chakfu Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Im all for California Warriors..San Francisco is too long = could have OKC bad jerseys trying to fit all those words. .and Just no just cause1. The Warriors' uniforms don't really require the city name to be present, and if they do, the font is small enough to negate length.2. Even if they want the "San Francisco" words to show up on their own, it's been done before and looked fine.I'm all for the "San Francisco" name change, even if "Golden State" sounds unique (a relic of travel teams). Interesting, I never knew about that jersey - kind of a transitional form from Philadelphia with the red being retained.I can go either way on this. On the one hand, Golden State was always a weird name that didn't make much sense. On the other hand, it's got some tradition behind it and is unique - and changing to SF is a bit of a slap in the face to Oakland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 If the Rangers moved over to Dallas and changed their name to the Dallas Rangers, no one here could complain about it since the team would actually play IN Dallas. Of course, that would take away the significance of why they're called the Texas Rangers instead of the Dallas or Fort Worth or Arlington Rangers... I've complained that they even went with a dopey name like "Texas Rangers" in the first place. "Dallas Chaparrals," sigh, if only. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rays Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 They're returning to San Francisco. Why are people upset over the name change? It's logical. I am upset over both, don´t leave Oakland dammit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromatic Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 I'm definitely in favour of the name change. Yes 'Golden State' is unique, but not only does it sound like a div 3 college team, there are 3 other basketball teams in California. I hate when teams use an entire regional moniker when there are other teams in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Noire Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 As far as the Warriors being the bay areas team...they don't seem to agree. They have branded heavily in favor of SF and now its name should reflect that. I see this in the same vein as the Cowboys, representing Dallas but playing in Arlington. As well as the "Los Angeles" Angels playing their ball in Anaheim. They may play in a building in Oakland but the Warriors are of San Fransisco. I'm breaking my cousins heart here but its true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rays Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 What´s the problem up there, The Raiders moved back and forth several times, now this crap ! *facepalm* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 They're returning to San Francisco. Why are people upset over the name change? It's logical. I am upset over both, don´t leave Oakland dammitHave you ever actually been to Oakland? On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 "Golden State" is actually short for:California State University - Golden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xist2inspire Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Meh, "Golden State" has a certain charm to it in my opinion, same as "New England" does for the Patriots. I tend to forgive teams for using a state name when the state's large enough to have multiple markets that are left out despite having multiple teams, or in New England's case, a large area that the vast majority will probably never see a pro team, ever. It makes sense for them to change, but something about "San Francisco" doesn't sound as nice to me, never did. Tradition is the foundation of innovation, and not the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soarindude Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Plot twist: team moves to San Diego, uses the German version of the city."Whales Vagina Warriors" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerslionspistonshabs Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 What´s the problem up there, The Raiders moved back and forth several times, now this crap ! *facepalm*They moved forth and back once. Normally, I would be against state or regional names if there are more than one team in that state or region. In this case, there's 4 teams. But it's been their name for 43 years. I vote for Golden State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Meh, "Golden State" has a certain charm to it in my opinion, same as "New England" does for the Patriots. I tend to forgive teams for using a state name when the state's large enough to have multiple markets that are left out despite having multiple teams, or in New England's case, a large area that the vast majority will probably never see a pro team, ever. It makes sense for them to change, but something about "San Francisco" doesn't sound as nice to me, never did.The difference is that the New England patriots are right in between providence and boston and cant really claim either city. They are also the only nfl team in all of New England. The warriors are completely different they are located in a major city, and there are 3 other teams in the area they are trying to claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xist2inspire Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Meh, "Golden State" has a certain charm to it in my opinion, same as "New England" does for the Patriots. I tend to forgive teams for using a state name when the state's large enough to have multiple markets that are left out despite having multiple teams, or in New England's case, a large area that the vast majority will probably never see a pro team, ever. It makes sense for them to change, but something about "San Francisco" doesn't sound as nice to me, never did.The difference is that the New England patriots are right in between providence and boston and cant really claim either city. They are also the only nfl team in all of New England. The warriors are completely different they are located in a major city, and there are 3 other teams in the area they are trying to claim.True, but it's also important to note that California is extremely large. Even if you exclude both LA teams and Sacramento, there's a lot of cities left. It's not like there's a limited amount of area to claim.Example: If hell froze over and Baton Rouge somehow received a pro team, calling them the "Louisiana _______" would be stupid. Why? Because there's not really that much outside of New Orleans and Baton Rouge to claim in Louisiana, so there's really no valid reason to use the state name. That's not quite the case in states like California, Texas, and New York, there's enough there, enough reasons, to justify using a state (or city, in New York's case) name. To be honest, trying to pass off the use of "San Francisco" in terms of representing the entire San Francisco Bay area is a sillier idea to me, because if you're willing to go to that length not to piss off a fanbase, then you might as well just bite the bullet and use a state name. Tradition is the foundation of innovation, and not the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 That's actually not a bad point, though I don't find it totally applicable in this case. I'll use PA as an example. Philadelphia is kind of "Philadelphia", and then there's the rest of PA. It wouldn't surprise me if the overwhelming majority of PA (geographically at least) is Pirates and Steelers fans. I don't necessarily like the idea of regional location identifiers, but I get that it makes sense in some cases, and you're right - even though it sounds awkward, it's not totally out of line to have a team named for a state while there's a team named for a city within that state. Still should be avoided unless absolutely necessary though. Either way, it doesn't work in CA, since as mentioned, there's too many other teams to have one team be the "state's" team. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Do you really think the warriors reach in terms of people going to games extends beyond the Bay Area, they arent going to have fans in San Diego. And golden state is a bad name because it sounds like a college, and for the longest time i thought the team was in Las Vegas because i didn't know California was the golden state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Right, it's horrible for no fewer that 541 documented reasons. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Giant Pacific Octopus Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 It's too bad that Charlie O Finley wasn't around and bought the team.Then he could name them the California Golden Warriors! The Catch of the Day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmatias Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 I wonder if from a marketing standpoint San Francisco might be a better sell, nationally and internationally San Francisco is definitely more recognized then Golden State. I was born and raised in San Francisco and grew up in the 60's with the San Francisco Warriors, I detested the name to Golden State when they moved from the Cow Palace to the Arena. Let's bring class to the name...San Francisco (we all know it's all inclusive to the entire Bay Area including Oakland and San Jose). You could check out anytime you like, but you could never leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rays Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 They're returning to San Francisco. Why are people upset over the name change? It's logical. I am upset over both, don´t leave Oakland dammitHave you ever actually been to Oakland?Nope, but i know Too $hort is from Oakland......that´s reason enough to keep a team there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRicSlick Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Do you really think the warriors reach in terms of people going to games extends beyond the Bay Area, they arent going to have fans in San Diego. And golden state is a bad name because it sounds like a college, and for the longest time i thought the team was in Las Vegas because i didn't know California was the golden stateThey do now. Only because of all the bandwagoners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.