The Gipper Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 OK, this thread is not about the blues band that played "I'm going home" at the original Woodstock concert....it concerns a team's name. You may have heard that the now New Orleans Hornets of the NBA is going to be changing their name to the New Orleans Pelicans. And, apparently, they are being magnanimous by offering to allow the Charlotte team (now Bobcats) to have the name Hornets back if they wish to have it. And it is my understanding that Charlotte will take the name and rename the team The Hornets, thus restoring the name to a Charlotte NBA team as it was back in the original expansion of the 1980s. The hypothetical question is this: IF asshole had been successful in removing the Browns franchise to Baltimore...and that team there went by the name Browns for several years, and if Cleveland had been given an expansion franchise which had to have a new name....let say "The Bulldogs" ....and they had been operating under that name for say the last 10 years. And say hypothetically that the new owner of the Baltimore franchise wanted to change the name of his team to something more reflecting Baltimore (like say "The Ravens)...and if he offered the name The Browns back to the Cleveland NFL franchise... would you want that name back? Or would you have wanted to keep the new name, the Bulldogs or whatever, that the team had been operating under for a decade? (they had a whole argument about this on Kylie an Booms this morning) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 It would have all depended on what the name was, that would have been used the last 10yrs, if the name was something that was as generic and not really related to Cleveland football(such as Bobcats is to Charlotte Basketball) then I would have been 100% ok changing it back. But if they had named it something that tied it into the city of Cleveland and its history(like the Bulldogs after the Canton Bulldogs or something like that) then I would have wanted to keep the "new" name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Yes, I'd want it to be the Browns. I'm not a fan of the relocated franchises in any sport keeping the original name. I'm sure Ratbird fans would rather have their team as the Baltimore Colts, for instance. Utah Jazz? LA Lakers? Stupid. Only thing stupider is nicknaming a team without an "s" on the end (Heat, Lightning). At least the NHL has it right for the most part- when their teams change cities, they are pretty consistent in changing nicknames (Nordiques became Avalanche, Whalers are the Huricanes, etc.). I know the Atlanta Flames= Calgary Flames, but that's the only one I can think of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Yes, I'd want it to be the Browns. I'm not a fan of the relocated franchises in any sport keeping the original name. I'm sure Ratbird fans would rather have their team as the Baltimore Colts, for instance. Utah Jazz? LA Lakers? Stupid. Only thing stupider is nicknaming a team without an "s" on the end (Heat, Lightning). At least the NHL has it right for the most part- when their teams change cities, they are pretty consistent in changing nicknames (Nordiques became Avalanche, Whalers are the Huricanes, etc.). I know the Atlanta Flames= Calgary Flames, but that's the only one I can think of. Atlanta Thrashers became the Winnipeg Jets. Yea, about half the MLB teams changed names with a move: e.g. those who didn't: Boston Braves=Milwaukee Braves=Atlanta Braves New York Giants=San Francisco Giants Brooklyn Dodgers=LA Dodgers Philadelphia As=Kansas City As=Oakland As But, those who did: Montreal Expos became Washington Nationals Washington Senators 1.0 became Minnesota Twins Washington Senators 2.0 became Texas Rangers St. Louis Browns=Baltimore Orioles Seattle Pilots=Milwakee Brewers Compare the NFL: Chicago Cardinals=St. Louis Cardinals=Arizona Cardinals Cleveland Rams=LA Rams=St. Louis Rams Oakland Raiders=LA Raiders=Oakland Raiders Boston Redskins=Washington Redskins LA Chargers=San Diego Chargers Baltimore Colts=Indianapolis Colts But: Houston Oilers=Tennessee Titans Dallas Texans=Kansas City Chiefs Portsmouth Spartans=Detroit Lions A few teams changed their name without changing cities: New York Titans=NY Jets The Steelers started out as the Pirates The Redskins when they were in Boston started out as The Braves. In the NBA: Seattle Supersonics became the Oklahoma City Thunder....maybe, although some say the Thunder is a new franchise. The following team has gone through the most moves and changes of anyone: Rochester then Cincinnati Royals became the Kansas City then Sacramento Kings...and now they are moving again to Seattle apparently. Who knows what they will be. Again, some move is to simply contract the Kings franchise and to give this new Seattle team the identity/history/records/ colors etc. of the Sonics franchise. Stay tuned on that one. The Syracuse Nationals became the Philadelphia 76ers. But the Philadelphia Warriors became the San Francisco then Golden State Warriors. The Boston Braves became the San Diego then LA Clippers The New York Nets became the New Jersey Nets became the Broooklyn Nets. The Baltimore Bullets became the Washington Bullets...but much later changed to the Wizards. Vancouver Grizzlies became Memphis Grizzlies. Ft. Wayne Pistons became the Detroit Pistons....oddly, the old name fit the new town better than the old town. St. Louis Hawks became the Atlanta Hawks. and so it goes. Hockey has had a lot of changes as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 By the way, it is my understanding that officially no NFL franchise has ever technically been rendered "defunct". In theory, even a team that has been out of operation since the 1920s could possibly be revived to the point that a new franchise could actually be given the identity of an old franchise. In theory, if the Browns franchise had been moved, and a new "Bulldogs" franchise been located here, that franchise could have been awarded the history and titles won by the old Canton/Cleveland Bulldogs. The only two franchises that ever actually came back from complete in active status have been the Cleveland Rams of like 1942 or 1943 and the Cleveland Browns of course from 1996-1998. The Steelers had a couple of years where they merged with first the Eagles then the Cardinals during WWII, but they came back full fledged from that. The last NFL franchise to go defunct is the Dallas Texans in 1952. If the Sonics franchise is "reactivated" and its history given to the Kings, well, I am not sure what to make of that, whether that is good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 The horror of it all Gipper- you missed one big one!!! The Decatur Staleys became the Chicago Bears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 The horror of it all Gipper- you missed one big one!!! The Decatur Staleys became the Chicago Bears. I didn't mean for that list to be comprehensive. I know I didn't list a few. Example: The original Baltimore Orioles became the New York Highlanders became the New York Yankees. The orginal Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns who became the now Baltimore Orioles. The Cubs began their existance known as The White Sox. The Astros began as the Colt 45s. etc. etc. etc. In the NBA here are a few other name/location changes: Brooklyn Nets started existance as the New Jersey Americans Denver Nuggets were originally the Denver Rockets Houston Rockets were originally the San Diego Rockets The San Antonio Spurs began life as the Dallas Chapparells Utah Jazz were New Orleans Jazz And, believe it or not, the Washington Wizards began existance as the Chicago Packers, then were the Chicago Zephyrs A few in the NHL: The Redwings were originally the Cougars The New Jersey Devils began life as the Kansas City Scouts The Toronto Maple Leafs at one time were the Toronto St. Patricks etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Italian DawgPound Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I apologize for my irrelevant comment but relocating franchises SUCKS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I apologize for my irrelevant comment but relocating franchises SUCKS! Its not irrelevent at all. It is precisely what this thread is all about. More or less. Note this however, here are the teams in the leagues that have moved at one time or another: NFL: Cardinals, Bears, Lions, Colts, Chiefs, Raiders, Rams, Titans, Redskins, Chargers 10 teams or 31.25% or the league. (and I am not counting the Ravens) MLB: Braves, Orioles, Dodgers, Brewers, Twins, Yankees, As, Giants, Rangers, Nationals 10 teams or 33% of the league (I am not counting Angels who have gone back and forth but all within the LA/Anaheim market NBA: Hawks, Pistons, Warriors, Rockets, Clippers, Lakers, Grizzlies, Hornets, Thunder, 76ers, Kings, Spurs, Jazz, Wizards 14 teams or 46.66% of the league (and I am not counting the Nets who have moved but have stayed within the NY/NJ metro area) NHL: Flames, Hurricanes, Avalanche, Stars, Devils, Jets, Coyotes 7 teams or 23.3% of the teams. Oddly, hockey has been the most stable in terms of franchise movement. I know that a number of these moves took place long ago...even to the early part of the 20th century and that a few of these teams were in their original home for only like one year (Brewers/Bears/Chargers)...but, still those were "franchise moves". The question is: should a new team in town take on the name of an old team in town. The most recent example: The original Winnipeg Jets started play there in the 70s...but years later moved to Arizona...to become the Coyotes. When Winnipeg got a team back last year when the Thrashers moved there, that name was changed to the Jets...like the old team. Would that have been the kind of move you would have liked to have seen for the Browns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Here is an irrelevent post. Ultimate boogie blues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.