INbengalfan Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 9 hours ago, OkeyDoke21 said: They shouldn't be forced, but the majority of the time, I like it more when they do. Browns to Ravens would be another example, for the NFL. Pelicans from Hornets for NBA. Dallas Texans to KC Chiefs. Those aren't the only non NHL examples. There are a lot of examples you didn't use. The Dallas Texans should have been the KC Texans. It goes well with the NFL's sense of geography (Dallas in the NFCE, Baltimore in the AFCN,Miami not in the AFCS etc). And please resist the urge to inform me about traditional rivals. It's a joke 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raidersedge Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 That's a no for me. I'm a Raiders fan not a fan of a city. If they were the Las Vegas Outlaws, I wouldn't even follow them and I'd be done with the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everybodyluvstheniners Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Itz just how it iz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrantikRam Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 No way. When the team name is changed, they typically become the equivalent of an expansion team. Once the Browns came back, the Ravens lost that history. That's important to me because for most teams, their fans outside of their home state probably outnumber their fans in their home state. Plus, teams play away from home for half their games. I don't care where the Rams play, but I'd care if they weren't the Rams anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammymvpknight Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 If the Saints moved from the gulf south...I’d stop carrying about them. And frankly...I’d care a heck of a lot less about the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 16 hours ago, raidersedge said: That's a no for me. I'm a Raiders fan not a fan of a city. If they were the Las Vegas Outlaws, I wouldn't even follow them and I'd be done with the NFL. What if they stayed in Oakland, but changed the name. Like what the Redskins are having to do? Oakland Outlaws. You'd be done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 4 hours ago, FrantikRam said: No way. When the team name is changed, they typically become the equivalent of an expansion team. Once the Browns came back, the Ravens lost that history. That's important to me because for most teams, their fans outside of their home state probably outnumber their fans in their home state. Plus, teams play away from home for half their games. I don't care where the Rams play, but I'd care if they weren't the Rams anymore. Well the Titans still have the Oilers history. Washington Football Team will still have the Redskins history. Would suck to lose the history of the team with a name change, but I think that the Ravens/Browns example is the only one in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 Thank god that Baltimore was renamed the Ravens and Cleveland kept that cursed name of the Browns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OkeyDoke21 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 On 10/2/2020 at 9:07 PM, INbengalfan said: The Dallas Texans should have been the KC Texans. It goes well with the NFL's sense of geography (Dallas in the NFCE, Baltimore in the AFCN,Miami not in the AFCS etc). And please resist the urge to inform me about traditional rivals. It's a joke Ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilflamingo Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 Yes from me. Would probably make re-locations harder and less frequent. Maybe the Raiders stays in Oakland (both times), maybe we didn't have teams like the Rams having played in four different cities etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhorse Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 On 10/2/2020 at 6:07 PM, INbengalfan said: The Dallas Texans should have been the KC Texans. It goes well with the NFL's sense of geography (Dallas in the NFCE, Baltimore in the AFCN,Miami not in the AFCS etc). And please resist the urge to inform me about traditional rivals. It's a joke Weren't the Dallas Texans the team that became the Colts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apparition Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, Warhorse said: Weren't the Dallas Texans the team that became the Colts? Chiefs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhorse Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 10 hours ago, Starless said: Chiefs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Texans_(NFL) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duluther Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 The NFL is a lot less regional and a lot more about the clubs themselves, so I think it’s fitting when they don’t change. And they shouldn’t be forced to change. Raiders is a huge brand. They’d be losing a goldmine by changing their name/brand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 Changing names is definitely best practice, especially when the name refers at all to the area. Baltimore Colts to Indianapolis Colts isn’t as bad as Minnesota Lakers becoming the LA Lakers or any of the other relocated team jokes from Baseketball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.