There's some room in my mind for the Cascadian teams, because there was some continuity to the old NASL teams, right?
No no no, you can't pick and choose which teams' history you're going to piss on and which ones you'll give a pass. Either cut it out or piss off.
It was a question. The answer to that question is "The Cascadia teams stole NASL history, too; they just did it in the 80s"
I don't get it. Do you like the Clash or the Earthquakes? And more to the point, did you read sj_oldtimer's post that I quoted? Or is all that besides the point and you just don't like any team that uses the name of a former team in that city and then call it even, such as the Cleveland Browns, or even ones that do it across different sports like the Colorado Rockies and St. Louis Cardinals?
No. Yes. And it doesn't matter. The San Jose Earthquakes are 8 years old, not 40. Pretending that you are is just as much stealing history as the Union pretending that they're Bethlehem Steel. Neither is okay. The Browns get an asterisk. It's not the same thing, but there was an agreement among the principals and there was never a year without a Cleveland Browns. And the Rockies and the Cardinals are definitely not the same thing. No one looks at the purple pinstripes and goes "well, looks like The Rockies moved back from Jersey, hung up their skates, and started playing baseball"
So you're a fan of the band, The Clash? How are the Browns different? The Dynamo move to Houston and were considered an expansion team, just like the Ravens. The club, colors, and crest remained in San Jose, and when we got our team back, we picked up where we left off. The two stars above the crest speak to that history.
I very much agree with that. Owners, FO employees, managers, and players can/do change. Longtime passionate supporters will always be there.
Guess I was wrong. I'm fine admitting that. The New Browns are stealing history, too. Doesn't make it right
Technically, no, we aren't. Legally, the new Browns are the continuation of the old franchise. The Browns did not actually move, the team went on hiatus for 3 years. Baltimore was an expansion team. EDIT: I didn't read. This was already mentioned.
So the owners of the Browns, if I'm hearing you correctly, sold their franchise in 96 and took a hiatus until 99. Which is way different from pretending your new team is the same thing as a team that played in the 70s, if anyone was wondering
I am inclined to agree, but it's hard to know how it will look on a body, as opposed to flat and stretched horizontally.