Golden State Considering Name Change to "San Francisco Warriors"

[CrazyAnna]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

Houston would probably feel the same way it does about the Texas Rangers

[CrazyAnna]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

Houston would probably feel the same way it does about the Texas Rangers

The Texas Rangers currently represent 12 Texas counties while playing in the Metroplex. Now if the Rangers moved to a new stadium closer to or in the city of Dallas, then yes, they should be the Dallas Rangers.

But I also think the Jets and Giants have no business calling themselves New York when they play their home games in New Jersey.

When the Warriors move to San Francisco in 2018, I definitely support a name change.

[TheRicSlick]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

Houston would probably feel the same way it does about the Texas Rangers

The Texas Rangers currently represent 12 Texas counties while playing in the Metroplex. Now if the Rangers moved to a new stadium closer to or in the city of Dallas, then yes, they should be the Dallas Rangers.

But I also think the Jets and Giants have no business calling themselves New York when they play their home games in New Jersey.

When the Warriors move to San Francisco in 2018, I definitely support a name change.

But the Jets and Giants have their offices in New York City.

[CrazyAnna]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

Houston would probably feel the same way it does about the Texas Rangers

The Texas Rangers currently represent 12 Texas counties while playing in the Metroplex. Now if the Rangers moved to a new stadium closer to or in the city of Dallas, then yes, they should be the Dallas Rangers.

But I also think the Jets and Giants have no business calling themselves New York when they play their home games in New Jersey.

When the Warriors move to San Francisco in 2018, I definitely support a name change.

But the Jets and Giants have their offices in New York City.

The Jets' corportate offices are in Florham Park, New Jersey. The Giants' corporate offices are in East Rutherford, New Jersey. In fact, nothing about them are New York.

[phutmasterflex]

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.

They are the Bay Area's team. It's just several rich guys in the front office want it different. They will always be the Bay's team, the fans claim it as the Bay's team. It's just ownership doesn't want to do it. Ownership's decision doesn't represent what the team means to the entire community

[wonderbread]

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.

They are the Bay Area's team. It's just several rich guys in the front office want it different. They will always be the Bay's team, the fans claim it as the Bay's team. It's just ownership doesn't want to do it. Ownership's decision doesn't represent what the team means to the entire community

Then it shouldn't matter what the name is. San Francisco is a lot better than golden state

[The_Admiral]

The difference is that the New England patriots are right in between providence and boston and cant really claim either city.

Didn't they have victory parades in Boston?

[4_tattoos]

The Warriors front office probably does not care if they piss off the Oakland fans by changing the name. Especially after the team relocates to SF. I think they already have their minds made up, but just want to give the perception that they want fan input. The San Francisco Warriors will become a reality. I just hope they ditch the stupid bridge logo and go with actual warrior imagery upon the rebrand.

[wonderbread]

The difference is that the New England patriots are right in between providence and boston and cant really claim either city.

Didn't they have victory parades in Boston?

because you aren't going to have a parade in foxborough and providence isn't as big of a city as Boston, and boston makes better sense logistically having the duck boats there, providence simply doesn't have the capabilities to have a parade like that

[GMW79]

How about $an Franci$co Warrior$?

[wonderbread]

How about $an Franci$co Warrior$?

or $an Fran¢i$¢o Warrior$

[Soarindude]

The Warriors front office probably does not care if they piss off the Oakland fans by changing the name. Especially after the team relocates to SF. I think they already have their minds made up, but just want to give the perception that they want fan input. The San Francisco Warriors will become a reality. I just hope they ditch the stupid bridge logo and go with actual warrior imagery upon the rebrand.

I don't think they will go with warrior imagery. Any route they take with using warrior imagery is a bad one-- On one side, you attempt to portray a warrior of a specific ethnicity. That is surely not going to happen, there's really no need for me to explain why. On the other side, they could go with a generic "warrior" look that'll resemble half the clipart/high school/local college look that really doesn't set them apart from the rest. Similar to any team that takes on the challenge of portraying any form of a knight.

I hope the team uses San Francisco imagery instead of warriors.

[Mitch B]

I think they should retain their colors and the bridge logo, and rebrand as The Bay Warriors.

[eliasrappaport]

Where did Golden State come from in the first place? There's no other team whose geographical identifier is the nickname of the state or city they're in.

To an extent, the New England Patriots.

[TruColor]

Where did Golden State come from in the first place? There's no other team whose geographical identifier is the nickname of the state or city they're in.

To an extent, the New England Patriots.

Going off-topic, but I've always maintained that "Boston Patriots" is a far superior name...

[wonderbread]

Where did Golden State come from in the first place? There's no other team whose geographical identifier is the nickname of the state or city they're in.

To an extent, the New England Patriots.

Going off-topic, but I've always maintained that "Boston Patriots" is a far superior name...

it's not though, New England is superior because the stadium is located 20 miles from Providence and Boston. That might not sound like far but it is a good 45 minute drive from either city without traffic and that by itself makes it so they can't name themselves after either city. it was also located there for that very reason to be close enough for both to appeal to fans from around both metropolitan areas and appeal to the whole area of southern new england. and the whole area of new england identifies with the patriots not just boston.

[Muggens]

It's pretty obvious it's going to be San Francisco Warriors. Conversation over.

As for the Texas Rangers. They're named after the Texas Rangers. Hello. Dallas Rangers wouldn't make any sense even if they played in Dallas.

[rams80]

California is too big. Just like the California Angels were a horrible name. How would fans in San Antonio and Houston feel about the Texas Mavericks? It should be the San Francisco Warriors again.

Houston would probably feel the same way it does about the Texas Rangers

The Texas Rangers currently represent 12 Texas counties while playing in the Metroplex. Now if the Rangers moved to a new stadium closer to or in the city of Dallas, then yes, they should be the Dallas Rangers.

But I also think the Jets and Giants have no business calling themselves New York when they play their home games in New Jersey.

When the Warriors move to San Francisco in 2018, I definitely support a name change.

But the Jets and Giants have their offices in New York City.

The Jets' corportate offices are in Florham Park, New Jersey. The Giants' corporate offices are in East Rutherford, New Jersey. In fact, nothing about them are New York.

Besides playing in the flippin' metro area. Look, I know this is a surprise to folks out west, but some times metropolitan areas can even cross state lines.

[The_Admiral]

Going off-topic, but I've always maintained that "Boston Patriots" is a far superior name...

it's not though, New England is superior because the stadium is located 20 miles from Providence and Boston. That might not sound like far but it is a good 45 minute drive from either city without traffic and that by itself makes it so they can't name themselves after either city. it was also located there for that very reason to be close enough for both to appeal to fans from around both metropolitan areas and appeal to the whole area of southern new england. and the whole area of new england identifies with the patriots not just boston.

No, they built in Foxboro (when did we add the -ugh on, anyway?) because the owners were poor, the land was cheap, and there was nowhere to drop a football stadium in the dense and tiny city of Boston, Fenway Park and wherever else the AFL Boston Patriots hung out all falling well short of NFL standards. Who has ever given a jack about Providence? Come on. If that were such a crackerjack business move, all their teams would do it, but nope, just the one that was the bad joke of sports for 35ish years. The original Foxboro Stadium had, what, one entrance/exit off a two-lane highway when it was built? Yes, this was a calculated move, if the calculations were "30,000 + 2 / 1 = potato."

Also, their original choice for a non-Boston name was "Bay State Patriots" to tie in with the Bay State Raceway, but they were disabused of this when someone pointed out that they'd be labeled "B.S." in box scores, so not buyin' the importance of Providence here. Should have just kept Boston Patriots. It's perfectly understandable that you can't fit a football stadium in Boston. More teams should probably put their football stadiums in the middle of nowhere so cities can use that land for things that don't, you know, sit around doing nothing for 325+ days a year.

COUGH COUGH CHICAGO COUGH COUGH.