If Rochester makes it to MLS...

How about Rochester Viola?

Sachin

 

How about Rochester Chivas USA....um, never mind.

 

Or it could be just left the same

Click Here

 

I have been wondring this very same thing. Is there anyone here that can / will have a serious discussion about this? Given that the Dallas _______ are changing thier name / identity with thier move to a new SSS, wouldnt it be a good time for a team such as Rochester to possibly try and improve thiers?

Im not knocking it, or saying its bad or anything like that, however I will say thier name, and logo really are pretty "minor league America". Its a great identity for an A-league team sure, but IMHO, I think that MLS and its fans would want MLS to move towards more traditional names/ logos/ identities for its clubs. Granted, there are some in MLS such as Dallas that desperately NEED changing (id say KC, COL, and SJ could also use and overhaul too.) but for any new teams perhaps it would behoove MLS to set some guildlines so there are not more mistakes in terms of bad marketing/ focus group/ corporate thought up crappy names/ logos/ identities.

I realize that Rochester has history and all that, but surely there has to be another name that is much more traditional (soccer wise at least) that is also meaningful to the city, and will pay tribute to the organisations history, the city's history, the soccer legacy there, while also being in good taste in terms of keeping with the traditional football club type identities.

Maybe something with the year pro soccer was first played in Rochester in the name? Who knows...

My point is, that MLS is trying to break into the sports mainstream, and or at least become more successful than it is now. Part of any pro sports league's image is its member club's identities, and I think it would do MLS some good as a whole if it moved away from having clubs whose identities were more akin to those of what you would find in lower level hockey leauges like the UHL, ECHL... etc.


Some people ask me why I even care about things like that, and Ill tell you why. Its because I care about the sport, and MLS, and want BOTH to grow, become even more successful and popular, and to be taken more seriously in this country and in Canada, as a major sport and league. Things such as new teams names/ identities etc... have a direct effect on all of those things, and more, and as a fan of not just one team, but of MLS and the sport as a whole, it affects me too.

Again, im not knocking Rochester in any way, I hope they do make it to MLS, and love the support they get up there. I just think they could to themselves, and MLS alot better by making some changes to thier identity to something more in keeping with MLS/ and world wide soccer traditions. Also what a better time to do that than upon entry into an entirely new league?

 

i think that if you get rid of the Rhino name in Rochester, there will be some backlash from the town. Probably not much from the soccer geek people (and people that post on BigSoccer, USLdiscussions.com, etc are soccer geeks) but more from the average fan. You know, the person that is 90% of the fans of the team. I love the Rhino name and logo. And I don't mind the "Raging" part of the name either. It is different and American.

 

I fully understand where you are coming from. I agree in part, however, I think that could be made up for if it was changed to something along the lines of what I suggested, and something that was keeping with traditional soccer type identites, and with the city of Rochester, and its history.

Sure some might not like it, or may be alittle upset by it, but would they lose any fans, probably not.


The Washington Capitals decided to totally change thier identity except for thier name (IE team colors, logo...etc...) and while it upset quite a few people, including myself as a lifelong diehard fan, in the end, we all got over it, and it really didnt hurt anything.

Im certain there is some compromise that can be come to that would suit both the team, and thier supporters, as well as MLS and all the things I talked about in my previous post.


Its not so much that I dislike thier name/ identiy now, in as much as it is that it just seems very minor league to me, and probably would to alot of outsiders looking in. Sure its American enough, thats fine and dandy, but the sports roots are not, and neither is most of its history. Im all for American this that or the other..but some things just shouldnt be "Americanized" as much, or even at all really ya know?

A few of us fans of MLS are lucky to be supporters of clubs that have great names/ identities, like you and I. Hoefully F.C. Dallas will soon join those ranks.

I know im not the only one who thinks/ feels this way about team names/ identities either.


But I cant lie, and say personal preferences dont play into it at all for me either. They do, and quite frankly I just dont care for team names that are contrived, silly, gimicky (SP?) bush league esq or otherwise seem like something a child thought up. Im not saying that Rochesters was thought up by a kid or anything either, I just personally find it to be, well, minor league quality. But thats just me, and im not trying to discuss my personal preferences here.

 

we just can agree to have different opinions on that then.

i shudder when I hear FC Dallas. For one, it is called soccer in this country. And it is a team/franchise, not a club. I can stomach DC United cause of Washington being the capital and such. But I don't want teams be be named like the are in Europe. Like is Cleveland were to get a team, there were people pulling hard for Forest City as their name? To me, that is a no-no. In the US, we do it City/State/Region first and then the mascot. Sure there are some anomolies like Mighty Ducks of Anaheim. The only name that wouldn't destroy the Rochester team, in my opinion, is the Lancers cause of their NASL roots. But the name "Rhinos" and their mascot was a big reason why I try to follow a little of how they do. If/once they get rid of it, I could care less if there was a team in Rochester. We are trying to market to fans in America, where the vast majority of the fame and money would come from. I don't want to compromise anything to pander to Europe or Latin America.

 

Well, for me personally, I cant say that I have ever followed a team because of thier name. And I do agree with you on one thing.. Lancers is OUT OUT OUT. NO WAY to THAT one!

I understand all about America's way of doing the city/state/region and then mascott thing sure, but at least lets pay alittle attention /homage to the the heritage of the game, which isnt American. Names like D.C. United do that nicely, as do Chicago Fire, New England Revolution, (though I dislike the Rev's logo.) even the Metrostars. (if they were just N.Y. Metrostars that would be ALOT better though) I dont mind "Americana" and all that, but some of the names of pro sports franchises are just rediculous. And yes, I know its called soccer here. So ill concede. S.C. Dallas.

So I guess other than the Lancers thing being a total NO WAY...
you and I will have to agree to disagree on this one. No harm in that that... you know what they say about opinions.... they are like...... well you get it.

At least its been a nice, intelligent conversation so far. *smile*

So im curious as to what others besides just us think on this? Im sure there are alot more out there who have thoughts on this... so lets hear em!

 

I vote to leave the name alone ... mostly. They should drop the "Raging" part. That is bush league. But, otherwise, the "Rhinos" is a great name, IMO. It reminds me of the San Jose Sharks, in that it has lots of possibilities for really good merchandising. The Sharks sell a ton of shirts, hats, etc. with their logo on them. I think the Rhino gear could do pretty well, too. Lord knows MLS teams need all the cash they can get.

 

I vote for Rochester Sounders....that would piss off both Seattle and Rochester.

 

The only name change I could see is dropping the Raging part. But, I wouldn't expect anything to happen given that they have built up a solid brandname in the Rochester market.

Personally, I hope they don't change too much. I hate it when teams change their names, logos, colors, and such every 5 to 10 years.

That's really minor league to me.

 

Dropping the "Raging" part is a start.



Also, I never said anything about changing the teams name/ identity every 5 to 10 years. I would hope that any change to a new, and more major league identity would be for good. Heaven forbid MLS ends up with another team with a silly name/ logo..etc and have to have another Dallas (guess the team name here) type situation.

 

They can get Cindi Lauper to sing "True Colors" before every game.

- Paul

 

Haha, gotta love Portland Fans. Gotta love their team too! Best name, logo and colors!

Back to Rochester Raging Rhinos...

The reason Dallas is changing their name is because the "Burn" are drawing 7K in MLS.
The reason Rochester will keep their name, is because the "Rhinos" are drawing 12K in the A-League.

 

I don't think Rochester should change their name.

Doing so will make their current fans feel alienated.

What do you gain from a name change? "The logo is less minor league?" What defines a minor league logo/name? United at the end of it? Town at the end of it? Those are Premiership names, not MLS names. There is no reason to copy other country's soccer teams to make MLS teams stronger. No matter what the name is the play on the field needs to be at the top level. If the Rhinos go on to win the US Open Cup and MLS Cup three years running, they will be top of the heap. Their name won't change that.

Look at other names around American sports. The Utah Jazz? Who knew a form of music could be a team name? Should Rochester become the Rock and Roll? No. The Seattle Super Sonics? Ohh, our basketball team runs really fast! At least a Rhino is something any human will recognize.

Franchise names take time to catch on. The key is, you can't change them every five-ten years so that people just start to accept them. If Rochester changes their name now, it will take another 15 years before people just accept it.

Let them keep their name.

 

A point made on the Dallas board is that, if the team name is changed to FC Dallas (which is easier to say than 'ess cee' which ends up sounding like 'essee' -- and maybe they intend to present themselves, indeed, as a futbol club, with community outreach, etc.) then the fans are free to annoint the team with any nickname they choose -- including 'Burn.'

But the Rhinos have real following in Rochester, which looks upon the team as an asset. That's why MLS can never 'start' a team in Rochester, the community expects the Rhinos to be promoted, name and all.

Seattle, on the other hand, seems not to have such a strong attachment to the Sounders name. Strange, because of its link to the golden days of the NASL. Perhaps familiarity breeds contempt; the Sounders management thinks that keeping the name won't be enough for Seattle. The impression will be that the A-League Sounders just added a few players and switched to MLS, and management wants Seattle excited about a new MLS team.

But, in your case, if going MLS means a suit and tie, how about Rochester RRC (Raging Rhinos Club)?

 

Well, that was one, weird move. As the New Orleans Jazz, the name made sense. It was linked to something unique about New Orleans, where jazz was born. To move the team to Utah without changing the name was grotesque.

I aways think of them as the Utah Tabernacle Choir.

 

Team names always make me laugh. I think they are kind of ridiculous, overall, and it doesn't matter what team has them. (Aren't there a number of "bird" team names in England? Many people don't really know, because they aren't really part of the name--but Everton's nickname is the "Toffeemen" or the "Toffees" and Newcastle United are the "Magpies")

However, over time, a team's identity becomes closely associated with their name. Why change it? If the Burn had been around for 100 years, I doubt anyone would ever consider changing it. Rochester Raging Rhinos is a name that is instantly recognizable. Any work to change the name and try to get the word out about its identity would be a waste of money and resources. The name is great because it has an identity in the community. Don't change it.

The same can be said about the Sounders. I think it is a mistake to change it. And I doubt that they could come up with anything that is intrinsically better, anyway.

 

Never thought of that, but I think THAT is a great idea. Or even Rochester RFC (Rhinos Football Club) or even Rochester RSC. (for those over here who abhore calling soccer by its birth name.

 

True, but those are just "nicknames" that arent really part of the club's official names though.

Very True, and agreed, but, shouldnt a teams name have something to do with thier city/ region too? I just dont see what Rhinos has to do with Rochester, other than its just a minor league team name thats been used a long time.

Once again agreed. I actually like thier name, and the newer logo (the shield w/ the orca on it) is even beter. Now THAT to me is a great start for an MLS team.

 

Actually, I just read the history of how the term "soccer" came about and Soccer was actually the original name, and Football was used mainly for rugby in England. Then, as time went by, Football became what we know it as (soccer) and Rugby became just that. So soccer is actually a British term that we adopted in America mainly because football was already taken.

 

First post in the thread to say leave as is except for the "raging" part.
I've given out too much rep this past 24 hours - damn.

 

First of all, pretty sure they'll be at least the "Rochester Rhinos"
http://www.foxsportsworld.com/content/view?contentId=2417824
Now to the rest of this junk:

First, I'm calling "bull**********" on you. You are knocking it, throughout all of your posts on here. You are not seperating you bias and providing reason or logic as to why they should change; just that YOU THINK it would sound nicer. Second, Why would SJ need an overhaul? They just changed to show their history. Personally I definately disagree with you on COL too, but I'm not going to go that far off-topic. Third, the Rhinos are marketed more "major league" than some MLS teams.

Well, apparently "Rhinos" has some of the better history of US soccer anywhere. It's not like the Burn moniker; it has much more history, fan support, proven love, attendance, etc attatched to it.

Again, biased personal opinion, ignoring fact. Rochester marketing and local/national brand recognition would disagree with everything you are saying. They are one of the best run/marketed/attended teams around.

Hypocrite. Also, MLS and worldwide soccer traditions in terms of names are totally different things.

For one thing, this is a totally different situation than Seattle or Dallas. The Rhinos are very well known/recognized/attended, unlike Burn and Sounders (to different extents and situations). Next, changing this recognition very well may lose some fans because it part of the local area, one of the city's flagships, unlike Dallas or Seattle, where Mariners, Sonics, Cowboys, Stars, etc reign supreme. Next, the comparison to the Caps is INSANE. They didn't change their name, which makes it a COMPLETELY different scenario and not very comparable. They were still the "Caps."

Keeping "Rhinos" apparantly suits everyone important just fine.

I don't think it does to most outsiders (outside of the "Raging" part). So what about the sports roots? Should we name NHL teams the "NY Eskimos" or "Florida SledDogs" or "Carolina Canada HC" because hockey's roots are in Canada? Get real. This is an AMERICAN LEAGUE. Get over it. Why are "Chicago Fire" and "New England Revolution" and "Metrostars" good, but "SJ Earthquakes" or "Colorado Rapids" bad?

First,
Second, who says "FC Dallas" joins those ranks. As others said, it is called football here, it's not a club, and almost always the city/state/region comes first in name. That's a total personal assumption.

I believe you're in the minority.

Again, BULL**********. You ARE trying to discuss your personal preferences.

...and it means soccer in Rochester.

It hasn't all been... :smile:





Last, your "arguments" have been devoid of logic, reason, & fact; just contain preference, opinion, & degradation. So, Rochester RRC is so much better than Rochester Rhinos? Have some tea and crumpets (?) and then come back to the real world. Rochester RRC personally is not bad to me, but youre argument is laughable. Personally I think the "minor league to major league" transition is made by taking out the "Raging" part, and it still keeps the (local) identity. It has soccer meaning, recognition, and even alliteration . IMO, that would not sound minor league, although I do think they would have to do some work on the logo. Seperate from the Rochester RRC suggestion, Why would it be a good thing to get rid of the marketing, fan brand recognition, media recognition, etc? They have good attendance and are VERY well respected in the Rochester sports scene. You still haven't answered why you would abandon that and the support and success they've had and do have now. I'm originally from Cleveland, not Rochester, and live in Dallas, but I'd love to see them do it, and I think they have everything in place already.

 

Great post. Still can't give out more rep yet.