B-Rich

ESPN writer suggests Clippers change name

Recommended Posts

At this point, I think the Clippers changing their name would make them even more of a punchline than they are now. The Clippers brand is synonymous with being an underdog and it pre-dates Donald Sterling's ownership of the club. Embrace it.

That said, I could definitely get behind and identity refresh for the Clippers, and would be completely happy with the light blue/red-orange color scheme thats been proposed in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle Sonics, green and gold

They will keep the Clippers for now since I think there is a good chance they will change to the Seattle SuperSonics in 5-10 years. Here is my scenario:

1. Lakers get back to being the Lakers and Los Angeles goes back to not caring about the Clippers

2. Balmer grows tired of the LA scene and the fair weather fans, and longs for Seattle and its fervent fans

3. Balmer and the NBA realize that it would be better to have the Seattle market instead of the Lakers' left over crumbs of an LA market

Mock me if you wish but I don't think my scenario is outlandish. And, if the Clippers somehow succeed, great for everyone down there. I just think the NBA may have told Balmer that he can move to Seattle in 5-10 years IF things aren't going well for the team.

Your team got stolen, so now you want to steal another team while still playing the victim? This vulture-like attitude has made me lose a significant amount of sympathy for Sonics fans, and I hope no more teams have to be "stolen" to fix Sonicsgate.

The NBA created this "vulture-like attitude" by their actions. I hate when teams move but that's the playing field the NBA has created so we have to do what we can. Lie, cheat, steal, whatever. Hansen found out last year honesty gets you nowhere.
Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco. The Godfather wasn't exactly amused by the precedent that would set.

That's okay the NBA will expand back into the Pacific Northwest. Too bad Seattle residents have to drive up to Canada to watch the new Vancouver franchise. You can bet they will use every lame excuse for why Seattle will NEVER get an NBA franchise via relocation or expansion. They will go after another small market team (Louisville), and then another city just to be anti-Seattle (that is the reason for Vancouver). It's going to happen so Seattle fans get used to not getting what you want.

But hey, at least you got the WNBA Storm and a new NHL franchise coming up. All will be forgiven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Clippers brand is synonymous with being an underdog and it pre-dates Donald Sterling's ownership of the club. Embrace it.

Four years without Sterling, 32 years with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle Sonics, green and gold

They will keep the Clippers for now since I think there is a good chance they will change to the Seattle SuperSonics in 5-10 years. Here is my scenario:

1. Lakers get back to being the Lakers and Los Angeles goes back to not caring about the Clippers

2. Balmer grows tired of the LA scene and the fair weather fans, and longs for Seattle and its fervent fans

3. Balmer and the NBA realize that it would be better to have the Seattle market instead of the Lakers' left over crumbs of an LA market

Mock me if you wish but I don't think my scenario is outlandish. And, if the Clippers somehow succeed, great for everyone down there. I just think the NBA may have told Balmer that he can move to Seattle in 5-10 years IF things aren't going well for the team.

Your team got stolen, so now you want to steal another team while still playing the victim? This vulture-like attitude has made me lose a significant amount of sympathy for Sonics fans, and I hope no more teams have to be "stolen" to fix Sonicsgate.

The NBA created this "vulture-like attitude" by their actions. I hate when teams move but that's the playing field the NBA has created so we have to do what we can. Lie, cheat, steal, whatever. Hansen found out last year honesty gets you nowhere.
Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco. The Godfather wasn't exactly amused by the precedent that would set.

That's okay the NBA will expand back into the Pacific Northwest. Too bad Seattle residents have to drive up to Canada to watch the new Vancouver franchise. You can bet they will use every lame excuse for why Seattle will NEVER get an NBA franchise via relocation or expansion. They will go after another small market team (Louisville), and then another city just to be anti-Seattle (that is the reason for Vancouver). It's going to happen so Seattle fans get used to not getting what you want.

But hey, at least you got the WNBA Storm and a new NHL franchise coming up. All will be forgiven.

Not having a good arena isn't a lame excuse for why Seattle wouldn't get a team, it's just a fact. I know that they could either play in KeyArena for a year or just play in the Tacoma Dome like the Sonics did in 1994, which would be weird but what else? Seattle fans just simply don't want to wait and want their franchise at the expense of another. I live in the Sacramento area and the people here were losing their damn minds at the Seattle relocaton rumors, I felt bad for the fans because they didn't deserve that after all the years they supported the Kings, hell, nobody deserves it. Relocation sucks, but it sucks even more when you steal from fans who are heavily invested in the team. Seattle or Vancouver will definitely get an NBA franchise again within the next 5 to 10 years, I predict. No way a market like Louisville is going to get it when you have the Kentucky Wildcats and Louisville Cardinals dominating that area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco.

I know you know Bennett's arena proposal in Renton was not done in good faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco.

I know you know Bennett's arena proposal in Renton was not done in good faith.

Schultz wanted an arena too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, they DO need to move out of the Staples Center for anyone to take them seriously and not as a sloppy second. Building a new arena in LA is next to impossible. The Honda Center desperately wants one, problem solved. Just figure out some loop hole in the lease.

THEY'D MAKE LESS MONEY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Honda Center needs to do some serious renovation if they want to bring the Clippers there. Doubt the city of Anaheim will fit the bill for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I propose that ESPN News be changed to ESPN Tabloid Network. That's all they are anymore.

Perhaps that can also update their motto to "The Worldwide Leader in Sports rumors".

It's a completely ridiculous proposal that the team change their team name because of a change in ownership OR the actions of a former owner. The franchise is bigger than a single exexutive.

Also, even though Sterling's racism is 100% wrong, I also do not feel that a business owner should be forced to sell his business because of comments he made or any personal actions. Let there be boycots or a consumer stand against him that affects his wallet, but being forced to sell just did not sit right with me. What's next, Daniel Snyder gets forced to sell his team because he's standing for tradition over politics? Even though there's absolutely NO parallell between Sterling and the Redskins, the policical correctness crowd would make any leap to get their way.

The entire situation with the Clippers is unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Honda Center needs to do some serious renovation if they want to bring the Clippers there. Doubt the city of Anaheim will fit the bill for that.

The Honda Centre's already been renovated for NBA basketball. The Clippers could move tomorrow and everything would be good to go from an arena standpoint.

They won't move though, for the reason rams pointed out. They make too much money at the Staples Centre to even consider leaving for Anaheim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco. The Godfather wasn't exactly amused by the precedent that would set.

Not exactly true. He purchased the team before any of that was done. Then, when the NBA "changed the rules" and held up the sale to allow Sacramento to scramble and put together a plan, he was screwed and had to try something to salvage the $30 million+ the NBA cost him. If the NBA would have done the same for Seattle when the sale to Bennett happened, the Sonics would still be in Seattle.

As for the Clippers name, got to keep it the same if they are staying in Los Angeles. It has more history (albeit bad) than many teams in the NBA.

I know you only paid attention when it looked like Seattle could vulture the team, but Sacramento had a publicly funded arena deal that was acceptable to the NBA hammered out that the Maloofs torpedoed in 2012. Hansen chose to do business with the Maloofs after that, so Seattle has absolutely no room to talk about how this is but another chapter in David Stern's persecution of the city.

Regardless the taxpayers of Sac are getting royally screwed by the new arena deal. I know the fans love their kings but diverting funds out of your general fund (to pay the interests on the bonds) to build an arena is insane. And yes it's the general fund as the parking revenue used to be a major revenue source for the gf.

It's unfortunate but stern/silver should have saved Sac from itself and let the move happen. It's going to be subject to decades of financial pain in order to support a for profit sports entity.

Seattle chose to avoid that pain. That should be remembered whenever we hear the meta-narrative about how the Sonics were "stolen".

It's OK, their new $15 minimum wage also guarantees no NBA team will be profitable without soaking the fans and taxpayers. $15 for the kid who scoops popcorn into a bag? Great move. Maybe this will just lead to self-serve popcorn dispensing kiosks...so the owner won't have to overpay for the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco. The Godfather wasn't exactly amused by the precedent that would set.

Not exactly true. He purchased the team before any of that was done. Then, when the NBA "changed the rules" and held up the sale to allow Sacramento to scramble and put together a plan, he was screwed and had to try something to salvage the $30 million+ the NBA cost him. If the NBA would have done the same for Seattle when the sale to Bennett happened, the Sonics would still be in Seattle.

As for the Clippers name, got to keep it the same if they are staying in Los Angeles. It has more history (albeit bad) than many teams in the NBA.

I know you only paid attention when it looked like Seattle could vulture the team, but Sacramento had a publicly funded arena deal that was acceptable to the NBA hammered out that the Maloofs torpedoed in 2012. Hansen chose to do business with the Maloofs after that, so Seattle has absolutely no room to talk about how this is but another chapter in David Stern's persecution of the city.

Regardless the taxpayers of Sac are getting royally screwed by the new arena deal. I know the fans love their kings but diverting funds out of your general fund (to pay the interests on the bonds) to build an arena is insane. And yes it's the general fund as the parking revenue used to be a major revenue source for the gf.

It's unfortunate but stern/silver should have saved Sac from itself and let the move happen. It's going to be subject to decades of financial pain in order to support a for profit sports entity.

Seattle chose to avoid that pain. That should be remembered whenever we hear the meta-narrative about how the Sonics were "stolen".

It's OK, their new $15 minimum wage also guarantees no NBA team will be profitable without soaking the fans and taxpayers. $15 for the kid who scoops popcorn into a bag? Great move. Maybe this will just lead to self-serve popcorn dispensing kiosks...so the owner won't have to overpay for the help.

I know we're all about the conservative talking points, but taking the wages that high might just justify the current popcorn price structure in NBA arenas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, even though Sterling's racism is 100% wrong, I also do not feel that a business owner should be forced to sell his business because of comments he made or any personal actions.

Owning an NBA franchise (an important distinction, because NBA teams are not standalone businesses) is a privilege, not a right. By agreeing to the league constitution and signing all those morals and ethics contracts, Sterling opened himself up to the risk of losing his franchise if his conduct were to have an extremely harmful effect on the league at large.

To act as if he's been forced to give up property over mere words is a dishonest portrayal of the situation. What really happened is that he was kicked out of a private club because they were tired of the negative image he brought to it with his words and actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Honda Center needs to do some serious renovation if they want to bring the Clippers there. Doubt the city of Anaheim will fit the bill for that.

The Honda Centre's already been renovated for NBA basketball. The Clippers could move tomorrow and everything would be good to go from an arena standpoint.

They won't move though, for the reason rams pointed out. They make too much money at the Staples Centre to even consider leaving for Anaheim.

Additionally, Anaheim had their chance with the Clippers - even hosting a few games - in the mid-'90s before the Staples Center was built and they failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, even though Sterling's racism is 100% wrong, I also do not feel that a business owner should be forced to sell his business because of comments he made or any personal actions. Let there be boycots or a consumer stand against him that affects his wallet, but being forced to sell just did not sit right with me.

It doesn't sit right with you that he's going to pocket over a billion dollars? That's not bad.

Anyway there were boycotts of a sort. Sponsors for both the Clippers and the NBA were jumping ship (pardon the pun) after Sterling's comments were made public. At that point the NBA had to protect its brand. How Sterling's comments were made public were immaterial next to the fact that they were public and that they were affecting the league's brand. So they removed him, in complete accordance with the league's by-laws. By-laws Sterling agreed to when he purchased the team.

What's next, Daniel Snyder gets forced to sell his team because he's standing for tradition over politics?

Aren't you a Redskins fan? You should be absolutely giddy over the prospect of Dan Snyder being forced to sell.

Even though there's absolutely NO parallell between Sterling and the Redskins, the policical correctness crowd would make any leap to get their way.

I know there are Natives who would consider the parallels to be pretty strong.

The Honda Center needs to do some serious renovation if they want to bring the Clippers there. Doubt the city of Anaheim will fit the bill for that.

The Honda Centre's already been renovated for NBA basketball. The Clippers could move tomorrow and everything would be good to go from an arena standpoint.

They won't move though, for the reason rams pointed out. They make too much money at the Staples Centre to even consider leaving for Anaheim.

Additionally, Anaheim had their chance with the Clippers - even hosting a few games - in the mid-'90s before the Staples Center was built and they failed.
To be fair to Anaheim this had more to do with Sterling not being arsed to drive out to Orange County.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco. The Godfather wasn't exactly amused by the precedent that would set.

Not exactly true. He purchased the team before any of that was done. Then, when the NBA "changed the rules" and held up the sale to allow Sacramento to scramble and put together a plan, he was screwed and had to try something to salvage the $30 million+ the NBA cost him. If the NBA would have done the same for Seattle when the sale to Bennett happened, the Sonics would still be in Seattle.

As for the Clippers name, got to keep it the same if they are staying in Los Angeles. It has more history (albeit bad) than many teams in the NBA.

I know you only paid attention when it looked like Seattle could vulture the team, but Sacramento had a publicly funded arena deal that was acceptable to the NBA hammered out that the Maloofs torpedoed in 2012. Hansen chose to do business with the Maloofs after that, so Seattle has absolutely no room to talk about how this is but another chapter in David Stern's persecution of the city.

Regardless the taxpayers of Sac are getting royally screwed by the new arena deal. I know the fans love their kings but diverting funds out of your general fund (to pay the interests on the bonds) to build an arena is insane. And yes it's the general fund as the parking revenue used to be a major revenue source for the gf.

It's unfortunate but stern/silver should have saved Sac from itself and let the move happen. It's going to be subject to decades of financial pain in order to support a for profit sports entity.

Seattle chose to avoid that pain. That should be remembered whenever we hear the meta-narrative about how the Sonics were "stolen".

It's OK, their new $15 minimum wage also guarantees no NBA team will be profitable without soaking the fans and taxpayers. $15 for the kid who scoops popcorn into a bag? Great move. Maybe this will just lead to self-serve popcorn dispensing kiosks...so the owner won't have to overpay for the help.

1. the WA minimum wage has a 85% cap for persons 18 and younger.

2. Most stadiums have the booths run by volunteers/orgs that receive a stipend and really make money on tips and not on wages. While I am not sure if that is the case in WA stadiums, it is common practice in most stadiums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sheer ignorance of the law and basic business economics in this country is absolutely astounding and it's rearing its ugly head on this board.

Before anyone starts bitching about an individual having their business taken from them, do some basic studying up on franchise law and on how constitutional rights apply to contractually bound business associations. Before you start complaining about minimum wage's effect on the cost of popcorn and game programs do some research on how an nba franchise derives the majority share of revenues and profits. Hint: The owners aren't getting rich off popcorn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco.

I know you know Bennett's arena proposal in Renton was not done in good faith.

Schultz wanted an arena too.

Well, the timing wasn't right for him. Seattle rebuilt the arena in 1994 both to the NBA's liking and to specifications that were reasonable for a single-sport arena in a medium-sized market. Just like New Comiskey Park barely missed the neo-retro explosion, Seattle barely missed the explosion of super-sized luxury arenas. At that time, you only had the United Center and the Palace of Auburn Hills, one built for a metro area at least twice the size of Seattle, both built entirely on the owners' respective dimes. That every mid-market from Denver to Charlotte to Memphis to goddamn Oklahoma City who didn't even have a team would eventually get a 19,000-seater with two rings of luxury boxes and blowjobs at the door for everyone making six figures...well, that wasn't something they could have seen at the time. Something needed to be done when it was done, it was enough at the time, suddenly it wasn't, but that wasn't an excuse for giving up after eleven years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen's problem was that he tried to steal a team from a community that had done exactly what the NBA had asked of it, namely make a deal for a new publicly-funded arena. You know, the thing Seattle singularly failed to do during the Sonics fiasco.

I know you know Bennett's arena proposal in Renton was not done in good faith.

Schultz wanted an arena too.

Well, the timing wasn't right for him. Seattle rebuilt the arena in 1994 both to the NBA's liking and to specifications that were reasonable for a single-sport arena in a medium-sized market. Just like New Comiskey Park barely missed the neo-retro explosion, Seattle barely missed the explosion of super-sized luxury arenas. At that time, you only had the United Center and the Palace of Auburn Hills, one built for a metro area at least twice the size of Seattle, both built entirely on the owners' respective dimes. That every mid-market from Denver to Charlotte to Memphis to goddamn Oklahoma City who didn't even have a team would eventually get a 19,000-seater with two rings of luxury boxes and blowjobs at the door for everyone making six figures...well, that wasn't something they could have seen at the time. Something needed to be done when it was done, it was enough at the time, suddenly it wasn't, but that wasn't an excuse for giving up after eleven years.

PREACH!

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made this quick concept a few years ago. I think A slight "tweak" to their logo would be enough to move away from the Sterling era. Although I would fully embrace moving away from the RWB scheme.
179228_483377356038_2775985_n.jpg

Share this post


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