yauger72

New Orleans ditching Hornets name?

Recommended Posts

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the announcement has come out and Benson let it be known he's looking for a rebrand, every morning the "Letters to the Editor" section of the local paper is filled with more goofy name suggestions. In addition to some discussed on this thread already (Bees, Pelicans, Creoles) here's some other "gems": Horns... Flambeaux... Funk...Second Line... Parade... Termites... :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since we're getting a ton of silly names now, I'm going to suggest the...

New Orleans Army Ants

It's acronym is perfect for Mardi Gras time... :mojoto:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Orleans not really known for its possum population. That's more rural South.

Now, raccoons-- that's a different story. I live in a very developed, rather urban suburb of New Orleans and we've got those all over the place....

Think about Raccoons for a second. I don't think the NBA wants fans chanting "Let's go, Coons" at games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

I disagree. In my opinion the history should ALWAYS stay with the city not the franchise. If an owner wants to move, fine, but start over with a new history in your new city. I've said it before and will continue to do so. Do people in new cities honestly care what teams accomplished prior to moving?

- Do people in LA really think "they" won the world series when the team was in Brooklyn?

- Do people in LA really care what the Lakers accomplished when in Minneapolis?

- Do people in Indianapolis bask in the glory of what the Baltimore Colts did?

- Do people in Tennessee discuss the "good old days" of the Houston Oilers?

I could go on and on. Owners, players, and coaches come and go. It's the cities and their fans that are the constant for a team.

As happy as I will be when the Sonics return to Seattle, I don't care if it's the Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers that move here to become the Sonics, I won't care about what the team did prior to coming here. All I'll care about is the Sonics 41 year history and what happens from then on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

I disagree. In my opinion the history should ALWAYS stay with the city not the franchise. If an owner wants to move, fine, but start over with a new history in your new city. I've said it before and will continue to do so. Do people in new cities honestly care what teams accomplished prior to moving?

- Do people in LA really think "they" won the world series when the team was in Brooklyn?

- Do people in LA really care what the Lakers accomplished when in Minneapolis?

- Do people in Indianapolis bask in the glory of what the Baltimore Colts did?

- Do people in Tennessee discuss the "good old days" of the Houston Oilers?

I could go on and on. Owners, players, and coaches come and go. It's the cities and their fans that are the constant for a team.

As happy as I will be when the Sonics return to Seattle, I don't care if it's the Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers that move here to become the Sonics, I won't care about what the team did prior to coming here. All I'll care about is the Sonics 41 year history and what happens from then on.

You might have a point if the fans had anything to do with the nicknames or the teams won with local players, but neither is true for the vast majority of American sports teams. "Fans" are customers by another name, and nobody acts like the local McDonalds building needs to keep its records and furnishings if the boss chooses to move his franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

I disagree. In my opinion the history should ALWAYS stay with the city not the franchise. If an owner wants to move, fine, but start over with a new history in your new city. I've said it before and will continue to do so. Do people in new cities honestly care what teams accomplished prior to moving?

- Do people in LA really think "they" won the world series when the team was in Brooklyn?

- Do people in LA really care what the Lakers accomplished when in Minneapolis?

- Do people in Indianapolis bask in the glory of what the Baltimore Colts did?

- Do people in Tennessee discuss the "good old days" of the Houston Oilers?

I could go on and on. Owners, players, and coaches come and go. It's the cities and their fans that are the constant for a team.

As happy as I will be when the Sonics return to Seattle, I don't care if it's the Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers that move here to become the Sonics, I won't care about what the team did prior to coming here. All I'll care about is the Sonics 41 year history and what happens from then on.

You might have a point if the fans had anything to do with the nicknames or the teams won with local players, but neither is true for the vast majority of American sports teams. "Fans" are customers by another name, and nobody acts like the local McDonalds building needs to keep its records and furnishings if the boss chooses to move his franchise.

Exactly.

A sports team is a private business, a private entity. If a championship is won then that private entity won it, not the fans or the city.

Also, if I spend the money neccecary to purchase a team I'm going to make sure I retain all the relevant trademarks and history of that team if I, for whatever reason, decide to move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

I disagree. In my opinion the history should ALWAYS stay with the city not the franchise. If an owner wants to move, fine, but start over with a new history in your new city. I've said it before and will continue to do so. Do people in new cities honestly care what teams accomplished prior to moving?

- Do people in LA really think "they" won the world series when the team was in Brooklyn?

- Do people in LA really care what the Lakers accomplished when in Minneapolis?

- Do people in Indianapolis bask in the glory of what the Baltimore Colts did?

- Do people in Tennessee discuss the "good old days" of the Houston Oilers?

I could go on and on. Owners, players, and coaches come and go. It's the cities and their fans that are the constant for a team.

As happy as I will be when the Sonics return to Seattle, I don't care if it's the Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers that move here to become the Sonics, I won't care about what the team did prior to coming here. All I'll care about is the Sonics 41 year history and what happens from then on.

You might have a point if the fans had anything to do with the nicknames or the teams won with local players, but neither is true for the vast majority of American sports teams. "Fans" are customers by another name, and nobody acts like the local McDonalds building needs to keep its records and furnishings if the boss chooses to move his franchise.

Exactly.

A sports team is a private business, a private entity. If a championship is won then that private entity won it, not the fans or the city.

Also, if I spend the money neccecary to purchase a team I'm going to make sure I retain all the relevant trademarks and history of that team if I, for whatever reason, decide to move.

I think you're both missing the point. There is no way you can compare a pro sports team to any other business in the world. It's apples and oranges.

Honestly, Ice_Cap, if the Montréal Canadiens were stolen away by another city and then the LA Kings moved to Montréal 5 years later, you're telling me you're going to ignore the previous history of the Canadiens and then claim the history of the Kings as your own?

I don't buy McDonalds gear, I don't pay to watch the workers cook burgers, I don't listen to the post closing report to hear how the day's sales went. Teams are a whole different world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, teams are strictly speaking private entities. But they enter into a sort of public-private arrangement with their cities, especially in light of the massive public investment.

Cities aren't spending half a billion dollars to build facilities for a McDonald's franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, teams are strictly speaking private entities. But they enter into a sort of public-private arrangement with their cities, especially in light of the massive public investment.

Cities aren't spending half a billion dollars to build facilities for a McDonald's franchise.

It wouldn't surprise me if Glendale did...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, teams are strictly speaking private entities. But they enter into a sort of public-private arrangement with their cities, especially in light of the massive public investment.

Cities aren't spending half a billion dollars to build facilities for a McDonald's franchise.

No. They just give tax breaks. Which are effectively the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the best name would be the New Orleans Spirit! While I do not personally like non plural names this seems to fit & the NBA is all about doing that Heat, Magic, & Thunder to name a few.

The rest of the names just sound like they do not belong in the NBA. Mardi Gras colors should be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*facepalm* oh boy..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are confusing franchise history and fan memories. The records should stay with the team. If your city gets a replacement team, go ahead and honor it, but don't pretend like you own it. I still think the Browns deal is an insult to fans' intelligence. But it certainly has changed the way some people think about these things.

Bottom line IMO: The Hornets can change to whatever they like. And the Bobcats can rebrand if they think that helps, but do like the Jets and recognize that you aren't the same team. Our do as the Rams and honor both.

I dread the Sonics return for only one reason: the mess it will make with the now Thunder history, and also with whatever team's history relocates there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the best name would be the New Orleans Spirit! While I do not personally like non plural names this seems to fit & the NBA is all about doing that Heat, Magic, & Thunder to name a few.

The rest of the names just sound like they do not belong in the NBA. Mardi Gras colors should be used.

And ironically, "Spirits" was the original name of the Charlotte expansion franchise before ultimately choosing "Hornets".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said, simply leave the New Orleans Hornets name alone.. if ya do that, ya gonna have some NBA teams demanding to swap nicknames and histories and it will get confusing in a hurry.. so best to leave the NO Hornets, Utah Jazz and Charlotte Bobcats names alone.. period, that's all..

I disagree. In my opinion the history should ALWAYS stay with the city not the franchise. If an owner wants to move, fine, but start over with a new history in your new city. I've said it before and will continue to do so. Do people in new cities honestly care what teams accomplished prior to moving?

- Do people in LA really think "they" won the world series when the team was in Brooklyn?

- Do people in LA really care what the Lakers accomplished when in Minneapolis?

- Do people in Indianapolis bask in the glory of what the Baltimore Colts did?

- Do people in Tennessee discuss the "good old days" of the Houston Oilers?

I could go on and on. Owners, players, and coaches come and go. It's the cities and their fans that are the constant for a team.

As happy as I will be when the Sonics return to Seattle, I don't care if it's the Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers that move here to become the Sonics, I won't care about what the team did prior to coming here. All I'll care about is the Sonics 41 year history and what happens from then on.

You might have a point if the fans had anything to do with the nicknames or the teams won with local players, but neither is true for the vast majority of American sports teams. "Fans" are customers by another name, and nobody acts like the local McDonalds building needs to keep its records and furnishings if the boss chooses to move his franchise.

Exactly.

A sports team is a private business, a private entity. If a championship is won then that private entity won it, not the fans or the city.

Also, if I spend the money neccecary to purchase a team I'm going to make sure I retain all the relevant trademarks and history of that team if I, for whatever reason, decide to move.

I think you're both missing the point. There is no way you can compare a pro sports team to any other business in the world. It's apples and oranges.

Honestly, Ice_Cap, if the Montréal Canadiens were stolen away by another city and then the LA Kings moved to Montréal 5 years later, you're telling me you're going to ignore the previous history of the Canadiens and then claim the history of the Kings as your own?

I don't buy McDonalds gear, I don't pay to watch the workers cook burgers, I don't listen to the post closing report to hear how the day's sales went. Teams are a whole different world.

Couldn't agree more, sports franchises are unique in this respect. The connections made by a sports franchise to that individual city are solely based on what occurred during the history. That's precisely why it's ridiculous for relocated teams or merchandise to claim any achievements from another previous city. Technically, we can say the Giants baseball franchise has won 6 World Titles. However, the reality of the situation is that five of those titles were won in New York, which lost the team more than a half century ago. Aside from Willie Mays and a few others, there were few connections from the New York era. The San Francisco Giants were born after that, and have established their own legacy, including the 2010 World Championship. When you stop and think about it, countless sports franchises have the city name on uniforms for a reason. How many other businesses utilize the city name at their location and have their employees wear attire with both the city name and company name?

Folks, franchise movement is much like a divorce, and often, it's best to change team nicknames as well to signify a fresh start. The case of the Giants I cited was a little different, since the western part of this country had very few other sports franchises during that era. The memories which happened during the time in the old city stay there, and with the fans who may be transplants or have a connection with that franchise. Heard one weird comment from a Braves fan comparing Chipper Jones with a Boston Braves player last season. Talk about a tenuous connection! Let's do a poll on how many other Atlanta Braves fans could even name one Boston Braves player. Naturally, the score will be incredibly low, because that was 60 plus years ago in a city twice removed. The uniqueness of sports franchises to the city the play in cannot be overstated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I know it'll never happen, but I can dream, can't I?

New Orleans Hornets switches identities with Utah Jazz to become the New Orleans Jazz yet again. It solves a decades old oddity as New Orleans was about the only place that could pull off the nickname Jazz right in the first place.

Utah becomes the Hornets which actually fits nicely with their state moniker as Utah as known as The Beehive State anyway and it also dovetails nicely with their minor league baseball team the Salt Lake City Bees (AAA). Besides, for all the success the team might have enjoyed, it's not as though they have any championships, so a slight change might be good.

As for Charlotte, I'd ditch the Bobcats in place of Cougars. Partially for the history of that name already, partially because the team's poor history under the current identity and because I really don't like the alleged narcissism in the choosing of the name by the team's original owner Robert "Bob" Johnson.

I think whatever team eventually comes to Seattle should adopt the Sonics moniker. It's not as though the team was only around for a couple of years, they were part of the city's fabric and even won a championship. I look to their return in much the same way Winnipeg got the Jets back. It's not so much about the team and the past history of the identity, it's the identity as it was identified with the city itself and their fans. Sure it's just the laundry, but it's the fans' laundry and they should be able to use it as the conduit for their support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the fans here in New Orleans are ok with not getting the Jazz nickname back, why can't the rest of the world be ok with it? Like it or not, they are the Utah Jazz. Utah is most certainly the rightful owner of that nickname and the history associated with the team (of which the vast majority of it has been in...oh Salt Lake City).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I know it'll never happen, but I can dream, can't I?

New Orleans Hornets switches identities with Utah Jazz to become the New Orleans Jazz yet again. It solves a decades old oddity as New Orleans was about the only place that could pull off the nickname Jazz right in the first place.

Utah becomes the Hornets which actually fits nicely with their state moniker as Utah as known as The Beehive State anyway and it also dovetails nicely with their minor league baseball team the Salt Lake City Bees (AAA). Besides, for all the success the team might have enjoyed, it's not as though they have any championships, so a slight change might be good.

That's...actually...brilliant....

Didn't know that bit of trivia about Utah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.