colortv

Golden State Considering Name Change to "San Francisco Warriors"

Recommended Posts

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 cause

1. 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.

warriors_011.jpg

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What´s the problem up there, The Raiders moved back and forth several times, now this crap ! *facepalm*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

Have you ever actually been to Oakland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Golden State" is actually short for:

California State University - Golden.

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

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
Have you ever actually been to Oakland?
Nope, but i know Too $hort is from Oakland......that´s reason enough to keep a team there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

They do now. Only because of all the bandwagoners.

Share this post


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