Wow. Most of these names are absolutely retarded. No more singular noun names. Stupid stupid stupid. We've already had our fair share. Crew, Burn (even worse, a verb!), Mutiny, Fusion, Galaxy are all ridiculous names. Even the Fire is a little iffy, but generally gets the OK because of, well, the Great Chicago Fire. Everyone is complaining about "European" names, and I agree - we don't need to pick up Uniteds and FCs and Dynamos and Sportings. But the Force and Chaos aren't American either. American sports teams are the Cardinals, the Browns, the Eagles, the Bears, etc etc. Anyway, my two cents (which is roughly $3.50 compared to everyone else's): Chivas: if we have to have them, Chivas San Diego. OKC: OKC Barons, Roughnecks, or even OKC 66. Cleveland: WTF!?s Rochester: Rhinos. Mike Segroves: Raining Righteous Indignation on PC Jackasses everywhere.
Yeah, that's just what is needed. It'll go a long way to appealing to the D&D and Babyon V crowd that is so underrepresented on these boards.
The Cleveland Rocks (Hello Cleveland!) The Cleveland in Twain (Opponents will fall like a butcher's pig!) The Cleveland SpeedDealers (A shout out to the Plain Dealer AND REO Speedwagon -- who aren't from Cleveland but may as well be!) The Cleveland Beige (Brown was taken, but it fits! And it's that whole singular/plural thing that US Soccer likes so much!) The Cleveland Stevens (It'll be like Chivas, but instead of Mexicans, sign only Stevens!)
after reading the posts i like the Cleveland Bulldogs The Rochester Rhinos is a great name Chivas could be anything..I will hate them regardless I really like the Oklahoma Flames -named after the best thing out of oklahoma-The Flaming Lips
i like the flames as well, but we already have two fire-related teams (don't wanna saturate the market)... maybe dallas should consider a name change to that.
I second the Oklahoma Flaming Lips and as for the indian names - We need a separate forum so Mr Segroves can really argue his case.
Yeah!! Why isn't it the Dallas Mustangs or something? They wouldn't have to change their logo. . . Rochester Rhino's is whaaaaacky. I mean, I wouldn't name a team that, but it's way better then "Sockers" Couldn't we do the Philadelphia Talons? That's kinda scary, but related to the Eagles. . .
I think even Dallas fans would like to change their logo. It looks like something out of Playmakers, that shit. That's why I suggested the Dragons. It's classier, it's meaner, it sounds less like a cross training shoe, it doesn't interfere with the Brimstone Cup, and it's... alliterative. Either that or the Diablos. I'm glad someone else likes the Philadelphia Talons. As far as the Washington Redskins are concerned, I'll say this. If you really to change the name, make the colors green and white and call them the Micks. You could even make the logo a bloodshot-eyed leprechaun wielding a shillelagh. The Irish wouldn't mind, believe me. They'd become my second favorite team, after the Patriots of course.
The Brimstone Cup isn't about the team names... and why are other people discussing Dallas' team? The fans there WANT TO KEEP THE BURN name, want to keep the red and black colors, the only thing most want with the logo is to put a shield behind it...but there are a few who want something totally different...
I am from Germany, and would only say to that; You`re a huge country and what is problem to play with 22 Clubs on a straight table? It`s not American style, but is soccer that til yet? Why they don`t try? Ok in LA they`ve a really soccer crowd in the final. But the rest? They've more attendance in regular games. In LA they go the stadium when the light is shining. Like Schalke or Dortmund. This happens really, Schalke test the Floodlight, and 20,000+ rund to them cause think they`ll play tonight. Why not in the states?
That would be just fine by me. I hope to God they don't stick with "Force". It's a f***ing stupid name for a sports team. Its a gimmick for kids. What's next, the Cleveland Force vs the Philadelphia Dark Side? The Rochester Ton Tons vs the Houston Battle Droids? The Miami Bad Scripts vs the Atlanta Bad Acting? Why - someone please tell me why - we have to pick a name that NO OTHER team in the northern hemisphere is using?
In his MLS Cup address Don Garber stated that the new team being run by Jorge Vergara will be allowed to be called "Chivas USA." I hope everyone can see two very significant problems with this (one is much bigger than the other). The biggest one that should not stand is that the team has the name of the entire country that every MLS team resides in. This makes no sense and it is confusing. Where are they from? Where is their unique geographical or city area? One would never know. It would also forever link our league to the Mexican league when we truly have nothing in common. (Except that we are playing the same game) And the second one, although not as significant is that Chivas is not an English word. Every other professional sports team in the United States uses english words for their name. Do we really want to allow French and German or even Japanese and Chinese names if investors come from those areas? Obviously the answer is no. Garber said they will adhere to the same rules that all the other clubs are, but it seems that on the very first decision they already aren't. I am in the process of putting together an official protest and will post more on this later.
San Diedo Padres I have no problem with "Chivas USA" other than it sounds dumb. No doubt the "USA" is there to differentiate it from its Mexican counterpart. Part 2 of that I would bet is Vergera's wishes to attract Mexican fans from outside the city they play in. I would prefer a city name attached to it rather than the country but no one asked me.
Actually it won't be online. It will be mailed out on official letterhead as longas the board for our supporter's club supports it. I will find out next week.
I meaned with that, A-League-teams have a long tradition, why would they not asked to get professionals? Or other teams in other leagues, e.g. Schalke 04 or Hotspurs Black in San Diego? (Only Examples). There are lot of teams in U.S. who play soccer over a very long time. And they have traditional teams with traditional fans. The straight table with relegations, so every team can get up and down. E.g. Traditional MLS-Teams can stay in the MLS and new who will try it can join. When they sportly strong enough and it's profitable for them and they have the background in their areas, they stay, when not they`ll be relegated.
But I thing Rochester have a goot background when they have a chance to play the MLS. They've a derby with the Metro's. And when they reactivate Cosmos (I see a site in the web about this) they`ve two.
Cleveland is much closer to Rochester than is New York City. The Revolution and DC United are both much closer to the Metrostars than is Rochester. It wouldn't really be a local derby at all.