Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Community Moderator
Posted
Are there fewer Grizzlies in Memphis than there are Lions (or Tigers) in Detroit?

 

No, but Grizzlies made a lot more sense for a team in Vancouver. moon used the example of Utah Jazz and we were just following the same theme.

Community Moderator
Posted (edited)
Good point, or Bears in Chicago.

 

Nobody ever said a team's name had to be a fit for the place, of course.

Edited by Bellhorn04
Posted (edited)
Nobody ever said a team's name had to be a for for the place, of course.

 

True, and names like Lions, Tigers and Bears are so cool, you could write a song about them, but "Lakers" and "Jazz" are pretty weird for their locations and meaning.

Edited by moonslav59
Old-Timey Member
Posted
No, but Grizzlies made a lot more sense for a team in Vancouver. moon used the example of Utah Jazz and we were just following the same theme.

 

The thing is, now Grizzlies just feels like one of those “fierce animal” mascots, like Lions. Or Hawks. Or Blue Jays. Jazz only makes sense as a moniker if it’s part of the city culture.

 

I get Jazz, Grizzlies and Lakers all began in cities where those names made regional sense. But Grizzlies actually works anywhere.

 

Now if there is a city that should not let the names travel with the team, it’s Buffalo. I mean, Buffalo Bills is just a bad pun and possibly the worst moniker in professional sports. But that city also has a minor league baseball team called the Bison. That’s just annoying.

 

But to make matters worse, their hockey team is called the Sabres. I mean, come on! “WINGS” is RIGHT THERE!! And it’s a legit hockey term!! I can picture the uniforms as orange, while the helmets get painted to look like blue cheese. And maybe green sticks.

 

Your NHL Buffalo Wings! It should have already happened. What’s wrong with those Snow Belt Freaks?!?

Posted (edited)

I like it when a team adopts a name that is rooted in the history of the city/state where the team plays, and that is why I would like to see the A's change their name to something else. The best example of this would be the San Francisco 49ers. The gold rush was such a fascinating period in U.S. history and gave birth to the city of San Francisco. In turn, the football team called themselves the 49ers, the term that described the people who rushed out to northern California looking for gold beginning in 1849. Cool stuff.

 

I guess someone could argue that the name "Athletics" is part of baseball history and that the A's should maintain historical continuity for the sake of baseball history. That is a fair point too.

 

Good point on the Buffalo Bills, a strange name for a team in western NY. I wonder what the story is behind the name and why was it adopted over other choices?

Edited by Fan_since_Boggs
Community Moderator
Posted
But to make matters worse, their hockey team is called the Sabres. I mean, come on! “WINGS” is RIGHT THERE!! And it’s a legit hockey term!! I can picture the uniforms as orange, while the helmets get painted to look like blue cheese. And maybe green sticks.

 

Your NHL Buffalo Wings! It should have already happened. What’s wrong with those Snow Belt Freaks?!?

 

Detroit already took Wings.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Detroit already took Wings.

 

1. Only the red ones. Just like Boston did with Sox.

 

2. If we can learn nothing else from CFL football, and we can’t, we at least know it’s not a big deal when two teams have the same name. Even when it’s as uncommon as Rough Riders…

Posted
I visited San Francisco back in January and that area of town where the stadium is for the A's is a complete dump. I like to tour stadiums when I travel and I skipped this one. It's really bad down there
Community Moderator
Posted
I visited San Francisco back in January and that area of town where the stadium is for the A's is a complete dump. I like to tour stadiums when I travel and I skipped this one. It's really bad down there

 

Yes, the A's have needed a new stadium for 20 years now.

  • 5 weeks later...
Community Moderator
Posted
A's halfway gone from Oakland as legislature hurdle cleared. Hate to say I told ya so MVP.

 

I didn’t say they wouldn’t move to Vegas.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
I didn’t say they wouldn’t move to Vegas.

 

You did say it would be very difficult, and I told you it wasn't going to be difficult at all. By the time they made the announcement, there were a lot of greased up palms already.

Community Moderator
Posted
You did say it would be very difficult, and I told you it wasn't going to be difficult at all. By the time they made the announcement, there were a lot of greased up palms already.

 

That's not what I said either.

Community Moderator
Posted
It wouldn't be difficult for the A's to move to Vegas. It's very likely that the A's will move to Vegas. It's just not 100% that they are going to that specific location yet. They aren't staying in Oakland for sure.

 

There you go.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...