Also rename the team to something that doesn't sound arena league-ish. Chivas USA and New England has the worst names in MLS.
I knew someone would say this. But our name has a "ring" to it. Plus the name sorta pays homage to the NY Cosmos. Revolution sounds like a bad pun or something, ugggghhhh. We get it, you're New England.
one shitty arena league name is no better than the other. Galaxy has too much brand power to change and Revolution makes enough sense that it shouldn't change. Kill the Crew, though. Eff that noise
A filthy toilet bowl "has a 'ring' to it", too. Just saying. Which, given the fact that the Galaxy franchise is based in suburban Los Angeles and the Cosmos represented Greater New York, would make absolutely no f***ing sense. Then again, the Galaxy name isn't remotely meant to pay "homage to the NY Cosmos", so you can stop attempting to pull absurd justifications for your side's own "arena league-ish" name out of your hind-quarters. How, exactly, is it a pun? Yes, New England. Birthplace of the fomentation that lead to the America REVOLUTIONary War. Hence, our side's team name. It pays homage to the history of the New England region.
the Cosmos name has nothing to do with "the cosmos", it was an abbreviation of the word "Cosmopolitan"
The only thing that separates a "good" name from a "bad" name is time. If you kept with name for 50 or 100 years and suddenly that name is ingrained in the city, the culture, and the supporters. It takes a bland name and makes it "classic" or takes a stupid name and makes it "unique". Updating a crest or a slight colors/kit re-brand is completely understandable as styles change, but the longer you can keep a name, the better, in my opinion. We're not talking about the Detroit Dildos or the Cincinnati Chili Rings or something totally egregious like that.
So instead of chosing a name based on the culture and history of the area in question, you'd rather ask some consultants to come up with a name that 'has a good ring to it'. And WE'RE the one's being arena-ball? And don't pretend you're the heir's to the Cosmos, which as pointed out, has nothing to do with space. Galaxy, Clash, Mutiny, Metrostars, Burn, Wiz, New England Revolution. I promise you that the latter stands out more than the former (Only because I know that the original Nike plan for the team was the Orange and Green New England Nitro, which sounds almost as bad as LA Galaxy) I'd agree with you, except for the fact that I've heard of the Cincinnati Bengals. That team's been around since '68 and still sounds dumb.
Why?.. because there are no bengals in Cincinatti zoo? (Honest question, I don't really know). What makes different the Bengals from the Detroit Lions?
There are certain animals that a strong and dangerous and powerful and part of the collective culture: Lions, Tigers, Bears, Eagles, etc. Bengals isn't on that last, and sounds like they wanted to be the Tigers but also wanted to use some alliteration, but unfortunately they're in Cincinatti Because history and tradition dating back to the first ever professional baseball team ever is way worse than some obscure Middle-Ages term for a Bear.
I know what it means. Taken purely on it's surface it's a shitty name. Just like my Knicks have a garbage name without the historical context. And yeah, Bruins is kind of weird.
The name "Cincinnati Bengals" was taken from a semi-pro football team that played in the 1930's. So, it has a historical basis. The runner-up nickname, as I recall, was the "Cincinnati Rhinos," which was a play on the vast number German immigrants who wound up in Cincinnati in the 1800's. Uh, "Rhinos = The Rhine," get it?
Cincinatti Rhinos would be the absolute worst name I had ever heard of. I meant no ill-will towards Bengals fans or the Bengals in general, it just seems that after 50+ years, the name still sounds like the Jacksonville Jaguars and the Carolina Panthers.
The name was chosen by the legendary Paul Brown, who was gifted the team in the immediate aftermath of the NFL/AFL merger. The worst part wasn't the name, but rather the team colors (black, orange and white) and the uniforms the Bengals wore for their first ten years which were all but identical to the Cleveland Browns uniforms and colors (brown, orange and white).
a Bengal is a specific type of Tiger how are "Panthers" and "Jaguars" bad names? Comparing them to the likes of MLS names is silly, for starters they're both plural and therefore not instantly dateable to the mid 90's.
They sound 90's, they sound dated. They don't sound classy and timeless. 90's expansion teams in the Big Four (excluding teams that I am aware of that are using names of older teams): Sharks, Lightning, Rockies, Marlins, Mighty Ducks, Panthers, Raptors, Grizzlies, Panthers (again), Jaguars, Ravens, Diamondbacks, Devil Rays, Thrashers. Is it hard to see that all of those teams were cut from the same cloth as the Tampa Bay Mutiny?
I don't see it. Most of those names are about as good as anything that came before, just without the benefit of time. Panthers, for example, is a great name that had somehow managed to unused forever. Mutiny is a generic minor league name that screams "1996, bros! We're XTREME!"
Agree.. add another example, I don't really see the difference between "Bears" and "Sharks". Namewise, they are the same.
No shit. But those two things have nothing to do with the Red Sox you were talking about in reference to the historic first ever professional baseball team .... from Cincinnati. No, I don't see how the Sharks, Rockies, Marlins, Diamondbacks, or Devil Rays are from the same cloth as the Mutiny.