MLS is Crashing American Soccer in REAL Big Ways

my apologies is this have been mentioned in the other naming threads.

Should have been called the Salt Lake City Shakers.


But seriously, what's in a name, that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

When Real Salt Lake was proposed a few months ago, I thought it was a mistake. Now, I don't really care--it sounds fine. The crest looks good. The shirts look good.

It's not the name, it is the association that is built up with a team that eventually gives meaning to the name. 100 years from now, the fans of Major League Soccer are going to be complaining about the new names for the expansion teams, while wondering why MLS can't go with traditional MLS names like Real Salt Lake.

Salt Lake choir boys, perhaps???

Just trying to help.

MiamiAce, in order to try and make a point (a dubious one), you've really stretched some examples.

DC United--as one person pointed out, Kevin Payne is a fan of Dundee United. But my understanding is that the genus of the name predates even MLS. Gordon Bradley (former Washington Diplomats and George Mason University coach) started an investor's drive in which the team would be owned by the community. It was labeled "Washington United" b/c the idea was:
(a) Washington is pretty divided (not just the GOP-Dems thing but between Virginia and Maryland) but this team would bring them together in a manner of speaking; and
(b) a team created through public investment and genuinely a team of the community.

The story I'd heard was that when the league died (and Bradley returned the money that the public had given to start up the team), Payne remembered the Washington United concept, knew that natives call the area "DC" and not "Washington" and switched it to DC United. Ads the first year and beyond emphasized the divisions in the DC area but that everyone could come together over "DC United." To argue that this is a plot by MLS solely to capitalize on another team's rep is like arguing that the BYU Cougars are trying to capitalize on any other team that predates them that use the name Cougars.

Two of the other examples you cite are about uniforms (notably: Metros and Rapids). Those clubs have had a range of uniforms and with the league agreement with Adidas, I wouldn't be surprised if their uniforms change again.

Like some of the names and uniforms or hate them, MLS has a lot more problems to deal with than the name/uniform thing. Can anyone honestly say that the reason Malcom Glazier (the TB Bucs owner who's trying to buy ManUnited) didn't invest in MLS b/c he thought MLS wasn't original enough? Or that the reason attendance isn't double for all MLS teams is b/c fans are turned off by the AC Milan look?

The key point about the Epcot Centre is that those countries in it look far better in the Epcot Centre than they do if you were to ever visit them in real life.

Given time the same will apply to the MLS.

You know what? i have made several posts of how dumb i have thought the name was, but this post actually made me think it's not so bad. There's club teams around the world that adopted names like Arsenal, United, Barcelona, tons of FCs and SCs, Racings, Santos, Wanderers, Rangers, etc...

The name is not so bad. I can live with it.

I still think it's strange that the name that got the most negative opinion from all the fans is the one that was picked, but I guess the name itself is not so bad.

Thanks - you feed my already ballooning ego!

I'm just a little freaked out that your 3 favorite teams are my 3 favorite teams: Why Arsenal & Barca?

I'm Swedish born and US raised (explains a lot doesn't it), but Freddie Ljungberg and Henrik Larsson are my boys - with the exception of Arsenal, I'm more of a player follower than a team follower in Europe.

But now, I got my RSL boys to cheer!

the full name is not the best. but it's not my choice.

I do like "RSL", i think that's fine.

and the logo, badge, uniform and colors are also better than i expected. i would have liked to have seen purple, but then again, not my choice.

RSL is fine with me.

aosthed, i sent you a PM.

I'll probably just call them RSL. it sounds kind of cool. Like PSV, PSG, QPR, etc...

While I did complain that the name sounds stupid, I wouldn't for a second think a stupid name is the death knell of MLS. if that was the case it would have died long ago.

That'd be great!

Who cares if they ripped it off from Real Madrid? The more I think about it, the more I like the name. It says soccer. "FC Dallas v. Real Salt Lake" Can't mistake that for an arena league game. Plus, it's cosmopolitan like the game. So what if it's not American? Does anyone actually think that the people who already have something against soccer would change their view if the name was more American? "Geez, I've been a soccer hater for years, but the new MLS team is named the Golden Spikes, now I like it." No. Plus RSL rolls on the tongue quite nicely and they get to pick their own nickname, i.e. the Saints. That rocks. Anyway, it is a solid name with a solid badge. Well done.

Y'all need to lighten up here. No matter what name had been picked for Salt Lake, there inevitably would be a thread like this. Me, I would have liked Salt Lake Smithees. Oh well.

* Kansas City Royals - The name is a salute to a pair of baseball teams that had previously called Kansas City home: the minor-league Kansas City Blues (named after the style of music and the predominant color in their uniforms) and the Negro League Kansas City Monarchs (they were one of the dominant teams in Negro baseball, hence "kings" or "monarchs" on the diamond). Therefore, Royals has a double meaning. It references both the color Blue and the notion of being a Monarch (royalty).

* Kansas City Wizards - A reference to L. Frank Baum's The Wizard of OZ. The classic children's book begins in Dorothy Gale's home state of Kansas, and the Greater Kansas City metropolitan area straddles the Missouri-Kansas border.

* San Diego Padres - The name honors Padre (Father) Junipero Serra, who established the Mission San Diego de Alcala, the first of the famous California Missions. Though the team is named in Spanish rather than English, the Greater San Diego area has always had a large Spanish-speaking population. Further, given the region's history, even non-Spanish speaking fans know that "padre" means "father" and refers to an early Mission priest. The term ties in directly to the region's history.

* Los Angeles Lakers - The franchise was initially established as the Minneapolis Lakers in the State of Minnesota, commonly referred to as "The Land of 10,000 Lakes". The franchise's name should have been changed long ago (just as the Utah Jazz name should have been changed). However, when the franchise relocated in 1960, sports marketing and branding had not evolved to its current level of sophistication.

* Sacramento Kings - The franchise now known as the Sacramento Kings has been relocated three times. It was initially established in 1945 in Rochester, New York, playing as the Rochester Royals. The owners of the then semi-pro team followed a pair of the crude branding practices of the era... namely, utilizing an alliterative name to make it easier to remember, as well as adopting an identity that implied that they "ruled" over the other teams in their sport. The Royals retained their moniker upon moving to Cincinnati, Ohio in 1957. The team once again adopted an alliterative name, albeit still tied to a royalty theme, when they arrived in Kansas City, Missouri in 1972: Kings. The club maintained the Kings' name upon relocating to Sacramento in 1985.

* New York Rangers - The NHL awarded Madison Square Garden the rights to operate an expansion franchise in the building beginning in 1926. The Garden's president at the time was G.L. "Tex" Rickard. Local sportswriters began referring to the team as "Tex's Rangers"... a play on words referencing the world-famous Texas Rangers police force. In an era when sports marketing/branding were an afterthought, the name stuck.

* New York Giants - The original New York National League baseball franchise (since moved to San Francisco) was initially called the New York Gothams (based on their location) and/or Green Stockings (uniform color). However, the 1885 team - which featured a number of six-footers on its roster (not exactly ordinary for the era) - was often referred to by manager Jim Mutrie as "my giants". The name stuck. In 1921, the American Professional Football Association granted an expansion franchise to New York City. It was owned by the baseball National League's New York Giants, and adopted the same name as the baseball team. The team folded after a single season. In 1925, Tim Mara established a National Football League team in New York City, naming the club the New York Football Giants (thus, both trying to trade on the popularity of the baseball team in that market, while establishing a unique identity as well).

* Tennesse Titans - The Houston Oilers relocated to the State of Tennessee in 1997. They played their first two seasons in the state as the Tennessee Oilers. Recognizing that the Oilers identity no longer fit in their new home, team management selected the Titans moniker as a tribute to Nashville, Tennessee's nickname, "The Athens of the South" (a full-scale replica of the Parthenon actually stands in Nashville's Centennial Park). Athens was the center of learning and culture in ancient Greece, and the Titans were, in fact, creatures in Greek mythology. Hence, the connection.

* St. Louis Rams - The franchise now known as the St. Louis Rams has been relocated four times. Founded in Cleveland, Ohio in 1937, the team is reported to have received its name when owner Homer Marshman asked local sports reporters what they felt would be suitable. The concensus amongst the newspapermen was that the name should be short, so as to easily fit into headlines. The team's General Manager at the time - Damon "Buzz" Wetzel - had long been a fan of Fordham University football, and offered up Rams as a possible "short" nickname. Marshman liked the idea of naming the team after an aggressive animal (often standard practice in the early days of pro sports branding), and the Cleveland Rams were born. The team has maintained the nickname through moves to Los Angeles (1946), Anaheim (1980) and St. Louis (1995).

* Oakland Raiders -

The Name.

My opinion:

This just BLOWS.

What do I care if other leagues have screwed up with the Mighty Ducks or the Lakers or the Jazz? Is that our goal? NO.

United is United: there are a lot of United teams and in 1996 a little dash of euro-poser was a good thing.

And just because teams separated by oceans and continents, in the days before satellite TV and the internet, named their grassroots clubs after foreign teams... that doesn't mean savvy-21st century marketeers should name their institution by copying the going flavor-of-the-month superclub.

*It invites mockery by comparison.

*It's unoriginal.

*It's Europoseur (and somewhat difficult to pronounce, and to me a feminine sounding name. Not a positive in the American sports scene.)

*It's soccer-snobbish.

*American sports media hates names like these.

* It is purposely elitist - and elitism is another stereotype America likes to pin on soccer.

*It came in dead-last in the fan poll.

So here we are again with some rich dude's whim being a complete fuccup, and the usual corporate execs fawning all over it, and the usual fans here on big soccer trying to defend it. Disingenuously.

I am in the "make the best of it" crowd who will be trying to slide past the name when I try to talk genuine soccer fans into going to a game.

But I'm happily not one of these bigsoccer old-timers who so predictably and derisively come to the league's defense on every fuccup.

The Colors.

Furthermore...

How does the famously Single Entity league allow another team to pick these colors?

Do we have any famous Yellow teams? Yup.

Do we have any established Blue teams? Yup.

How about Red teams? Oh, three or four.

Okay how about red and blue teams? Just a couple.

With Checketts slinging so much BS about royalty and Madrid, one might think Purple would've been a natural selection. Come to think of it there aren't any Orange or truly Green teams either...


(sorry, couldn't think of a way to spin this part into a superiority dance.)

The "badge."

(Okay, whew...)

And why are so many people hung up on a having some kind of Disney-ish coat of arms?

If we want to look like we're part of the fabric of world soccer - rather than simply imitating our myopic cliche of it - a circle or a rectangle works just as well as a shield-shaped emblem.

The much-hated MetroStars logo-system, for example, used to be interesting. Very stylised and unusual. Now it's a caricature.

These threads are silly.

A team name won't destroy, demolish, crush, or erradicate soccer as we know it in the USA. Sound effects and endless annoucements over the PA during play makes the game look way sillier than a club name can.

I doubt very highly that MLS gave SLC a team with the stipulation they name it after a european club. So lay off MLS if you hate the name.

This same thread has popped up endlessly on the RSL board. I would think they have better things to discuss. Conversely, they have to sift through endless tirades on a daily basis about how their team name is a disgrace written by people predominently from other regions who would never route for RSL even if their "dream name" was adopted.

There are plenty of general discussion boards for these types of rants Please use them.

Re: The Colors.

though i agree that rsl could have chosen some original colors but its done so everyone stop complaining. you dont hear people all over the world complaining that team a has the same colors as team b. get over it

epl
newcastle - black white blue
arsenal - red white blue
man u - red white black yellow
liverpool - yellow red
chelsea - blue white
crystal palace - red blue
everton - blue
manchester city - blue
nottingham - red
sheffield - blue
west ham - red blue

out of these 11 teams, 8 have blue, 5 have red, 3 have blue and red
who cares what colors teams are as long as they are great on the pitch!

1. Don't know if you were addressing me but I didn't say MLS stipulated anything.

2. IMO, you underestimate the power and value of a name.

3. The Salt Lake MLS board is inundated with people complaining about the name - and you're suggesting that's not significant?

4. Hopefully those Salt Lakers frustrated by the threads in question won't have too difficult a time sifting out "MLS is Crashing American Soccer in REAL Big Ways."

5. You live in Saratoga, NY. So how, by your logic, would your opinion count?

Silly soup man...

Whatever, IMO, if you shell out $10 Million you have the right to disappoint any of us with your stupid team name. Besides, it is growing on me, especially since so many of us hate it. That is sort of cool.

Also, let me be the first to predict that next year we will have the Atlanta Arsenal in MLS.

Re: The Colors.

You're comparing apples to orchards, AND you missed my point.

Just because other places have it wrong doesn't mean we should imitate their flaws or use them as justification for our mistakes.

Unlike the century-old, hundred-team English league system, we are starting out as a pro league. We only have twelve ********ing teams. And we are single entity - which means we can, in theory, manage these things quite easily.

And we have the advantage of looking overseas and saying "Okay, well ideally we won't have half our top teams nicknamed the Reds."

Then some other marketing wiz kid might look north and say "Yeah - and let's not name two of our teams the Rough Riders."

Do you follow me?

The BS boards are inundated with people complaining about everything - that's not a criteria for anything...

Well, these shoes are killing me...