Charlotte Hornets?

[BlackBolt3]

The history wasn't handled as well as it could have been. That itself is true. But, just the emotional value of having the old Hornets history back is just so satisfying. There's just this aurora about it that everybody that's a fan of the franchise wants back.

[IceCap]

Now obviously for season-by-season record-keeping, Team X isn't Team Y

Which is the problem, because the NBA is now saying Team X is Team Y.

The history wasn't handled as well as it could have been. That itself is true. But, just the emotional value of having the old Hornets history back is just so satisfying. There's just this aurora about it that everybody that's a fan of the franchise wants back.

That's cool, but the new Winnipeg Jets managed to accomplish that for their fans without re-writing history.

[jakepled]

I'm at the point where I just don't care. Too old. I see both sides, we smart fans know what's up, but if it seems to bring happiness to people, fine, whatever, let people pretend. Santa Claus makes kids happy, too. World keeps turnin'.The only sport where I think I have some cut-and-dried stance on all this is baseball, owing to the rareness and magnitude of its franchise relocations (for the most part). I think a team should be entitled to civic history and organizational history. That is to say, the Twins get to honor the Washington Senators' history as part of the franchise, the Nats get to honor the Senators' history as part of Washington [iNDEPENDENT] baseball, and also get to honor the Montreal Expos as part of their franchise. Actually, I would say not "get to," but "should." Now obviously for season-by-season record-keeping, Team X isn't Team Y, but teams like the Brewers should be able to freely refer to Milwaukee Braves achievements as part of a greater shared history without dorks on the internet going NO YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CLAIM THE MILWAUKEE BRAVES THEY'RE MINE MINE MINE MINE MINE.I guess the upshot of this is that the Nationals shouldn't have reinstated the Expos' retired numbers, those rat bastards.

So Baltimore holds claim to 27 titles?

NYY were originally the BLT Orioles.

[guest23]

The history isn't that murky. It's quite simple, actually. The New Orleans history is 2003-present. The Charlotte history is 1988-present and includes all teams that played in Charlotte.

The city of Charlotte led the entire NBA in attendance in '88, '90, '91, '92, '93, '94, '95, '96, as well as finishing 2nd in '88, '97. The Hornets finished 20-62 their inaugural season, but still sold out every single game and led the NBA in attendance. A banner was made that read "Charlotte Hornets 1988-89 NBA Attendance Champion 950,064". They set it up during the summer and allowed season ticket holders to sign it. Then on opening night they honored the fans of Charlotte for their support and raised the banner to the rafters. Why should that banner be hanging in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

The purple/teal Hornets that featured Muggsy, LJ, & Zo never played in New Orleans. The brand that is so popular was exclusive to Charlotte. When they moved to New Orleans the colors were changed to blue & yellow, & they later completely revamped the old logo. Why should purple/teal snapbacks & Larry Johnson jerseys be sold in the New Orleans team store instead of the Charlotte team store?

Bobby Phills died while playing in Charlotte. The next season the team held a special ceremony with his family and hung his jersey in the rafters, permanently retiring his jersey number. He died while playing and living in Charlotte, where his family resides to this day. Why should his banner hang in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

The name "Hornets" has ties to Charlotte dating back to the Revolutionary War in 1780, when a General called Charlotte "a hornets nest of rebellion." From 1892-1936 there was a minor league baseball team in Charlotte nicknamed the Hornets. Why should the Hornets brand be locked away by a franchise that didn't want it in New Orleans instead of returning to a city that truly loves it and has a deep history of meaning with it?

Even the mascot is named after a hurricane that tore thru Charlotte in 1989, during the start of the team's 2nd season. Hugo the Hornet was created and named after history involving Charlotte. Why should that mascot be locked away and unused by New Orleans instead of returning home to Charlotte?

The history being taken from the New Orleans franchise and given to the new Charlotte franchise seems really stupid on the surface. However, when you look at the big picture and everything it means the change makes absolutely perfect sense. It has nothing to do with the actual statistical numbers and records. It is everything else. In order to get all that other stuff that is so deeply tied to Charlotte the stats have to be included in the transfer.

New Orleans fans can keep crying and saying Charlotte stole their name. Sorry folks, it was never your name to begin with.

That's all well and good, except for one simple fact: they're not the same team, period. The original Charlotte Hornets are the Pelicans. The new Hornets are an expansion team. Bobby Phills has no legitimate ties to the former Bobcats. Neither do Muggsy, LJ, and Zo. They have ties to the city, to the memories of the people living there, but as for an actual, concrete connection, there's nothing valid there. Memories are fine, so is nostalgia, so is honoring a legacy. That's what the reclaiming the Hornets name was supposed to be. But twisting and reshaping history to fit the memories and nostalgia of the people? That's wrong and dishonest, plain and simple.

It amazes me how a citizenry can become so emotionally attached to a for profit business. There's nothing inherently wrong with being a fan, but some of these explanations of a civic attachment to a short lived expansion franchise seems absolutely nuts. The fact of the matter is that no degree of rebranding is going to recreate some flash in the pan 1990's nostalgia if they don't win.

Super-Fans need to separate themselves from their franchises a bit. 99% of these instances the ownership only cares about making money and having taxpayers subsidizing their business. If the team packs up and leaves move on. If a new franchise sets up shop, support it or don't, whichever you choose. To think that there's some history or ownership embedded within the city is just foolish. The only exception that's ever made sense is the Browns as that was a total screw over because there was no decent excuse to leave.

[The_Admiral]

So Baltimore holds claim to 27 titles?

NYY were originally the BLT Orioles.

I think you're doing it backwards.

[IceCap]

NYY were originally the BLT Orioles.

And all of the original Baltimore Orioles records belong to the New York Yankees. MLB didn't re-write history like the NBA is doing and award the Yankees' Baltimore-era statistics to the new Orioles.

[jakepled]

The NBA is simply doing what they should've done in '02.

They're simply saying when New Orleans relocated they became an entirely new franchise. The old team stays behind.

[The_Admiral]

And I'm not saying they should, either. More than anything I think I'm reacting to how people were getting really bitchy about the Jets and how no broadcaster would be allowed to say things like "the most points scored by a Jet since Dale Hawerchuk" or whatever. There shouldn't be any harm in making references like that. Trying to pretend the original Jets are off-limits from being acknowledged is silly, and particularly ironic since the Septet of Stupid retained all the trademarks on the Atlanta Thrashers and so they're legally off-limits from being acknowledged.

[TaylorMade]

So... where does the New Orleans Jazz history fit in?

I'll see myself out.

[frosty06306]

The NBA is simply doing what they should've done in '02.

They're simply saying when New Orleans relocated they became an entirely new franchise. The old team stays behind.

This is really making people upset.

[jakepled]

The history isn't that murky. It's quite simple, actually. The New Orleans history is 2003-present. The Charlotte history is 1988-present and includes all teams that played in Charlotte.

The city of Charlotte led the entire NBA in attendance in '88, '90, '91, '92, '93, '94, '95, '96, as well as finishing 2nd in '88, '97. The Hornets finished 20-62 their inaugural season, but still sold out every single game and led the NBA in attendance. A banner was made that read "Charlotte Hornets 1988-89 NBA Attendance Champion 950,064". They set it up during the summer and allowed season ticket holders to sign it. Then on opening night they honored the fans of Charlotte for their support and raised the banner to the rafters. Why should that banner be hanging in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

The purple/teal Hornets that featured Muggsy, LJ, & Zo never played in New Orleans. The brand that is so popular was exclusive to Charlotte. When they moved to New Orleans the colors were changed to blue & yellow, & they later completely revamped the old logo. Why should purple/teal snapbacks & Larry Johnson jerseys be sold in the New Orleans team store instead of the Charlotte team store?

Bobby Phills died while playing in Charlotte. The next season the team held a special ceremony with his family and hung his jersey in the rafters, permanently retiring his jersey number. He died while playing and living in Charlotte, where his family resides to this day. Why should his banner hang in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

The name "Hornets" has ties to Charlotte dating back to the Revolutionary War in 1780, when a General called Charlotte "a hornets nest of rebellion." From 1892-1936 there was a minor league baseball team in Charlotte nicknamed the Hornets. Why should the Hornets brand be locked away by a franchise that didn't want it in New Orleans instead of returning to a city that truly loves it and has a deep history of meaning with it?

Even the mascot is named after a hurricane that tore thru Charlotte in 1989, during the start of the team's 2nd season. Hugo the Hornet was created and named after history involving Charlotte. Why should that mascot be locked away and unused by New Orleans instead of returning home to Charlotte?

The history being taken from the New Orleans franchise and given to the new Charlotte franchise seems really stupid on the surface. However, when you look at the big picture and everything it means the change makes absolutely perfect sense. It has nothing to do with the actual statistical numbers and records. It is everything else. In order to get all that other stuff that is so deeply tied to Charlotte the stats have to be included in the transfer.

New Orleans fans can keep crying and saying Charlotte stole their name. Sorry folks, it was never your name to begin with.

That's all well and good, except for one simple fact: they're not the same team, period. The original Charlotte Hornets are the Pelicans. The new Hornets are an expansion team. Bobby Phills has no legitimate ties to the former Bobcats. Neither do Muggsy, LJ, and Zo. They have ties to the city, to the memories of the people living there, but as for an actual, concrete connection, there's nothing valid there. Memories are fine, so is nostalgia, so is honoring a legacy. That's what the reclaiming the Hornets name was supposed to be. But twisting and reshaping history to fit the memories and nostalgia of the people? That's wrong and dishonest, plain and simple.

It amazes me how a citizenry can become so emotionally attached to a for profit business. There's nothing inherently wrong with being a fan, but some of these explanations of a civic attachment to a short lived expansion franchise seems absolutely nuts. The fact of the matter is that no degree of rebranding is going to recreate some flash in the pan 1990's nostalgia if they don't win.

Super-Fans need to separate themselves from their franchises a bit. 99% of these instances the ownership only cares about making money and having taxpayers subsidizing their business. If the team packs up and leaves move on. If a new franchise sets up shop, support it or don't, whichever you choose. To think that there's some history or ownership embedded within the city is just foolish. The only exception that's ever made sense is the Browns as that was a total screw over because there was no decent excuse to leave.

Charlotte's franchise can never be relocated.

[IceCap]

And I'm not saying they should, either. More than anything I think I'm reacting to how people were getting really bitchy about the Jets and how no broadcaster would be allowed to say things like "the most points scored by a Jet since Dale Hawerchuk" or whatever. There shouldn't be any harm in making references like that.

No, there's no harm in that. Hell, there's no harm in bringing Teemu Selanne out for a ceremonial puck drop now and then. The issue is where the record books are concerned. The NBA is now actively re-writing those.

Charlotte's franchise can never be relocated.

It was. For two years. When the team left. And took the history and identity that was rightfully theirs with them.

[jakepled]

The NBA is simply doing what they should've done in '02.

They're simply saying when New Orleans relocated they became an entirely new franchise. The old team stays behind.

This is really making people upset.

Good.

Charlotte was screwed over by Stern. They were the most loyal fanbase in the NBA and he allowed Stern to :censored: it all up. The team should've been stripped from him in the 90s. Then none of this mess would be happening.

[Shadojoker]

You guys are all ignoring the best stuff out of that news presser....NEW UNIFORMS AND JERSEYS in June!!! No long wait til like August or anything!

Besides you got to give them props for working with the NBA and the Pelicans organization to coordinate the history together. Not ignore but embrace and expand that two separate entities can exist at one.

[Xist2inspire]

As far as Bobby Phills goes, and the rest of the original Hornets' players for that matter, let's look at the Minnesota Timberwolves. They have a statue of George Mikan outside of their arena. But that's it. They don't have his number retired, they don't claim the Minneapolis Lakers' titles as their own, they don't pretend that Minnesota basketball is all one pure, unbroken entity. If the new Hornets want to prevent players from wearing Phills' number out of respect, that would be wonderful. If they want to give Muggsy, Zo, LJ, etc. statues, go right ahead. But the original team left, folks. You reclaimed the identity. History does not change because of it.

It's a shame that I hope the Sonics never come back for a good while, so that this situation doesn't repeat itself.

[The_Admiral]

I agree that retroactively shuffling the records around is stupid. I just can't get worked up anymore. I just got some exercise! I'm tired! I'm hungry. Ask me again tonight.

Mr. Jake P. Led, however, is adding an interesting angle to all this with the intimations that David Stern pushed hard for this to happen and never wanted the team to leave or take the history with them. I wish he had had the league buy the team from Shinn in 2002; it would have prevented the domino rally of crap that went on with New Orleans/Seattle/Oklahoma City.

[tron1013]

How mentally challenged are some of you?

You seem to take the cake, champ.

The history isn't that murky. It's quite simple, actually.

Not really.

The name "Hornets" has ties to Charlotte dating back to the Revolutionary War in 1780, when a General called Charlotte "a hornets nest of rebellion." From 1892-1936 there was a minor league baseball team in Charlotte nicknamed the Hornets. Why should the Hornets brand be locked away by a franchise that didn't want it in New Orleans instead of returning to a city that truly loves it and has a deep history of meaning with it?

Do you know who the city of Charlotte is named after? Queen Charlotte, beloved wife of George III, the king the American revolutionaries were revolting against. The city even calls itself "the Queen City" in reference to Queen Charlotte. Your "rah rah Revolutionary War reference rah rah" argument would hold more water if your city didn't keep the name of the wife of the guy the Revolution was waged against.

The city of Charlotte led the entire NBA in attendance in '88, '90, '91, '92, '93, '94, '95, '96, as well as finishing 2nd in '88, '97. The Hornets finished 20-62 their inaugural season, but still sold out every single game and led the NBA in attendance. A banner was made that read "Charlotte Hornets 1988-89 NBA Attendance Champion 950,064". They set it up during the summer and allowed season ticket holders to sign it. Then on opening night they honored the fans of Charlotte for their support and raised the banner to the rafters. Why should that banner be hanging in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

It should hang in New Orleans because it's the New Orleans franchise that achieved that record.

Bobby Phills died while playing in Charlotte. The next season the team held a special ceremony with his family and hung his jersey in the rafters, permanently retiring his jersey number. He died while playing and living in Charlotte, where his family resides to this day. Why should his banner hang in the New Orleans rafters instead of the Charlotte rafters?

Again, because the franchise Bobby Phills played for now resides in New Orleans. He may have played for them while they were located in Charlotte, but the franchise's history should stay with the organization. Which means it should say in New Orleans.

New Orleans fans can keep crying and saying Charlotte stole their name. Sorry folks, it was never your name to begin with.

Actually, it was New Orleans' name. For eight years.

I get it, the new "Hornets" are not the OLD "Hornets". But the history of basketball in Charlotte deserves to stay there.

Anyone who thinks the old Hornets history belongs with the Pelicans has their priorities out of whack.

I don't mean for this to sound insulting, but here's why I disagree. Facts mean things.

Fact is the first Charlotte Hornets franchise moved to New Orleans in 2002, where they currently reside under the name "New Orleans Pelicans." The new Charlotte basketball team can use the old Hornets name. That's fine. Actually re-writing history and ignoring the facts of what happened? Orwellian historical revisionism and blatant disregard to the factual historical record.

According to the NBA, they are the exact same franchise. Period.

And that's what's so bothersome. They're not the same franchise. It's obvious. The NBA is simply re-writing history to say they are. And that's not cool.

So then the Clippers, who used to be the Celtics until 1978, have 13 NBA titles in their illustrious history, right?

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/freaky-friday-n-b-a-style-when-the-clippers-were-the-celtics/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977%E2%80%9378_Boston_Celtics_season

[IceCap]

The NBA is simply doing what they should've done in '02.

They're simply saying when New Orleans relocated they became an entirely new franchise. The old team stays behind.

This is really making people upset.

Good.

Do you know why it's getting people upset? It's because this whole thing is an exercise in massive delusional group think. It's an entire fanbase wilfully ignoring reality. It's bad enough that the actual history of the game is being tampered with. It's made worse by a large group of people collectively closing their eyes and humming really loud, hoping if they do it hard enough history will somehow contort itself into their desired shape.

I don't care about the team reusing the Hornets name, jake. I care about the integrity of the past. Which as been violated so an entire fanbase can play make-believe.

So then the Clippers, who used to be the Celtics until 1978, have 13 NBA titles in their illustrious history, right?

Nah. The franchises and organizations stayed intact even if the personnel changed. Nice try moving the goalposts though.

[frosty06306]

"Do you know why it's getting people upset? It's because this whole thing is an exercise in massive delusional group think. It's an entire fanbase wilfully ignoring reality. It's bad enough that the actual history of the game is being tampered with. It's made worse by a large group of people collectively closing their eyes and humming really loud, hoping if they do it hard enough history will somehow contort itself into their desired shape.

I don't care about the team reusing the Hornets name, jake. I care about the integrity of the past. Which as been violated so an entire fanbase can play make-believe."

I don't think anyone is willfully ignoring reality lmao

[IceCap]

I don't think anyone is willfully ignoring reality lmao

Nah, they are. By re-writing the record books they're ignoring what actually happened.