ksupilot

NYC FC Branding

Recommended Posts

Not involved in the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I continue to be amazed by the America is correct, and the rest of the world is wrong, mentality here. It's ok for things that Americans didn't invent to be considered good. It doesn't make one any less patriotic. America does a lot of things wonderfully. So does the rest of the world.

Yeah, but the practices of soccer fandom in the U.S. versus the rest of the world are kind of a "push". Organized fan groups "over there" tend to be bastions for political violence, racism, intimidation, and crime, just as much as they are about cheering for your home team. When's the last time an American professional team played in a (deliberately) empty stadium again?

That said, looting the names of famous European teams if you don't have an applicable local context for the name should never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but we're not taking about fan groups. We're talking about the teams and leagues themselves; do we deliberately change the game in an attempt to make it "ours" or do we embrace the best traditions from around the globe as emblematic of the sport's heritage?

I'd say a name like "New York City FC" is easily among those traditions. It enhances the league while serving as a mission statement for the club.

I really don't see where the gripe comes from. There is a possible case to be made against "Orlando City" or "Detroit City", not that I'd even agree there, but against a team that will play in (and definitively wants to represent) New York City? Setting itself up in opposition to the established suburban team? The objection is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I wish the MLS would do, is literally carry over the score on playoff games. Aggregate is not something a lot of North American sports fans understand.

During the Canadian Championship (our FA Cup) Vancouver and Montreal tied 2-2 on the 2nd leg (1st leg was 0-0), and only about half the fans there realized the Whitecaps lost because of away goals.

The MLS also has to make their playoffs mean something, and not have them in October/November. Their attendance actually goes down, because of weather and because Oct/Nov are the busiest sport times of the year.

NHL, NFL, NBA, MLB playoffs, college football, and college basketball are all going on at that time of year. End the season in September

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not a bad idea, although I'd have to take a serious look at the schedule. Having playoffs before baseball's would be good for exposure, but does that give them enough room to fit in the games? Can't start much earlier than they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to the traditions that govern the naming of pro soccer franches worldwide, said traditions include the so-called "American" convention of combining a place-name with a nickname. Soccer... football... futbol... calcio... is a GLOBAL sports phenomenon. Said globe includes the United States of America and Canada. As such, the "American" franchise naming convention is as legitimate a part of soccer's branding traditions as any other.

Therefore, I see no reason to believe that pro soccer in this country is suddenly going to abandon place-name/nickname combos completely. Nor should it.

Major League Soccer is likely to remain a league marked by multiple franchise branding traditions for the forseeable future: "American" (Chicago Fire, New England Revolution, Columbus Crew, etc.),.. "International/Euro" (DC United... FC Dallas... New York City FC, etc.)... even corporate (New York Red Bulls). I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. If anything, the variety makes for a less staid, more colorful and creative landscape.

My only concern would be if long-time MLS franchises jettisoned existing identities solely to ape whatever branding style happened to be trending at a given time. Similarly, as new teams enter MLS representing cities that had longstanding traditions in previous American and Canadian soccer leagues, I would hope they'd give consideration to reviving/maintaining identities from said leagues (as the Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers, and Vancouver Whitecaps recently have).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not a bad idea, although I'd have to take a serious look at the schedule. Having playoffs before baseball's would be good for exposure, but does that give them enough room to fit in the games? Can't start much earlier than they do.

I'd suggest a February through August schedule. Start the season right after the Super Bowl (Feb is a very slow month) and then have the Championship the weekend before the NFL regular season starts (MLB pennant races haven't heated up yet and the final preseason NFL game is by far the worst).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not a bad idea, although I'd have to take a serious look at the schedule. Having playoffs before baseball's would be good for exposure, but does that give them enough room to fit in the games? Can't start much earlier than they do.

I'd suggest a February through August schedule. Start the season right after the Super Bowl (Feb is a very slow month) and then have the Championship the weekend before the NFL regular season starts (MLB pennant races haven't heated up yet and the final preseason NFL game is by far the worst).

I think that's a little too early to start. Even though the EPL plays during the winter, most North American fans aren't acclimated (no pun intended) to the idea of soccer as a cold weather sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would also chop out a lot of games, given that it's two months shorter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed on Silverbacks. No better choice. Is the group getting the MLS club the same that owns the Silverbacks? In other words, is there a hurdle to leap to procure that name? Haven't been following this story closely.

If Blank is getting the team he can just buy out the owners for the name or invite them to join his group and co-opt it that way. As long as the logo has an actual gorilla and not the AS logo reconfigured it'd be a good look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to the traditions that govern the naming of pro soccer franches worldwide, said traditions include the so-called "American" convention of combining a place-name with a nickname. Soccer... football... futbol... calcio... is a GLOBAL sports phenomenon. Said globe includes the United States of America and Canada. As such, the "American" franchise naming convention is as legitimate a part of soccer's branding traditions as any other.

Therefore, I see no reason to believe that pro soccer in this country is suddenly going to abandon place-name/nickname combos completely. Nor should it.

Major League Soccer is likely to remain a league marked by multiple franchise branding traditions for the forseeable future: "American" (Chicago Fire, New England Revolution, Columbus Crew, etc.),.. "International/Euro" (DC United... FC Dallas... New York City FC, etc.)... even corporate (New York Red Bulls). I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. If anything, the variety makes for a less staid, more colorful and creative landscape.

My only concern would be if long-time MLS franchises jettisoned existing identities solely to ape whatever branding style happened to be trending at a given time. Similarly, as new teams enter MLS representing cities that had longstanding traditions in previous American and Canadian soccer leagues, I would hope they'd give consideration to reviving/maintaining identities from said leagues (as the Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers, and Vancouver Whitecaps recently have).

Chalk me up as another person who prefers the mix of naming conventions. I don't have a problem with European-style names for new clubs or old ones with crappy identities (Dallas Burn), but it'd be a shame to give up names that recall what little soccer tradition this side of the pond actually has (Timbers, Sounders, Whitecaps, Earthquakes, etc.) for the sake of adopting an identity that *sounds* traditional in the European sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but we're not taking about fan groups. We're talking about the teams and leagues themselves; do we deliberately change the game in an attempt to make it "ours" or do we embrace the best traditions from around the globe as emblematic of the sport's heritage?

I'd say a name like "New York City FC" is easily among those traditions. It enhances the league while serving as a mission statement for the club.

I really don't see where the gripe comes from. There is a possible case to be made against "Orlando City" or "Detroit City", not that I'd even agree there, but against a team that will play in (and definitively wants to represent) New York City? Setting itself up in opposition to the established suburban team? The objection is silly.

No sir. We make it ours. Our own traditions. Being a Europoser only gets you so far.

For those who really like tradition and are in favor of the Europoser, I mean Eurocentric names. we could go back to naming our football teams after baseball teams, like in the old days. NYCFC fits no tradition other than copying Europe. It's beyond stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we want to be truly traditional when it comes to American soccer, we'd name the teams after companies, eh?

1918team.jpg

So, our most traditional team is... RBNY?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're talking about Atlanta, Silverbacks is the right choice. But I like continuity, even if it's a somewhat-silly name.

Primate United :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but we're not taking about fan groups. We're talking about the teams and leagues themselves; do we deliberately change the game in an attempt to make it "ours" or do we embrace the best traditions from around the globe as emblematic of the sport's heritage?

I'd say a name like "New York City FC" is easily among those traditions. It enhances the league while serving as a mission statement for the club.

I really don't see where the gripe comes from. There is a possible case to be made against "Orlando City" or "Detroit City", not that I'd even agree there, but against a team that will play in (and definitively wants to represent) New York City? Setting itself up in opposition to the established suburban team? The objection is silly.

No sir. We make it ours. Our own traditions. Being a Europoser only gets you so far.

For those who really like tradition and are in favor of the Europoser, I mean Eurocentric names. we could go back to naming our football teams after baseball teams, like in the old days. NYCFC fits no tradition other than copying Europe. It's beyond stupid.

New York. New York. New York.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I like "Houston Dynamo," but it's a shame they had to abandon the original "Houston 1836." Naming a team after a year without adding "-ers" to the end was kind of cool. Saying that you're playing against "the eighteen-thirty-six" also sounds a lot more daunting than just eleven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're talking about Atlanta, Silverbacks is the right choice. But I like continuity, even if it's a somewhat-silly name.

Primate United :P

Playing in the Chimp Conference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're talking about Atlanta, Silverbacks is the right choice. But I like continuity, even if it's a somewhat-silly name.

Primate United :P

I don't get the joke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of other 'combo' Uniteds in the English Leagues...

  • Rotherham United, formed from the the merger of Rotherham County and Rotherham Town.
  • Torquay United, formed from Torquay Town and Babbacombe - although the waters are muddied somewhat as Town were the result of a previous merger in which one of the teams already carried the United suffix.
  • We could also count Hartlepool United - formerly Hartlepools United - named to represent the twin towns of Hartlepool and West Hartlepool.
  • There was also the now defunct Burton United, formed from Burton Swifts and Burton Wanderers.

In the main though, 'United' has become a generic name in the same way as Rovers or Town/City. What the MLS really needs, however, is a 'Stanley'. ;)

Accrington Stanley, who are they?

Share this post


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