5 years ago, or 500 years ago. It's going to get some flak and it's justified. I can't think of any other team off hand that is named for a serial killer, and with good reason... it glorifies what that sicko killer did. Time doesn't change that. Remember there is no statute of limitation on murder so what he did was very wrong and prosecutable then and remains very wrong and prosecutable now.

There are thousands of books, movies, museums and news stories and documentaries that glorify serial killers! I'm not saying Jack the Ripper was a model citizen or that what he allegedly did wasn't wrong. What I'm saying is that there have been countless other examples of people making money off the stories of serial killers and other deplorable people. This just happens to be the first example of a sports team. It's probably not the right move, but the owners have a right to do it if they think they'll be supported by a fanbase who likes the team and identity.

How is this any different than pirate-themed teams or Disney using imagery based on Edward Low, one of history's most brutal pirates who savagely tortured victims before killing them?