No, I thought Ismitje (the person with the best Simpsons line ever in a sig) was. If not, my bad. Tony
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. Two words for you: Houston Texans. That has got to be one of the most ridiculous and least creative team names ever. I think that the name and logo reinforce the stereotype that people from Texas are half-witted. It is as if they couldn't think of a good name and logo, so instead named the team after the state and copied the University of Texas longhorn logo. If you're not careful, a plural name can be just as terrible.
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. University of Texas Longhorn: Houston Texans longhorn: Actual longhorn: Foghorn Leghorn: Are the good people of Houston up in arms? If they're not, maybe you shouldn't be, either.
Personally, as UT alum and a Texans fan, I thought they could've done better with the name. It seems like half the pro football teams that have been in this state have had the name "Texans." You had the Dallas Texans of the AAFC (which became the Baltimore Colts), the Dallas Texans of the AFL (which became the KC Chiefs), the Dallas Texans of the Arena League, the San Antonio Texans of the CFL, and now the Houston Texans. At least, the USFL showed more originality with the Houston Gamblers and the San Antonio Gunslingers. I would've preferred that Houston's new NFL team had the name Oilers, but apparently Bud Adams, in a final "f.u." act to Houston, got the NFL to retire the name when his Tennessee team was renamed to the Titans. The logo doesn't offend me. It's a bull, but it's not a longhorn by any stretch of the imagination. Even Toro, the fuzzy-suited mascot that runs around the field at Reliant Stadium, doesn't have long horns. There's other things that they could've done for a team named "Texans," and I'm sure that some provincial smartasses are warming up their keyboards as we speak, but it's not bad.
Apollos was one of them, wasn't it? Actually, the Dallas Texans that became the Baltimore Colts weren't of the AAFC (the original Colts were, though). The 1952 Texans were an NFL team. There was also a CBA team called the Wichita Falls Texans.
Of course. The revenue sharing agreement that settled the 1994 dispute is as much to blame as anything for the Expos current plight. The prospect of a guaranteed profit via revenue sharing money, was a carrot the Expos management at the time found too good to pass up. So they slashed salary to an absurd extent, raked in the money and then sold. I'm just saying that other teams have managed to survive nonsense of that type before, while it pretty much buried the 'Spos. I'm just wondering to what extent a better name would have helped. At the very least, the Royals would have allowed Montreal to do more nostalgia type marketing (Montreal was where Jackie Robinson began his career in integrated pro-baseball) than a name whose importance disappeared pretty much within a few years of the start of the team. As it stands right now, the only thing really needed to save the team is for a well financed group to go to bat for it. Hasn't happened. I think we're mostly in agreement, you just may have misinterpreted what I was saying.
Of course, women are the great inovators of language -- 'sort of.' By consensus, the 4 great writers of the last century were (Marcella) Proust, (Francine) Kafka, (Jane) Joyce, and (Samantha) Beckett. Who knew? And why wasn't Danielle Steele consulted?
A couple of points: 1. The name has nothing to do with the demise of the Expos. The strike 10 years ago killed them. Remember when everyone abandoned baseball? Well the folks in Montreal have never come back. They had one of the best fanbases in baseball before that strike, and the team could never, or never really tried hard enough, get them back. If they changed their team to the Montreal Naked Chicks, I dont' think they'd get a boost in attendance. 2. It was reassuring to see MLS featured so prominently in the article. I read it as MLS is the only new league with any real success, or emerging from the 'other sports' pack of Arena Football, WNBA, WUSA, Lacrosse, etc. 3. Most of the newer teams (and logos) suck. In the last 10-15 years, I can only think of a handful of names that I do like: Chicago Fire, DC United, Arizona Diamondbacks, San Jose Sharks.
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. Love that rooster. Now there's a nickname that hasn't been tapped yet-- "the Roosters". At least not over there... it has been here, by a few of the sports teams, in fact. Most significantly in my mind is that of the North Ballarat Roosters, who play Aussie Rules footy in the VFL, and also because I used to live in Ballarat up until about six months ago and still go there for business frequently. A mate of mine in suburban Melbourne runs the Footypedia.com website that is devoted to that football code throughout Australia, and on there is a section on team nicknames. And there are some pretty cool nicknames on that list, and some which you may not have even thought were possible.
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. The University of South Carolina mascot comes very close: I'm still waiting for that Southern California-South Carolina matchup. USC vs USC Trojans vs GameCocks
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. Richmond (Indiana) Roosters of the independent Frontier League.
Wichita Falls? Geeze, I knew there was an untapped market I was trying to think of when posting on the MLS Expansion forum. My fave name for a team was the North Stars, back before they became a bunch of ******************************* sellouts and moved to a state that wouldn't know an ice skate from from it's hind-end.
They didn't become anything, Norm Green did. And the fine folks of Dallas seem to have supported the Stars just fine over the years, looks like. Is this another one of those "If it doesn't get below zero for weeks at a time in your city, your brain can't possibly function well enough to understand the nuances of a game as complicated as hockey" things?
Re: There's no such thing as bad publicity. Good call, Kenn. But that's a nickname that hasn't been used en masse. Wonder why-- and also wondering what it says in the whole "what's in a name?" scenario...
LOL! Im actually impressed that someone remembered them. Sadly, I dont think they exist any more. I think they were ECHL, and they folded. Another good ECHL one is this one... Wheeling Nailers: One could probably have as much fun with that one as they could the Macon Whoopie... espeically if you got alittle um... creative.
Just stab me in the heart a few more times, why don't ya! No, it's just that I suddenly realized that I fully, completely understand the hatred that old Wimbledon fans hold for the move to Milton-Keyes. I'm not sure how else to explain it. It's one of those things that for me was just sick and wrong. I can understand how to someone else it's the old "get over it, crap happens" but the North Stars were THE team. I mean, can you imagine how gutted someone from MOntreal would feel if the Canadiens packed up and left for Houston one day? Or what if the Yankees decided to, god knows why, move to Vancouver?
Im sure those in Quebec (the city) feel and know your pain very well too. The Quebec Nordiques packed up and left Quebec, and landed in Denver Colorado, and are now known as the Avalanche, and everyone knows who they are. Not too many had heard of the Quebec Nordiques though. And just to pour boiling acid in the wounds... they proceeded to win the Stanly Cup the very following season. I dont know about anyone else, but if I were a Nordiques fan I would be PISSED beyond belief!!!!! Sure I would still be glad that "MY" team won, but still, they are in another CITY!!! Ugh... just a bad situation all around for Nordiques fans. The Stars at least didnt go ahead and win the cup THAT soon after thier move, but I sitll wish they had stayed in Minnesota.
There were actually three different Macon Whoopees. The first lasted one season (1973-74) in the Southern Hockey League. The second was the one I was thinking of, the Central Hockey League team from 1996-2001. They went into the ECHL in 2001-2002 (should be the same franchise, don't know for sure), and for the last two seasons, Macon's team in two leagues (ACHL and WHA2) has been the Macon Trax. So Macon has been in four leagues in four years: 2000-2001 CHL 2001-2002 ECHL 2002-2003 ACHL 2003-2004 WHA2 And, in a circular turn of events, the WHA2 is now the Southern Hockey League after a brief period as the Eastern Hockey League. Make sense? I imagine when they change names again, they'll be the Macon Bacon.
Then maybe Minnesota shouldn't have told the North Stars to take a hike. And by the way, the Stars are better supported in Dallas than they were in Minnesota. The average attendances for every single one of the 11 seasons that the Stars have been in Dallas have been higher than they were when they were in Minnesota. Highest average attendance in Minnesota: 15,320 in 1971-72 Lowest average attendance in Dallas: 15,572 in 1995-96