Lights Out

Charlotte Hornets?

Recommended Posts

I like the name "Bobcats." I just hate the way their identity has progressed. Too much tinkering while staying true to the ugly font they've had since 2004. It's unfortunate that they've done so much tweaking and adjusting while never being any good on the court. That'll ruin any brand. I'd prefer they try to salvage it, but you can't fight the will of the people, and if the people want to dress them up as the old Charlotte Hornets, fine. Objectively, it'd be an improvement, if you can divorce it from the muddy lineage stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on what version of the Hornets logo they go with. The old one (the last one used in Charlotte) would look incredibly dated today.

As for the Bobcats, they should have made this the primary and gone from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this a few times, but the topic always comes up so I'll post it again. The Jets did it right. They took the old name and made it their own with a new logo and uniforms that look great. Evander Kane even asked Bobby Hull permission to wear #9 because of what he did in Winnipeg. But the team doesn't pretend that their the old Jets. That's perfect fine IMO and hopefully that's how the Bobcats treat it if/when they change to the Hornets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes between what's factually correct what's sentimental I'll chose the former over the latter. At the very least it's intellectually honest.

35ke38.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How has this thread not gotten Clevejacked? I'm sure every Browns/Ravens fan is rolling their eyes right now.

It may be unpopular, but I feel that cities should be able to protect a name of they choose. Obviously there are exceptions that have turned great (Lakers, Dodgers) but certain names are tied to a city or region, like the Hornets, Packers or Rockies.

Being fan-owned would prevent a Green Bay relocation, but could you imagine the Rockies being anywhere but Colorado?

Also, Utah Jazz is still a retarded name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How has this thread not gotten Clevejacked? I'm sure every Browns/Ravens fan is rolling their eyes right now.

It may be unpopular, but I feel that cities should be able to protect a name of they choose. Obviously there are exceptions that have turned great (Lakers, Dodgers) but certain names are tied to a city or region, like the Hornets, Packers or Rockies.

Being fan-owned would prevent a Green Bay relocation, but could you imagine the Rockies being anywhere but Colorado?

Also, Utah Jazz is still a retarded name.

The ABA's Spirits of St. Louis were planning to move to Utah and be called the Rockies if there had been another season for that league IIRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How has this thread not gotten Clevejacked? I'm sure every Browns/Ravens fan is rolling their eyes right now.

It may be unpopular, but I feel that cities should be able to protect a name of they choose. Obviously there are exceptions that have turned great (Lakers, Dodgers) but certain names are tied to a city or region, like the Hornets, Packers or Rockies.

Being fan-owned would prevent a Green Bay relocation, but could you imagine the Rockies being anywhere but Colorado?

Also, Utah Jazz is still a retarded stupid name.

Fixed it for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes between what's factually correct what's sentimental I'll chose the former over the latter. At the very least it's intellectually honest.

35ke38.jpg

While I always enjoy a good Princess Bride reference I'm afraid you've miss used one here. I'm well aware of the meaning behind the terms I'm using. Let's break it down.

The Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans and became the New Orleans Hornets. They've since announced their intentions to rebrand as the New Orleans Pelicans. Same organization, two locations, two names.

The Charlotte Bobcats are a 2000s expansion team. They were never the original Charlotte Hornets and never will be, even if you dress them up like them.

This is not an opinion. It's not an interpretation of a series of events, they are the events, simply stated as they happened. To recognize that as the reality, that's intellectually honest, my friend. To dress the Bobcats up as the Hornets and pretend they are the Hornets of days past because that's what the fanbase wished had happened (ie sentimentality)? That's a lie.

Look, if you want to disagree with me because you value the role sentimentality can play, go ahead. Don't insult me in a backhanded manner though. My terminology was correct and consistent with my argument even if you disagree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people/costumer/$$$ base of Charlotte wants it. New Orleans doesn't. What is the problem again? Hell, the guy who picked the Bobcats name in Charlotte isn't with the team anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people/costumer/$$$ base of Charlotte wants it. New Orleans doesn't. What is the problem again? Hell, the guy who picked the Bobcats name in Charlotte isn't with the team anymore.

I agree way too much thought being put into connecting the old Hornets with the future Hornets. Who cares? Just like the Seattle Sounders, Vancouver Whitecaps, Portland Timbers, and Winnipeg Jets, fans want their free agent basketball identity back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To dress the Bobcats up as the Hornets and pretend they are the Hornets of days past because that's what the fanbase wished had happened (ie sentimentality)? That's a lie.

One thing does not necessitate the other, and I'm not aware of anyone seriously suggesting the latter. If and when the franchise does that, you are free to repeat the charge.

Having a plaque to Warren Spahn inside Miller Park doesn't mean anybody's pretending he was a Brewer, after all.

Look, if you want to disagree with me because you value the role sentimentality can play, go ahead. Don't insult me in a backhanded manner though. My terminology was correct and consistent with my argument even if you disagree with it.

I didn't mean to insult you. I thought that meme an exceedingly mild jibe at best. Sorry you didn't receive it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How has this thread not gotten Clevejacked? I'm sure every Browns/Ravens fan is rolling their eyes right now.

It may be unpopular, but I feel that cities should be able to protect a name of they choose. Obviously there are exceptions that have turned great (Lakers, Dodgers) but certain names are tied to a city or region, like the Hornets, Packers or Rockies.

Being fan-owned would prevent a Green Bay relocation, but could you imagine the Rockies being anywhere but Colorado?

Also, Utah Jazz is [redacted]l a retarded stupid fine name that is inextricable from it's location of the last 30 years. So quitchyer bitchin'

Fixed it for you.

Fixed it for both of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To dress the Bobcats up as the Hornets and pretend they are the Hornets of days past because that's what the fanbase wished had happened (ie sentimentality)? That's a lie.

One thing does not necessitate the other, and I'm not aware of anyone seriously suggesting the latter. If and when the franchise does that, you are free to repeat the charge.

Having a plaque to Warren Spahn inside Miller Park doesn't mean anybody's pretending he was a Brewer, after all.

Yes, and I've already said that I'm fine with a situation where the Bobcats name themselves the Hornets, and even honour the old team, so long as the New Orleans Pelicans get to hold onto the records of the original Charlotte Hornets team. It is their past and all.

I hope that's what happens, but I'll play the pessimist card here. If the Bobcats change their name to the Hornets you will see some level of record book gerrymandering to grant them at least the Pelicans' pre-New Orleans records, which as I said would be intellectually dishonest. Why do I think they'll actually do that? Well when news first broke that the Sacramento Kings might move to Seattle there was, of course, the debate about franchise history. I think it was reported that if the Kings did become the new Sonics then Clay Bennett would send the Sonics' history back to Seattle.

We talk about this stuff fairly regularly so we're used to these kinds of terms, but actually think about what that statement is implying. Sending history back. How does that work, exactly? The idea of it is absurd. Like BigBubba said, if I changed my user name and he adopted the user name Ice_Cap I couldn't just send him my post history. History is history. It binds to us, to people, organizations, what have you. What you do, it's your history, but it's not yours to do with as you wish. You can't send it away or trade it. Yet in the case of the Kings, Seattle, and the Thunder the NBA is quite ready to try to do just that. So I don't believe they'll be able to restrain themselves should the Bobcats adopt the Hornets moniker. Again, if the records of the Charlotte/New Orleans Hornets stay with the Pelicans while the Bobcats rename themselves the Hornets that's fine. And I'll be pleasantly surprised if that's all that ends up happening as a result of this proposed name change.

Look, if you want to disagree with me because you value the role sentimentality can play, go ahead. Don't insult me in a backhanded manner though. My terminology was correct and consistent with my argument even if you disagree with it.

I didn't mean to insult you. I thought that meme an exceedingly mild jibe at best. Sorry you didn't receive it that way.

I guess my issue with it was that it just didn't work. I maintain that my use of terminology has been on-target this entire discussion. I don't think I've misused a word or phrase at all. Even if we agree to disagree on this issue, I don't think you can say my language has been faulty. A meme is a form of comedy, after all. And comedy works best when it's based on truth. Without that it just came across as mean spirited.

My apologies for misinterpreting it though.

Also the Utah Jazz name is awesome, and it's been around longer then New Orleans has hosted NBA basketball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History is where it happened. Using the Thunder/Sonics as an example; yeah, the Thunder were the Sonics, but according to history and the NBA record books, the Oklahoma City Thunder didn't win the 1979 NBA Championship, the Seattle SuperSonics did. Like you said, you can't move history. All you're saying is who "owns" that history. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter who technically owns it, because its still where it happened. Yes the original Hornets are now, or soon will be, the Pelicans. And if the Bobcats switch to the Hornets they won't have the same lineage. Doesn't mean any history of the previous Charlotte Hornets is actually in New Orleans. It's still in Charlotte.

To sum it up, there's a difference between legal ownership of history and actual history. Legal ownership of the original Charlotte Hornets' history is in New Orleans. The actual history of the original Charlotte Hornets is in Charlotte.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History is where it happened. Using the Thunder/Sonics as an example; yeah, the Thunder were the Sonics, but according to history and the NBA record books, the Oklahoma City Thunder didn't win the 1979 NBA Championship, the Seattle SuperSonics did. Like you said, you can't move history. All you're saying is who "owns" that history. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter who technically owns it, because its still where it happened. Yes the original Hornets are now, or soon will be, the Pelicans. And if the Bobcats switch to the Hornets they won't have the same lineage. Doesn't mean any history of the previous Charlotte Hornets is actually in New Orleans. It's still in Charlotte.

To sum it up, there's a difference between legal ownership of history and actual history. Legal ownership of the original Charlotte Hornets' history is in New Orleans. The actual history of the original Charlotte Hornets is in Charlotte.

Summed it up right totally agree with this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History is where it happened. Using the Thunder/Sonics as an example; yeah, the Thunder were the Sonics, but according to history and the NBA record books, the Oklahoma City Thunder didn't win the 1979 NBA Championship, the Seattle SuperSonics did. Like you said, you can't move history. All you're saying is who "owns" that history. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter who technically owns it, because its still where it happened. Yes the original Hornets are now, or soon will be, the Pelicans. And if the Bobcats switch to the Hornets they won't have the same lineage. Doesn't mean any history of the previous Charlotte Hornets is actually in New Orleans. It's still in Charlotte.

To sum it up, there's a difference between legal ownership of history and actual history. Legal ownership of the original Charlotte Hornets' history is in New Orleans. The actual history of the original Charlotte Hornets is in Charlotte.

Can you move history? The people and groups who it happened to can move, so in that sense it can. If you move to a new city your history, all that happened to you in your old home, is still yours. You can't trade your history though. If I move to your old city you can't "send" me your history in that city. Reality doesn't work that way.

So history can't be moved in the sense that the people and organizations it "clings" to (for lack of a better term) can't just send it or trade it away because it becomes inconvenient. It can be "moved" of the people and organizations associated with it move though. The history moves with them, and the past from the old locale shapes the future in the new one.

Basically the 1979 NBA Championship was won by the organization that now plays in Oklahoma City. While the sentimental attachment without question lies in Seattle no future Seattle team, be they a relocated team or an expansion team, can claim that 1979 NBA Championship as their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to handle it like the Jets did if it happens, even if they want to use the old logos. Can't pretend that Hornets version 1 has a lineage to version 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How has this thread not gotten Clevejacked? I'm sure every Browns/Ravens fan is rolling their eyes right now.

It may be unpopular, but I feel that cities should be able to protect a name of they choose. Obviously there are exceptions that have turned great (Lakers, Dodgers) but certain names are tied to a city or region, like the Hornets, Packers or Rockies.

Being fan-owned would prevent a Green Bay relocation, but could you imagine the Rockies being anywhere but Colorado?

Also, Utah Jazz is [redacted]l a retarded stupid fine name that is inextricable from it's location of the last 30 years. So quitchyer bitchin'

Fixed it for you.

Fixed it for both of you.

I agree with you on that opinion ... being a Jazz fan and all. Just fixing an ignorant way of stating one's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do those of you who don't want cities to keep their history honestly believe that Tom Benson and New Orleans have more to do with the Charlotte Hornets than the city of Charlotte does? Really?

Share this post


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