Actually, the tribe originated in the Southwestern US, Northern Mexico, which isn't too far from Sac'to. Besides, it wouldn't exactly be the 1st pro sports franchise to be "inappropriately named": LA Lakers, come to mind...
that doesn't really qualify Sacremento for the Aztec name... So according to that logic, the new New York team should be the Seminoles or the Cherokees?
By that logic, the Sacramento Eskimos also rings true. Of course the name made sense when they played in Minnesota....
but makes no sense to keep the same in a glorified desert. and Alaska is quite a ways away from Central California.
Gosh, I guess I better go look at a map. I had no idea that NYC was a 7 hour drive to Seminole and Cherokee country. But thanks for the heads up...
More so than Jazz in Salt Lake City..... So is this: http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/map16-az.html The middle of CA was nowhere near the Aztecs. You can get away with it for SoCal, but not other locals. There's plenty of cool things you can use for someplace like Sacramento, no need to burn one from some other locale.
North Pacific Rangers? I have to come out and call the North Pacific Rangers the worst idea yet. First of all where the h*ll is the North Pacific? I've heard of that movie South Pacific, but what would the North Pacific be? The Aleutian Islands? Seattle is a city in what is known as the Pacific Northwest if you need the help with geography. Then they would be PNR and avoid the acronym confusion with National Public Radio. And why would someone from Texas want a team in Seattle called the Rangers, when the only place in the US that ever had Rangers was Texas? Why Lone Star FC and not Lone Star Rangers? Why call them the Rangers? Just because there is a team in europe called that? I think the names Rangers and Wanderers and Rovers and etc. are already taken. And you want to give a team in seattle a deliberately vague geographic location in their name but you think the Revs, whose geographic location is not so vague and is often used by the general public, should drop their location from their name? I just don't get it at all.
1 mls cup 1 supporters shield 3 u.s. open cups what bad omen? i think people need to get off of the literal or business definition of "football club". in american sports lexicon, the players , coaches, employess are the "club" "The Chicago AmericanLeague Baseball Club"... i often hear the phrase "ball club" in association with sports, including college teams outside of baseball.
team names I agree that some classics must be kept, such as... Seattle Sounders Portland Timbers Chicago Sting But in Houston I'd like to see... Lone Star FC In New York... Empire FC Others... Oklahoma City FC Indianapolis Racers Detroit Drive (Though I think this is an arenaball team) I am not unhappy with Chivas San Diego, but Chivas USA is a really cheeseball name.
this must be a reference to that "other" playoff team from chicago...i got yer omen right here... the last time "they" were in the playoffs the fire flipped the double... but back on topic... HOUSTON WRANGLERS cuz it's a rodeo town.
I wanted Chicago's team to be called the Machine, but I suppose they didn't want to antagonize the Mayor.
Some of the best names of all times (and hopefully these teams will be resurrected from the A-League and brought into MLS) are the Vancouver Whitecaps, the Seattle Sounders, and the Los Angeles Aztecs. Tulsa Roughnecks was also a great name. Tampa Bay Rowdies, too. New Names: FC Dallas Dragons, San Antonio Panthers, Philadelphia Bluecoats, Cleveland Warriors or Grizzlies, Salt Lake Highlanders (no, I didn't think of it, but I hope it becomes their name), Atlanta Chiefs, Memphis Rogues. Names to avoid, even if they re-join the league: Minnesota Kicks, San Diego Sockers, Philadelphia Fury, Houston Hurricane, Detroit Express (too WUSA-sy), New England Team Men (worst name of all time, except basketball's Utah Jazz and NASL's Diplomats).
As a Philadelphia resident, I would love to move away from all the historical sports team names associated with the city. It just reminds people how important the city was in the 17th and 18th Centuries, but we are living in the 21st. We need to keep the image of the city slightly more current, less regressive. The Revolution was 228 years ago, and while there is no more proud American than I (it still blows me away that on my walk to work I can pass houses once owned by Ben Franklin, Betsy Ross, and others of that era)we need to stop living in the past and live in the 21st Century. Someone had suggested Philadelphia Scythe, which I thought was pretty cool and would have a great potential for a logo; a scythe cutting through the air in a swooping motion. Just the word "scythe" sounds cutting...
From the current teams, I'd love to see, as new names: -New York Cosmos -LA Aztecs -Dallas Tornado -Chicago Sting (yes, I like the NASL names) -Fountain City Athletic (for KC, the Fountain City. Why the hell not? Do you like the Wizards name?) -Celtic Foxes FC (for the Revs) -Dynamo Denver -Earthquakes, Fire, Crew and United work, I guess And for new cities: -Motor City Rovers (Detroit) -Twin Cities United (Minneapolis or St. Paul) -Racing Indianapolis -Girondins New Orleans -Olympique Montréal -Center City Club of Philadelphia (just think of all the cool CCCP merchandise ;-)) -Houston Hurricane -Vancouver Whitecaps -Seattle Sounders -Phoenix Rising FC -Tampa Bay Rowdies -Real Sociedad Sacramento -Kansas City Comets -California Surf FC (Anaheim) -Excelsior Baltimore (it rhymes!) -Steel City FC -Music City FC -Tulsa Roughnecks -Winnipeg Wanderers -Deportivo Santa Barbara (anyone who's ever seen the La Playa Stadium of Santa Barbara City College can just imagine a great backdrop for a small soccer stadium, right? It's either that, or I'm crazy.)
if philadelphia is awarded an expansion club that 2 potential names for the philly club should be 1) philadelphia union fc or 2) philadelphia fury fc. personally, i like #1
Once again I will bang this drum: let's stick to American team naming conventions. We are not in europe, let's not pretend we are. Philadelphia Union could just as well be Dubuque Union; there is no pride of place or any uniqueness with a "United" or "Union" as your team name; and FC means football club, but in America football is a different sport, and they are not clubs; they are major league sports teams, way beyond being a club activity. Rowing on the Schuylkill is a club activity, rugby is a club activity, but mls and other pro leagues are multi-million dollar businesses. don't pretend it's otherwise, you're just kidding yourself.
hey skyscraper...it was the american sports naming conventions that lead to great names such as the san jose CLASH, dallas BURN, and kansas city WIZ. yeah, leave to convention...
Yes those names suck, so we come up with better ones. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater; Union FC United crap is not better. It is less imaginative, not more. I have suggested a few for my hopefully new Philadelphia team, which may be better, worse, or equal to the Wiz or the Clash. But even those are better than Union FC United. Philadelphia Scythe is my suggestion.