Thank you for the new thread (hopefully the old one is locked). I've been reading how the Seattle Sounders fans are upset that IF they get a MLS franchise they might have to give up the Sounders name. Since the Utah Blitzz are part of the bidding group for MLS in SLC, does anyone think that Blitzz ownership or fans would also have a problem giving up the Blitzz name (as you know they will have to)? I realize that the Sounders are much older than the Blitzz, but I was curious how Blitzz fans felt.
Why is it a lock that the Blitzzzzzz name has to go? I'm not saying I like it, but has MLS said publicly that it needs to change?
it's a lock because the name sucks. If they're getting rid of the Burn, they're not going to bring in the blitzz
As I said before, the Blitzz are 2nd in line to the Checketts group for the MLS team bid for SLC. The MLS would not seriosly look at SLC if it was only the Blitzz ownership group making the bid. From what I have heard there may be a personality conflict between the Blitzz ownership group and the MLS heads. In other words MLS doesn't like someone in the Blitzz ownership group. Not to mention Checketts brings far more sports franchise experience to the table. That being said you can pretty much bet the farm that IF the MLS selects Utah the name will NOT be Blitzz.
The Utah team will simply drop the second z, and the Burn will be rebranded the Dallas Schlieffen Plan. Meanwhile, the Seattle team will be admitted in 2006 as SeaTac Shock and Awe, with the Pennsylvania Guerillas rounding out expansion in that year.
Rumor has it DC United will be remaned the DC Keystone Kops and that Columbus will be FC Maginot Line. Sachin
For your viewing pleasure, Some of the articles from the old, locked thread: http://skysports.planetfootball.com...=209353&cpid=98 http://www.ussocceruk.com/news/?Cat...&ContentId=1694 http://www.usatoday.com/sports/socc...expansion_x.htm http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Jun/0615...orts/175573.asp http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headli...=301875&cc=5901 http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595065041,00.html http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=5&sid=68560 http://www.ussocceruk.com/news/?Cat...&ContentId=1651 http://www.foxsportsworld.com/conte...ntentId=2420610 http://www.ussocceruk.com/news/?Cat...&ContentId=1632
I currently hold the record for the Blitzz fan who has travelled the farthest to an away match (Charlotte, USL D3 semifinals, 2000) and I say that the Blitzz name has to go. As if the Blitzz name isn't bad enough, our logo looks like the logo of an elite Nazi Commando unit. (Does that post now qualify under Godwin's Law.) Utah Buffalo Soldiers. The "real" Buffalo Soldiers were once stationed at Fort Douglas, 2 light rail stops away.
Weren't the "Buffalo Soliders" the black soliders who killed the Indians to pave the way for white people to take over?
Most of what I know about the Buffalo Soldiers comes from Quincy Jones. I understand there was some dirty work that they did but I believe it was as much about segregation. I don't think white unit would have been subjected to the lack of supplies that often characterized the Buffalo Soldier campains in the West. I'm no military historian, maybe it was more typical than I think. I will reassert my name for the team: the 47s. Sure there are some overtones. But there aren't many things as important to the development of the region as the immigration to the SL valley. Golden Spikes would be relevant too. Wasn't the Omaha triple A team the Golden Spikes? Would they own a trademark on the name? I had a source close to the Blitzz ask me about the name. (The source was not from the legal department.) Anyone know: would using the Blitzz or Sounders be a matter of striking a deal to sell the trademark? If it wasn't a completely stupid idea someone could in passing suggest the Lakers.
Ya know, that's not a half bad idea. Personally, I hate the LA Lakers, but this could honestly turn into a real good idea.
that wasn't funny spenser, i don't care what the name is as long as i don't have to hear that the corner kicks are sponsored by Taco Bell, i don't want greg wrubell saying "yo quiero taco bell" corner kick taken by freddy garcia.
During the Metros-LA game today, there was a new local ad for Garff auto plex or something, which said you could get Blitzz tix and enter to win Rapids tix?? Does this mean anything as far as Garff-MLS relations are concerned or am I just way too desperate for expansion news?
I don't know if you read my post before or the articles in the news about Checketts but the Blitzz group is not really in the running for the MLS team.
but ken garff autoplex or whatever they are called recently purchased the Blitzz. Not related to expansion however.
doesn't matter. MLS does not want to work with them. They want Checketts group. Garff/Jacobsen group bought the Blitzz thinking that it would show the MLS that they were serious but MLS still won't go for them.
Am I the only one who never took/doesn't take expansion into SLC THIS YEAR seriously? I mean it feels really rushed. These other cities, Seattle, Philly, etc.. have been involved in the talks all along. Then 2 months out, all of a sudden SLC is in the running? I don't buy it. I'm from SLC and nothing would please me more than a team here, but it seems awfully forced to me. Anyone who has worked for a smallish company/startup can tell you, these talks take time...business takes time. Its not something easily forced down the pipeline. Oh yeah, IF we get a team, and if any of these suggested names make it through, I just might puke on my keyboard. Why does it have to be something so regional or Utah based. Does the Galaxy have anything to do with LA? I realized there are subtle ties with a lot of the cities, and others not so subtle (San Jose, New England) but can't we have something a little more generic that doesn't sound silly?
I think that someone from SLC, ie Checketts, finally got involved. If the investor would have stepped up in OKC, Cleveland, Philly, wherever, they would've been probably in the same spot as SLC. If Checketts truly is involved as it sounds he is, I think it may be likely to see a SLC expansion team next year, whether with Rochester, Houston, Philly, OKC, Cleveland, wherever. As for names, I'm not saying you're wrong, and you're from there, so what would be a good generic (no negative conotation) name? Salt Lake City Lions? Salt Lake City Tigers? Salt Lake City Bears? Seriously, what do you suggest?
If we're going with indiginous wildlife, you could name the team the Utah Bears FC or SLC Cougars (U of U fans won't like that as much as BYU fans). I'm still a fan of SLC Punks or Golden Spikes FC.
